date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/07/26 | 1,127 | 4,649 | <issue_start>username_0: Here is my situation, I'm about to graduate with a Ph.D. within the next few months. My dissertation is done, so I can dedicate quite a bit of time to the issue I'm describing.
At the moment, I have never taught a college level course. For the entire length of my program I've been on the research side. I'm very frustrated by this, as "teaching" was always my personal number 2 choice after graduation (number 1 is not in academia, a long shot and not relevant to this conversation). (And just to remove those suggesting that I should have asked to teach, I have -- for years -- but that's water under the bridge as they say)
Due to this lack of teaching, I've done everything I could think of: I've taught mini classes to staff and my cohort on specific topics (e.g. LaTeX), and when available, I've taught at university programs for high schoolers. And, I've recently, applied to every community college in a two hour radius (our university is in the sticks, so that isn't actually very many), to try to get an adjunct job.
But my fear is that the community colleges won't care about my research or other experience -- they will just note that I don't have teaching experience, so I won't get those positions either -- which means I'll graduate without ever *really* teaching.
So, here is my question: Is there something I *should* be doing that I'm not already? What have others done in similar situations? I'm starting to get very concerned about the long term implications of this hole in my CV -- especially given I could really see myself at a lib arts university.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, put down all of that experience on your CV, and when you apply for jobs, make sure you write a great teaching statement on some of these experiences. Make sure to talk about any courses you designed (the LaTeX one, perhaps?), and don't disregard the high school teaching at all. I was a high school teacher for seven years before I went to get my PhD, and when applying for college teaching positions, I played up the fact that teaching high school is (in some ways) more challenging and that it made me a better teacher.
I believe that with your current experience, you have a good chance at one of those community college adjunct positions (depending on your field), so don't sell yourself short yet.
One other option that might not sound so great but could at least get you into the classroom is to apply to adjunct positions with for-profit colleges (U. of Phoenix, etc.). If you can disregard any problems you might have with that "type" of education and dedicate yourself to doing the best you can for the students, it would give you experience. The problem may be that you're in the sticks.
Speaking of living in the sticks, are you able to move for a semester? If you're flexible enough, you will be able to find that adjunct position (Alaska? Kansas? Puerto Rico?).
Let's say you can't find a teaching position. What's stopping you from developing a full-up course, even if you won't teach it now (or ever)? Be creative, and design the course you've always wanted to teach! You can then put down, "designed xx undergraduate course, which included a unique assessment plan and a flipped classroom approach, blah, blah, blah." A bit hokey, maybe, but it's something.
Depending on your field, you could branch out and apply for positions or volunteer to teach classes that aren't directly in your field.
The bottom line is (and you seem to already know this): you have to be as flexible as you can if your goal is simply to get college teaching experience. But try to think if there are other ways you can be even more flexible, and something is likely to come your way.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer is truly excellent. I would just add one more thought.
You might consider teaching for free. There are countless opportunities to educate if you do not require compensation. At my university, they are always eager to help the students...especially if they can do so without spending any money. I am sure they would offer me the facilities (room, etc.) if I were willing to 'donate' my time to teach an extra course.
Of course, this requires you to design a course which is desired by students as well as acceptable by the school which is not already offered.
There are plenty of other opportunities - if you have facilities or can afford to rent them. Put an ad in the paper and start teaching. Disadvantaged youths, high school, university students hoping to understand how to get better grades...there should be lots of choices.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/26 | 820 | 3,294 | <issue_start>username_0: My wife and I just found out that we're having our first child. While this is a wonderful thing, it also concerns us a bit. Particularly because we're on limited funds (TA & RA combined salary) and we're still 1.5-2 years away from graduating together. Also, since our academic careers are so demanding, we're also concerned about balancing time taking care of our newborn.
I read the responses in [this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9769/can-one-excel-in-graduate-post-graduate-school-with-a-demanding-family-life), but I'd like to ask for more specific advice for new parents in graduate school. What strategies have you used to enable you to handle having a newborn while both parents are finishing their PhD? Both in terms of time management and making ends meet, financially.
Any personal anecdotes, experience, advice, and tips are welcome! :)<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations! First of all, you are in for a wonderful and life-changing experience.
However, your life is going to change quite drastically - so try to be prepared.
Some things that come to mind in no specific order (some of these are not specific to academia):
1. On the personal side, you must first realize that you will have much less time to work. Get used to the idea. The way to deal with this is to organize your time and stick to your schedules. No more random web browsing during work hours - use your time with your child as time for brain rest. As a scientist you may know that it is not always easy to be creative/focused on cue, but you will learn to get used to it with practice.
2. As JeffE commented, if your advisors don't know yet, notify them. A supportive advisor can make a huge difference in terms of flexible-work time, working from home, and even moral support. I would also try to gently ask if they increase your salary or offer some other kind of financial benefits. Also, your graduation will most likely get delayed, hopefully not too much - try to see that your supervisors are ok with that.
3. If possible, have your family help as much as possible.
4. The first year with a child is a huge change and can be quite difficult, especially in your situation. Help each other and be understanding towards each other.
5. Your school's HR can give you information about benefits you could get for children (healthcare, day care).
6. You can find tons of used baby/child stuff (toys, clothes) for free or very cheap, because they are often useful only for a short time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The first 3 (or even 6) months, it's your fun time. There is not much to worry about.
If there is something I want to recommend is to find a spot for your infant at your university day care ASAP. Most of them give students/faculty members priority. Unfortunately they are always full and have +years of waiting list (specially for infants <2 years old). Register your infant ASAP. Of course, after making sure its a good place to put your child in. Then, you will enjoy visiting the baby during the day hours (12-1pm is a nice time to get your lunch nearby your kid). I went through a nightmare when my kid was at day care far away from my university. This becomes worse in Winter because of the weather conditions.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/27 | 1,229 | 5,282 | <issue_start>username_0: If no author of an accepted paper registers for the conference, the paper is simply dumped from the conference.
If, however, the authors duly register but fail to present it at the conference, what is the fate of the paper? I have an accepted paper at a European conference (IEEE), but due to lack of travel funds, our team has decided that we will not be travelling to present the work (I am not based at Europe).
I wrote to the General Chair of the conference, and he writes to me that if the paper is not presented, it will not be indexed in the IEEE Xplore library.
What I wish to know is, will the paper still be published in the 'Conference Proceedings' booklet or CD? My guess is Yes, since these must be printed before authors arrive for the conference. The General Chair has not responded with an answer on this.
Question two, which happens to be my real inquiry- does such a thing count as a valid 'publication' for me? Will my work get indexed somewhere (wherever it might be) or not, would it be searchable via the Internet or not?<issue_comment>username_1: This has actually happened to me a couple of times in the past. This really depends on the policy of the organizing professional group (ACM/IEEE) and even within sub-groups of that body (SIGWEB/SIGCHI within ACM)
Generally, I have found that if your paper is accepted in a conference and you or any of your co-authors **register** for that conference, then the paper will still be published in the conference proceedings and indexed in the relevant digital library. e.g. IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library etc.
If you or a co-author do not register for the conference, then your paper, in general, will not be indexed.
If an accepted paper is not published in the conference proceedings (and by extension not indexed in the appropriate digital library), then it generally does not "count" as a valid publication. You are better off, in that case, by withdrawing your paper and submitting it at a more acceptable conference venue (or a journal where there is not travelling involved)
**PS:** You can always link to such a paper on your personal website or put it on [arxiv](https://www.arxiv.org) for comments. Google Scholar will obviously index it but such indexing has limited practical value.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From what I know in CS field, most conferences care only about **Registration**. That means if one author registered before the deadline then the paper will be included in the conference proceedings. This mostly due to the fact that many conferences send their papers to the publisher **before** the conference take place. It happens all the time where during the conference sessions some papers have no presenter.
Now some conferences make it explicit that you need to to come and present your paper in order to include it in the final proceedings. Such conditions are usually available in the conference website or after-acceptance emails.
For the second question, it is really a good and rationale question since your paper passed the peer review process but at the same time you do not have hard evidence for that. Personally I can't comment on that since I am new to conference organisation and academia.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It very much depends on the conference regulations. As an example I know that [Eucap](http://eucap2013.org) indexes the paper in IEEExplore if one of the authors registers and the final paper passes the checks in IEEE PDF Express.
Some conference management systems like [Edas.info](http://edas.info) have a special page called "Explain no-show". It's a common issue for authors who are unable to obtain their Visas to enter the country where the conference is held.
Also, it's a good idea to consider submitting to arXiv
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Whether or not a paper appears in IEEE Xplore is very dependent upon the sponsoring society and conference's own policies. In general though:
* If none of the authors have registered for the conference, this should be spotted by the organizers. In this case, it is unlikely your paper would be in the proceedings, as often the deadline for paper submission coincides with the deadline for author registration (for this reason).
* If one of the authors of the paper has registered, the paper would appear in the proceedings handed out at the conference (the USB stick or similar). This is on account of the fact that, until registration is completed, the organizers are not aware you have not attended.
* If an author is registered for the conference, but does not present, this depends upon the policies of the conference. I can say with 100% certainty at the conference I am involved with, that failing to present will lead to the paper not being indexed on Xplore - we have a team of volunteer session chairs who submit a report for each session.
The ComSoc policy [1] on no-shows is quite clear, and is one that many conferences are modeled around. While some people may be lucky and get their paper on Xplore, that's incredibly unusual in my experience, given the role of session chairs and room monitors.
[1] <http://cms.comsoc.org/eprise/main/SiteGen/Confs_P_P/Content/Home/No_Shows.html>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/27 | 1,783 | 7,605 | <issue_start>username_0: I just received the galley proofs for an article which has been accepted to a well-regarded math journal.
The copyediting is, quite frankly, terrible. The copyeditor has introduced dozens of mathematical, typographical, and bibliographic mistakes. The proofs were accompanied by a list of changes and questions, and some of the newly introduced mistakes were described in this list, but not all.
A few representative examples:
* The editor has, in many places, replaced the mathematical notation << with "is much less than". It is universal within my subfield of mathematics that << means something very different from "is much less than".
* The editor has typeset fractions in different ways, so that what was formerly in the denominator is now in the numerator.
* The editor has monkeyed unacceptably with the bibliography. I used a software package, for which I looked up on their FAQ how to cite it. The editor replaced my correct bibliography entry with something different.
* The tables now appear in wrong places. A cursory reading of the edited text reveals that it now makes no sense, and this would be obvious even to someone without specialized knowledge of my field.
I could go on and on, but I don't want to just rant. Instead I have two closely related questions:
* First of all, is this typical? I find it difficult to imagine that a publisher who did this kind of shoddy work on a regular basis could stay in business. I wonder if I just had the bad luck to get the new employee this time around.
* More importantly, is a strong response warranted? I am inclined to write to the journal staff, tell them that their work is unacceptably sloppy, explain in detail why, and ask them to start over from scratch, and to furnish a list of all changes made, no matter how minor.
This is not just because I want to pick an argument. I have gone through my paper line-by-line several times in the past, making very sure that everything I said was correct. With this level of copyediting work, I am back to square one and I suspect I might accidentally miss several errors introduced by the copyeditors.
Would such an e-mail be likely to produce the kind of results I'm looking for?
Thank you very much.
**Update:** Thanks to everyone who replied. I wrote a strong, but I hope polite, e-mail to my contact at the journal, listing several of the mistakes, and asking them to start over and to send me a complete list of changes. His first reply was a little bit ambiguous, appearing to perhaps misunderstand what I was asking for -- but he has since apologized and agreed to my requests.
One point of departure from Anonymous Mathematician's advice: I haven't said anything to the editorial board and the publisher, or discussed this issue (other than here, anonymously) with anyone but my coauthor and my contact at the journal -- happily, it looks like there won't be any reason to.
**Update 2:** As I requested, my contact at the journal started again from scratch, did a much more conservative job of copyediting, and provided me a copy of my file which was marked up in red and blue with every change they made. Needless to say this made my job quite easy and I thanked them for their good work.<issue_comment>username_1: If a copy-editor (CE) changes the meaning of your manuscript you obviously need to recorrect it. The CE should have received a set of "house rules" for how thing should be formatted but it is not likely the CE is an expert in evey field. In your case it sounds as if the CE has been "trigger happy". In any case, you should makethe necessary corrections and return the proof to the editor detailing what you find wrong with the CE edits. You should clearly state why the edits are unacceptable.
Concerning your point about location of tables, I am not sure what exactly you mean by "wrong place" but the journal will obviosuly place tables and figures where they make type-setting sense but should of course be located after where they are first referenced in the text.
So in some cases journals (CE) may change things to adhere to "house rules". These changes must be accepted but of course not when they change the meaning of the paper or introduce errors. I have experienced similar (but not as severe) edits to my own papers, I have also been in the position to enforce house rules in the journal I edit, but never to the point of changing the meaning. If in doubt I would have contacted the author or passed along a query about the particular issue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: That does sound terrible. I haven't run into anything so bad myself, but I know people who have. It seems to vary a lot by publisher. My impression is that it happens occasionally when they try to save money on copyediting by outsourcing to a new, cheap copyediting company. If the results are terrible, then the publisher will switch to the next-cheapest company, and this will continue until the publisher finds an acceptable level of quality. Unfortunately, it leads to bad results for authors who get caught in the middle of this process. Hopefully the publisher will learn from this incident and the problem won't continue.
>
> More importantly, is a strong response warranted?
>
>
>
Yes, certainly.
>
> ask them to start over from scratch, and to furnish a list of all changes made, no matter how minor
>
>
>
I'd guess that getting them to start over from scratch will be difficult, but you should certainly insist on seeing a second set of proofs.
Asking for a list of all changes made could be useful, but it's not clear whether you can trust that they will compile a complete list (they may be sloppy about that too). Many copyeditors mark up a paper copy before changing the file, so you may have some luck in getting a photocopy/scan of the marked up copy.
I'd also recommend letting the editorial board know, and perhaps the publisher too. If you just resolve the issue directly with the copyeditors, it's possible that nobody else will find out what happened.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is perfectly normal. Copyediting is often of poor quality, even with reputable publishers.
In my experience, the following approach seems to work fairly well:
* Be polite. Thank for the proofs. Do not accuse anyone, do not vent. Imagine how you would respond if you had found just one tiny typo, and follow the same pattern even if there are dozens of mistakes.
* List every copyediting error, and explain carefully what is wrong in each instance. Try to be as thorough as possible. Most likely this is your last chance; do not assume that you will get another opportunity to review the proofs before the paper is printed.
* Email your response ASAP, preferably before the deadline. Remember that copyeditors have their own deadlines to meet.
This way you can maximise the chances that the copyeditors will do their best to fix all mistakes in your paper — they will know what to fix and how, and they will also have time and motivation to do it.
**Summary:** Do not try to fix the whole world, just try to *cooperate* with the copyeditors to fix *your paper*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Tell them to revert everything to the original version, period. If they introduced 100 mistakes, it is not your job to find them all (besides, I doubt you'll find more than 70 anyway). Be polite but firm. Don't accuse anybody of anything but stand the ground even if you'll have to withdraw the paper. Your primary duty, as a writer, is to readers, not to publishers. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/27 | 642 | 2,852 | <issue_start>username_0: This is one question that probably has an archaic answer. I recently reviewed a paper for a journal that stuck all the figures at the end (with placeholders in-text). Where I publish, we typically provide camera-ready manuscripts or at least give reviewers a version with the figures embedded so that they can see what the heck is going on. Occasionally, you embed the figures plus they are attached separately at the end (due to how the system generates the PDF). However, I recognize that dumping the figures at the end of a journal submission for review is quite common in some fields.
My simple question: Why?
I assume that at some point, there was a purpose to putting figures at the end rather than where they belong. I am also aware that it is quite common for journals to shuffle around your figure positions. But why would journals possibly want their copy to have all the figures dumped at the end? Obviously it is not for the reviewers' benefit, as it makes certain papers nigh-unreadable ("As you can see in Figure 1" - *opens up second copy of the PDF so I can see Fig 1 at the same time as the text*). Anyone know the reasoning behind this?<issue_comment>username_1: There is a long tradition of submitting text and figures separated. this stems back to when manuscripts were typewritten and figures were drawn by ink. Many journals have kept this format and now the reason to keep figures separate is to facilitate the typesetting/layout. In addition, many electronic submission systems assemble manuscripts by merging text files with graphics files. The reason for having separate graphics files is that the typesetting processing inserts figures during the process. Not all journals take camera-ready manuscripts (in fact none in my field).
As a reviewer, and if you review from a printout, it may also be advantageous to have figures separately since it is easier to look at them in parallel with reading the text. If you review on screen, it will of course not be an advantage.
There is actually no need to format a manuscript this way as long as figures and text are delivered separately in the end if that is what the journal requires for their typesetting. Always follow any instructions provided by the journal!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You are correct that this has to do with pre-online publishing practices. In "the old days," most images had to be made "camera-ready," and were to be shrunk down to the required size. Consequently, the figures should be on a separate page at the end of the paper, so that different images didn't "stray" into the area that was to be photographed for another figure.
In spite of this, there has been no real need for the journals to change this practice, and thus it persists to the present day in a number of journals.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/07/27 | 1,115 | 4,482 | <issue_start>username_0: I recognize my advisor is busier than I am. But, nonetheless, I feel the need to tell her sometimes that I am overloaded with too many tasks and I need to push a deadline back or pass on some request.
How do other people handle this tactfully?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't look up my advisor or other faculty members. I always behave like they were my peers. This way, there's never any kind of social problems, since the relationships are completely professional right from the start (and, if someone is not okay with this, one gets to know who to avoid). Usually, about after a month, people in higher positions than me stop introducing me as a student for other people, and start talking about their new collaborator/workmate instead.
Really, I just don't get this kind of questions, most people doing their PhDs are 20-30 years old, and find it difficult to say what they think, want to do, not want to do, or tell if they are angry, happy, sad, etc.
You are in no need to explain yourself. Just be professional. Either it works out, or doesn't. Get rid of unhealthy social relationships.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have had this discussion with my supervisors/advisors many times, all with positive outcomes. This is what I do:
* Be direct and to the point, it sounds like neither of you have time to dance around the issue.
* Offer alternative ideas/timelines/strategies, I found that coming up with a solution is appreciated as in the long term, it is going to save time.
* Be honest and truthful, state that you are overloaded - show how this is so, and either defer or decline the request.
Remember, your time and well being is just as valuable, and any good advisor already recognises that fact.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: "I'm not sure I have time to do X in addition to Y and Z. If I take X on, it might push me back three or four weeks in finishing Y. Is it that important?"
There is, of course, the off-chance that X is more important than you realize and your advisor might say yes.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Improve your work efficiency first.
For example, prioritize your assignments. What should be done first? what next? What can wait? If you're not sure about the priorities, ask your advisor. She is the one who advises you. Use her.
Then, work hard. Do your best. Manage your time wisely.
If you still cannot handle them, then tell her that you need to push a deadline back or pass on some request, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think that the first thing to do is to organize ourselves and to see what we can do on our own. Then, the next thing is to inform our supervisors of any “deadline issues” or “work overload issues” and to fix them. Our work is important. Our health is even more important.
Yes, it is really important to keep our supervisors informed of our obstacles; especially the research (and deadlines) related ones. He/she can help us to anticipate research pitfalls such as hard problems (to avoid or to dig in by priority), or exception cases (to exploit as shortcuts). It’s also better to inform our supervisor that there is an obstacle on the way than to miss a deadline. Still, we need to be prepared to work harder and to propose solutions of our own.
In the end, there is no single best answer to “how to tell our supervisor that we’re overloaded tactfully”: It depends upon our relationship with our supervisor.
I would prepare myself from the start. This may mean to refuse some tasks or to propose alternative deadlines instead of simply “missing the boat”, but it also means to know my priorities. Regarding work overload, I usually prioritize things by deadlines. When I’m overwhelmed, I do a list to see if something can be postponed, then I focus on my academic or research-related work. Strong deadlines, like call for papers, are sometimes hard to meet, but they’re worth the time! As soon as I see a problem coming I identify it. I try to find a solution. Before it overwhelms me I inform my supervisor. The answer is often as simple as “Have you tried this instead of that?”, or simply “Leave it for later.”
Once, I attended a talk titled “how to manage your supervisor” (with humor) [1]. I think that these slides are valuable material. They may provide some answers to the question of “how to tell our supervisor that we’re overloaded tactfully”.
[1] <http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~tw/manage.pdf>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/28 | 1,951 | 8,136 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a question about my advisor (supervisor, professor) in a lab, where I am a graduate research assistant, and had done research together with a PhD student, as a part of his dissertation. The student happened to be one of my close friends. The professor wanted to write a journal paper based on the results of his dissertation with that candidate. This was kind of near the end of his PhD program (three weeks before final defense). At that time he said that he was already stressed out about defense and will write the paper after the event as it won't take him more than a week.
After he graduated, he had asked the professor about the journal paper but the professor kind of brushed it under the carpet saying he is looking for CFPs (call for papers) where they can write and never got back to him, despite his constant inquiries.
For his research on human-computer interaction, I had developed applications which formed the core of his project. So my advisor asked me if I was interested in writing the paper and she convinced me that since I developed the applications (that formed basis of the research) it was fair enough that I write it. But after a week, she ignored me and wrote the paper herself and submitted it to the journal.
I came to know last week that my advisor wrote the paper herself and got it published. This professor is an assistant professor trying to get tenure. I am trying to understand the motivation behind this behavior.
My questions:
1. The journal paper was published by my professor as sole author. Won't the paper count towards her tenure if she wrote it with a graduate student or will it count towards higher credit if she is the sole author?
2. Is it ethical to publish the paper based on my friend's dissertation? (I mean it is legal, because she will be referencing his PhD dissertation, but is it ethical or common in academia to sidestep the original author?)
3. Should I be listed as co-author for all papers coming out of this research because I developed the applications that formed basis for this research? I mean the concept for them was not mine, but I did program them.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not really qualified to assess how other departments would treat single- versus co-authored papers. As for the other points:
[2] It is *completely unethical* for the advisor to submit a journal article based on work done by a student as solely her own, even if she were entirely responsible for writing the paper. Being a single author implies that the author is responsible for the entire content of the work described, referring to both research and preparation of the manuscript.
[3] Your rights to being credited for this work depend on the nature and scope of the work that you individually did. If you simply built the apps once, and then did no subsequent work on the project, then you are entitled to a paper credit for a work describing the tools and how they were used (in part or in whole). However, unless you have been doing *ongoing* development on these tools, you would not be entitled to receive authorship credit whenever the work is used. (You would, however, be entitled to a citation on the use of your work in future publications!)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Before anything else: **Don't walk. Run.**
There are almost certainly details of this story that you have omitted, or that you have unintentionally embellished, or that you are unaware of, and **clarifying those details here would be inappropriate**. What is clear is that your relationship with your advisor is completely broken. Get help, and get out.
>
> Q1) Wont the paper count towards her tenure if she wrote it with a graduated student or will it count towards higher credit if she is the sole author?
>
>
>
All publications count toward tenure, whether solo, with colleagues, with current students, with former students, or with strangers from Zanzibar.
>
> Q2) Is it ethical to publish the paper based on my friend's dissertation? (i mean it is legal, because she will be referencing his phd dissertation but is it ethical to sideshaft the original author)
>
>
>
There are a few different possibilities here:
1. Your advisor's submission does not report your friend's thesis work as her own, but rather builds on your friend's work in a novel direction. In this case, your advisor's submission is *ethical*, but perhaps a bit unfriendly. After all, the success of her students is a significant component of her upcoming tenure case.
2. The results in your friend's dissertation are the main topic of your advisor's submission, but your friend did not make a significant and novel contribution, and therefore does not deserve coauthorship. But in this case, your friend **also** does not deserve a PhD, and your advisor's signing his thesis was unethical. This possibility seems highly unlikely; passing a thesis defense generally requires the unanimous approval of the entire thesis committee.
3. Your friend made a significant and novel contribution, which is the main topic of your advisor's paper. **In this case, your advisor is being grossly unethical.** Fortunately, since your friend's dissertation is easily accessible online (**Isn't it?**), any competent referee or editor should quickly spot the intellectual theft. That would just be *stupid*.
>
> I came to know last week that my advisor wrote the paper herself and got it published.
>
>
>
If you believe that your advisor has stolen credit for another person's work—your friend, her former student, or a stranger from Zanzibar—it would be appropriate for you (or better yet, your friend) to speak *discreetly* to your department head or another trusted senior faculty member, with both the original dissertation and your advisor's publication in hand, asking them to clarify the ethical boundaries. Do not *accuse*; such accusations are *very* serious, and your advisor's colleagues may react defensively on her behalf. Instead, explain the delicacy of the situation and ask for guidance. And then listen.
They may react badly anyway, but then you have your answer.
If they agree that your advisor has acted unethically, **get out of the way**. This is not your fight.
>
> Is it common in academia to do this?
>
>
>
**No.** I won't claim they *never* happen, obviously, but serious breaches of ethical behavior, at the level you are accusing, are extremely rare.
>
> Q3 One more question i have is should i be listed as co-author for all papers coming out of this research because i developed the apps that formed basis for this research. I mean the concept for them was not mine but i did program them.
>
>
>
That is a more subtle question. As a general rule, I would say **no**. Of course you deserve credit for your contributions, but only once for each contribution. If your contribution is a key piece of software, then the **first** paper that uses that software should describe that software in detail and include you as a coauthor. If you walk away after that first paper, later work that relies on your software—by your advisor or anyone else—need not list you as a coauthor; you already got credit. With good reason, <NAME> is not a coauthor on every paper that uses Mathematica. You should of course be *cited* in any paper that uses, builds on, or improves your work, but that's a separate issue from coauthorship.
But reality is rarely so cut and dried. Is moving the software to a new platform a sufficient contribution? Optimizing the underlying algorithms? Adding a new, easy-to-implement feature suggested by your advisor? Adding a new, **hard**-to-implement feature suggested by your advisor? Adding support for a new input device? I have no idea. **You and your advisor should have agreed *in advance* on the contribution required for you to be a coauthor.**
Normally, if you had not had this conversation already, I would recommend having it **now**, but it sounds like it may be too late for that. You may be better off simply walking away and finding a new advisor that you can trust.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer] |
2013/07/28 | 1,577 | 6,566 | <issue_start>username_0: I've seen some universities encouraging students to contact with the faculty before making applications. For example, [this one](http://www.cse.psu.edu/prospective/graduate/gradgrad). On the other hand I've heard some people saying that they are waste of times because professors receive several such e-mails every year and they don't even have time to look at them.
So, is it good idea to make contanct professors before making the application? Can it increase my chances of acceptance? Can it ever backfire me?<issue_comment>username_1: This really only works as a strategy if you have something truly meaningful to say. If you have to force yourself to do it and struggle to come up with something to say in your email, you're not helping yourself. Faculty get tons of email all the time and every year - as you say - get emails from prospective students, many of whom will not be admitted and in whom they invest no effort. So, if you genuinely think you're a good fit for a program/lab and have solid questions in mind to ask the faculty/PI of that lab that will communicate your quality and fit, this may be viable. But, I would definitely not recommend it as a general strategy.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: From the link you provided,
>
> To increase your chances of admission to our program, you are strongly encouraged to discuss your research interests with one or more faculty from our department prior to your application.
>
>
>
It sounds an invitation for you to contact the faculty members. In cases like this, I would recommend you to contact them. Find the faculty memebers whose research interests are close to yours and write e-mails to tell them that you are interested in what they are doing. I believe those e-mails won't hurt your chance to get admitted because they ask you to do so in the first place. How much it will help you remains to be seen. As the web page says, it increases your chances of admission.
However, if you do not see such invitation on their web pages then I agree with username_1 that don't contact them unless you do have *truly meaningful things* to say.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **Australian context:** If by graduate school, you are referring to doing a PhD, then in Australia the standard first step is to find an academic willing to supervise you. The university will typically have additional requirements, such as regarding grades and prior academic experience. In particular, if you want a scholarship for your PhD, grades will be very important. Even if your grades a little lower, there is sometimes the option to commence a masters by research and convert to a PhD thesis at a later stage. Furthermore, if an academic is keen to supervise your project, then they are likely to do what they can to facilitate your application. So in summary, contacting academics to enquire about PhD supervision is essential.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If there is a particular professor in mind, it may be a good idea to contact him. After I retired, I received a few such inquiries, and wrote back telling them I was retired an no longer taking students. This is another reason (different from "improve your chances").
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Canadian context: I applied for four Master degrees in three different universities (Concordia, UdeM, UQAM) in Montreal.
I've contacted beforehand teachers or head of departments. I was welcomed by everybody I talked to.
Three out of four applications were succesful. I even found two people offering to be my thesis co-director months before the start of the first term. In this latter case I met three different professors before my official application was processed. The head of department encouraged me to do so.
The only university I did not contact beforehand –I was an undergraduate at this one– refused my application. (I did not bother talking about my application, because the people processing it knew me already, apparently they felt neglected that I did not try to suck up to them during the last term.)
So, from my experience I would advise to do so, but, and it's a big big but, I had very good reasons to contact them. I had a three page proposal for the subject of an eventual thesis.
I was asking them for advice, I wanted to know if my proposal was something I could do at their university or not. I wasn't wasting their time or trying to look good, I was talking only about what we could do together,about their expertise, asking to use their brain for something they were familiar with. Basically, asking to do the job they are paid for.
On the other hand, I advised my wife to do the same two year ago, when she wasn't sure of her academic orientation. She did it with 3 different programs at two universities, contacting professors or department officials.
She was constantly brushed off or refered back to their website.
They felt she was wasting their time, because she had only hard "technical" questions (fees, hours, amenities, agenda...)that could be answered perusing through documentation or questions so "soft" (what's the atmosphere like" "I wonder if that program is for me") that they could not be answered.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Yes, it is a good idea. And, yes, it can backfire. I regularly receive inquiries from individuals interested in "joining my lab," laying fairly bold claims to be moved by my research. They can be both annoying and humorous because I am very active in research but my area of study does not have any type of "lab model." In most cases, these types of inquiries are generic messages that are essentially copied to a very large number of professors, with hopes of getting a reply. It is very easy to see through this snowball approach, and the outcome is invariably a deleted message. The most qualified individuals do their homework and tailor the messages to demonstrate knowledge and genuine interest in the topic area.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: If you'd only go to a given school if you get into the lab of a very short list of profs, you might contact them, explaining your situation, to see if they'll be accepting students. One can certainly argue about whether this is a good approach, but if that's really the situation, it's a big time and money saver.
Now, aside from the above, can this improve your chances? If the admissions committee is trying to align recruiting with the needs of faculty, I think "mabye" (at least for a fairly typical student recruitment in the US)
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/07/28 | 836 | 3,448 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm about one year from receiving my master's degree. I have published a few papers, so I'm confident that I want to do research. I have been offered two different PhD positions at my current university, but I might not want to stay here. The reason for not taking the first position is that I don't like the advisor too much, and for the second position that they lack funding/other resources.
I recognize the early(?) offers are due to my hard work. If I would like to apply to somewhere else, when should I start contacting potential supervisors?
Also I need some strategy to get out nicely... it will be difficult to stay under the radar<issue_comment>username_1: It is never too early to look around for PhD positions. Start out by looking at what is advertised to see what is available and where. If you already know of places to go then get in touch with the department/research group to present yourself. Having a few papers under your belt will be a plus so provide a CV and the papers in your first contact and add a statement of what you want to do and why you are interested in that place.
Being focussed and showing you have a strong urge to continue is likely to impress.
I can understand it is difficult to say no to two offers and move away but remember that you are free to move. Saying no to a position without funding should not weigh you down. The other position is a little more sensitive of course. But, people move for many reasons, personal and professional. I do not think you need to explain your motives. A change in location is enough. Moving is a positive so there is nothing remarkable about doing so. There is, furthermore, no reason to bring up any negatives about your present location. If your move stirs bad feelings then it is a sign things are not right anyway.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two factors:
* looking for a university and a research group,
* having time for the formal admission process.
I will start for the later, as it is simpler. It depends on place, but some typical estimates of effective time you need are (at least, for applicants from aboard):
* in US ~1.5 year,
+ applications for Oct in Dec-Jan plus SATs that need to be taken before,
* in UK ~1 year,
+ applications for Oct in Dec-Jan,
* in continental Europe ~3 months,
+ some applications May-Jun, some - on rolling basis.
However, it depends to some degree on particular university or institute (so always check that; and also check prerequisites, e.g. language tests, documents to be collected - some of them need time).
Moreover, it depends also or your national/visa status.
When it comes to searching for a group, it varies. You may find an advisor of your dreams on the first conference you attend (or via a talk at your university, or recommendation of a local professor), or you may spend a year and be far from that. (See also: [Methods for finding graduate programs for specific areas of research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5300/methods-for-finding-graduate-programs-for-specific-areas-of-research).) The time you need depends on:
* popularity of your target field,
* how well are you networked in the target field,
* how popular is your current universities for that field (are professors well networked? are there many talks of invited guests?),
* how many conferences/schools/workshops you attend and how good are you at networking.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/07/29 | 2,403 | 10,427 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished my bachelor project and my supervisor suggested to work with me on publishing a paper about my work which is an encryption algorithm, Now my supervisor helped me with some remarks along my bachelor project and helped me with the paper (like grammar mistakes and such) but I am the one who made encryption algorithm and I am the one who wrote the paper:
Now should I include my supervisor as a 2nd author **as he wants**? (I can refuse, and then publish the paper on my own) He is a senior IEEE member and has published papers (where he was also 2nd author taking credit for others' work). Should I mention him just for the sake to get my paper accepted or protect it from getting stolen?
From my point of view, what he deserves is to be mentioned in acknowledgments but not as a second author.
And will the ownership of the paper will be 50% to me, while 50% to him ?<issue_comment>username_1: Since he's your advisor and you consulted him through out the project, then you definitely need to put his name as a co-author (unless he refused to be a co-author).
Taking into account that this is your first paper and he's a senior IEEE member (I don't know what this really mean but IEEE love its members), I believe it is a plus for your paper to be co-authored by him.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In engineering, it is common (accepted) for students to put their advisor's names as authors. This does not detract from the student's efforts; in some respects it can enhance the reception of the paper because the wider community will probably know the supervisor more than the student.
Be aware that if you try to publish it without your advisor's name, then the reviewers or editors may contact them and ask what is wrong (and also decline to publish the paper).
My advisor told me that the work I was doing was worthless, and not worth publication. I moved universities (and advisors), completed the work and submitted it without my original advisor's name as author. The IEEE editor rejected the paper until my original advisor was added as author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The rules for what co-authorship mean vary by field: in math it would be unusual for an advisor to be listed as a co-author under the circumstances, while in engineering, as others have notes, an advisor is normally included.
One of the reasons is that fields like engineering list authors in an order conveying information about the contributions: you'd be listed as first author, and your advisor as last author. Readers understand that this means you had the main intellectual contribution and your advisor acted as a supervisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You have many questions as about authorship, and I am afraid some of your questions/comments indicate a certain level of confusion about authorship. You could [browse the](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/authorship) [authorship](/questions/tagged/authorship "show questions tagged 'authorship'") [questions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/authorship) on this site, and it may Enlighten you to some extent.
Regarding your specific questions:
* **Should I include my supervisor as a 2nd author as he wants?**
First, you should check the policy on authorship directly from the publisher. [IEEE Publication Policies](http://winet.ece.ufl.edu/tvt/authors/Policy%20Statements.pdf) states that:
>
> Authorship and co-authorship should be based on a substantial intellectual contribution. It is assumed that all authors have had a significant role in the creation of a manuscript that bears their names.
>
>
> Therefore, the list of authors on an article serves multiple purposes; it indicates who is responsible for the work and to whom questions regarding the work should be addressed. Moreover, the credit implied by authorship is often used as a measure of the contributors’ productivity when they are evaluated for employment, promotions, grants, and prizes.
>
>
>
> 1. The IEEE affirms that authorship credit must be reserved for individuals who have met each of the following conditions:
>
> a. Made a significant intellectual contribution to the theoretical development, system or experimental design, prototype development, and/or the analysis and interpretation of data associated with the work contained in the article;
>
> b. Contributed to drafting the article or reviewing and/or revising it for intellectual content; and
>
> c. Approved the final version of the article as accepted for publication, including references.
>
Unless you performed research entirely without any input from your advisor, it seems unlikely that he did not make a “significant intellectual contribution”. Possible types of contribution include proposal of research subject/project, any guidance in the choice of method to pursue the project or on intermediate results, guidance on how best to interpret results and present them, etc.
* **Will the ownership of the paper will be 50% to me, while 50% to him?**
No, co-authorship does not necessarily mean equal contribution (and is not understood as such by the readers). To go even further, some journals offer the option of writing an explicit statement quantifying (to some extent) the respective contributions of the coauthors.
* **Won't people think he contributed in making the cipher?**
Not necessarily, as above. They will think he contributed *to some extent* to the research project, but will understand that he may not have been the one who came up with the idea.
---
I'll end by adding that you should be really wary not to dismiss your advisor's role too much. Even if you had the breakthrough idea and implemented it yourself, surely the guidance offered by your teachers and supervisors are to be credited, maybe more than you realize right now. Also, that he gave you the opportunity to pursue a worthwhile research project, and then helped you transform that into a publishable (quality) paper, are important contributions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If he wants to be an author, add him, and use that as leverage to improve your paper.
Being first author is *plenty* of credit for you; in fact, in your situation being sole author could be an indication that you are unable to work with others, which is a *negative* in most cases. People are highly accustomed to crediting the student with all of the value of the work (because they did the work), and the professor with all of the value of the work (because they enabled the work in various ways), and the credit can count twice because the student and professor almost never are competing for the same things. I'm assuming that the professor actually *did* do something enabling.
In any case, before you publish the paper you should get someone to read it carefully, and if they say things like "this passage is unclear" or "this needs more background" then your professor ought to be able to give advice and/or help fix it. There's nothing like having a highly experienced co-author to make short work of a request to place this work in the context of the field! If your professor cannot help improve the paper in this kind of situation (and help write a good cover letter, etc.), *and* they didn't actually enable any of the work, then even if it would help you, it is probably not ethical to include him as an author. Otherwise, there are only positives for all involved.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It appears to me that you are looking for validation for not including your supervisor. A supervisor is not supposed a person whose brain emanates marvelous and groundbreaking ideas which are later developed by a horde of pawns. Research does not work like that. It is about collaboration at different levels.
If you cannot admit he has contributed to some extent, that's fine. My point of view regarding this sort of ego-fights is: is it worth creating a whole circus and fighting for being first/solo author of a paper that is not going to change the world? Time will pass and you will understand ... Hopefully.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: As I read through your question and some of your comments, I get the impression that this faculty member has already done some work on your paper, presumably believing that he would be a co-author.
If so, I think it would be wrong to submit a solo paper with his improvements incorporated into the work. If you want to be sole author, then you should do ALL the work, including the proofreading, etc. – or at least have let the professor know up front that he would only be listed under the acknowledgements, so he could make an informed decision about whether or not it would be worth his time and effort to make those improvements. Proofreading and correcting is not a trivial feat.
More importantly, though, your question reminds me of a similar situation I experienced during graduate school. During a computer graphics course, my lab partner and I did a lot of work on an algorithm, and we ended up getting a paper published. Our instructor was also listed as a third author.
My partner and I developed and tested the algorithm, and our instructor did little but give us the problem. Did I feel slighted? No, and in hindsight, I now better understand his vital role in our work. These problems don't just pop up like dandelions, or infiltrate our email like spam – they are usually the result of extensive study, along with collaborative research with industry. In other words, without us students, he wouldn't have had an answer, but, without our instructor, we would not have had a problem of any meaningful significance.
If I see an IEEE paper with two authors, instead of presuming that the work was split evenly between those two, I'd probably assume that one author's principle role was to *identify the problem*, while the other *worked the solution*. That's so common that it's almost a given – such symbiotic relationships are ubiquitous in academia.
In other words, I think you misunderstand the nature of coauthorship in research. Your instructor thought the work you did was good enough for the two of you to get something published together. You ought to be appreciative of his guidance, happily put his name alongside yours, and get off to a good start in the realm of academic research.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/07/29 | 904 | 3,203 | <issue_start>username_0: For university-level researchers and professors, is the salary higher in the medical fields than in other fields? I suppose attracting physicians to teach may be harder, because they can usually get high payments working as physicians. Where can I find data about this in Europe, Australia, Canada and US?<issue_comment>username_1: For the US, I would have thought the data would be in the [AAUP report](http://www.aaup.org/report/heres-news-annual-report-economic-status-profession-2012-13), but I cannot find any data that breaks salaries down by field.
There is also [CUPA-HR](http://www.cupahr.org/surveys/index.aspx). The [free data set](http://www.cupahr.org/surveys/fhe4-tenure-surveydata-2013.aspx) has a break down by field with "HEALTH PROFESSIONS AND RELATED PROGRAMS" as a field. I would assume that this includes medical doctors, but also nurses. There is also some [free data](http://www.cupahr.org/surveys/fhe4-nontenure-surveydata-2013.aspx) about non-tenure track salaries including "Medicine, Medical Clinical Sciences, Graduate Medical Studies".
In summary, I think defining the "medicine area" and equating job duties and responsibilities is tough. There appears to be a large variation in salaries.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: So the problem with this question is going to be one of comparing like with like. I have seen some grants that implicitly assume an MDs salary is higher than a PhD's salary when in the same R01-type grant application, but this usually also involves a comparison of senior vs. junior faculty, which is always tricky. Even comparing "tenured faculty" is hard, because tenure at many medical schools is a much, much more rare thing to have.
I'd say the following generalizations are probably defensible, assuming we are talking about academic medicine vs. "nearby" fields, or PhDs in academic medicine.
* Hard money positions in research hospitals for *doing research* are vanishingly rare.
* MDs do have the option of making up for some "gaps" in funding with taking on more clinical duties whereas a PhD might have to take a salary hit, or cut back in other areas.
* Opportunities for clinical consulting, to pharma, device manufacturers, etc. are probably more available to clinicians.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: You could mine some of the Collegiate Times public university salaries data, e.g.,
[UVA Medicine salaries](http://www.collegiatetimes.com/databases/salaries/university-of-virginia-2010?dept=medicine)
vs.
[UVA English salaries](http://www.collegiatetimes.com/databases/salaries/university-of-virginia-2010?dept=english)
vs.
[UVA Chemistry salaries](http://www.collegiatetimes.com/databases/salaries/university-of-virginia-2010?dept=chemistry)
Obviously, you have to make apples-to-apples comparisons (full professor -vs- full professor, asst. professor -vs- assistant professor, etc.), and also realize that the State provides as little information as they have to by law, and there may be other hidden data that sway the results one way or another (for instance, you'll see full professors making $45000, but these might be half-year appointments, sabbatical years, etc.).
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/07/29 | 519 | 2,250 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a literature review at the moment. I have many many papers to read and I don't have that much time (just one month).
What I do is reading the abstract and then the conclusion and from the conclusion I see what were the key findings and then look them up in the paper and see some details.
Is that good way or should I read them cover to cover?<issue_comment>username_1: Your strategy sounds sound to me. You cannot read the papers from end to end. You need to weed out they papers you will possibly need in your review with as little effort as possible. Title and abstract should be enough. Once you have done this you should be left with a bunch of papers that are likely to be of use to you. While you have looked through them you must also consider how the material can be organized. There are many ways of doing this, chronological order (boring), thematic order (are there subfields?), contradictions (are there compeeting ideas) etc. The point is to try to get the information organized. You need some form of organization fo the papers so that you know how you will treat them in your review.
Once you have found all papers you think you need you can start assembling the information into your text. It is at this point you can start reading them in more detail. It is still not necessary to read every detail. you need to focus on the background to the different conclusions drawn.
The goal of the review should be to provide a new perspective on the field you have chosen so your own familiarity with the field (papers) is key. Try to collect as many as you can; not all will be used.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I fill the following template for each article I read. Some of them I fill only partially at first, to potentially come back later if I interested in spending more time. I found that noting the plan was taking little time and helping enough to be worth doing during the first read.
```
**** Reference for Humans
**** Abstract
**** Bibtex
#+BEGIN_SRC bibtex
#+END_SRC
**** Index Terms
**** Plan
**** Definitions
**** Results
**** Algorithms
**** Questions
**** Summaries
***** By Authors
***** By me
**** My Notes
```
Hope it helps!
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/07/29 | 1,803 | 7,217 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently finishing a B.Sc. Honours in Canada, and I'm applying to Edinburgh (among other places) to do a Masters. They have two [research-based degrees](http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/informatics/postgraduate/research-degrees), and I was wondering if people with experience in academics and CS could help me distinguish between the two. I'm not overly familiar with the British Education system.
The M.Sc. is a one-year degree of independent research, with very little to no classes. The MPhil is a two-year degree, where classes are taken in addition to independent research.
In particular, I'm wondering:
* Which is considered "more academic" or "more prestigious?"
* Which would be better for getting into a PhD program?
* Since there aren't classes in the MSc, are you expected to have a higher level of knowledge coming in?<issue_comment>username_1: Looking at the courses there appears to be a one-year [taught MSc](http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/informatics/postgraduate/msc/msc-informatics) and a one-year [MSc by research](http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/informatics/postgraduate/research-degrees/mres). The two-year [MPhil](http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/informatics/postgraduate/research-degrees/mphil) while described as a research degree, has a one-year taught component. It seems to me that the MPhil is just the two MSc courses combined. The programme description says:
>
> The first year of MPhil studies is probationary.
>
>
>
suggesting to me that if you do not do well enough on the taught component that you cannot progress to the research part.
I would say that taking classes is less "academic" than doing research and therefore the MPhil is less "academic". I would also think that the MSc by research has the highest admission standards and therefore is more prestigious
For getting into a PhD program you need to prove you can do research. Graduate level course work often helps in doing research. If you already have the fundamental skills that you would be learning in the taught components, there is no big benefit to taking more courses. Similar with research experience. If you are lacking both the MPhil might be the way to, but if you are lacking only one chose the appropriate MSc.
As for entry requirements, it is probably best to contact the department and ask them. As I said above, my guess would be that the MSc by research has the highest entry requirements.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the UK it's relatively unusual to apply for an MPhil - MSc and MRes are much more common. MPhils really exist to cover failed PhD candidates. When you apply to study for a PhD in the UK, for the first 12-18 months you are placed on "probation" (even if you alread hold an MSc/MRes). After this time, a review (and mini-viva) of both your progress and quality of research is conducted and you are either "confirmed" as being a PhD candidate or are relegated to MPhil.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Generally in the UK, the MPhil is seen as a senior level research qualification just above the MRes and below the PhD - at least in computer science. I do not agree that an MPhil is necessarily a failed PhD as there can be many reasons why a candidate cannot produce a full PhD thesis ranging from company support, time and funding to personal circumstances. A PhD fail to me is someone who has done a PhD thesis and failed the PhD viva and failed to get at least major corrections or a recommendation for resubmission in 12 months.
This was true in my case that I was transferred from PhD to MPhil, albeit my situation was rather difficult; I was in a PhD route for 3.5 years full time at Lancaster University and the sponsor company (a major water utility company) stopped communicating with me and my supervisor. As a result, my prototype was left untested in a real world scenario which was necessary for my PhD work as there is a requirement in producing innovative and original work. After a year of starting my PhD, I had a supervisor change resulting in a research area change resulting in a late panel 2 years down the line which didn't help either. The panel is a useful tool to know if you are being guided in the correct path and to know if you are getting along well with your supervisor as well as to see if you are producing work that is up to PhD/MPhil standard. If your work is not up to MPhil standard, they can altogether cancel your registration and you are out.
I can't stress this enough; you should have your panel early in your PhD and never late. In my case, it was given late due to a supervisor change and that "I fell through the cracks of the system" and nothing could be done other than to make a formal complaint which I have already.
The panel concluded that I had enough work to do a PhD and decided to change my route from PhD to MPhil on the premise that I was running out of time and no funding available for me (I only had 6 months left of funding, but due to other circumstances, this went well beyond my defence and upto summer 2017 surviving on a TA salary which was less than £5000 pa). This was compounded with fears that I might leave with nothing. They did say that if got the MPhil, then perhaps I could use this as a stepping stone to a PhD and upgrade my work.
It took me 5 years to complete my "over bloated" MPhil and I decided not to pursue the PhD in my area due to difficulties with my current supervision - it is another long story. I feel I do have enough research skills to carry out research in other areas which are of interest to me.
To clarify whether the MPhil has any classes: no, it doesn't. It is purely research unless you are doing a professional Doctorate which have taught components with research. The MPhil is research work done at the same quality and academic rigour of a PhD, albeit shorter in length - hence why the MPhil is seen as a higher degree than an MSc by Research. The MPhil used to be the gold standard during the 60's and 70's for lectureships until requirements increased to have a PhD under your belt.
Which is considered "more academic" or "more prestigious?"
From the Masters degrees, the MPhil as it is the highest Masters qualification that you can get before embarking on a PhD. I know people in my area who haven't got a PhD but have an MEng and produced academic output equivalent to that of a Professor with a PhD. Having research output and published by top ranking publishers is more prestigious in my opinion.
"Which one is better for a PhD?"
It depends on which subject you are studying; in computer science, you only need a BSc honours with a first class honours to enter the PhD route directly without requiring an MSc. Having an MRes or even better, an MPhil in a related area, would considerably boost your chances in succeeding. Other subjects like psychology would require an MRes to enter the PhD route depending on research areas.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Mphil is an interphase between MSc and PhD. I.e above MSc but below PhD. Masters program pose more importance to thesis. Mphil is usaully research based and that case higher than MSc.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/07/29 | 1,623 | 6,884 | <issue_start>username_0: How should one engage uninterested students in a fast-paced, densely fact-packed science course such as chemistry or microbiology? I find that the only students who truly understand and engage with the material are those who already have a strong background in the material being covered, while the rest of the class is usually ranging from bored to panicking, depending on how much they care about grades. (For most of the students in these classes, the science courses are required for their major, so they are taking them because they have to, not because they are intrinsically interested in the sciences.)
So how could I engage the interest of these students without dumbing down the course material or slowing down the pace of the class? Neither seems a viable option given department wide standards at this institution.<issue_comment>username_1: From a pedagogical standpoint, you always want to teach with a couple of things in mind:
1. You have to have a standard for the class.
2. The standard you set should be influenced by the level your students start at.
These two criteria frequently are at odds with each other, which is a shame: you want to teach the most engrossing, intellectual class so that each student can obtain a mastery of the important details of the subject, yet sometimes your students don't have the background and are not prepared to learn at that level, or are unmotivated for other reasons.
A third issue, and the one that you brought up, is the question of what to do when you have a heterogeneous set of students where some are unprepared (or unmotivated) and others are well prepared. If you are at an institution where the standard is very high, one option (and probably the right one) is to teach the material with the expectation that everyone will try their best and that it will be challenging for everyone, and let the cards fall as they may. Do your best to point the struggling students who want to learn the material to avenues for help -- office hours, tutoring, key reading material, etc. Don't worry particularly much about the ones who don't care -- if you're teaching an engaging class and they are bored because they don't really want to be there, that isn't your problem. If you find that you do have too many panicked students, you probably need to re-evaluate your teaching style or assessment plan, and slow things down. This is just the reality of the situation: too many of your students aren't prepared for the class as you envision it.
From your comment:
>
> This is a community college so many of the students are working parents who juggle multiple demands on their time.
>
>
>
I believe in this case you may end up in the situation I just mentioned more than you'd like. I would venture a guess that many of your students have academic priorities that are less about getting every bit of learning out of your course, and more about doing well enough to graduate and be prepared for whatever the next step in their career is. I urge you to try to put yourself in their shoes (this is always a good idea) and try to see from their perspective what the course means to them. I have taught a college physical science course to non-science majors at the community college level where I was happy to give them the *exposure* to the material -- most of them had never taken a physics or chemistry class in their life (high school or otherwise), and I knew that it would not have been a good idea to try to force a lot of math-heavy science down their throats.
So I haven't really answered your specific question about how to "engage the interest of these students without dumbing down the course material or slowing the pace of the class." My suggestions are (1) to re-evaluate why you think you're already engaging (and tweak it to meet your students' level), and (2) to make sure you are providing concrete assessments for them to study for (or work on in lab). If your students know what they have to do to get a "B" versus an "A", this might lower the level of panic if they see that shooting for that "B" will be obtainable while still giving them time to keep the other priorities in their life straight.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If I may contribute something more from username_1's excellent answer, from my experience as a high school science teacher for over a decade, in a range of environments. All having students with a mix of abilities and motivation.
Make the scientific concepts relevant, link the concepts to current discoveries - show them where the science is headed. Show them how the science affects their lives and how it would continue to affect them.
This is not always easy time-wise and logistically as it is not always easy to find how it links to their lives. But I found that the question:
"Have you seen/heard about [everyday life concept related to the science taught]?"
and go from there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As a student, even if I was deeply enthusiastic about the course, I would be completely unengaged in any class session that consisted of powerpoint lectures. There are many alternatives, such as flipping, peer instruction (Mazur, Peer Instruction: A User's Manual), and various other forms of active engagement (Hake, "Interactive Engagement Versus Traditional Methods: a Six-Thousand Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses, Am. J. of Phys, 66 (1997) 64).
>
> How should one engage uninterested students in a fast-paced, densely fact-packed science course such as chemistry or microbiology? [...] For most of the students in these classes, the science courses are required for their major, so they are taking them because they have to, not because they are intrinsically interested in the sciences.
>
>
>
Are these actual examples? Do you actually teach both chem and microbiology? (That would be unusual.) I would think that microbiology would be the easiest thing in the world to sell to students. E.g., if they're premed, they ought to easily be able to appreciate the relevance of learning about viruses and bacteria.
In any case, your subject has intrinsic worth, interest, and beauty. Presumably that's why you got a graduate degree in it. Approach it from this point of view and without apology, and you have every right to expect that at least some of your students will respond. You can't expect *every* community college student to respond. Look at the parking lot on the first day of the semester. Look at the same parking lot in the last week of instruction. Many, many community college students simply shouldn't be in college.
Re "densely fact-packed" -- you could ask yourself whether your subject could be presented with less emphasis on memorization and more emphasis on concepts. Do you give open-notes tests? If not, why not?
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/07/30 | 1,207 | 5,171 | <issue_start>username_0: A little while back I had sent one of my works to an ACM conference -just a National level conference. I knew my work was not one of the best they were going to receive, but given the quality of the papers published in the conference in the previous years, I was almost sure of an "Accept", and sure enough, an "Accept" did arrive around a week ago. But reviewer practically tore my work to pieces, saying that the claim is not novel, the data sets are biased, etc. And I do agree with him on most of the points.
Since the reviewer had given a detailed review, I had been working all week long to improve the quality of the paper and address all the points mentioned by him.
But to my great surprise, today I receive a mail from the PC chairs stating -
>
> we had inadvertently sent an ACCEPT for your paper. After discussion with reviewers we have decided to not accept this paper.
>
>
>
This is, to say the least, unethical unprofessional. And my entire week of hard work in improving the paper just went down the drain I guess.
My questions here-
1. Should I put any endeavor in contacting the PC Chairs and ask them to explain this strange stand? Should I explain my stand that the work has been drastically changed and improved from what it was when submitted?
2. Does such a behavior make them accountable for any legal action from my side? And, is it worth for me to take such an action?
**UPDATE:**
Thank you all for your comments and answers. Posting this here just to make the story complete. My guide insisted that we should write to the PC chair, requesting an opportunity to resubmit since some of the previous review comments were not really justified and too harsh on us, and anyways our paper stands improved from what it was before.
So we did re-submit. And our improved paper was accepted as well! Rather having an unsatisfactory publication, I have a better paper at hand now!
So happy ending after all :)<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Should I put any endeavor in contacting the PC Chairs and ask them to explain this strange stand? Should I explain my stand that the work has been drastically changed and improved from what it was when submitted?
>
>
>
I think an email to the PC would be appropriate. Don't expect the answer to change, however, and it may very well have been an administrative oversight. Even as a mistake, it is a relatively minor one that you don't have much control over.
>
> Does such a behavior make them accountable for any legal action from my side? And, is it worth for me to take such an action?
>
>
>
No. Their decisions aren't bound by any laws (that I know of) that could force them to honor their original email. If you make a big deal of it, you're likely to make a bad name for yourself, regardless of the mistake being on their end.
In the end, you've now got a better paper that probably shouldn't have been published anyway. Your changes are now in place, and you admit to having improved it. Submit it to another conference, and move on.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can always try to send an email to the PC explaining that you used the comment of the reviewer to greatly improve the paper, and that you hope that the paper could be reconsidered in this improved form. I don't think your chances of acceptance are big, but you can always try.
In regard to the legal action, I doubt that you have anything based on which you can sue them. In addition, what do you hope to gain.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Without knowing what happened at the other end it is early to place judgement such as "unethical" on this circumstance. It is of course very unfortunate and also clearly something that all editors do not want should happen. Clearly the accept was prematurely sent away; that was the mistake. I would interpret the "discussion with reviewers" as the editor(s) trying to see if the paper could pass despite the reviews but such an action could seemingly not be supported.
Now the course of events have happened. You can certainly contact the editors to get more feedback, I am sure they would help you with more (scientific) information if they can. Under most circumstances (do not know how this applies to your manuscript), I would recommend you to take the comments you were given and work up your manuscript (which you have also done). The manuscript should now be better than before and it might be suitable to publish somewhere else. This is also something you can ask in your letter to the editors unless you and your immediate surroundings do not already have a clear picture of where it might fit for possible publication.
Regarding the legal bits, journals have no obligation to publish anything and can even reject a paper without telling why. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to do this since it would reflect very badly on the journal and the publisher but the decision lies with the editor(s) and it is final. As an editor, one must think of the reputation of ones journal (because a well run journal attracts good papers) which usually means trying to be as fair and open as possible.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/07/30 | 393 | 1,613 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a table of studies and formula per study in the appendix, so sth like
```
study A E = mc²
study B v = ma
```
etc. For each study I need to cite a source. Now normally the citation list for the main part of document appears before the appendix. How do I handle this? Do I create a new citation list after the table?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on where your appendix falls in your document (or whether it will appear in the document at all). If appendix precedes references, just include citations in the regular reference list. If it follows, have a separate set of appendix-specific references. If it is separate, do the same as the latter case (a separate reference list).
This will depend on your style manual and publication outlet.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For a PhD thesis (as indicated in the tags of your question), check your university's reference style guide. I suspect, however, that it doesn't go into that much detail. So:
**do what you like best**, as long as it's **clear** and **coherent**.
If you have many citations in the appendix, and you suspect that people will want to read the appendix and main document separately, just maintain two separate lists of citations. It makes each of them shorter, and thus easier to read.
If you have very few citations in the appendix, you can also consider citing them in a different style, such as footnotes. It keeps them separated from the main references, for clarity, but doesn't necessitate to have a full “appendix list of references” if it's very short.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/07/30 | 1,209 | 3,884 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to find journals that:
* are ranked with JCR (no matter how low) *and*
* have open access (anyone can access the papers for free) *and*
* are free to publish (authors are not required to pay)
Maybe I am asking for a unicorn, but I think this should be feasible.
If I'm not mistaken, [arxiv.org](http://arxiv.org/) only fails in the first point. If someone could provide (a link to) a list of such a kind of journals that would be awesome. If such a list does not exist, how would I go about creating a list.<issue_comment>username_1: Please feel free to edit anything.
* Computer Science
+ Artificial Intelligence
- Machine Learning
* [Journal of Machine Learning Research](http://jmlr.org/)
+ General
- [Journal of Universal Computer Science](http://www.jucs.org/)
* Mathematics
+ Combinatorics
- [The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics](http://www.combinatorics.org/)
+ Statistics
- [Journal of Statistical Software](http://www.jstatsoft.org/)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are many journals that satisfy your criteria… here's how to find them!
1. Use [Journal Citation Reports](http://admin-apps.webofknowledge.com/JCR/JCR?RQ=HOME)
2. Search journals by publisher:
3. Choose an open access publisher, such as “Public Library of Science”
4. Enjoy!
---
**Edit:** as JeffE wisely noted, this does not address the criterion of “no publishing charge”. You'll have to check the various journals, but some have no publishing charges, including some published by [Hindawi Publishing Corporation](http://www.hindawi.com/apc/) for example. To find out which, **cross-reference the JCR data with [this list](http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/scholarlycommunication/oa_fees.html) maintained by Berkeley**.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is perhaps not exactly what you look for but, as a partial answer, the [Advanced Search](http://doaj.org/search) feature of the directory of open access journals (DOAJ) lets you filter the open access journals by subject AND by publication fee. Unfortunately, you cannot infer from the DOAJ data whether these journals are on JCR.
In particular, the DOAJ search results for open access journals in Computer Science with zero publication charges are at [this URL](http://doaj.org/search?source=%7B%22query%22:%7B%22filtered%22:%7B%22query%22:%7B%22match_all%22:%7B%7D%7D,%22filter%22:%7B%22bool%22:%7B%22must%22:[%7B%22term%22:%7B%22_type%22:%22journal%22%7D%7D,%7B%22term%22:%7B%22index.classification.exact%22:%22Science%22%7D%7D,%7B%22term%22:%7B%22index.classification.exact%22:%22Electronic%20computers.%20Computer%20science%22%7D%7D,%7B%22term%22:%7B%22bibjson.author_pays.exact%22:%22N%22%7D%7D]%7D%7D%7D%7D%7D).
In principle, as a next step one could compare (by hand or perhaps using some software) the list resulting from the DOAJ search with the list from JCR for (a given branch of) computer science or search in JCR (e.g. in [the list of full journal titles](http://admin-apps.webofknowledge.com/JCR/JCR?RQ=TITLES_FULL)) for specific journal names.
Also, the DOAJ listing includes links to home pages of journals and often data about the journal impact factor (if any) or JCR listing are available at these home pages.
To give a specific example resulting from a quick attempt to compare the lists, the [Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research](http://www.jair.org) is open access with zero publication charges and has a 2013 IF of 0.904.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME>, <http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/>, might be helpful to you, as well. I think you'd still have to do your cross-check against the JCR, though.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/07/30 | 1,530 | 6,369 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing 2 conference papers. One is highly quantitative in nature and the other is absolutely qualitative in nature. I am submitting both papers to conferences having deadlines in the next couple of months.
The papers present results on 3 **different** research questions on the same topic and are highly related with each other. You could argue that paper A + paper B together present a holistic view of the answer to these research questions. Individually, paper A and paper B show a different side to the problem since you generally get alternate points of view from quantitative and qualitative works.
Since the papers and their results are highly interrelated, there exists a compelling reason for me to ensure that they cite each other. I have seen [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8443/cite-paper-in-the-same-upcoming-conference) question and [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4837/can-i-present-the-results-of-a-paper-that-is-currently-under-review) question which are also highly related to my question. However, my question is different enough, in my opinion to warrant a separate question.
1. How should I cite these papers? (one paper is going to be in APA style and the other will be in ACM style)
2. Does it make good sense to contact the Associate Chairs of these conferences for further clarification?
3. The **most** important question for me is, is this ethical? Does it not break the double blind review system? I am ready to not cite these papers if that is the case.
I am having conversations with my adviser about this but just want some broader perspective from different disciplines if I am somehow missing something.<issue_comment>username_1: I think this boils down to the question
>
> Should I cite a paper that has not (yet) been accepted?
>
>
>
In my opinion, citing an unaccepted paper is risky, since for a reason or another it might be rejected, and submitted somewhere else later on. Then, your paper would be citing the wrong proceedings or journal. Once a paper is accepted (achieves the *in press* status), I think citing is OK.
And hey, you can just write in the conclusions that your future work will be concentrating on the same problem from another point of view. Interested readers will go google your name.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Normally, you can update citations until the proofreading stage. I've done that at more than one occasion. When submitting the article, I cite Myself et al. (submitted 20xx). Then the manuscript goes through peer review, revisions, subsequently typesetting, etc. By the time the final proofs come out, I probably know whether Myself et al. is rejected or not, and can probably provide an updated citation. In the worst case, I can replace it by a short text that this will be considered in a future publication.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Normally, unpublished materials are just that, unpublished, and should be treated as such. It is, however, always possible to reference your other work as "in prep." until it becomes published. You need to look carefully at any instruction for authors on how such references should be made and if they are acceptable.
If you add such a reference to a paper it is always possible to remove the reference if one of the works becomes rejected or if it is unlear if it will be published. What should be avoided is to have references to work as "in prep." remaining if the work is unlikely to ever getting published. After all, the purpose of referencing is to provide published sources that others can access.
Including an "in prep." reference will also provide problems for reviewers and adding or removing such a reference during the review process means that something that can not be checked is added or removed in the manuscript. So my suggestion is to avoid having to rely on such a reference for any key points in the manuscript.
You are, in other words, in a grey zone when it comes to referencing. The best solution would be one where you do not rely on unpublished references but if you think you must then use your discretion and make sure your inclusion is made in a way that it is not key to your conclusions or that it might not affect the reviews in a signficant way. You, furthermore, should be as confident as you can that they both will be accepted in the end.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You could create Technical Reports for each paper and cite the Tech Reports in your conference submissions.
If you decide to do this (and especially if you put the TRs on your web page), you may want to be careful about self-plagiarism.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Editor A wrote to editor B, indicating that one of the reviewers of a paper submitted to Journal A contained material that had been submitted at about the same time to Journal B. Editor A requested a copy of the paper submitted to Journal B. Editor B responded, confirming that the paper in question had been submitted to Journal B (submission date two weeks earlier than the paper submitted to Journal A), but had been rejected eight weeks later after external peer review. Editor B sent a copy of the rejected paper to editor A. Editor A examined the two papers and confirmed that there was “some degree of overlap” between the two and also felt that there was a degree of “salami slicing.
>
>
> What should the editors do now?
>
>
>
The answer can be found [here](http://publicationethics.org/case/dual-submission-salami-slicing-redundant-publication-or-all-three).
In order to avoid such an unpleasant affair why not boil the question down to
>
> [One] could argue that paper A + paper B together present a holistic view of the answer to these research questions.
>
>
>
and submit only one paper?
I don't want to accuse you of scientific misconduct but your statement is at least suspicious in this regard. Therefore, a single paper would provide the following two benefits:
* No need to cite your second, unpublished paper.
* Absolutely ethical scientific conduct (in contrast to a strategy of "[salami slicing](http://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/74559)" or building on the "[Least Publishable Unit](http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/The-Publishing-Game-Getting-More-for-Less.pdf)").
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/07/31 | 341 | 1,417 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a senior in college and working for my final year project. I am required to read more than 8 papers. However, 2 of them cannot be found online or in the library (Summon system). The library delivery service is inaccessible now, and I believe my advisor have that papers.
Can I ask professor to send me a copy of the papers? Is it impolite to ask such favor or illegal?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can, and you should. It is not impolite (unless you actually have access), and it is not unethical. I don't think it is illegal, if you do not distribute it further, and it is certainly not uncommon.
First, make sure you really don't have access (otherwise, you risk looking a bit like a fool), then ask him. Don't make a big deal of it, just explain that you lack access and you believe he may have them, if so could he please send them.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One trick is to google the complete name of the paper in quotes. This will very often pull up a pdf copy stashed somewhere; perhaps on the profs own web page. Sometimes you can get essentially the same paper from arxiv. But I totally agree with the previous answer that you should make sure you don't otherwise have access to the paper before emailing. If you can't get an email response, your library can almost certainly get you a free electronic copy by inter-library loan.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/07/31 | 772 | 3,250 | <issue_start>username_0: My field is cardiovascular epidemiology, and my current research question relates to some risk factor which is supposed to strongly elevate cardiovascular risk in a defined subgroup. However, my data do not indicate any such association, and power analysis shows that I have about 0.85 power to detect an effect of the size previously published. I see my findings as evidence for the null hypothesis.
Most of the available work on this risk factor in this subgroup comes from papers that all share one author. He is the leader regarding this question. He also holds a patent for assessment of this risk factor and possesses shares of a company that develops and plans to sell diagnostic tests to assess this risk factor.
I would like to make a statement in my paper that politely mentions these facts. This other author has published virtually everything there is that reports this positive association, and would profit enormously if it were true. However, I'm only a PhD student and they are top tier.
So how would I best go about this in my paper?<issue_comment>username_1: First off the fact that one group is dominating will be implicitly understood if you provide a paragraph or two summarizing their work and cite their publications. In such a paragraph you could add words like "ground-breaking" or phrases that describe the dominance of the group on the field.
You could for example start the paragraph by saying:
>
> "The work concerning risk assessment of [...] has largely been carried out by [the research group] (example citations)."
>
>
>
(I hope you see the main idea of my attempt) Then you follow up on what they have done and cite their work.
It is just important to keep the tone as neutral as possible and let the citeable work speak for itself. Spending one or more paragraphs describing the work should be enough to make everyone understand the message.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 1. >
> *Most of the available work on this risk factor in this subgroup comes from papers that all share one author. He is the leader regarding this question*
>
>
>
This you can freely express in your paper: it is a statement of fact, and if you provide evidence to back it up (papers, reviews, book chapters, etc.), there is no reason for it to be interpreted as a hostile statement. It is actually quite interesting.
2. >
> *He also holds a patent for assessment of this risk factor. […] This guy has published virtually everything there is that reports this positive association*
>
>
>
Again, it's a statement of fact, not a problem. You can cite a patent if you want, and stating that in a neutral light is easy.
3. >
> *and possesses shares of a company that develops and plans to sell diagnostic tests to assess this risk factor. […] and he would profit enormously if it were true.*
>
>
>
This, on the other hand, I would be **very wary** of writing that in a review. First, because it is not a scientific statement, so its place in a scientific paper is not clearly defined. Secondly, because it could (and probably will) be interpreted as having a strongly negative implication, possibly to the extent of suggesting very serious ethical issues.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/07/31 | 392 | 1,734 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in a "transition period" shortly after having finished my MSc, and shortly before beginning my PhD. In the summer period the academic life doesn't cease, though, and sometimes an affiliation is asked for at scientific events. I am going to a conference soon, and indeed the organisers need an affiliation.
Is there some rule saying what affiliation I should mention in a situation like that: the past one, the future one, both, or neither?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe I'm a little too practical, but I would go with whichever email address will you be using most consistently in the future. Presumably that's the PhD one, assuming you have access to that email address. If anyone wants to contact you in six months that will be the more correct affiliation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Be pragmatic. If you need to provide affiliation for, for example, presenting work you have already done, then use the old affiliation. It would be odd to provide your coming affiliation in such cases. Even later when you are at your new place you may want to use the older affiliation along with your new one to show where you did the work and where you are now. If you need to provide contact information not related to work you have done then the new affiliation migt be good. That said, however, it would be wrong to use the new affiliation until you become officially affiliated by a contract (equivalent). From this perspective your old affiliation can be used until the new one is official (find out by asking your new location when can be applied). There is of course not wrong to clearly state that you *will be* at your new affiliation starting such-and-such time.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/07/31 | 620 | 2,625 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a beginner researcher in a relatively new area. I published two papers in a conference directly related to the general field of my research (the general field is Artificial Intelligence or AI). Still there is no major conference for the new area; only one workshop and several special editions in top journals. As I am progressing in my PhD thesis, I see I am becoming a self-citation researcher.
Although the new area is attracting more people within AI and other disciplines, I am worried about my research. My advisor is happy and enthusiastic about my work. The big names in my research are well recognized in the AI field in general. My question is how to get their attention to read and therefore cite my work?<issue_comment>username_1: It's generally acceptable to e-mail senior scientists a copy of your paper. Say who you are and who your advisor is, describe your paper very briefly, and tell them that if they have any comments you'd be grateful to hear them.
Most will ignore you, don't take it personally -- it's not something that will "count against you", unless you do it too often, or to people who's research has nothing to do with your paper. Usually this just means they're too busy or have nothing in particular to say. But you might get a couple of interesting and/or supportive replies. I did, when I was a grad student.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Get face-to-face time with them.** Email is a “least effort” solution if you have no other possible way, but the way to sell your research is by informal discussions. There are many ways to get one-on-one time with big names, some of which you can pursue alone, some of which your advisor can help with:
* Introduce yourself during a conference, preferably in a rather informal setting. If the conference has a poster session, engage the discussion if they pass in front of your poster. Otherwise, it is perfectly acceptable to spot them in the crowd, introduce yourself, and say *“I have a poster over there and I would like to discuss one of my conclusions with you”*. Just be polite, and courteous if you see they want to opt out.
* In a smaller conference or workshop, just ask the guy a question after his talk, in a way that relates their work to yours. Possibly follow up with some discussion during a coffee break.
* Get your advisor to invite Prof. <NAME> to give a talk in your department, and among the activities scheduled during their visit, arrange for a discussion with him.
* Invite (or get your advisor to invite) Prof. <NAME> to be on your thesis committee!
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/01 | 1,427 | 6,093 | <issue_start>username_0: I am lucky (or potentially unlucky) enough that a grant applications that I am working on does not have any formatting specifications and instead just has a limit of 5000 words. There are some suggested sections, that will be be variable in terms of length (some will have 200 words and others over 1000), and it is likely that everyone will need to add additional sections. I am used to grant applications using poorly created MS Word forms with predefined sections that allow no formatting and are a single column with narrow margins/long line widths and single spacing.
I am looking for a style guide (or recommendations) about how to format the grant and the pros/cons of different formatting styles. I am both interested in the physical layout on the page, use of figures and tables, as well as advice on sectioning and the order of sections. I use LaTeX if that matters, but am happy for MS word advice also.
For example, do I go single column or double column and wide or narrow margins? The suggested sections do not include an obvious place for aim. Is it worth starting with an an overview that defines the problem and the outlines the proposed research or is 5000 words short enough that you do not need it?<issue_comment>username_1: I envy you the fact that it is only a word count that counts. I am in a system where everything has to fit a certain number of pages with 12pt Times-Roman and 2.5 cm margins.
With the word limit as your main limitation you have the possibility to illustrate your application more freely. If suitable, I strongly suggest you try to come up with conceptual graphics to strengthen the text and make difficult concepts easier to grasp. This can be a huge advantage. Since your are not limited to pages you can afford complex and larger illustrations than otherwise possible.
As for typesetting, you use LaTeX (as do I) which produces excellent text. Trust the LaTeX settings for text width, line-spacing etc. to get a readable text. Too long or too short lines makes the text difficult to read. See the [geometry](http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/geometry) package for details if you are not already using it. EDIT: I do not think two-column format is good for proposals. It is a way to put as much text into a small area and also involves using smalller type sizes, typically around 9 in order to get enough characters into a line to make it readable. Since the number of pages is not a limit, I would aim for something which is as easily read as possible, typically 11-12 pt single columns. the margin widths can be determined so as to get reasonable line lengths. I do not think wide or narrow margins make a difference but wider margins make the page more attractive than narrow (basically a typographical design issue).
EDIT: With one-column format you can add figures at full width and with the no-page-limit do not have to worry about the size of the graphics (in the sense of having to make it as small as possible so to not use up space. I think a straight-forward simple formatting is best. There is no need to be overly creative. What conveys the message without resistance is the best.
One of the more useful concepts in grant writing I have come across is given in the book [Writing Successful Science Proposals](http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300119398) by <NAME> and <NAME> which outlines a two-paragraph summary, akin to an abstract whith which you introduce your proposal. The point of this is to quickly and concisely convey the key points of the proposal to the reader. This involves starting from the big picture metion key gaps in knowledge, how to tackle them (methods), preliminary results (if existent) and expected results. I obviously cannot copy the book content here but the point is to make the reader of the proposal completely clear over what to expect in the proposal and so all details given is just putting substance to the known structure. I believe this is what you aim for in what you call an overview section.
EDIT: After having started your text with a brief introduction, you simply follow up by the usual type of structure:
* *background* (to focus on the gap of knowledge to be targeted)
* *objectives*
* *project outline*
* *time table (milestones; can be a [gantt plot](http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/graphics/pgf/contrib/pgfgantt))*
* if applicable: *research group/resources*
* *references*
For references I would go for footnote type references since the harvard-style citations uses up many characters. It is also possible to abbreviate the reference list by omitting the paper title, similar to what is done in *Nature* and *Science*.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: By submitting a grant proposal you're asking the funding agency to give you some resources (funding) to investigate some problem. Very early in the proposal you should make the case, clearly and succinctly, why you --- and not someone else --- should be given those resources:
* *The problem*:
+ what is the issue you propose to investigate?
+ why is it worth investigating?
* *The current state of knowledge*:
+ what are the shortcomings or gaps in the current state of the art?
+ why are those gaps or shortcomings important and worth addressing?
* *The proposed research*:
+ how do you propose to approach these gaps or shortcomings?
+ what specific research questions will you address in the course of your investigations?
+ what will be the impact if your investigation is successful?
* *Likelihood of success*:
+ what makes you qualified to do this research?
+ what preliminary evidence do you have that suggests that your proposed approach is likely to succeed?
I would suggest addressing these points in an "Executive Summary" or "Background" section, of at most one or 1 1/2 pages, at the very beginning of the proposal. This will give the reviewer a high-level view of what you're planning to do and help set the context for the more detailed discussion in the rest of the proposal.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/01 | 739 | 3,240 | <issue_start>username_0: I just found out that my undergraduate institution made a tiny error on my transcript of records. I moved to another country and am currently in my masters and I'm wondering if I should make the effort to get that little mistake corrected.
So how often will I need that transcript of records from my bachelors in the future?
I assume that after I have the masters degree I am probably expected to just send in the bachelors and masters certificate (+letters of recommendation etc.) for applications in academia or industry, because adding both transcripts of record would bloat my application significantly.<issue_comment>username_1: I guess this largely depends on *where* you apply. Industry usually interested in what recent projects/ education you have. However, academia usually want to see the complete history of the candidate. Regardless where you apply, doing good on the most recent degree is a good sign of productivity.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, you should get the error corrected. Do it now, before you need it. Although not all employers will want to see it, there's a chance that some may, and if they do, they will probably need it quickly.
Generally you should not include a transcript or other official documents with your application unless they are specifically requested. Your resume or CV will have the basic information about your degree. As you say, it adds several pages; if an employer wants it (and some will!) they should say so.
This may vary by country, but when applying to faculty jobs in the US, perhaps 10% of employers required a copy of my undergraduate transcript; enough that I couldn't afford to ignore it.
I'm not sure what you mean by a "certificate"; the US may not have a direct equivalent. Here you do get a diploma, but this is just a fancy piece of paper that you frame and hang on your wall; it lists only the degree and the date, with no further details. Nobody has ever asked to see my diploma. For us, the transcript is the only real official document; it is sent directly from the institution so that it can't be tampered with. (However, many employers will be satisfied with a simple photocopy for a preliminary application, and only request an official copy in the final stages.)
As there have been some high-profile cases lately of people claiming degrees that they didn't have, I'd expect that in the future, more employers will want to see transcripts.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to field making a difference, there are strong differences between countries. For instance, for my jobs in the US, I never needed to show any of my diplomas; however, I had to supply my transcripts for undergraduate and graduate programs. By contrast, in Germany, job applicants are normally expected to show their *entire* pedigrees—which means at a minimum the diploma certificates at both the university **and** high school levels! (I was also expected to produce the transcripts, of course.)
So, the best advice I can give is to follow the expectations of the industry in the region where you are applying. If you have any doubts about what is required, ask the contacts for the position or program.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/01 | 1,063 | 4,906 | <issue_start>username_0: Just like my other research-related activities, I keep a complete record of the reviews I perform: both the original papers and the reviews I have written, as well as the revised manuscript I receive one, and the final published manuscript if it is published (but sometimes in a different journal!)
I don't think I ever read anything in reviewer guidelines that forbid this, but I recently met someöne who argued that confidential material should be deleted after review. It's true that keeping it on my hard drive exposes it slightly to a risk of breach of confidentiality, but no more than the rest of confidential material that I handle every day…
So, what are policies on this matter and what are the existing practices?<issue_comment>username_1: There is no legal reason to hold on to old reviews, it would be the responsibility of the journal in that case. I have kept a record of my reviews just as you describe you have done, mostly because I like to save my work. I sometimes curse this because I can see reviews I would like to share with students but cannot since I perceive them as confidential unless agreed otherwise with the author(s), and the reasons I would like to share them usually does not reflect well on the paper.
Unless the reviews are made under a contract of some sort, I would argue that they fall under immaterial rights; it is your intellectual work which is provided to (1) the author and (2) the journal. I do not think anyone else can claim rights to a review.
The review work is generally made under the assumption that it is a communication between reviewer and author, albeit filtered through an editor. I have not seen any instance where someone has argued ownership of a review in my field, either in general or in the case of the journal where I am an editor. As a reviewer one must always consider the fact that all help that is provided is practically given away and should of course be seen in the greater perspecite of both giving and receiving in some form of balance.
Instances where reviews may be contracted are common when reviewing reports for government agencies or commercial enterprises. I have not seen, but cannot discount the possibility, that a journal or publisher could have such agreements. But I cannot imagine such an agreement would be hidden, it would be communicated very clearly.
As for keeping your reviews safe from being spread, I would say that the journals electronic manuscript systems are far more likely to be hacked into than that of an individual researcher. To some extent I would compare having a review on a hard drive to having it in a ring-binder. It IS possible to get hold of it but I doubt more security than that is required (i.e. ordinary computer "security" measures, e.g. provided by a university).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I do the same (i.e., save all versions of a manuscript I receive and all of my and the other reviewers' comments that I receive through the review process). I save them in a single directory according to their manuscript number, which tends to keep things fairly organized and easy to find later.
Why might I want to find them later? First, when I receive a revision, I find it is a lot easier to go back and look at the files I have stored locally to see what I recommended change (in case it has been months since I first saw the manuscript), whether the author(s) did, in fact, change anything, and whether the changes were actually in-line with my and the other reviewers' suggestions. This came up recently when I received a revision that claimed to make changes but I found they had actually not made changes in the manuscript (the original and revision were strikingly similar) and I suggested a rejection.
The second instance where this can come up is receiving the same manuscript from a different journal (e.g., because it was rejected by the journal you reviewed for first). Having your previous comments and the previous version allows you to see how the manuscript has developed and either provide original feedback or reiterate points that still need improvement that you highlighted in your previous review. Or, decline to review because youf ind it difficult to present an unbiased opinion.
A third, and final, reason that I find it useful to save these things is pedagogical. In graduate school, several professors sent us versions of their reviews for manuscripts so that we could see how to write a peer review. Having manuscripts and your reviews available makes passing down that future pedagogical activity much easier. (Note that sharing manuscripts may be more controversial than sharing one's review, but if the paper was previously available as a working paper or conference paper and was subsequently published, I see little ethical concern with sharing the manuscript with future students.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/01 | 863 | 3,687 | <issue_start>username_0: A high citation rate is desirable in academia. Citing other work doesn't cost much, so citations are cheap to give but desirable to get. That brings me to the question:
If a previous article addresses a topic similar to the one I'm writing, is that a sufficient reason to cite it? Or should the prior article meet a minimum quality to "deserve" a citation? To put it bluntly: if I'm aware of a prior crappy article, should I ignore it, or cite it and write why it's crap (of course in a more diplomatic way)?
In my field, some articles questioning anthropogenic climate change get quite a lot of citations from colleagues pointing out flaws in their reasoning or statistics...
Note that I'm exclusively talking about peer-reviewed publications.<issue_comment>username_1: There's a certain amount of judgment that needs to be exercised here. One of my more frequently cited publications is an attempt to correct methodological errors in a previous work (which was also highly cited). While it got the point across, it has also led to my work *not* being cited by the other authors, even though they've adopted the methodological points laid out in my paper.
Now, part of the reason why we discussed the work in detail was because there were major problems that led us to being unable to reproduce their results when we used their techniques with the "advantages" of modern technology. Since it in fact "inspired" our work, we felt the extended discussion was appropriate. However, if the same paper were to present results that were simply wrong, and didn't have the same "primacy" within the research literature, we would have probably ignored it.
Literature citations in standard journal papers (as opposed to review articles) are not meant to be ecumenical or exhaustive. Your job, as an author, is to exercise judgment as to which articles provide an accurate overview of the state of work in the field, and provide the best support for the arguments you wish to make.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Negative citations** is what you describe. It is something of a fallacy of the system that a paper may get many citations and therefore seems important when it is clearly sub-par and is referenced in a negative connotation.
Seen objectively, one should give credit where it is due. If someone was first to realize something then that is the origin of the idea (in official terms), how good or bad the paper is, is irrelevant. In some cases first discoveries may just be gut feelings and not well-founded.
I sometimes have to bite my lip when I reference some papers because I really do not think they deserve it (because I know the background) but realize there are no two ways about it. You can of course chose not to reference it, as you have the freedom to chose what we cite, but you may end up getting reviews asking you to add it (if it is something key).
In some cases it is possible to provide objective criticism of a paper. The problem is that the shortcomings will have to be clear.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends what is your goal. If you are doing a thorough review of literature, you *will* have to cite prior work, even if your opinion of it is low (and you can briefly state why). If you are doing a comment, follow-up or other work where criticism of the prior work is key to your argumentation, then of course you have to cite it. But, if the field is otherwise plentiful and there are other more successful prior works which you can cite, you don't need to be exhaustive, and you can thus omit those works which you consider subpar (or of low originality, or derivate works).
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/02 | 499 | 2,104 | <issue_start>username_0: I work for a large company, I am also a student at a big school. My employer is supportive in terms of funding required for my studies. Although the research paper has more to do with my academic studies. What is a reasonable way to put both affiliations in the research paper? My primary affiliation is my employer and second affiliation is my school. Is it ok to put in the Author section both affiliations? And give a footnote with the details?<issue_comment>username_1: You should be able to put both affiliations on. I assume you are permanently employed, in which case that is more permanent than the academic address. However, if your published work is done as part of your schooling you should put that affiliation first, perhaps listing your job affiliation/address as "permanent" or something describing your employment.
The reason for putting your academic affiliation first is that it is within that you have done the work and probably received intellectual coaching and support (if you receive similar input also from work then that affiliation might be equally valid as first). Listing two affiliations is common and the reason is typically when people move between institutes and it is important to keep readers aware of one whereabouts in such circumstances. In your case you will likely be found at your company in the future (my assumption) and it therefore makes sense to list also that.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If both institutions contributed to the work you are reporting in your article, you should **list them both as affiliations**. It is not unusual at all, and in most (all?) journals there is no concept of “primary” or “secondary” affiliation: **whichever order you list them in is fine**.
For example, see the penultimate author in the list below:
or [this other example](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/3446/2700) (which I consider over-the-top):
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/02 | 1,102 | 4,754 | <issue_start>username_0: This has not happened to me, but to a friend in the final stages of her PhD, she and the rest of the research group are understandably devastated, as the advisor was not only (in my friend's words), brilliant, but very kind and approachable.
My friend and all the research students are also worried about their research projects, as the advisor was one of the top researchers in that field and apparently, the only researcher in that university. The associate advisors have indeed stepped up, but as good as they are, they do not have the insight that the late advisor had.
What is a bit of advice that people may have for this situation?
One suggestion is that the research group (students, co-authors etc) band together to help each other out, with the guidance of the associate advisors.
I have looked over [this question and the posted answers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3172/what-are-some-options-for-a-graduate-student-abandoned-by-ph-d-advisor), but I feel that this situation is considerably different as there is the ever-present aspect of the feelings of loss, that are present and should not be ignored.<issue_comment>username_1: We had a similar situation at my university when a professor running a large group with millions of research dollars passed away. There are a few issues that have to be dealt with, and usually the department chair and/or the dean play a major role in this
* research funding: often this can be transferred (in consultation with program managers) to faculty in related areas who (depending on the degree of involvement in the research) either merely manage the money for the students involved, or might play a more active role in spending it.
* students: students need committees and replacement advisors. Again, the department chair, in consultation with the students and related faculty, might be able to assign faculty as caretakers for the students.
* teaching/committees: while there are likely significant teaching/committee disruptions, these don't affect the former students of the researcher, so I'll ignore this component.
My view is that students that are close to graduating need someone who can sign off on their thesis work (hopefully without too much modification). They hopefully already have a few other people who can write letters for them for jobs, and can mention the advisor's demise in their letters to explain the absence.
Students earlier in the Ph.D program (say just post-qualifying) are in the biggest bind: they've spent enough time in their research area to have committed to a topic, but now they have no one to guide them. They are the ones who probably need the most help from senior students, other faculty and the department.
Students early in the program have the option of switching advisors, or even schools if there's no one else in the department who can advise them/fund them/works in their areas of interest. Again, the department is usually sympathetic and might be able to provide such students with short term funding via TAships if that's an issue.
None of this of course addresses the feelings of grief and loss
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is without doubt a tragic situation. However, it is not an insurmountable problem.
As you suggested, the important thing is to allow both the grieving process and the research to continue at their appropriate paces. Without the room to understand and deal with what's happened, the research can't really go as it's supposed to, and the work is needed to provide a focus so that grief doesn't completely bring the group to a standstill.
From an emotional perspective, I'd certainly recommend that the department make a counselor available to the group members, and to encourage them to talk about things, rather than to shove them aside.
With respect to the research, there really isn't a completely satisfactory solution. It really does need to be a group-wide effort, as you've suggested, with collaborators and co-advisors stepping up to take a senior role. Another idea might be to reach out to former group members who are still active in academia to help with mentoring the group members. Note that this is not the same thing as being a full-fledged advisor; this is more of having an extra person to talk to when needed.
(This is also why good short-, mid- and long-range planning is essential for everybody, and why thesis committees and planning meetings with the advisor are so important for graduate students. If appropriate plans-to-finish and related strategies are in place, then it should be largely a matter of executing those plans, rather than trying to devise something new without the advisor's help.)
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/03 | 1,326 | 5,584 | <issue_start>username_0: I'll be starting a Masters of Science program soon and wanted to make plans for my professional/educational future. I've been looking at different doctorate level degree programs and I'm having a bit of trouble in understanding the difference between a Doctor of Computer Science program and a Ph.D. in Computer Science program. I've seen it listed both ways which leads me to believe that they're two separate programs.
Could someone explain what the differences between the two are and identify which is more appropriate for someone with a development and software engineering background?
Here are two programs that show the difference in titles. These are not necessarily the programs I have in mind but they're the first ones I could find that show the title difference.
[Colorado Technical University - Doctor of Computer Science](http://www.coloradotech.edu/Degree-Programs/Doctor-Of-Computer-Science)
[Nova Southeastern University - Ph.D. in Computer Science](http://www.scis.nova.edu/doctoral/cisd.html)<issue_comment>username_1: This is the first I've heard of a "Doctor of Computer Science" degree. Not having a dissertation requirement is a clear sign that this is different from a "standard" Ph.D program. A Ph.D (in any discipline) requires you to produce an original piece of research that you defend to a committee of experts. In addition, most Ph.D programs will have course requirements, residency requirements and so on.
**Update**: Some googling led me to the Wikipedia entry on '[professional doctorates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_doctorate#Professional)', which most closely match the nature of the degree the OP describes. As <NAME> points out, this is close in spirit to an MD (USA) and JD.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are interested in a career in research, I would strongly recommend avoiding "executive-format" programs such as the one you've linked to. A program like that is *not* a standard PhD program, in that you are not required to produce a piece of original research, and therefore cannot claim to have met the standard of being an independent researcher (and problem-solver) at the end of your program.
If your long-term interests, however, run more toward being in management and other non-technical careers, then perhaps this would be an option—but I would only recommend it if you were already working in industry.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The Doctor of Computer Science program at Colorado Technical University has a dissertation requirement. At one point there was an optional four paper option but it is really a dissertation broken out into three papers that are the dissertation chapters broken out separately. The fourth paper is a publishable journal article. Thus you are doing much more work if you elect not to do the dissertation. The current program has removed the four paper option and is now dissertation only.
I am an alumni of the program and currently in a tenure track role at a state university while also holding an honorary position at a Tier 1 (top 100) institution. When I was in the program we had three residencies per year and now they have two. Remember that not all institutions are allowed to have a PhD but may have another terminal (doctoral) program. My Research Gate profile is below however you may contact me on LinkedIn to ask any questions. Additionally, I can point you towards other alumni who are professors West Point Military Academy, George Fox, Alabama A&M University, The Oklahoma State University, and other institutions.
Research Gate Profile <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Maurice_Dawson2>
LinkedIn Profile
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauricedawson>
Both programs are great but you have to look at publishing peer reviewed research immediately to bring value to your terminal degree. Again feel free to reach out to me.
-Mo
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Sorry for late response but was busy with grades and research activities. Colorado Technical University has always had the dissertation option however they had the four paper option as well. The four paper option has been phased out completely. The dissertations can be found on the IEEE Digital Library and through the institution's library. Also the 12 research and writing courses are the dissertation courses for the three year period. If you view the catalog and do a search on dissertation the word comes up a 144 times. See <http://catalog.careered.com/~/media/Catalogs/ctu_6/course_catalog.pdf> On pg 36 where you will see the following for the Doctor of Computer Science degree plan and description.
>
> **Graduation Requirements** In addition to the successful completion of
> the above 96 credits with an acceptable GPA, students must also
> satisfactorily complete and defend their research proposal and final
> dissertation.
>
>
>
Since the program and degree is relatively small it is easy to come to conclusions. It should be noted that the college has the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) accreditation and is a National Security Agency (NSA) & Department of Homeland Security (DHS) National Centers of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Education Program (CAE/IAE). Additionally, the most similar degree would be the Doctor of Science (D.Sc. or Sc.D.) which very few institutions have. I hope this assist and thanks for checking as well.
See ABET accreditation at <http://main.abet.org/aps/AccreditedProgramsDetails.aspx?OrganizationID=192>
-Mo
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/03 | 1,807 | 7,980 | <issue_start>username_0: I spotted that some universities do not have a comprehensive exam for their PhD students while it is standard at most universities (specifically for computer science). For what reasons do some universities drop the requirement of comprehensive exam? What is the impression towards someone who has graduated from no-comprehensive department?<issue_comment>username_1: My department does not have a comprehensive exam. The most frequent reason I have heard is that we don't **need** it. On the other hand, some other departments in our university have comprehensive exams and I have heard that they are primarily used to **weed out** students after the first year.
I will venture to say that there is absolutely no impression towards graduating from a no-comprehensive program. Research job committees look at publications, letters of recommendation and research experience. Graduates from my program have found jobs wherever graduates from similar programs find jobs.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The primary reasons for having a comprehensive or qualifying examination are as a measure of quality control, and as a means of "population control."
The first ensures that students meet minimal criteria for promotion to PhD candidacy. This allows, in part, PhD programs to take a few candidates who they feel could be successful, but are not 100% confident thereof.
The second is used if departments admit more incoming students than they have funding to support as PhD candidates. Then the exam is used to "cull the herd," and keep the candidates the faculty wants to continue to fund.
My field used to be the kind of program where everybody had to do a qualifying examination. But, in recent years, this trend has started to swing away from comprehensive exams to research prospectuses. There is no stigma associated with either approach, though; both are considered acceptable.
Practically, departments choose not to have a comprehensive exam for a variety of reasons:
* They may feel that they need neither quality nor population control.
* They may not want to spend the time required to prepare, administer, and grade such exams (particularly if there are large numbers of students as well as time-intensive components, such as oral sessions).
* They may feel other means of assessing performance are superior (for instance, a research dossier and oral proposal).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I got my PhD many many years ago in CS, and in my case the department had a 4 part/4 day written + a 2-3 hour oral a year or so later. The written was the same for everyone, 1 part CS theory (computability, formal languages etc), 1 part math (formal logic, combinatorics etc.), 1 part software (compilers, OS), 1 part hardware (mostly the content of the Hennessy and Patterson book, 1st edition at that point). All at the graduate level (they subsequently dumbed-down the exam because the pass rate was too low and some faculty were loosing favored students who could not pass)
I spent a good 6 months with my head in books and in study groups studying for that exam, and though I was happy to be done with it, I didn't see the great value at the time.
I do now. Even now, with my "background information" 20 years out of date (not really), I find that I'm often using some piece of what I learned in that half-year to explain something to my students or to conceive of how I might implement some research or project idea--not all of it, mind you, but I have used all 4 parts. Students ask my questions expecting to get answers that draw from various parts of the discipline, and I'm grateful that I have that knowledge.
In a recent committee meeting to vet faculty candidates, I was discussing courses we'd want then to teach and one member of a committee [a dean, not a CS faculty member] asked me about the common knowledge that all PhDs in CS would have, and I was lamenting the fact that many schools do not have rigorous comps, and so we can't make assumptions about what background knowledge they have. That said, I usually don't bother looking at the comps page on candidate's universities, rather we ask a bunch of technical questions in the phone interviews
As a side note about "admissions committees" and why they might do a good job and still need comps, many CS departments take a large number of people with degrees in related disciplines (Math, EE etc), and while I think they make great computer scientists, they lack something if they don't have the opportunity to study the foundations of CS
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Of course there are many advantages to having a comprehensive exam as are outlined in many of the other answers here, but there are also many reasons why departments don't have them.
A comprehensive exam creates more work for professors (they have to grade it, write it, and often even hold study courses for it) and potentially, if the program only admits good students, or if weaker students drop out due to poor performance in coursework, or unsatisfactory progress towards research, some professors consider the exam to not be worth the extra work (i.e. an unnecessary piece of bureaucracy).
In addition for some fields, research topics are very diverse, and course requirements are effectively all electives. In such cases, it would be unclear what course work a comprehensive exam would pull from.
Even if this is not the case, not all professors will agree with the definition of what a "core subject" in the field is. This is a bigger problem than you might think. Say as a professor I am really excited that I finally got a great student in my subfield and we are doing great research. Now say he fails the qualifying exam in some other topic that is viewed as a "core" topic, when my subfield is not considered as important. You can bet I will be bitter about that. If the professors can't settle on what topics are core (a political not just academic process), then sometimes the only solution that can gain enough approval from most of the professors is to not have a qualifying exam at all.
At some programs that do not have comprehensive exams, the advancement to candidacy exam can act as one, by including questions about topics from coursework that are only loosely related to the proposed research (in addition to questions more directly related to your thesis proposal or research presentation). These advancement to candidacy exams can require just as much studying as one would typically do for a qualifying/comprehensive exam. There are advantages and disadvantages to this approach. One advantage is that having the comprehensive exam material in the advancement to candidacy exam makes you go back through your course work and think critically about how each topic relates to your area of research. Your research allows you to review the material from a new, perspective that allows you to draw new interesting pieces of understanding.
In other fields, a comprehensive exam is viewed as a waste of time because the final exam in a set of core courses effectively act as a comprehensive exam. Usually, some students do not make the required grade and drop or retake the class (similar to a comprehensive exam). The big advantage here is that the professor who taught the material writes the exam, this saves time on the professor's end and also prevents needlessly failing students who might get hung up on inconsistencies between two different exam writers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I simply would not have done a PhD if I had to take comps. To me it was extremely important to finish as quickly as possible. With starting salaries in Engineering at a pretty high level, every year I was in school I felt was like leaving money on the table. I suspect that many universities also find that students in high demand areas feel the same and there is a scarcity of grad students, particularly local students.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/03 | 971 | 4,221 | <issue_start>username_0: Are students with masters degree allowed to enter a masters program in the same area at a good university?
Is second masters a good option for a better research experience and improving your CV before applying to a PhD in top programs? I am specifically interested in US universities and computer science.<issue_comment>username_1: You are certainly allowed to apply, but your chances of getting accepted for a second master's in the same field is approximately zero--with one exception.
If you already have the master's degree you're seeking, most graduate schools will assume that you are really applying for a doctoral program, if the degrees are awarded separately. If you make if clear you are applying for a second master's degree, they'll probably just throw out your application.
The exception to this are programs where you can only be admitted as a doctoral candidate, but can earn a master's along the way. Then the normal procedures will likely still apply. Otherwise, you're out of luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm doing a 2nd Master's right now in Philosophy when my first was Philosophy of Religion (same classes basically). Both schools are American. There are some schools that are often recommended for people trying to get a 2nd MA in Philosophy. You most certainly CAN do it, at least in the humanities, although there are some cons to going about things this way.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Getting a second masters degree in the same field may be allowed, but it's extremely rare and I don't think it's a good use of time. I don't think it will help you get admitted to a PhD program. It would just look like an anomaly to the admissions committee. I think it would make more sense to apply directly to PhD programs.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Besides to very good advices posted in other answers to this question; I want to mention a few words.
>
> Can a masters student apply for a second masters in the same field at
> another university?
>
>
>
I think, you are asking about applying and then *studying* for a second same masters degree. Because a student may be free to apply for a degree, but the admissions office will reject his profile as he is currently student else where.
Answer to your question depends on the educational system of the country and universities policies too.
In some countries, studying simultaneously in two universities and majors is prohibited and graduate students are only allowed to study in their own university. Also, I have seen many universities asking students whether they are currently students or not, because they seek full time students not part time ones.
However, I have seen that some students with outstanding grades and educational background can apply a minor very close to their field in their own university but it was for bachelors level only.
Also, you may find a university which accepts students seeking for double major; but the university in which you are currently studying may not agree to you to study a second major when you are their students.
As a general advice, *double* check the regulations of both universities and the countries in which you want to study simultaneously.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, it is possible. I have had a master's degree in CS from my home country and then applied for a second master's degree (in an interdisciplinary program but my research was still focused on CS) in order to be able to eventually immigrate and settle in the US. Your best bet is to first secure a professor who is willing to be your supervisor as it will make the whole process easier.
As with your second question, I think it is a better use of time to find a research assistant (staff) position rather than applying for a second master's. the pay will be higher, there will be fewer speed limits (courses, qualifying seminars, mandatory workshops, etc.), and you can focus on your research with less stress about the outcome.
I saw a lot of professors at top US universities with two master's degrees though (usually immigrants with their first master's from their home country) and I don't think it is THAT unusual to do so.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/03 | 2,335 | 8,579 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm going to my first conference in about a month, where I will be presenting a poster.
How do people usually dress for conferences? Do I need to dress more smartly than usual? Is formal dress (e.g. a suit) normal? Or does no-one really care?
I'm a PhD student, if that makes any difference, and both my university and the conference are in the UK. It's a biology conference.<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience the dress code at academic conferences is really casual. I would just wear what you would normally wear to work, possibly avoiding shorts when giving a presentation (although I have seen plenty of people presenting in shorts). You could also wear a suit, although I think you would be one of the few that does. If you do want to make your clothes a bit more formal for your presentation, I would wear only the jacket of the suit combined with nice shoes, with for example jeans and no tie.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In academia, the dress code is much more relaxed than in business settings, but there are exceptions in certain fields. But overall, people care less about what you wear, and more about what you have to say. (And I must, I quite like it.)
The dress code in most academic events (conferences included) is often called **“academic casual”**, and is not very strict. If you want to be sure to avoid any gaffe, just stay away from the short pants and T-shirts (overly casual), as well as full suits and ties (overdressed). So, long pants (may want to avoid blue jeans), a shirt (or other top with collar), possibly a decent sweater.
[](http://mcnair.wsu.edu/Documents/pdf/dress%20code%20guide%20for%20web.pdf)
Regarding women's attire, in addition to the choices above, pantsuits are fine, dresses and skirts (not short enough as to be provocative!) are also okay, but again do not overdress.
---
Regarding various fields: I have noticed that researchers at physics conferences are usually more casual than chemists and chemical engineers. Others will surely comment about their own field(s)…
One exception I am aware of: law conferences usually follow a more business dress code, rather than casual.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The important thing is to wear something you are comfortable with. If a suit/tie/dress really makes you uncomfortable or self conscious, don't wear it regardless of what other people are wearing. If you are comfortable wearing anything, I would error on the side of too formal. It tends to be easier to make an outfit less formal than more formal and while I have never heard comments about how someone dresses at a conference, I have heard negative comments about how a candidate dresses at a job interview (always that the dress was too informal). I find that a good starting point is to look at what people wear when they are teaching.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: It depends a lot on the event (some gatherings are more formal than others) and on your status (win a Nobel prize, and you can wear anything you damn well want), but in general, you're not really expected to wear anything fancier to an academic conference than you would for a normal day at work or in class.
In practice, most people *do* tend to dress up a little bit, just to look their best, but still, even if you just wear your normal clean everyday clothes, you're not going to embarrass yourself (any more than you usually do, at least). As the other answers note, "smart casual" is the usual style here.
Nothing says you can't wear a suit if you want to; I see people do that all the time in conferences. Then again, some of those people also wear a suit to work every day, so...
Still, if you're in doubt, why not **ask your advisor** (or someone else in your group who's been to similar events before)? That's part of their job: to teach you the basics of academic work, which certainly includes presenting your work at a conference.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It depends on who you are, who your audience is, and what you're presenting.
If your talk is very, very academic, then your best going with *business casual*. I have never seen a speaker wear a suit and tie.
[<NAME>](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysXzbPP8rSM)'s dress at this Siggraph 2009 seems exemplary:
He's got:
* A light colored shirt with a collar
* Likely dark colored pants
If you're a woman, women's business casual is usually very similar.
This is [<NAME>](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPdn_dG6XiI) at Siggraph 2009, talking about Web3D.
Sometimes you will see people wearing T-Shirts at academic conferences. This seems to be ok for **developers** who spend all their time developing software, and are showcasing what they have recently developed.
This is [<NAME>](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE1A_SQX-Mk) talking at Siggraph 2008. I kind of believe developers dress this way to kind of implicitly give the impression that "Hey, I was just developing and I popped in to give you this talk. After, I'm going straight back to my desk." A T-Shirt says "this is a casual talk. Relax. I'm showing you some cool stuff."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: For women and men, I would err on the conservative side for conferences - but this does not mean you should throw out your own, personal style. My first conference, I felt awkward and uncomfortable because I had decided to wear pants and a blazer instead of one of my usual dresses. I though the pants made me look more professional - but they fit poorly and made me feel insecure.
Here are some tips from my department: <http://ucfhistory.wordpress.com/2014/07/07/what-to-wear-to-your-first-conference-10-tips-for-grad-students/>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: This is *profoundly* field dependent, and even within what could be considered the same field, may vary based on individuals and the slant of the conference. For example, in conferences I regularly attend:
* At a computational conference, half the attendees were wearing the conference t-shirt. I felt perfectly comfortable presenting in jeans and an untucked button-up shirt.
* At a public health conference, "someone wearing a navy blazer" is almost 100% predictive of that person being a clinician. Wearing a sport coat with no tie is "dressed up".
* At medical conferences on the other hand, the same attire is "dressing down" a bit, and visually separating myself as "not a clinician".
* At homeland security conferences, nearly *everyone* is in a shirt and tie with a blue or black blazer, besides the academics.
* At all of these, the military types are in whatever uniform they're mandated to wear by their service.
I could credibly be giving the same talk at each of these. There's also differences by rank ('Big names' in my field are often dressed *considerably* down - at one point pink parachute pants) and other aspects like gender (women are, in my experience, more harshly judged for 'missing the mark' in either direction).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Note: I'm female.
The conferences I've gone to weren't overly dressy. I've gone to a few chemistry conferences, a multi-disciplinary conference, and one for writing. I wore black slacks a nice top and I fit in pretty well.
However: I wanted to make a great impression and wore really nice shoes. They weren't crazy shoes, but there was a LOT of walking (and thus a lot of blisters.) Make sure your shoes are comfortable not just for standing in, but for walking.
Next time, I'll still dress nice, but I'll wear much more comfortable shoes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I googled this topic because I was in a similar situation. Generally speaking, my solution to the problem is:
Find pictures of previous conferences and see what people are wearing.
Maybe it is an annual conference or summer school, or maybe you know a similar conference, chances are that someone was walking around with a camera, taking photos for posterity.
Apart from that, things hugely vary by field. In my field, for example, the old folks show up in dress pants or jeans and with a dress shirt, long or short sleeve. The younger ones have relaxed expectations. Sadly, we don't have Nobel prize winners who don't care about their appearance.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/03 | 1,357 | 4,697 | <issue_start>username_0: I am looking for different national repositories (US, Canada, Australia, UK, etc.) of funded research projects, similar to what **[Cordis](http://www.cordis.europa.eu/projects/home_en.html)** does in EU. Any suggestions?
I am after any repository that list funded research and some of the projects details, whether it is public, private or partnership...<issue_comment>username_1: **In the US,** the government funded agencies usually publish lists of funded projects. For example, you can search the [National Science Foundation](http://www.nsf.gov) database for all of the funded projects relating to ["beer"](http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/simpleSearchResult?queryText=beer&ActiveAwards=true). Each of these entries lists the name of the project, the NSF program that funded it, the PI's names and contact information, the amount awarded, the date awarded, and an abstract, among other information.
Here are the databases from other US government funding agencies:
* [National Endowment for the Arts](http://www.nea.gov/grants/recent/index.html)
* [National Endowment for the Humanities](https://securegrants.neh.gov/publicquery/main.aspx)
* [Environmental Protection Agency](http://yosemite.epa.gov/oarm/igms_egf.nsf/HomePage?ReadForm)
* [Department of Energy](http://science.energy.gov/funding-opportunities/award-search/)
* [National Institutes of Health](http://report.nih.gov/)
There are other agencies probably, but all you need to do is go to their main site and search for "funded projects" or "Search awards" or "recent awards" or something like that.
One agency that may be hard to search would be DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which is the scientific research arm of US military.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In Australia, one of the main funding sources is [Discovery Projects](http://www.arc.gov.au/ncgp/dp/dp_outcomes.htm) from the [Australian Research Council](http://www.arc.gov.au/default.htm). Another are [Cooperative Research Centres](https://www.crc.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx) - the website has several links attached to it.
Also, 'block grants' are allocated by the [Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education](http://www.innovation.gov.au/research/researchblockgrants/Pages/default.aspx) (yes, that is the department's real name).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There are a couple of databases about funded research projects in the **Benelux** countries:
* [NARCIS - National Academic Research and Collaborations Information System](http://www.narcis.nl/?Language=en) (**NL**)
* [Fonds National de la Recherche](http://www.fnr.lu/en/Searchable-Project-Database/Research-Domain) (**LU**)
* [Databases INVENT and FEDRA by the Belgian Science Policy](http://www.belspo.be/belspo/research/data_en.stm) (**BE**)
* [Flanders Research Information Space](http://www.researchportal.be/en/projects/search.html) (**BE**)
* [Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique](http://www2.fnrs.be/) (**BE**, only in French)
In the **German speaking countries**, there are informative databases about funded reseach projects as well:
* [ELFI database for the German-speaking area](http://www.base.elfi.info/elfi-2.0/)
* [Swiss National Science Foundation](http://p3.snf.ch/) (**CH**)
* [FWF Austrian Science Fund](http://www.fwf.ac.at/en/projects/projekt_suche.html) (**AT**)
* [DFG German Research Foundation](http://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/OCTOPUS) (**DE**)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In India it is [Shodh Gangotri](http://shodhgangotri.inflibnet.ac.in/).
From the website...
>
> The word “Shodh” originates from Sanskrit and stands for “research and discovery”. “Gangotri” is one of the largest glacier in the Himalayas and source of origination of Ganges, the holiest, longest and largest of rivers in India. The Ganges is the symbol of age-long culture, civilization, ever-aging, ever-flowing, ever-loving and loved by its people.
>
>
> ... research scholars / research supervisors in universities are requested to deposit electronic version of approved synopsis... The repository... would reveal the trends and directions of research being conducted in Indian universities [and] would avoid duplication of research. ...once the full-text thesis is submitted for a synopsis, a link to the full-text theses would be provided from ShodhGangotri to "ShodhGanga".
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In France we have the [Agence Nationale de la Recherche](http://www.agence-nationale-recherche.fr/) (ANR, National Agency for Research). The "régions", local administrative divisions, have also a capacity to finance research.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/03 | 1,645 | 7,052 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm working for a university as a **research programmer** (prof staff, exempt) on an external grant ("soft money"), and there is a clear understanding between me and my immediate supervisor/PI, and at least one other PI, that I can use a certain non-trivial amount of my time each week to work on my own projects (the so-called **"20% time"**).
I've tried investigating what the university would officially think of any such endeavour, and I found the IP policy ([IU](http://policies.iu.edu/policies/categories/administration-operations/intellectual-property/intellectual-property.shtml)) that seems to suggest that patentable inventions unconditionally belong to the university, whereas general copyrightable work does belong to its authors (unless they perform such work specifically for university use, e.g. course materials).
Apparently, the policy even says that it covers even non-paid individuals, part-time individuals and students (which are not even just "non-paid" for their activities, but are actually required to support the university by paying tuition and various other fees).
Supposedly, it basically applies to everyone who uses **University resources**, however, the term *University resources* itself is not defined amongst all the other terms that are, in fact, defined very specifically for this exact IP policy directly within the policy.
* Does a public university in the US really have such powers to implement a policy like that, and to claim patent rights to inventions which are not performed in the official line of duty and even oftentimes outside of the work clock?
* Have such policies ever been reaffirmed through courts? Especially when applied to non-compensated employees, or the various slave labour?
* What do I do to avoid being covered by such policy?
+ Must I never perform any parts of my own research on any equipment purchased through university, even on grant money?
+ Cannot use the monitors owned by the university together with my personally-owned laptop?
+ Cannot use university's internet connection to connect to my externally hosted personal servers, where the use of university's internet connection is merely coincidental to my own research on my own computing resources, and could easily be replaced by an off-the-shelf 30$/mo service from elsewhere without any significant side effects? (I'm just using ssh, basically.)
+ Cannot use my non-trivial work time that was allowed for my own research by my supervisors to do my own research? Do I have to request to be re-classified from being a full-time employee (1.00) to being a part-time employee (e.g. 0.80) to have my 20% time unencumbered?
+ Cannot sit in my office space doing my own search?
+ Cannot sit in a university building whilst doing any such research of my own?
+ Cannot be anywhere on campus doing any of my own research?<issue_comment>username_1: Note that a detailed response to your question, as well as any answer tailored to your specific case, will need to be given to you by a lawyer. And, if you think of doing anything that could even remotely be considered borderline or controversial… **just ask a lawyer**. And even if you don't do anything borderline, **better safe than sorry!**
Now, I want to explain some of the background of that answer: I have acquired some experience of my own, though not in the US, on dealing with being employed as a full-time researcher and professor, yet maintaining a certain level of activity outside of my employer. I actually produce intellectual property on my leisure time (both copyrightable materials and patent rights), and have consulted with law professionals on how to effectively keep control of my own IP (as opposed to that which I create for my employer).
The main conclusion is: **you actually have to be very careful to be able to fend off any potential claim of your employer on the IP created**. Of course, it's a risk of the “if it comes to that” variety. If your university is not interested in pursuing any claim to such IP, you may never have a problem, even if you did not clearly separate your own IP from that created for your employer. But… you never know what may happen in the future (e.g., your current understanding with the dean may not hold in a few years), so you should take maximal precautions.
In short, you should assume the following:
1. **Everything you do on company time is owned by the company**. I'm pretty sure that this includes your “20% time”: if it's 20% of the time the company pays you, it may mean that they leave you free to do research in a direction you choose for yourself, but it is still research you performed as their employee.
You certainly can't expect to be paid 40 hours a week, work 32 hours for your employer and then spend the remaining 8 hours for someone else, can you?! (in this case, the “someone else” is yourself as a freelancer)
2. **Don't use resources from your university**. This is also very typical of contracts and, at least the few European countries I know, the legal *status quo*: use of company resources means the company has rights on your production. This includes *every resource* you list, even smaller things you may not think of, like email account, FTP/web/ssh hosting, internet connection, …
3. **Everything you create while inside the company** is not yours. Walls, internet connection, desktop, electricity… are company resources. While courts in some jurisdictions have recognized that certain limited activities done inside the company, such as reading email during lunch break, may fall within the personal sphere (and not the professional sphere), it is not likely to be the case for any larger activity.
4. Finally, if you think of doing on your spare time anything that is thematically closed to your day job, take care: it becomes hard to claim that your own activities are not linked to your university position and resources, and do not in any way interfere with it, if you are a computer science researcher by day and patent new sorting algorithms by night :)
And, did I mention? Get help from a professional, aka lawyer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Some people are paid to be innovators. How much they pay you for your billion dollar work can be as low as peanuts. If an employer wants to employ you in such a fashion it should clearly be stated in your employment contract. Some people would refuse such positions or not bother with working hard when away from work and instead spend the time relaxing.
Generally if your employer asks you to work on something then that should belong to them. Higher level mangers are employed to innovate in their respective sectors whilst certain conglomerates work in all sectors. It’s the University researchers such as your self that are paid peanuts and expected to hand over all billion dollar inventions.
In short, if an employer wants outside work inventions then it should be clearly stated in the contract! Some people are smart enough to create enterprises for themselves!
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/08/03 | 429 | 1,801 | <issue_start>username_0: I am filling in an application form for a PhD program and I am supposed to answer the following question:
**"How do you intend to fund your studies for the entire duration of your stay in ...?"**
Actually, I cannot afford any part of the living costs and university fees but I don't know how to mention it in a academic, polite and well-structured fashion.<issue_comment>username_1: I see two possible ways to interpret your question, so I'll give two answers:
1. If you currently don't know how you will fund your studies, but you honestly think you will figure it out: just write down your best educated guess (“I will sell shoes by night”)
2. If you think the cost of life is too high and you probably will not manage it: please reconsider your arrangements. The happiness in life that might results from a successful PhD experience requires to have the mind free enough for science, which cannot be achieved if you worry day after day about how to eat. It is a very bad idea to make that gamble.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Maybe I'm missing something. But if this is a US Ph.D program, this question is really "Do you want us to fund you" and the answer is always yes. As JeffE says, you should not consider entering a Ph.D program unless you're being funded. Apart from the financial constraints this puts on you, the funding creates a commitment (by the department or advisor) to look after you. If the funding is from a research project, then you're even more sure that your work will be linked to something fruitful.
While there are many caveats to what I just said (and they're ringing in my head right now), they're not relevant at the time of applying to grad school.
So please always answer "I expect you to fund me".
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/04 | 1,063 | 4,290 | <issue_start>username_0: It is my understanding that patents can be invalidated if there is prior art to the technique at hand; DJB has a piece that would suggest that this way authors can inadvertently invalidate their own patents, if not being careful with information disclosure.
<http://cr.yp.to/patents/us/4200770.html>
>
> Diffie disclosed the idea of public-key cryptography at a conference
> in June 1976. Diffie and Hellman also distributed preprints of their
> ``New Directions in Cryptography'' paper, which disclosed the
> Diffie-Hellman system, at that conference and by mail. For example,
> <NAME> received a copy in August 1976. The patent was filed in
> September 1977.
>
>
> Under United States case law, a document has been published if it
> ``has been disseminated or otherwise made available to the extent that
> persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or
> art, exercising reasonable diligence, can locate it.'' A patent is
> automatically invalid if the patented invention was published more
> than a year before the patent's filing date.
>
>
> It appears, therefore, that the Diffie-Hellman-Merkle patent was
> invalid. In the subsequent court case MIT v. Fortia, another patent
> was invalidated for the same reason: the inventor handed out six
> copies of a preprint at a conference fourteen months before applying
> for the patent.
>
>
>
How does this work in the general case? Is it important that in both examples a whole year has passed between the publishing and the patent application?
Is it necessary for a significant amount of time to pass between the publishing of a paper, and the patent application, for the patent to be subsequently declared invalid?
Specifically, if one's university explicitly claims that it has no interest in one's copyrighted work (whether books, articles or software), and no interest in any part of any revenue from such copyrights, but that patent revenue sharing and disclosure to the university of the patentable ideas is mandatory ([IU](http://policies.iu.edu/policies/categories/administration-operations/intellectual-property/intellectual-property.shtml)), **can one get around of any future claims for patents by simply releasing everything open-source and publishing all pre-prints before the university's patent office can get their hand on any of the research?**<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, in most cases, dissemination of a patentable invention by academic publication (papers, talks, code) constitutes prior art and will result in a later patent application being rejected. That is why people and institutions who intend to patent their discoveries are very careful about what they publish, and when. (Basically, publish after the patent application is filed.)
Regarding your patent evasion scheme, it would probably work in practice, but could lead to severe retaliation from your institution. You said yourself that the policy is to report all patentable inventions. By not doing so, and publishing without first enquiring whether your employer wants to patent the invention, you violate the policy... And, given your question, you would be doing so willingly and in bad faith. This sort of thing could get you fired. And, it could get the papers retracted (look at some of the examples of this on Retraction Watch).
Finally, one piece of advice: if you're so afraid that your employer owns the IP you create, enough to look for strategies to remove from them some of the IP they pay you to create, **you should consider quitting**. It doesn't look like you have a healthy relationship with your employer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In response to your specific questions, yes, it is significant that the disclosure occurred more than a year before the patent was filed. In the U.S., there is a one-year "bar-date" after public disclosure of the invention covered by a patent. Most of the rest of the world does not allow any period between disclosure and patenting; once you've disclosed, the invention is no longer patentable in those countries (though it may still be patented in the U.S. for up to a year.)
As noted by username_1, sabotaging your employer's patent claims is a sure way to make a lot of trouble for yourself.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/04 | 1,312 | 5,452 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to know whether is it normal to publish an article in the journal in which one is associate editor. For example, one of the co-author article in [this](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539813000261) article in [this](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-empirical-finance/editorial-board/) journal.<issue_comment>username_1: It is not normal, but it *can* happen. Usually under such circumstances the article is handled by a different editor, and the submitting editor is treated as would any other person submitting to the journal.
Also note that a paper can be submitted to a journal like *Physical Review Letters,* and them get transferred to another journal where the conflict could be created. (This happened to a colleague.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my field (Epidemiology) it is *quite* common to publish in a journal where you are an associate editor. It's a fairly regular thing to see articles with authors who are also on the editorial board appear in an issue of the journal, and no particular fuss is made about it.
If nothing else, the Associate Editors for the *American Journal of Epidemiology* is both quite large (well over 70 people), and in some cases make up a large chunk of the senior faculty of a given department. With how prevalent collaboration and large co-authorship papers are in the field, not submitting would lock huge swaths of the field out of a particular journal.
AJE also has one of the most robust paper anonymization systems I've encountered for review, which I think makes the threat of any particular conflict of interest fairly small.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I do not think the situation you describe necessarily creates a conflict of interest, and thus I believe there is nothing inherently unethical about publishing from time to time in a journal where you are an associate editor.
The question, as Anonymous Mathematician nicely phrased it, is more "what measures does the journal take in this case?" At a minimum, it must be a different editor who handles the paper, maybe the editor in chief. And the system must be designed so that the anonymity of the reviews cannot be breached by the author/editor.
If this is enforced, then I don't see any major ethical issue. The one risk I see is that the author/editor might get a slightly more "deferential" treatment, but this is also a risk for some other authors, e.g. big names in the field. One case which might become worrying is if an editor were to submit the large majority of his papers to the journal he works for... Even if everything is ethically above board, it may look like collusion, and should probably be avoided.
Now, I want to highlight some reasons why it is desirable that editors are allowed to publish in the journal they work for.
1. If they are editor for a major flagship journal in their field, it is not fair to ask them, their students and coworkers to avoid it entirely. It could make a large negative impact on, e.g., graduate students' careers. (Imagine a chemist who could not publish their major work to JACS, or a physicist to PRL.)
2. If they want their journal to succeed, they want to attract the best papers. If they rightfully believe that their own work is good, publishing it in the journal will sustain its quality. I am not an editor, but I do that myself sometimes: publishing in a journal because you think it's a nice venue for the community, and you want to help it grow. I imagine an editor, who wants the journal to succeed, might feel the same.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It is entirely normal, with some uncommon exceptions. For instance, check out how many publications [Prof. <NAME>](http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=v1MTZmIAAAAJ&hl=en) (former Editor in Chief) has in The Annals of Statistics.
In this case, the papers have to go through the usual peer review process, handled by another editor/AE.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: There is nothing wrong with an editor publishing in the journal with which they are asociated. Put it differently, why should ones right to try to publish somewhere be limited?
All editors, at least should, be aware that publishing this way has some possible repercussuins. If an editor starts pouring out works in "their" journal, it will soon reflect negatively on both the editor and the editor. Hence, such behaviour is "self-regulating" in the longer term.
It is of course possible that a research field is very narrow and so the journal may be the only major outlet for papers in the field. In such a case there may be no escape but I would then also argue that the science community concerned may know each other quite well, peer presure should then be a major factor keeping things on course.
I am personally Editor-in-Chief (EiC; one of two, with 12 associate editors) for a journal. My fellow EiC has published one paper, I have not (there are enough journalsin my field so that it does not affect me too much). We make sure, in fact our electronic submission system ensures, any editor submitting a paper cannot see or affect it in the system. We also take care of papers from each others departments to avoid any suspicion.
So, the "problem" is quite common and unavoidable to some extent. It is only a problem if it is abused but that will likely soon back-fire on both the journal and the editor.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/04 | 702 | 3,007 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a question regarding how schools decide on who to give scholarship to.
Is it appropriate for me to ask my graduate school department on their guidelines in giving out scholarships?
I feel like I have been cheated from scholarship because I have found out people who have worse undergrad GPA/GRE got scholarship and I didn't. I am an architecture major and will study in USC this coming Fall. I submitted my application 2 weeks before the deadline, but they emailed me that I was missing my community college transcript so they couldn't forward to the architecture department they finally forwarded my application early March. I responded to their email the next day with the transcript, but they just took their time to file it. Could that be a factor? If scholarships are given out based on performance then I really think I deserve it after, again, knowing that people who performed worse than me in undergrad received it.<issue_comment>username_1: Your best bet would be to make contact with the scholarship people and ask (nicely) for feedback as to why you did not get a scholarship. This way, you'll know for certain as to why they did not award you a scholarship.
Often, scholarships are not just based on GPA/GRE scores or any other academic performance, there are often a myriad of other criteria they use to assess an applicant's scholarship suitability. Did you have to fill out a form with some details or supply a personal statement?
How do you know that they
>
> just took their time to file it.
>
>
>
If they did (which I doubt), then yes, it could be a factor, but I doubt a malicious one considering the amount of information that they would have to file, collate from the many applicants. More likely, they filed your additional transcripts as soon as they received it (or very soon after).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you don't really understand how grad school funding works.
Generally, GPA and GRE are not even close to the only things that are considered for scholarships. A lot of people can explain away reasons for bad grades, perhaps there was some reason they had lower grades like illness. They might have amazing letters of recommendation. They may have done research, which in my opinion comes way above GRE/GPA in the grad schools eyes. They may have some kind of interesting background, minority or first generation student or something. They may come from a much better school than you, which means the GPA holds a lot more meaning than yours. Their statement of purpose may have been right on target with what the school was looking for.
Additionally, seeing as your application was not complete at the time, probably did not hurt you that much, but it definitely did not help.
If you are going to contact them, do it in a really professional way. DON'T mention that someone with a lower GRE/GPA got a scholarship when you didn't. They'll just tell you they factor a lot of things into it.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/04 | 1,451 | 5,980 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc in Physics areas and trying to get myself ready for applying for tenure track positions. However, the US academic salary system seems still mysterious to me.
In several salary surveys, a reasonably close figure for starting salaries of starting assistant professor positions emerge as $75-80K per year. The point is that, as far as I understand it, the salary is based on the calender year basis. However, the contracts for the assistant professors are usually academic year basis (except that probably in the first couple of years they may get this full salary in their start up package).
This means that practically they get $55-60K for 8-9 months. The rest of the salary, called the summer salary, needs to be obtained via applying to the respective funding agencies.
However, funding is obviously not guaranteed every year. So it is obviously out of question that people should be based on the full year salary amounts shown above. Truthfully, their salaries are $55-60k per calender year and if they are able to get some funding, they can get some bonus over the summer.
Now, the first question is: isn't it way too low of a starting salary for a PhD in STEM areas?! Especially, people are normally already in their mid 30s when they get a tenure track position so they usually have a family to support. Sure, there are many people survive with much lower salaries and also the stereotypical argument that you don't enter academia if you want to earn money is also around. But I am talking about skills, experience and qualification. Anyway, it just seems too low salary to me and I would really want to know if there is something crucial I am missing here.
Secondly, what do faculty members do if they don't get the summer salaries, what other options are there for them to compensate the money.<issue_comment>username_1: In the US, salaries for tenure-track positions are usually for the academic year; one might get the summer salary thrown in as part of the startup package for the first year or two. So your academic-year (9-month) salary of $70K would translate to a full-year salary of $70\*12/9 = around $93K. The expectation would be that you would use those first two years to establish a research program, write grant proposals, etc., so as to be able to fend for yourself after that.
While it's true that grants are getting harder to get, remember that single-investigator grants are not your only option: you can also participate in larger multi-PI and collaborative proposals. For example, you may be able to put together a collaborative proposal with your dissertation advisor while at the same time striking out on your own -- his greater seniority and track record may make it easier to land such a grant.
Finally, I would counsel against spending a lot of time teaching during the summer --- IMHO you'd be better off spending the time moving your research forward (remember why your initial summer salary was included in your startup package). One reason (not the only one) is that having a solid record of peer-reviewed external funding greatly strengthens your case when you go up for tenure.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A couple of points on both the question, and comments by the OP above.
* As others have indicated, "too low" is sadly not a relevant comment where salaries are concerned. Faculty salaries, like any other salaries, are driven by the marketplace. In a field like CS, where there are many good industrial options, starting salaries might be a tad higher, and in the humanities (as others have indicated), even 55-60k would be considered higher than average. This has nothing to do with the time it takes you to get a tenure-track job, the amount of effort you put in, and so on. It's just about supply and demand.
* In most universities, your 9 month salary can be spread out over 12. This doesn't change the amount you get, but it helps monthly income management: you get the same amount each month of the year and can calculate your expenses accordingly.
* On the issue of being unemployed for 1 month a year: this is true with the NSF, but not necessarily with other funding agencies. The NSF will not fund you for 3 summer months, but you might (for example) get 2 months of support from multiple grants with the NSF, and potentially (given your area) some money from NASA, or ONR, or...
* As Yury mentioned, consulting is another possibility. Again, I wouldn't worry about this right now if you're starting, but theoretical physicists are often hired full-time by financial firms, and so I imagine consulting agreements might be possible with them as well.
* on the issue of an "honest conversation", I think you're having one right now. Also, why not ask your advisor/postdoc mentor ? I've explained this to my students a few times already, and not just the "average salaries", but in particular how my salary works (my actual salary is a matter of public record in any case).
* in my area (CS), it is common for new faculty to get summer support baked into their startup package (say 2 months for 2 years). this gives you time to get a research program rolling and get some grant money. Find out what's common in your area, and what junior faculty typically do to get summer support.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: All quoted academic salaries are for the "academic year" i.e. 9 months, unless otherwise specifically stated. Sp your 70k would be for 9 months (perhaps paid over 12 months), but you would be free to do any other work (consulting, paid summer grant research, etc) over summer with no work expectations for the university. So why is it called a 9 month salary - because you do not have to show up over summer -vacation in Tahiti, or work in 711 for extra income, or consult for a million dollars if you like. My first AP job paid 70k, 9 months (paid over 12 months), and I taught 2 extra classes over summer for which I got paid 5K apiece.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/05 | 1,138 | 4,855 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student, and have just finished the last part of my course requirement. My last assignment is to review several other student's term projects from a seminar course.
One of the projects I have been asked to review is rife with plagiarism. More than 75% of the paper is plagiarized, from over two dozen different sources, including academic papers, stackoverflow.com, and wikipedia. I have reported all of this to my professor, along with a detailed summary of which parts are taken from where.
However, some of the paper appears to be plagiarized from the student's *own* earlier assignments, in a different course. It's fairly obvious that this is the case because they first plagiarized the assignment description to summarize the problem they wanted to study, and then provide an answer to said problem, including answering discussion questions that are on the assignment, but somewhat unrelated to their main topic.
I know the professor who taught the earlier course well. Should I contact him directly? Should I suggest to my current instructor that the earlier professor be notified as well? Which course of action is more appropriate?<issue_comment>username_1: If you've spotted plagiarism, you have a duty to report it to a responsible authority. Just because the student is a fellow graduate student in your department does not absolve you of the duty. However, the politics of the situation can make things much more complicated, because it may lead to intra-departmental conflict, which is most certainly *not* a good thing.
I would believe the correct initial approach is to notify the professor of the current course of the current and past plagiarism. If you feel that no appropriate action has been taken, then you can consider notifying the instructor of the past course; however, the actions that can probably be taken are somewhat more limited than for a class where the final grades have not yet been assigned or have only recently posted.
How far you want to pursue this matter, on the other hand, depends on how serious you believe the transgression is. If the plagiarism is serious enough that it calls into doubt the student's ability to be an independent researcher, then further escalation—perhaps (in order of approach) to the graduate "officer" for the department, the chair of the department, or the dean for graduate students—may be necessary, if your initial efforts don't lead anywhere. This is, admittedly, a rather severe course of action, and one which may cause problems for you later down the road. So I would also recommend talking to your advisor as well, and solicit feedback as to what are the consequences of pursuing this.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is very serious, just noting the extent of plagiarism in your question:
>
> One of the projects I have been asked to review is rife with plagiarism. More than 75% of the paper is plagiarized, from over two dozen different sources, including academic papers, stackoverflow.com, and wikipedia.
>
>
>
and from the student's own work. To my way of thinking, this is wilful and blatant plagiarism, possibly due to laziness, and maybe desperation.
Just to add to what username_1 suggested, I would seek the faculty/university's rules and procedures for dealing with plagiarism and follow them to the letter - there must be a documented protocol to follow in situations such as this.
It may get awkward within the department, but putting the seriousness of plagiarism aside, they have put you in an uncomfortable position, something I am sure you don't need at this stage of your studies. Also, remember that they chose to plagiarise (at 75%, it is very likely a choice), so they have, in a way, chosen to bear the brunt of the consequences.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The other answers make it sound like it is *your* bounden duty to hound the plagiarist, yea, even unto the ends of the earth. My feeling is different in this case.
As I understand your question, the project was assigned for a course, and you are assisting the instructor of that course (call him or her <NAME>) by reading and evaluating the papers, in a role similar to that of a teaching assistant. You should certainly report your findings to Prof. Smith, and be willing to answer any further questions they may have, but **your responsibility ends there**. It is up to Smith to decide how to handle the matter and whether to pursue further sanctions, consistent with the institution's policies.
Regarding the student's self-plagiarism of past assignments (say, from Prof. Jones's course), again, report your findings to Smith. If appropriate, Smith can discuss it with Jones directly. It's not clear that the student has committed misconduct with respect to Jones's course, only Smith's.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/05 | 1,126 | 4,826 | <issue_start>username_0: I know it is slightly controversial, but I am supervising a student who started with the right attitude, but is now less and less engaged with the research. We are at a point where there's no end in sight, and the student still wants to finish within unmanageable time limits.
The *context* is peculiar (but I would like to keep it detached from the generality of the question): he's a part-time student, he's paying his own fees (as opposed to a PhD funded by a project), and he's after the PhD "title" more than the research that he has to put in for the title itself.
All these factors make it more difficult to dissuade him from his PhD choice: the endless excuses of putting more work when there will be time (he's a part time student); and the fact that I am proactively chasing him to arrange meetings are all things that are taking their toll.
My (general) question is therefore: how do I dissuade a PhD student from wasting his time and money, when it's clear that she is not PhD-material?<issue_comment>username_1: Do you want to dissuade the student from continuing because
1. You think the student is not capable because of a lack of ability,
2. You think the student might be capable, but just isn't engaging in the work,
3. You don't see the student is worth investing your time in,
4. You think the student is wasting his/her money?
If (1), then a frank discussion might be the best way. I have seen other PhD supervisors directly let their PhD students know that they think a research career is not for them.
If (2), you ought to move from dissuasion to a frank discussion in which you try and figure out the reason for the downturn in engagement. Is all well at home? Is it just the usual mid (?) thesis malaise? Has the student lost the big picture and therefore the drive to do the research? Why did the student start the research in the first place? Has the situation changed - e.g. has the life goals been redefined/changed?
If (3) and/or (4), if the student is paying for themselves, then it's their money they are potentially wasting so I wouldn't concern yourself on how other people spend their money. However, the money is presumably paying your salary in part so your obligations to the student remain in that regard. In return however, you can set reasonable expectations on your student. If you make it clear that you expect your student to achieve reasonable goal A by reasonable deadline Z, and the student doesn't, then that opens up another opportunity for a frank discussion along the lines of the need for effective prioritisation of research work and for-money work.
EDIT: To bring this answer into line with the edited question, I would set out an agreed plan of work - and behaviour (esp. showing up to meetings) - with deadlines for the next 2/6/12 months. **You might want to work with your Head of Department/School on this to ensure that your requirements are reasonable.** It appears that you have already said to the student that in your opinion the student isn't PhD material. In setting out your agreed workplan, you are giving - formally - the opportunity for the student to show that he or she is capable of working to an agreed standard. If, as you say, the student isn't capable, then the student will fail and you can reasonably excuse yourself as his PhD supervisor.
I am suggesting this cautious approach, as I am sure your Faculty will want to know why things went this way, and that you offered the best opportunity for your student (or fee-paying client) to succeed, before you ceased to be his supervisor.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There is a lot of context missing from this question, so I'll provide some leading questions.
First, is the student working independently, or are you/ your group counting on their results for some other project? If it's the latter, then you should have a conversation setting out clear and realistic time frames for the work that needs to be done.
If the student is basically operating independently, then how you respond depends on what their goals are. Maybe the student just wants a Ph. D for their own personal satisfaction, and isn't worried about how long it takes. Maybe they want an academic job afterwards, in which case your concerns are valid. You should first aim to understand the student's goals, and then you can suggest whether the way things are going are reasonable to achieve those goals.
If the student didn't have their own funding, there is the additional question of whether it is worth spending *your* resources to support them, but this doesn't apply here - your student is an adult and can decide if the costs in time and money are worth it for themselves.
Summary: ask your student what *they* want, and then advise accordingly.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/05 | 1,117 | 4,604 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing a manuscript for a scientific article, I often wonder what software I should cite or acknowledge, and how.
The first problem is to make a choice **which** software to cite. On the one hand, there is no way to cite all software, as this would mean to cite my whole software stack (Linux, GNU tools, emacs, git, ...). On the other hand, not citing any software is not fair, either. Furthermore, some software explicitly asks to be cited, some software doesn't. Also, some software is really crucial to the results, some isn't. Another important aspect is that citing software is not only about giving credit to the authors of the software, but also to give other scientists hints on what software they might want to use. So, the choice which software to cite is a problem.
The second problem is **how** to cite the software. Some (scientific) software does provide a classical scientific article that can be cited. However, in this case, no URL to the software is given. Others do not have an associated article. How do I cite these? I have seen people that cite the manual of a software, others just give the URL. What is the way to go?
Another aspect is **where** to cite the software. Some software can be cited in the course of the articles text, but when it comes to more fundamental software, other places may be more appropriate.
Are there any good ideas out there on any of these aspects?<issue_comment>username_1: After some thought on the matter, my own approach in my next manuscript will probably go like this:
1. **Which**: To choose which software to cite, I would try to answer the following questions:
* Is there a scientific article that can be cited and are the authors of the software asking to be cited?
* Was this specific software relevant to the results of the manuscript? If there are plenty of alternatives to the software and you use it merely because you knew it, this is probably not a reason to cite it. But if I used and profited from the specific features of a software, then it is probably worth citing it.
* Do I explicitly want to give credits to the software? Maybe I found the software very good to use and I want to tell other scientists to use it, then I would cite it.
2. **How**: If there is a scientific article, I cite it in the classical way. However, I would also cite a URL of the software, as this makes it significantly easier for a reader to find the software. Otherwise, cite the URL. Citing the manual doesn't make sense to me, the only reason to do so would be to give explicit credits to an author.
3. **Where**: If I can cite a software in the course of the text, I do so, otherwise, I would make an appropriate paragraph in the Introduction or Acknowledgements.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A few additional thoughts to your answer:
>
> Otherwise, cite the URL.
>
>
>
cite also the version.
>
> Citing the manual doesn't make sense to me, the only reason to do so would be to give explicit credits to an author.
>
>
>
* sometimes the manual is a normal book, so this allows you to cite it in analogy to the "there is a paper" strategy.
* manuals usually have the version of the software in their name.
* maybe a practical historical reason: BibTeX has an entry type @MANUAL (since at least 25 years), so for BibTeX users manuals are an easy way to cite the software.
>
> otherwise, I would make an appropriate paragraph in the Introduction or Acknowledgements.
>
>
>
I use a paragraph "software" in the materials & methods section
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: An variant of this question was asked today: *Whether* to cite software. Here is my answer about "whether."
Yes, cite key software that you use! Citing the work of software developers, by their name, is important to some careers. I'm a faculty member at a major research university, and we do a lot of "counting papers" and "counting citations" when it comes to promotion/pay/tenure cases. (I don't fully approve of how we do this, but that's irrelevant here.) Since open-source software is often not carefully cited, this really discourages aspiring junior faculty (and grad students) from working on it.
If they have written a paper about the software, by all means cite that. Our systems are quite good at tracking citations of academic papers (at least, citations in other academic journals). Otherwise, cite by name + web site.
You are also helping your *readers*, by being clearer about your methods, and giving them a place they can look if they want to pursue your techniques further.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/05 | 2,094 | 8,506 | <issue_start>username_0: Are there *written* or *unwritten* rules for avoiding the use of first-person while writing research papers? I was advised at the beginning of my grad school to avoid use of first person - but I still don't know why I should do this.
I have seen that, at many places, authors refer to themselves are "the authors" and not "we". At the same time, I have also seen use of first-person to a good extent.
Do these things differ in different Journals and Conferences (and in different disciplines as well - mine happens to be CS)?<issue_comment>username_1: The [link provided](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2945/choice-of-personal-pronoun-in-single-author-papers) in the first comment above has a VERY useful answer but I will add a little bit as to the **why** part of your question.
In writing research papers, the reader's focus should be on the idea, not the author. Yes, you did the research but the point is not "Everyone! Look what I did. I am so great!"
The research paper should be more along the lines of "Everyone! Look what is new and interesting. This information is really great!"
So, the purpose of the research report is not "I did this" but rather "This was done." For this reason, it is quite common to use the passive voice (this was done) rather than the active voice (I did this).
Personally, I disagree that removing the use of the word "I" prevents writing readable English. I do agree that is makes the writing more difficult but lots of things are more difficult when they are done the proper way. That doesn't mean we give up and do it the wrong way because it is easier.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: @username_1's accepted answer -- to use the passive voice -- is perhaps the convention in certain disciplines, but it is crucial to note that **the active voice is the convention in others**. Using the passive voice will make a paper sound daft and amateurishly pompous in certain communities.
My preference is very much for the active voice, first person (plural in almost all cases). This is also the most prevalent convention in my community (applied CS).
---
The strongest argument (and it is a very strong one!) against passive voice is that it removes all responsibility from the doer: it leaves ambiguity as to who did what, which is crucial for proper attribution in scientific writing.
For example:
>
> The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. The software was implemented in Java.
>
>
>
Who implemented the methods? The authors of the current paper or Franklin and his pals? Who should be contacted if there's errors in the software? Who's to credit and who's to blame?
Even aside from ambiguity, in the hands of a deceptive author, the passive voice could be used to subtly claim credit for others' work.
>
> The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. These methods were extended to incorporate the inputs previously described.
>
>
>
... the authors make it sound a bit like they did the extending, but maybe they didn't?
The second argument against the omnipresent passive voice is more subjective: that for many people (including me), it sucks to read, it sucks all humanity from the writing, any modesty it provides is entirely false, and it just generally sounds pompous.
---
So if using the active voice, which person to use? Again this is convention, but talking about yourself in the third person is again considered silly in many communities (although mandatory in some journals!). Also using the third-person can introduce the same ambiguities regarding what was *your work* and what was the work of others:
>
> The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. The authors extended these methods to incorporate the inputs previously described.
>
>
>
---
**Leaving convention aside, first person is the only voice with a clear *objective* argument in favour of it: it avoids ambiguity as to who did what!**
All arguments for passive voice refer to subjective matters of style or (false) modesty. (Aside from which, I feel that first person active voice is a more natural style!)
**However, you should follow the convention of the venue you are submitting the paper to!**
See these [letters to Nature](http://www.sci.utah.edu/~macleod/writing/passive-letters.html), for more on the debate.
(The second author sounds ridiculously pompous to me.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: The use of "passive voice" started to become common in US journals in the 1920's. The reason for this is that science and the conclusions you draw from your analyses should be objective, which comes across more easily in the passive voice. This is actually a heated debate in many academic circles. Most journals encourage the use of passive voice, and some reviewers may give you a hard time if you use active voice in a paper you're trying to publish.
It's best to target your audience and write for them. For example, if you are writing an article for a science magazine, the active voice might be more suitable. It certainly comes across as more exciting.
Some good reading on this matter can be found [here](https://cgi.duke.edu/web/sciwriting/index.php?action=passive_voice) and [here](http://www.sci.utah.edu/~macleod/writing/passive-letters.html).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Saying "a method was used . . . " doesn't make the method, or your use of it objective. Nobody who is stupid enough to be fooled into thinking that will be reading your journal article. Besides, what you want is to *be* objective, not just *sound* objective. If you have a firm grasp on your method, your data and your conclusion, then the objectivity of the results will be obvious.
For instance,
"My hypothesis is h. Since h implies p, I used method m, since m will tell us whether p or not because m works by . . . . And when I used m, it clearly reported that not-p. So, my hypothesis turned out to be false."
Sentences like this create a narrative with helpful guideposts, showing how you arrived at your conclusion and bringing the reader along with you. Narratives help you attract readers outside the immediate small circle of people already familiar with the problems, methods and principle results of your sub-discipline.
As a humanities guy who occasionally really wants to find out what's going on in relevant empirical literature, I find it really difficult to discover the information that I want because I simply cannot discern *why* we are using certain experimental or statistical methods, *how* those methods imply the conclusions the authors claim, or *what* the ultimate significance of the results of the individual experiments are for the overall conclusion that the paper is ostensibly about. Tell a good story that includes how the experimental work and mathematical analysis all fit together, and you'll attract a broader audience, I promise.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In mathematics, *we* is used in a few subtly different ways:
1. To mean *the author(s)*: "We are not aware of any previous work on reticulated splines." (But maybe we just didn't look hard enough.)
2. To mean *the author(s) and the reader*: "We see from Theorem 5 that every snark is a boojum." (You are supposed to be able to see it too.)
3. To mean *the mathematical community*: "We lack a complete classification of cromulent blobs." (No such classification exists, but it sure would be nice if it did.)
Usually it is clear from context which meaning is intended. But occasionally third-person phrasing like *the authors* will be used to emphasize or clarify that the sentence is only referring to the authors, and not anyone else. "We cannot prove Conjecture 6 using these techniques" could be ambiguous: is it an absolute claim that it is impossible to do so, or merely an admission of failure by the authors? "The authors cannot prove Conjecture 6 using these techniques" resolves it in one direction. To make an absolute claim, you might use the passive voice: "Conjecture 6 cannot be proved using these techniques."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: This is highly field dependent. Actually, in certain social fields such as women/gender studies, African American studies, ethnography, etc. it is **required** to use "I", to disclose any biases. "I am a 30 year old white male" etc.
I know advisers that would outright reject a thesis that **doesn't explicitly use "I"** in this manner (or at least something like "the author is \_\_\_").
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/05 | 1,506 | 6,416 | <issue_start>username_0: Many students arrive at University and struggle with the transition from school.
Has anyone run/attended a lecture in which some or all of the following topics - or similar - were covered? Note - I am envisaging a mandatory single lecture for first-years which is independent of course/faculty.
**How to behave in class**
e.g. little/no talking while the lecturer is talking; what to do if arriving late (go in through a rear door, and/or apologise),
**How to ask help of a lecturer/tutor**
e.g. make an appointment and arrive on time if you want to ensure you get attention; don't arrive unprepared - show that you've done some reading and/or attempted to solve the problem yourself; have a series of well-defined questions ready, rather than just "can't do it"; don't show up 24 hours prior to a deadline set a month ago asking for help that should have been sought weeks ago and expect miracles;
**How to engage with lecturers**
e.g. forms of address - initial formality (e.g. "Hello Dr/Prof. X") is very likely to be appreciated and then met with an invitation to be more informal (call me "Phil"). Remind that lecturers are often engaged in other teaching and/or research and may often be too busy to chat if you just drop by their office.
**How to engage with students**
Remind the students that they are adults, this is not school, there are now serious consequences for breaches of behavioural codes.
Note, this subject material is not course or subject specific, nor am I envisaging the lecture as part of a lecture course, where only a subset of the year group attends. I envisage a mandatory class that all first-year students must attend at the start of the year. Furthermore, it sets out only the basic requirements of behaviour - specific lecturers might have their own additional policies on behaviour that they follow in their class.<issue_comment>username_1: These are four very different topics, with distinct answers for each.
>
> How to behave in class
>
>
>
This is typically deliniated by each professor on a class-dependent basis, as expected behavior will vary from course to course.
>
> How to ask help of a lecturer/tutor
>
>
>
This is pretty low-level etiquette, and these sorts of things are typically tacitly conveyed through interactions with the community rather than being formally discussed in a lecture.
>
> How to engage with lecturers
>
>
>
Again, varies from lecturer to lecturer.
>
> How to engage with students
>
>
>
I've seen this discussed in a wide variety of settings, including seminars, course lectures, lab meetings, and individual advisor discussions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I attended such a course during my first semester at a community college. It was mandatory for all incoming students, in all fields/majors.
This course covered most of the topics you mentioned, plus effective study habits, time management, basic computer and research skills, and brief experience with PowerPoint and givng a presentation. A major focus of the course was introducing students to resources they could use if they ran into difficulties with studies or life experiences. For me, the course was not very useful, since I already had a strong foundation in those essential life skills. However, to other students, the course proved very useful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I set up an introductory lecture for students. Some of it was along the lines you outlined but there were some additional points which I will mention.
I had the possibility to run a short written anonymous survey asking for (up to three) keywords about their (1) expectations, (2) reason for studying in general, (3) reason for choosing the topic, (4) what they are elt uncertain about with their coming studies, (5) what they considered most important about studies, (6) listing differences and similarities between higher ed. and lower ed., (7) their roll as student, (8) the lecturers roll, and (9) what they look forward to the most. This was collected and could be summarized in an an hour before my lecture so I could use the outcome to discuss their answers directly.
First, I had students discuss in groups of four in the lecture hall to briefly answer the questions: why get an univ. ed.? How does a univ. ed. work? and what distinguishes university from lower level ed.? This formed the basis for going into, and this could possibly differ slightly between systems, the very clear differences between school and university. In school teachers are there to teach you and it is their job to make sure you understand. At the university, lecturers are there to present, help explain and structure material. The learning is the job of the student, not the lecturer. The lecturer facilitates learning. So, bluntly speaking, the difference is that if you do not learn in school it could be blamed on the school but if you do not learn at a university, you need to primarily blame yourself.
I also pointed out the importance of skill such as the written and spoken word, study habits and computer skills (many other specific to the particular education could be mentioned). These skills are usually not mentioned anywhere but are outcomes of almost every course in one way or another.
Second, I outlined the many rolls of someone working at a university: teach, develop teaching, teach and advice graduate students, research (including writing proposals), administration, maintain national and international contacts, and research information to society (please add if you can think of more tasks. It is important to understand the conditions under which the lecturers live.
Third: *Professional attitude*. Pointing out that studies are serious but also that they should be fun through good social interactions and that students and lecturers in a way are colleagues in a common project, to complete a successful and useful education.
I also re-ran the survey once they were done with the course (which ran a full term) and could then repeat and highlight the differences in their answers. The main point of this is to get everyone to at least have heard the same "truth" about what they were about to embark upon. For some it was no news but many expressed that they received a better picture of what it is all about. There certainly was a lot more understanding for the lecturers reality than earlier.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/05 | 1,032 | 4,687 | <issue_start>username_0: How can I motivate my undergrad students to do research?
Since these students are at an undergrad level, I don't expect any extraordinary results. However, I would like if they get something published (even in low impact publications).
Undergrads almost never do research in our country. It's not even a requirement of the course. But, I want to motivate them for research. If they get something published, it would encourage them in the future.
In our country, research at the undergraduate level is almost non-existent. I want to introduce this concept at the undergrad level, but I don't want to force anything upon them. I just want to show them the benefits of research.<issue_comment>username_1: I would say, as a teacher, you can allot a project as a mandatory part of course. This project should count towards the final evaluation of the course. You need to do a bit of design and planning about the project and research idea that you want to implement. Then you may divide the work among students based on their strengths and weaknesses. You may assign one group to the whole project and assign individual modules to the students or you may create many groups and each group an individual module. Once this phase of project is over, you will be able to assess the students by their research caliber and motivate the good students for further work, which may be another project with more intensity. In addition to this, you can motivate them to go to better universities and industries for project work. This will really broaden their outlook. They will start looking beyond getting some CGPA and grabbing a job. I hope I could give you some idea :P
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps teach it to them as doing research leads to potential publications, which in turn leads to them increasing their 'research profiles' - which will provide a great advantage for if they wish to pursue postgraduate studies, as there is often a lot of research necessary in Masters and PhD programs.
This won't necessarily get all of the students motivated (as some may not be interested in further study), but may be a stepping stone in making this a normal practice in the undergraduate course.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One of my favorite undergraduate classes had a original research requirement, as well as a publishing requirement. Neither was very stringent; the original research requirement was that we collect some data on our own, while the publishing requirement was to provide proof of submission of a manuscript. It gave us a taste of research and publishing, which in some caes led to in-depth, sophisticate research while the students were still undergrads.
Don't be afraid to make some research a requirement for your students. They will learn that they are capable of more than they thought, and it is likely that a few students will run with the opportunity and produce results that may surprise even you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Have you considered making it some sort of contest? Students will go to astonishing lengths to win a competition. :-)
I'll give you an example. One of the undergraduate classes I teach is a C programming class, and towards the end of the term we spend a couple of weeks on performance optimization. For the corresponding assignments the students are asked to speed up a slow program given to them. Their score on those assignments depends on the speedup they are able to get, and -- here's the kicker -- if they can beat the performance of my solution they get a 20% bonus. I've seen students explore exotic data structures and algorithms, figure out how to embed hand-tuned assembly code, and teach themselves how to write multi-threaded code, just so they can say they beat the instructor. It's really terrific watching them push themselves to excel.
Your situation is almost certainly different from mine, but I think it's still fair to say that students will self-engage, and push themselves to think creatively and explore different solutions, if the motivation to excel is coming from the inside -- which is really what research is all about.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I've discovered that an effective way to engage undergrads is to give them a tour of your lab and let them shadow a grad student or other undergrads for a few days. Speak with them as often as you can to gauge what they are interested in and let them get a feel for your research group. Handing students off to a grad student or a postdoc and not speaking to them for a month is not going to work. It would be nice if you can give them a short term goal, say a poster presentation.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/05 | 365 | 1,649 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose that a systematic review on a topic X was published some (3-8) years ago by someone else, and it is currently still a useful source for what has been made before it was published. However, more recent works were also published later.
Generally, how can I decide whether it is a good idea to work on a newer systematic review for publication, taking into account that the newer review could be (somewhat) similar in methodology and would be based on extended and more recent literature (including that already reviewed in the published one)?<issue_comment>username_1: I would include only the work done after the other publication, with the occasional exception of including papers which would be too important to leave out. Of course, if you think the previous review was not a good one, you can do it all over again. Before starting, check what are the main implications of the other review: were there some open important question, which have now been solved; bad practises in the reviewed field, which have been corrected; etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **When?**
1. Whenever there is a set of papers that has significantly extended or changed the topic of interest.
2. If you have to do it as part of your thesis.
3. If you are contributing with a new approach/method in a publication (the literature review would typically be part of the Introduction).
My advice: do not spend too much time on writing and trying to publish a literature review if the problem has not evolved significantly during this time. Most of this kind of works get lost in an ocean of surveys.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/05 | 3,721 | 15,100 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been reading in different forums now and searching for the advice that can give me an answer to my dilemma of quitting or continuing my PhD. In this search I did not find any entry to why I should stay in the PhD.
**Profile**: Female, 29 years old. Undergraduate in agricutural engineering and MSc in environmental studies
**CONTEXT**
**I started my PhD** on political economy 14 months ago. At the beginning I did not like the topic at all. However **doing a PhD has always been my dream,** as I am very curious and I love learning something new everyday. So despite my lack of theoretical foundations on this discipline, I was so passionate about politics that I considered it was the gap I needed to cover on my interdisciplinary education in order to understand the state of the agriculture nowadays.
At the start, I was not convinced of the reputation of my host university so I decided to search for a second supervisor who was internationally well-known and recognised in the field. Then, I engaged in different theoretical courses in order to acquire the background I was lacking and started working with both my supervisors.
**After my preliminary fieldwork,** I came back depressed, demotivated and wanting to quit. I realised that I did not have any other alternatives, so I started job hunting while I was giving my last change to the PhD. Steadily I brought the topic to a terrain I like more and I became a bit more enthusiastic about it. However it is not (and has never been) the topic I am passionate about. On top of that it implies the need for more fieldwork (1 year) and living in harsh situations that are not appealling anymore. Furthermore I realised that jumping into a new and so abstract discipline **is representing to me a more major challenge than I initially expected and I feel that I am much slower than my other colleagues.** I realised **I am no longer the bright student that I used to be before** and maybe I am not made to deal with the construction of knowledge that academia represents. I also started questioning the power relations in the academia and how hard and competitive it may become. I start feeling a lot of stress and **lose more and more self-confidence** on what and if I can do it. And finally I questioned if I really want to do a PhD? For what? What are the reasons that hamper me to quit? Why I am staying?
**DILEMMA: TO STAY OR NOT TO STAY?**
**The reasons why I am staying** is firstly because I love research (but I hate academia). I love learning something new everyday and engaging in discussions with very interesting people. However I hate the competitiviness that academia embodies and the constant show-off it implies. It makes me feel terribly insecure and to not enjoy the learning process.
I love the people I met along the way and I adore and admire my supervisors. However the topic is not the one that makes me feel super motivated in the tough moments.
**The reasons that hamper me from quitting** are the compromise I felt I have acquired with my both supervisors. The amount of money and time they have invested in me makes me feel I owe them to finish... Additionally both of them are very recognised people in the field, so in case I would decide to quit this PhD and change into another one where my passion is... I wonder what my credibility as an scholar would be if I keep changing without completing things.
So I asked constantly since a long time ago: **whether or not I want to do a PhD?** I get to the conclusion I can work in research in many other places (i.e. think tanks, international organisations) that even if, and most likely, might be also competitive and with power relations involved, I don't have to deal with the theoretical issues that are killing me now. I realised that I am more an action, hands-on person that search for solutions to problems and don't like so much revolving around a problem for so looooooong (which is one of the things why I can not find the passion in my topic). I realised that I don't need a PhD for doing so and that the labour market can not absorb so many Doctors.
So having reflected on what I would like to do in my life (which I can not now see how it will be in academia), **my fears about quitting the PhD are**:
* I don't have alternatives now. I searched for them but I see it is incompatible to be job hunting while trying to make sense of my PhD (in terms of emotions and time).
* I am scared of regretting quitting the academia and not being able to work in research in the future.
* I don't know if I can stand the disappointment of my supervisors for quitting.
* I don't want to lose contact with the wonderful people I met along the way.
And **why do I want to quit**?
I am fed up of theory. I am not good at engaging with it and I don't understand it. This is stressing me incredibly and is becoming a very painful process.
I don't want to defend myself in everything I elaborate putting all my intellectual effort, because someone else may find many things in my work to criticise.
I am not passionate about the topic.
I don't want to go back either to the fieldwork or to my host university.
I feel I have many other skills that are hidden in academia. However when I develop those skills I feel much happier (like social skills).
So what shall I do? I would appreciate any advice (apologies if I did spelling mistakes but I am not a native english speaker)<issue_comment>username_1: This sort of dilemmas are very common among PhD students. The reasons for this and possible solutions widely vary for different people. The best thing to do is to attend therapy. Many universities offer this service for free, and the psychologists involved with this are very familiar with this sort of problems. If this service is not offered by your university, then you may want to spend some money on this. It is an important decision and you should not take it lightly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Given how little I know about the specifics of your situation, it would be inappropriate of me to advise you on a life decision of the magnitude of whether or not to stay in your PhD program -- if at all possible, please talk to people who know you well: friends, family, colleagues, advisors, mentors.
You mentioned four reasons for not wanting to quit. It seems to me that, of those four, you should disregard (at least) the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th:
* *"I am scared of regretting quitting the academia and not being able to work in research in the future"* -- if you want to return to academia in the future, usually you can. There may be a cost, but note that there is also a cost to maintaining the status quo.
* *"I don't know if I can stand the disappointment of my supervisors for quitting."* You are not responsible for your supervisor's happiness, only your own.
* *"I don't want to lose contact with the wonderful people I met along the way."* Staying in touch with people you like is independent of earning any academic degree.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **You**
The dilemma here is more of what you feel in class than what your life should entail. I'm going to sound vague but I beg that you pick points from it. First, about feeling incapable, you should never let anything or anyone make you feel inferior. You have a life and your academia should not dictate much of it. The people you've met and those who you will meet will be in touch with you because they like you personality and not your PhD. As for your supervisor, lecturer etc, they are doing their work and you are liable to their happiness or disappointment.
**Job Market**
I see that you're looking at the job market while making the decisions about what you want to do; on this, kindly know that the job market is ever changing and you should therefore do what you like. The labor market may require specialist in political economy now and by the time you complete your PhD, the political economy labor market becomes saturated and less rewarding. Doing what you like has an advantage in that you can always do something with it no matter the situation in the labor market. There is this discussion among HRs that always sound vague and shallow but it is important. It is about the zeroth and first degree. These two degrees are more important than the rest (other degrees). You will most likely get a job based on your first degree (undergraduate degree) than with the PhD or Masters degree. Just in case you intend to be a lecturer in political economy, the question is; What do you intend to lecture yet you lack most of the foundation around the subject of political economy. Most foundation are found in undergraduate level. I suggest you do a PhD that will built up to what you did in undergraduate and masters level. The lack of foundation is what is making PhD more harder for you but remember that there is no easy subject in this world.
**Money**
I understand how you feel after spending your time and money for this long. You're young (Only 29 years. Sorry if I sound rude) and can still start a new. I suggest that instead wasting time and money on a subject, that makes you loose what you've built for the last 29 years, you should change to a PhD that relates or is more relevant to your undergraduate and masters degrees. You will learn to love the other subject with time (Example: individual's ambitions and targets change over time after interacting with several things i.e you may find that at 10 years, you wanted to be a doctor but at 18 years you want to be an engineer). Don't base most of your decision on the money because you will end up missing the point.
You are better place for the future by studying a PhD that is more related to your undergraduate and masters degree than by studying other PhD subjects. The future is about specialization and not diversity.
I can give so many reasons but think this is enough for now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a PhD quitter, I can relate to your situation. Before discussing the main topic, I’d like to state that I didn't notice you were not a native English speaker before you mentioned it. Neither am I. And I haven’t read the other answers before writing mine.
Back on topic: I was confronted to some of the same issues when I was working as a PhD student in the U.S., originally coming from France. My decisions were made easier because I believe the professor who supervised me despised me. I quit after 3 years, leaving the field of research completely. At the time the logic was:
1. There just were not enough jobs in research, even for the top tier of students.
2. I was slower than other students.
3. I was not motivated and had no support from my supervisor.
If you have a tendency towards procrastination (like I do), you can spend ages staying in a position that you don’t like.
What I suggest is giving some thought to the following questions, which I think are those that matter the most:
1. What do I want to do in the next years? Don’t limit your options yet. Think freely.
2. How do I get there? Imagine what could be the best strategy to get there.
If point 2 involves quitting your current position, think about it as a career move. No one wants to hurt feelings, but we’re talking about your life, not anyone else’s. If you explain that your decision comes from logical thinking, this should not be an issue. Offer to leave your notes in pristine condition; offer to train or work with a new student for a couple of months. You may be surprised by your supervisors being supportive with the new direction you want to take. An experienced supervisor will certainly try to step in your shoes.
Where I currently work, we've had 4 directors (the top guy in the company) in two years, each one quitting after 3 months or less. They are supposed to care the most about the company, but they have no problem moving along if there’s something wrong.
A PhD was a childhood dream for me too. Now I don’t care. In my field a PhD means going from one postdoc position to another until the age of 35 or more. Sixteen years have passed since I quit. I’ve been working for years as an independent contractor in IT. I was recently hired by my main client, but I’m not sure if I’ll stay. (If 4 directors can resign, I can too!)
About learning every day, be sure that you can still do it at any age, whatever your job is. I never gave up doing “research” on a personal level. So many books are written on everything. The internet is a blessing. YouTube is a great source of knowledge with lectures, documentaries, video blogs.
Addressing some of the specific issues you mention:
* There is a world outside academia. Academia is like a box, but it is only after you get out of the box that you realize this. The academic ways of thinking are very formatted. Being successful in academia requires diplomatic and political skills that are not involved in research.
* About regretting academia: just think about the miserable times you had. This should cure you.
* About your supervisors disappointment: don’t worry too much about them. Your mother is going to be a lot more disappointed ;-) No, just joking. When I told my father I was quitting my PhD, I was expecting he would be upset. He just said, “Oh, I see. Okay.”
* About losing contact with the wonderful people: you will lose some contacts whether you get a PhD or not. Even if you stay around, some won’t. But you’ll stay in touch with the best.
I’m not pretending to offer a turnkey solution, only a few ideas to think about. Obviously my answer is biased in one direction: this is from my personal experience, but you really look like you have had enough of this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Since no answers are supposed to be opinion base on this site, this answer comes with a warning: the following is my opinion. Take it for whatever you will.
A lot of the above answers seem to be aimed towards quitting, either because they think that's what you should do or they've decided that's what you're going to do (it seems this way to me anyway).
A word of advice from a fellow PhD student: **Do not quit**. Irrespective of how much you're enjoying your PhD, it's a qualification of your ability to research and approach a problem. Not the specific subject matter. Yes it shows you have a depth of knowledge in the specific subject of your PhD, but it's also used as a proof of your capacity for research. I'm a lowly PhD student as yourself, so this advice isn't coming from me. I've spoken to a few lecturers at different university before starting my PhD (and since) and this was the consensus. A final reason to stick with it is the human factor. As other answers have said, you *shouldn't* be turned down for future research positions just because you left this one - you shouldn't, but you may be. The Lecturer who's managing the future PhD is going to want to fill the position with someone who will fulfil the job. They may not say they'll turn you down because you've left a PhD before but it will be part of the consideration.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/05 | 755 | 3,090 | <issue_start>username_0: There's no way to evade having a lot of acronyms in a scientific paper, often already in the title.
I use the [latex](/questions/tagged/latex "show questions tagged 'latex'") package `glossaries` to automatically expand the first use of every acronym (except usage in the title), but for a scientific paper, I do not include a table of acronyms (for my thesis I do). In a long paper, if someone does not remember all acronyms or does not read sequentially, it could be difficult to look up the meaning.
If I use a not very well known acronym in, say, line 100, and again in line 500, should I expand it again, or is it a better style to stick with expanding only and exactly once?<issue_comment>username_1: * (I've been using a table with abbreviations also in a paper, that was no problem at all)
* For longer texts (thesis) I give long version and abbreviation again if the abbreviation has not been used for "a while" of the text. E.g. introduced in the introduction, but next used in chapter 7 (400 lines ≈ 10-11 pages, that I'd consider probably close enough for not giving the long form again).
* It may be a good idea to have the long forms in parts of the text that are expected to be read without the rest (obviously in the introduction, but also in summary and outlook)
* I also consider how widely-used and how ambiguous the abbreviation is: Does PCA mean principal component analysis or polymerase chain reaction? Is LDA linear discriminant analysis or latent dirichlet allocation?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Ask the journal or conference where you're going to publish the paper. Some specify that it is, indeed, exactly once at the first use. (Shorter-format journals especially prefer this.) Others prefer "upon first use and where necessary for clarity" instead.
Regardless, in a long work with many acronyms that may be referenced out of order, there is no substitute for a table. Likewise if you define specialized symbols, a table of symbols greatly simplifies out-of-order reading. It's often worth devoting a table to such things even if your allowed number of figures and tables is limited.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: First, try to avoid acronyms unless you repeat it frequently.
In the case you mention, occurring twice, an acronym is not warranted. New acronyms may be useful if it is likely that it will be used over and over again, both in your paper and in subsequent ones. It is difficult to say how many repetitions is needed before an acronym may become a viable option.
Acronyms generally make a paper less readable. We all know some like DNA or UN and particularly in the first case the acronym is easier to remember than the actual words. So use acronyms sparingly, be careful about what you abbreviate, and avoid publishing acronyms that only your research group uses unless it starts to become a standard (identified by other people also using it in presentations etc.). I think many acronyms start by it becoming jargon first. Trying to be restrictive is the best measure.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/05 | 847 | 3,503 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently graduated and am temporarily employed as a lecturer at the school I graduated from (9 hours a week of teaching, not counting prep time). There's a weekly seminar on my field of interest, and I've been asked to take over hosting it. This would involve handling various logistics like planning the meetings, planning lunches, booking the room, etc. etc. It would be a lot of work... On the other hand it might be a neat opportunity to network/make connections/etc., but not that much better than the opportunity one would get just by attending the seminar.
Should I do it or should I save that time for working on my own research/jobhunting?<issue_comment>username_1: It's in your interest to focus on research, then job search, then teaching, then service. This is service, so lowest priority. See if you can get a student assistant (grad or undergrad) to do a lot of the grunt work, while you handle the higher level logistical stuff. If you can't get some help, doesn't sound like it's worth your time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest that you decline. If there are enough researchers in your group to host a decent seminar, then there are enough people with job security to handle the grunt work.
Offer to help out, say, by seeking out and inviting people, chatting them up, and going to dinner with them, but I would avoid any and all grunt work. You have a good excuse.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Think carefully. If you are not successful with your job search (and that has already happened to you once, apparently, as you did not find the job around the time you defended), and you decline to run the seminar, you will spoil your relations with the department chair/head.
To other previous responders: come on, guys, don't you know who's who in the academic food chain positions? The leader of the group considers him/herself busier than other members of the group. Other professors are busy with the research, their own grad students, and other committee assignments, and don't like to be bothered by additional service (which they also view as the lowest priority job, as clearly, and to the point, [communicated by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11683/739). So the group leader went to the person with the least negotiating power and the greatest amount of time, at least as perceived by other professors -- the new Ph.D., arguably with no other service assignments, no students to teach, etc.
So the overall advice is to weigh your options. If you are certain that you'll find a job elsewhere, feel free to decline. Keep in mind that this is an intertwined issue in that your group leader is to write your recommendation letters, and if you are perceived as non-cooperative colleague, that will make a way to the letters and (fewer) interview invitations. I was given the department seminar series to run in my first year out of Ph.D. tenure track job, considered it fun, but got kicked out of my tenure-track job two years later as I was perceived as doing too much service, and too little research. If you will have the opportunity for a greater deal of interaction with the invited speakers than just sending email on your leader's behalf, this could be valuable. If all you will find yourself doing is reservations and such, then this may not be as good. However, if you have a regular date and time for your meetings, you should be able to reserve the room once for the whole semester.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/05 | 631 | 2,591 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm in the process of listing and comparing all the graduate schools I am interested in. What should I be comparing, gathering, etc. And what is the best way to keep all the information together?<issue_comment>username_1: Here are some ways in which different schools differ from each other:
* Size. Both small schools (personal attention) and big schools (lots of seminars, people to talk to) have their advantages. Which is more important to you?
* Research focuses. Even large schools will be dominated by a couple of research groups. Do you find their work interesting?
* Program structure. Some programs are very structured, with lots of requirements; some are more free-form. Which is best is a matter of individual preference.
* Competitiveness. Some departments are friendly and competitive, some departments are friendly and less competitive. (And a couple of departments are unfriendly and you should avoid them.) Do you thrive under pressure? If so, choose a competitive place.
* Quality. (This one is obvious.)
* Geography. Some places (Harvard, Wisconsin, Michigan, Washington, among many others) are located in towns where it's a lot of fun to be a grad student. Some are not.
* Support. Some places offer more money, and/or less teaching requirements in exchange for funding. (Typically private schools fare better than public in this regard, but not necessarily.)
All things to keep in mind when you compare schools.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What is the best way to keep all the information together?
>
>
>
You've got a number of options here, but I would suggest two:
1. A spreadsheet (as Thomas mentions in his comment) for the logistical issues. I had a spreadsheet with the following columns:
Name | Website | Location | Due date for application | App. complete? (Y/N) | Letters sent? (Y/N) | Accepted? (Y/N/Waitlist) | Visit date | Primary contact name | Primary contact email | Thoughts (this was a one-liner column where I would put "great location!", "no funding...", or "perfect research fit", etc.
2. A folder on your computer for each school, underneath an overarching "Grad School Applications" folder. This is where you can drop all information pertaining to the school, including: a document with jotted down thoughts, your personal statement personalized for the school, a cover letter, the application form (if offline), correspondence you've received from the school (printed emails work pretty well), etc.
I would put everything in a Dropbox so you can access it on the road (and for backup).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/06 | 573 | 2,520 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently finishing my undergraduate math studies, and I am really interested in computer science (especially theoretical). However, I realize that most CS departments expect their applicants to have a CS major or at least a significant amount of coursework in CS. I have taken a couple of programming courses and a course in data structures, languages and machines, and design of algorithms, but all very basic (so I would probably be rejected because of insufficient background). Therefore, I have been looking for math departments that do theoretical CS research, but I have found very few.
Is is possible for a mathematician to successfully enter a program of theoretical computer science with few previous experience in CS?<issue_comment>username_1: I thought this question was asked and answered before, but I couldn't find it. In any case, people with a strong math background can do very well in TCS. The only stumbling block might be the breadth of CS material (including things like architecture, compilers and operating systems) that might be required of a CS grad student.
However there are certain programs (CMU/Georgia Tech/Waterloo) in which TCS is a separate discipline: if you applied to one of these programs, you might be able to to circumvent core CS requirements that you don't have.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to username_1's excellent answer, a couple of practical steps you could consider doing:
* Contact the admissions people at your favoured universities; at the same time, caontact potential supervisors and ask about your concerns.
* Read more about the topics related to the research interests of potential advisors, this is to gauge your level of knowledge and confidence in the topics (this is what I did before my MSc, now I have followed through into my PhD).
I hope this helps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Many people in Theoretical Computer Science have undergraduate (and sometimes graduate) degrees in Mathematics, and some do not know how to program at all: do not be afraid and go on. Having a solid background of both mathematics and computers is an asset.
The only warning: be ready to learn by yourself, especially as you might be asked to TA or teach courses you never took (e.g. I had to learn a lot for teaching Operating Systems, or Networking, as this was never taught in my undergraduate degree in Mathematics). But if you go to Academia, you should be ready to learn by yourself anyway...
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/06 | 1,513 | 5,813 | <issue_start>username_0: As we enter a new school year, I'm wondering if the is any evidence to support or contradict the idea that putting a poor-performing students on academic probation improves their performance. Does anyone know of any such evidence?
I can imagine that schools are naturally concerned about eliminating students whose tuition keeps the doors open and my school does not have any formal rules on academic probation. I'm thinking of proposing some, but only if there is evidence that it will actually improve performance. If it demotivates students (for example creating a stigma which is a very serious issue here in Asia) and bounces students who might otherwise just pass then it does not seem so appealing.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'm wondering if the is any evidence to support or contradict the idea
> that putting a poor-performing students on academic probation improves
> their performance
>
>
>
Whose idea is this? I quick look at what US universities think academic probation means does not suggest that its purpose is to improve performance.
At [University of Tennessee Knoxville](http://studentsuccess.utk.edu/crisis/probation.shtml)
>
> Probation serves as a serious warning that your academic performance
> needs improvement, alerting you that you are in jeopardy of Academic
> Dismissal.
>
>
>
At [Harvard](http://static.fas.harvard.edu/registrar/ugrad_handbook/current/chapter5/ad_board.html) Academic Probation is defined as
>
> a serious warning to a student whose academic performance for the term
> is unsatisfactory. Academic probation is a formal action of the
> Administrative Board and becomes part of the student’s official
> record.
>
>
>
It seems that in general "academic probation" is an administrative state between "good standing" and "academic dismissal". The purpose is to warn the student if they do not improve that they will be dismissed.
A potentially relevant question might be are things like the [Success Plan](http://studentsuccess.utk.edu/crisis/docs/SuccessPlan-Probation.pdf) of University of Tennessee Knoxville successful. This, however, is a really broad question. Each University is going to have a different "success plan" and implement it differently. You might also wish to consider how to build and implement a successful success plan.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is only a part answer
[University of California Berkeley](http://ls-probation.berkeley.edu/definition.html) applies a probation when the cumulative GPA goes below 2.0 and are within grounds for dismissal. But, they give a semester and advise the student to:
>
> The College of Letters and Science encourages students who have been placed on term probation to seek advising at the Office of Undergraduate Advising for help with schedule planning and to discuss any issues that may have caused poor results in the first place. Although this web site may be helpful to you, it is primarily designed to assist probationary students whose cumulative grade point average has fallen below a 2.0.
>
>
>
An example from Australia, Brisbane's [Griffith University](http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/82774/Academic_standing_flyer.pdf), it seems that a similar constraint may be applied:
>
> The minimum standard for academic performance is a Grade Point
> Average (GPA) of at least 3.0 for undergraduate students and at least
> 3.5 for postgraduate students. Students who meet this GPA standard
> are said to be in ‘good academic standing’. If a student’s GPA is below
> this level their performance is ‘unsatisfactory’.
> The first time a student’s performance is below the required
> standard, the student is placed on probation for the next semester.
> The second time a student’s performance is below the required
> standard, the student will normally be excluded.
>
>
>
In the Princeton article ["The Effects of Academic Probation on College Success: Lending Students a Hand or Kicking Them While They Are Down?"](http://theop.princeton.edu/reports/wp/FletcherTokmouline_2010.pdf) (Fletcher and Tokmouline, 2010), found that often there is an improvement, but then their
>
> findings also suggest that this short term boost in performance fades out over time and students who are on academic probation following their first semesters of college do not have higher rates of persistence or graduation.
>
>
>
They also found that an overall model (indeed a definitive answer) is hard to come by due to inconsistency of heterogeneous effects, particularly
>
> pre-determined student characteristics as well as high school of origin.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I saw it more as "a notification that we're working on kicking you out". In my first term of college, I failed a calculus 1 class (passed 3 others, but that F pulled my gpa down to a 1.6). and was therefore placed on academic probation. My advisor then forced me to register in the second semester into 2 classes for which my failed calculus 1 class was a prereq (calculus 2 and physics), virtually ensuring that I would fail. I signed an agreement to enroll in the class, added the class, dropped it 15 minutes, and then enrolled in several easy classes in order to boost my gpa. I actually got over a 3.0 my second semester because the classes were so much easier, but I no doubt would have received F's in both the calc 2 class and the physics class had I taken them. After my second semester, I transferred out in good standing, went to the local community college for a year, and transferred to another university. Had I followed my advisor's advice, I almost certainly would have experienced academic dismissal. My take is that they were trying to get people to flunk out.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/06 | 597 | 2,693 | <issue_start>username_0: If a paper has 3 weak accepts (in all evaluations, a weak accept in each evaluation), will it be published in the conference? If this is the case, what is the difference if it has 2 weak accepts and a strong accept or 3 strong accepts?<issue_comment>username_1: This largely depends on the conference. The way that conferences usually work (at least in my field for computer science - subdiscipline software engineering or human-computer interaction) is that once the reviews come in, the program committee meets and then discusses which papers will be accepted and which ones are rejected. This often comes down to how many papers there are, how many they can accept (subject to things including a mandatory acceptance rate, how big the conference can be, etc) and what other papers are like (if your conference has very few "strong accepts" that year then weak accept is pretty good).
Usually, a paper with few "strong accepts" could end up around the "middle" of the pack are more likely to be held up for discussion where they have a chance for rejection. Most PCs won't extensively discuss a paper where all of the reviewers say "strong accept".
So, we don't know if it'll be published in the conference. However, in general, the more strong accepts a paper gets, the more likely the paper will be accepted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Note:** My answer is computer science and specifically HCI relevant.
This depends on the conference, the discipline and the conference committee. There are variables which determine the acceptance of a paper in a conference.
A paper with three weak accepts may be rejected if there are stronger papers out there or if the committee feels that another paper which describes something really new must be given an opportunity to be presented.
A paper with three strong accepts is most likely to be accepted because this means that there is an almost unanimous consent among the reviewers and the paper is most likely very strong and very relevant to the subject matter.
A paper with any such combinations in between the previously described examples may or may not be accepted depending on various factors. Ultimately, the decision is upto the organizing committee. For instance, I have seen papers in [CHI](http://chi2014.acm.org/) be rejected finally with three 3.0 scores (borderline accepts) but seen papers with one 4.0, one 3.0 and one 2.0 get accepted finally after the revisions were made.
Therefore, ultimately, my first sentence remains valid. It depends on a bunch of factors most of which are out of your direct control. The only thing which you can control is the revision of the paper.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/06 | 573 | 2,477 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently in the process of applying for PhDs. My question is whether it is frowned upon to have done a degree in a subject completely unrelated to my main studies. I just completed two masters at top universities concurrently, one in biology and the other in English literature. I did the literature degree to please my parents, my real passion is in biology. I steered my English degree somewhat towards the biology by writing my dissertation on the representation of tropical diseases in literature. I am wondering whether I should list this degree on my CV or just leave it off? I thought that it might prove how hard-working I am to do two masters concurrently. I also scored the highest mark out of my class in my biology master, so the other master did not affect my primary master.
Any advice would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I would say to list it, for a couple of reasons:
* It does show that you are hardworking, 2 concurrent Masters degrees completed and completed to a great standard.
* Practically, it further demonstrates the abilities necessary to research, synthesise information, draw valid conclusions from a wide range of sources.
Also, you put in the effort, why not 'show off' your good work. By steering your Literature Masters in a biological direction with your topic of tropical diseases, you have also shown how this long-standing and serious issue (tropical diseases) have been portrayed to the non-scientific community.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As Damien have stated you should list both and for the reasons provided in that answer. In addition, I think it is worth thinking about how well you can second guess how anyone on the receiving end will percieve your CV. Basically, you cannot know. It is therefore important to list everything and in cases such as that about which you ask, provide a brief account to honestly describe why you did it. If you managed to do a masters with flying colours ina topic you do not like, that is a very strong show. I am impressed and so will others. So look through your CV, list everything that indicates stamina, effort, ambition, perseverance etc. and where you think things can be misinterpreted, add some sentence explaining why you claim it is a plus. You can easily do this in a short narrative that summarizes your CV and strong points. You can then put everything in the light in which you want them to be seen.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/07 | 1,447 | 6,337 | <issue_start>username_0: We need to hire a computer scientist with a very particular specialty as a consultant for a long term industrial research project. We've read the relevant papers and so know who does good work in it. But we don't know the first thing about hiring a professor as a consultant.
* Do I just email them and say "Hi, Dr. So and so, I've read your paper about X and want to discuss hiring you as a consultant"? Or do I need some type of introduction? Specifically, if I'm coming from a small business (with the funds to hire them, mind you, but a small business nonetheless), will they take it seriously?
* How can I evaluate their abilities to be a good *consultant*? I know they have the brains and the know-how, but I need more than that: I need someone who will work on the problems we have, giving us a reasonable assessment of their likelihood to solve them, keeping us up to date, and clearing communicating their results.
* Once hired, how do we effectively manage them towards our goals?
* Currently, we have funding to hire them only for the initial stages. With good results, we have investors to approach, and we'd like to say "We're working on this problem; we have Prof. X on it, who's done this so far; with another $1M, we could get here." Will academics be supportive of such an arrangement?
* How do we protect our intellectual property? Our plan is to leverage existing research towards new technological applications. What's to stop our consultants from taking our ideas on their own? This is especially a concern in the initial evaluation stages, where we don't have a business relationship, but need to discuss our applications in some detail nonetheless.
Finally: Are there any resources on how to do this? Books, articles, services? We'd really like to benefit from someone's experience on this.<issue_comment>username_1: As an academic with a history of consulting, the proper way to approach the person in question is to contact him directly. Email might work but for initial contacts phone might be better. If he/she is geographically close, a face-to-face would be even better. The initial conversation is really about whether he/she is interested in consulting in his/her area of expertise. If yes, then you can start to dig a little deeper into the project.
Be clear and up front with what you have and what you hope to achieve. Make it clear what the limitations of the project are and that the project might or might not move past the initial phase.
It is unlikely that the size of your business would be an issue but that really depends on his/her personality. You'll know when you ask.
About evaluating if he/she can be a good consultant, explain very clearly what your concerns are. There is no reason for the Prof to be concerned since you do not know each other there is not an issue of personalities and you are not doubting him/her, you are simply saying what you are concerned about. If you have read this person's work you should have an idea of his/her ability to communicate clearly.
As far as managing this person toward the goal, handle him/her as you would any other employee. Normally consultants expect a little bit more freedom but, to repeat myself, be clear with what you want and that might include an update every 2-3 days (more or less depending on the nature of the project - you might want daily updates).
As for protecting your intellectual property, have the Prof sign an NDA/non-compete. This *might* be an issue if it will in any way limit the Prof from exploring his/her own work. For this, you will need to negotiate what kind of legal protections you feel you need. If you write the non-compete in a narrow enough way, the Prof might feel comfortable enough (he/she is getting something out of the deal).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One key question to keep in mind is why someone would want to work as a consultant, since that determines how you interact with them. You're hiring someone who already has a full-time job, and who has chosen to work in academia despite having skills that are valued by industry, so you need to convince them that this is worth their time. It's possible you can find someone short of money who is specifically looking for a part-time job on the side, but that will greatly limit your choices. (The best consultants are often already the best paid faculty to start with, and they generally have many consulting opportunities to choose from.)
In practice, I see three main reasons why someone might value a consulting job, in roughly decreasing order:
1. You offer something they just can't get in academia. For example, unique data or experiences, extensive resources, dramatic real-world impact, etc. A computer scientist might work with Facebook to get access to their social network data, or Google to be able to study search and indexing on a vast scale. This lets them advance their understanding of the field in ways they could not have done otherwise (and hopefully they can publish the results).
2. Even if you can't offer anything unique or unavailable in academia, you may still be working on cutting-edge problems that help inspire and shape their academic research program. The difficulty here is that the world is full of cutting-edge research problems waiting to be solved. To convince someone to work on your problems rather than their own ideas, you need some argument. Maybe your problems are especially exciting or important, maybe they are a perfect match for this researcher's background and interests, or maybe you are offering enough money to outweigh other considerations.
3. If what you want is really routine (with little or no academic research significance), then you may need to offer a lot of money.
This only deals with the first part of your question, on approaching faculty, but I see that as critical: once you establish mutual interest, you can work out the other details. Getting to that point is the hard part, and how you frame things can make a real difference. When you first approach someone, it's much better to say "Here's an opportunity in which we'll pay you to do exciting things that will advance the field and your own research" than "Here's what we need and how much we would like to pay. Would you be willing to do it for us?"
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/07 | 627 | 2,857 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a visiting faculty, professor in B-schools. How does one go about in designing or compiling an open book exam, ensuring that it's not tough and neither too easy. At the same time someone who has not read the book will not be able to answer the question. What at the pointers or measures that should be taken care? Isn't designing an open book exam difficult compared to traditional exam?<issue_comment>username_1: **Open book exams** are actually very easy to design (at least I think so, and I favor them in my own teaching): just design it the same way you would design regular exercises. The goal is to **evaluate the students’ understanding and skills**, i.e. how they analyze and solve problems, rather than the facts they have memorized. To do so, I usually design exams as **problems** rather than series of trivia questions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: When designing an assessment, it is helpful to look at something like [Bloom's Taxonomy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_Taxonomy). Since you mention B-school, I assume you are assessing a management or finance module. I always thought finance modules in particular should be open-book because of the extensive use of formulas and, as pointed out by username_1 and others, simply testing if the student can remember some information is not really the most interesting (for teachers or students).
Sticking with Bloom's Taxonomy, remembering is the lowest form of assessment. If the students do not have to worry about getting the formulas right, then you can start something more complex. For example, have them make recommendations or create a plan for whatever the subject is. For example, if you are assessing leadership, give them a scenario with enough background knowledge and ask them to recommend (with justification of course) a particular leadership style for the situation. Remembering the standard leadership styles is not what is most important. What is important is that they can see a situation, assess the more important elements of that situation with respect to leadership, evaluate the pros and cons of each option, and decide which would be the best of all the choices to be used, which may include creating their own leadership style.
Basically, for open book tests, move further up towards evaluation and creating and away from rote memorization.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Open book questions should be able to evaluate student understanding. Should be able to test the ability of the student to think and come up with innovative solutions. It cannot be completely open ended. there should be a sufficient number of constraints within the question to enable convergence and a positive solution.
It is more difficult to set a question paper for an open book exam than a closed book one.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/07 | 1,179 | 5,000 | <issue_start>username_0: Inspired by the following question: [Co-authorship for not very involved supervisor](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/6130/co-authorship-for-not-very-involved-supervisor)
I have got to ask a slightly different question: I have a past supervisor while I did my masters and she wasn't really involved or as active as I would have liked. Also, I received no funding from this professor. I did however receive a scholarship from the university to fund my masters; not sure if these facts change anything. Naturally, this person would also like to believe she was involved, so had I finished the research while I did my masters there I would have listed this individual as a second author and even the author of correspondence. But now I am pursuing a PhD and in fact in a slightly different field at a different university.
While preparing for my qualifiers I came across some fresh new ideas and had a light bulb moment. Consequently, I have made significant progress in my old project as of late. I believe by the end of the summer I will have results ready for publication. On the one hand, I feel I should notify my old professor of these results once they come in... I think it would be wrong or even unethical to let them find out through the grape-vine or just through reading to keep up with the field. On the other hand, I fear this person will want authorship or even write the editor and demand it; this person is a Reader at a prestigious university while I'm just a little PhD student. I feel it will be a case of he-said she-said with the Editor which will ultimately result in me losing (even though I completely believe I'm justified and the recent progress was 100% mine).
Maybe I'm over-reacting but I'm not sure what to do. And I certainly don't want this person to "read over" my paper or attempt to "edit" it, because I think then they would have more grounds to put their name on the paper. Any ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: First, *should* you include her as a co-author? **Customs in this are journal- and field-dependent**, so you should check with others in your field (you didn't tell us what it was) and also with the **authorship policy of the journal** you intend to submit. You may also want to check with the **department where you did your Masters** what their policy is on authorship and affiliation for students' papers. At the very least, if you're going to have someone be cross at you, know in advance where you stand!
I'll sum up [my answer to another question on the site](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11494/2700) by stating that **graduate students oftentimes dismiss too easily an advisor's role** in the research. Selecting a problem/project for you to work on, even guiding you in the selection of a problem can be considered a big intellectual contribution to your research. **Conception/design of research is an integral part of the research**, and usually explicitly calls for authorship in resulting papers.
It's okay to be proud of your work, and to think your contribution in it was crucial, but be sure not to be biased against your supervisor when evaluating her contribution. One person who may help you do that is your current advisor!
---
Now, that being said, let's suppose you have made the decision not to have her as coauthor. How do you manage that? The guiding principle should be: be upfront and clearly state where you stand.
1. Including her name in the acknowledgements of the paper, specifically stating her contribution. (*“SG thanks Dr. <NAME> for initially pointing him to this challenging problem.”*)
2. When the paper is published, be sure to send her a preprint, along with a nice email.
3. If you are worried about her reviewing the paper, list her in the list of potential reviewers to exclude (if the journal submission has space for that). But… having her in the acknowledgments may already be enough for the editor not to pick her.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a somewhat difficult situation, but I believe the most salient issue is the one that you originally mentioned in your comment: the master's advisor did not fund your research in any way. As a result of this, the demands placed on the advisor for authorship become even more stringent.
The criteria that becomes significant here is whether or not the advisor contributed materially to the development of the ideas you've carried out. If you decided upon the topic yourself, without assistance from your advisor, then it's appropriate not to give co-authorship.
However, there is also the issue of politics to consider. If, as you suggested, you are worried about the influence of your former advisor on spiking the paper, it may be worthwhile to consider the possibility of adding your advisor on at least the first paper; any future papers could be done without citing your advisor on the future papers (except as an acknowledgment, as username_1 suggests).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/07 | 918 | 3,947 | <issue_start>username_0: I know you can apply for fellowships for individual students, but I'm not talking about funding only for one's self. Let's say I noticed a grant that was solicited on grants.gov and I wanted to apply for it. Can I do that?
The nature of these grants is to supply the awardee with funding for experimental set-ups, student funding (undergrad/grad), and other various research supplies.
& As a follow up question, is it possible to apply, if your PI is applying for this funding as well. Basically, could I send in a proposal and my PI could as well? Are there some restrictions here? I've read through the solicitation's eligibility and couldn't find anything about multiple names being on different proposals, or if we were to apply separately, then having the funding go to the same group under different names.
Just curious if anyone knew.
I'll write back, if I find more info.<issue_comment>username_1: First, *should* you include her as a co-author? **Customs in this are journal- and field-dependent**, so you should check with others in your field (you didn't tell us what it was) and also with the **authorship policy of the journal** you intend to submit. You may also want to check with the **department where you did your Masters** what their policy is on authorship and affiliation for students' papers. At the very least, if you're going to have someone be cross at you, know in advance where you stand!
I'll sum up [my answer to another question on the site](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11494/2700) by stating that **graduate students oftentimes dismiss too easily an advisor's role** in the research. Selecting a problem/project for you to work on, even guiding you in the selection of a problem can be considered a big intellectual contribution to your research. **Conception/design of research is an integral part of the research**, and usually explicitly calls for authorship in resulting papers.
It's okay to be proud of your work, and to think your contribution in it was crucial, but be sure not to be biased against your supervisor when evaluating her contribution. One person who may help you do that is your current advisor!
---
Now, that being said, let's suppose you have made the decision not to have her as coauthor. How do you manage that? The guiding principle should be: be upfront and clearly state where you stand.
1. Including her name in the acknowledgements of the paper, specifically stating her contribution. (*“SG thanks Dr. <NAME> for initially pointing him to this challenging problem.”*)
2. When the paper is published, be sure to send her a preprint, along with a nice email.
3. If you are worried about her reviewing the paper, list her in the list of potential reviewers to exclude (if the journal submission has space for that). But… having her in the acknowledgments may already be enough for the editor not to pick her.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a somewhat difficult situation, but I believe the most salient issue is the one that you originally mentioned in your comment: the master's advisor did not fund your research in any way. As a result of this, the demands placed on the advisor for authorship become even more stringent.
The criteria that becomes significant here is whether or not the advisor contributed materially to the development of the ideas you've carried out. If you decided upon the topic yourself, without assistance from your advisor, then it's appropriate not to give co-authorship.
However, there is also the issue of politics to consider. If, as you suggested, you are worried about the influence of your former advisor on spiking the paper, it may be worthwhile to consider the possibility of adding your advisor on at least the first paper; any future papers could be done without citing your advisor on the future papers (except as an acknowledgment, as username_1 suggests).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/08 | 2,426 | 10,534 | <issue_start>username_0: As described in [Hiring a faculty consultant](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11715/hiring-a-faculty-consultant), we need to hire a faculty consultant. The initial stages are perhaps only 100 hours, but subsequent stages may blossom to ten times that.
Will good professors be able to deliver that much consulting time? Would I be better off with a grad student or postdoc - could they deliver that much time? Or with a less accomplished professor with more time on their hands?
One alternative we've considered is to hire a fresh Ph.D. looking to enter industry. The problem is that we are not ready to commit to a full time employee - it's only if we get good results in the initial stages (and our investors agree!). Is there a solution for this?
One last alternative is to work out a research arrangement, where the professor would direct some of their research towards our needs. They'd get to publish the papers (with the application details removed, but the algorithms there) and we'd get ownership of the IP and control over the research agenda. Is that an option?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors at *all* levels of seniority and accomplishment are very busy.
They have courses to teach, institutional committee service, and their own research programs. Neglecting any of these for any length of time can have a permanent impact on their career. Professors who are less accomplished or have fewer duties in one of these areas will typically have more in the others.
Even a professor who is very motivated to work on your project may only have a few hours per week to devote to it. One day per week would probably be a maximum. Teaching schedules are often inflexible, so it may be particularly hard for them to visit your site, especially if it is far away from their home.
Senior people (tenured full professors) may be more likely to be able to make time for your project, but they also have lots of other interests.
One thought: you might consider approaching an expert who has recently retired. They should have the time available, and may be interested in your project as a way to continue their work in the field and earn some extra income. But they also may not be interested in working a lot of hours per week, and they may demand a fairly high hourly rate (as they're probably not in desperate need of money).
Keep in mind, also, that research by its nature is very hard to predict. It may be difficult or impossible for your consultant to accurately estimate how much time they will need to solve your problem, unless it is so straightforward that they can solve it almost at once.
As far as fresh PhDs, note that a new PhD has just spent several years working long hours for low wages. It may be hard to entice them with an offer of unstable, part-time work, unless you can offer some other perks like stock options or an unusually enjoyable work environment; startups are a dime a dozen. Of course, a lot will depend on the overall strength of the job market in your industry.
Your third option ("research arrangement") doesn't strike me as particularly feasible. A major reason for being in academia is the ability to choose the direction of one's own work. I don't think you'll find many professors amenable to being told how to direct their personal research program. They not only have to publish papers, they have to publish *good* papers which are novel, interesting to the research community, and spur further work in the area. If your project doesn't lend itself to that, in the professor's view, then the right to write papers about it is useless to their career and won't be seen as a benefit. Moreover, if they're going to work on your project as part of their own research, which is on their institution's time, then you can expect the institution to get involved in any IP issues, and they often have lots of lawyers. Not to mention outside funding agencies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Foreword: I smell a contradiction… you talk about *“very large industrial projects”*, but *“we are not ready to commit to a full time employee”*.
---
You need to hire a consultant… but **why a *faculty* consultant?** In pretty much any field of science, you can find decent consultants outside academia, working in, well… **consulting firms**. From what you describe, it seems than you need a rather large amount of work done, rather rapidly, and the benefits for the academic would not be immediately clear. That doesn't align well with the constraints and career goals of most academics, as username_1 explains very nicely. However, **consultants from outside academia do not have such constraints**, and it seems like a better fit for your specific case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think hiring a new Ph.D. to a full-time job is the best approach. For the initial consult you may be able to hire a current Ph.D. student or two to a temporary summer job. They would both be able to help you sort out if the idea is likely to pan out, and let you determine whether that person would make a good hire.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Let's deal with the 'easy' part first: hiring someone for ~100 hours of consulting.
How easy or difficult this will be is going to be based on what answers you need to the questions "When can you start?" and "For how many hours are you available per week?" If you need them to be available during set hours, this will also effect the situation.
When can you start?
-------------------
Most busy/qualified/established professionals book their time out in advance, very often 3-6 months out or more. I'm not some super-in-demand expert or a professor, and yet I've turned down four offers in the last few months because I have already dedicated myself to things that would make my first availability to be summer of next year - unless it was just an amazing offer with triple the money, at which point I'd still only be available a fraction of the time for the next 3+ months.
Especially with teaching, grants, budgets, and research schedules, finding someone who could dedicate more than a few hours a week within 3-12 months will not be common.
If you only need someone for a few hours a week spread out over the next 3-4 months, you will likely have a much easier time of finding someone who is at least available and potentially interested.
Sabbaticals, Summers, Internships, and Finding the Time
-------------------------------------------------------
If the initial stages go well and you need hundreds of hours of consulting or extensive research, this will not fit into the schedule of a professor under normal circumstances. It's not to say it can't be done, but if the person is really interested - both by the project and by how much money they stand to make - there are a few ways to make it work.
One way is for academics who have flexibility in the summer. While senior faculty will often direct labs, summer research, and some even have teaching duties 4-5 days a week over the summer, there is still often more time that can be squeezed out for consulting than other times. If this has been arranged a year in advance, or if the person happens to have already arranged for a light/no summer load, they would potentially be available for consulting for this larger work load.
Once you start needing more than 20-40 hours a week of consulting, it is reasonable to start considering having more than one person. It would not be unheard of for a professor - especially in fields that are highly tied to industry like in technology/computer fields - to arrange for a summer internship/research project where they and their hand-chosen grad students might be available to do work.
This sort of arrangement would allow sufficient time and expertise, and allow a faculty member to get a sufficient return for their invested time - teaching, helping students, conducting applied research/work, and bringing in some extra personal wealth.
Approach a Prospect and Be Open, Honest, and Straightforward
------------------------------------------------------------
You have a situation where the industry lags behind the state of the art research, and you feel you have a great financial opportunity if you can close the gap - and need an expert to help you do it. That's great!
Professors and researchers are humans too, and are interested in things like making money (especially when it brings the potential for even more money), working on interesting problems, etc. If it is applying existing knowledge/research to a problem it might not result in interesting research, but this is very field-dependent as case-studies and applied techniques are standard in some fields and unpublishable in others.
Most people who have any experience in industry also understand the funding cycles are surprisingly similar to academics - you have a little bit of funding available to invest into exploration, and what happens from there depends on the results you get. So be open about this - if you know you have budget and money to pay them for the exploration phase, say so. If that phase doesn't work out then it will mean you don't expect to have any more immediate work - say so. And if it works out and you get the funding you are shooting for and will need a lot more work done - again, just say so.
Start a conversation and see where it leads. As with most professional tasks, it is not uncommon to have an offer come across your desk that just isn't something you are interested in, but perhaps you know someone who you might refer the opportunity to. Perhaps you'll find the professor who wrote the papers that attracted you to them in the first place will say that they actually don't feel they are the expert, and that actually the student they were working with would be better able to help you. Maybe they'll insist they are a package deal - you hire them and their collaborator. Perhaps they just aren't interested. Perhaps they already had a sabbatical planned and haven't 100% decided what they wanted to do, but this would fit the bill nicely...etc.
With a clear plan, seed funding in hand, and an open and honest discussion about your situation, goals, and what you can offer, most professors will be happy to take a meeting with you and discuss the matter! Few people are so busy as not to be able to talk about extra money, and most higher-level professors reserve a portion of their schedule for consulting gigs anyway (again though, this varies by field).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/08 | 813 | 3,406 | <issue_start>username_0: Long story short, my transcript is quite the spectacle: I started off getting really good grades, but due to a lot of personal issues ended up graduating with a respectable, but lackluster GPA. Unfortunately, I have a downward trend. While my final GPA is slightly below 3.5, I have failed quite a few courses. I'm getting a MSE in computer science, coming from an applied math background. My undergraduate computer science GPA is really high, but my GPA in everything else is pretty low. I'm confident that I will do exceptionally well in the CS MSE, but I have a few questions:
* Are undergraduate courses unrelated to one's discipline factored into the PhD admissions decision making process?
* Despite doing poorly in some math classes in my undergrad, will taking graduate level math courses and doing well in them essentially negate the fact that I did poorly in some classes as an undergraduate (did well in most of them)?
For reference:
I'm currently conducting research and should have good to outstanding recommendations.
I understand that for PhD programs, a common order of applicant evaluation is:
1. Recommendations
2. Research
3. Transcript
and that I have valid reasons for my poor performance, nonetheless, I'm scared that they're going to look at my undergraduate transcript and just get scared off. Any insight or advice would be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I have had an almost identical situation:
* not spectacular overall score in undergraduate (nor in my Honours for that matter)
* Did well in my MSc (in a different field). Got great references and did very well.
* Now are about to complete my PhD, with several publications under my belt.
The advice I can offer is:
* Be honest, if they ask for the transcripts, show them what they need - the improvement in your grades would be evident. More than likely they'll probably be more interested in your highest level of attainment (Masters).
* If unsure, ask the admissions people and even approach professors that have the same field as what you are interested in pursuing.
I wish you the best of luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You're right to be concerned. Some places *will* be scared off—or more accurately, won't even see your application—because of your undergraduate record. **But some won't.** Some will see your strong record in computer science, in graduate classes, and in research, at the expense of other classes as a sign of passion/focus/geekery (which is a strong advantage in research) combined with immaturity (which most people grow out of).
PhD admission is a random process, a numbers game. You have a high-variance record, so to be reasonably confident of admission, you should apply to a wider spectrum of places than someone with a more consistent record with the same average.
I **strongly** recommend discussing your concerns directly with your letter writers. They have to make the case that the admissions committee should ignore the black marks in your record and focus on your considerable strengths—good performance in graduate classes, excellence in your chosen field, strong research ability, and so on. (You can't really make that case yourself.) Your references may also be willing to contact colleagues directly, to convince them to pull strings on your behalf.
Also: **PUBLISH!**
Best of luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/08 | 4,595 | 18,939 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a first-year PhD student in Biology and I am currently working in a lab for a very hard-to-please PI (a new PI who started a couple years ago and only just recruited her first few graduate students). I am very interested and excited about this line of research and I really want to do what I am doing. But my PI's way of managing people makes everyone miserable and I am not sure what to do.
Background: Last fall, I rotated in a lab which I really enjoyed working in and generated some great data, but had to leave, along with the other rotation student, because PI had no funding. In the spring, I rotated with a brand new PI, whose lab I helped set up and started on a project, but did not stay in his lab because his management was very poor - was never around, didn't know or care what was going on with projects, etc, and I was also advised to join a different lab by the academic coordinator who said they thought this PI was not "ready" to handle a graduate student. So then, I started a THIRD rotation in another "new" PI's lab and have been here for three months.
This person's research is really great, but their management seems to focus heavily on threatening language and negative reinforcement. They often send very angry emails to the lab. When this person is feeling "iffy" about you because you didn't get fantastic results or you responded to an email too slowly, they will tell you to your face that you are not worth their time to mentor if you don't "try harder." I recently gave PI a sequence alignment, but accidentally gave them the wrong version of the sequence, and as a result, they said they would not be willing to fund me as an RA. PI actually made the same mistake when they did the sequence comparison (which is OKAY! It is an easy mistake to make!), but they were just so harsh on me for the mistake. All their communication with me makes me feel that, despite my good merits, progress or improvements, they disapprove of me or are angry with me. They deal with my labmates in the same way and my labmates have often expressed their worries and stresses to me over this. I should note that some of my labmates are well-accomplished, highly dedicated post-doctoral researchers who devote ALL of their time and efforts to their work. The dynamic in the lab overall is not very good, in part because people feel increased anxiety from the PI's anger or lack of professionalism in expressing themself. It is really a huge distraction from my work whenever PI is talking about kicking me out of the lab. I go from focused on an experiment to panicking about what to do or who I should talk to.
I still respect this person as a scientist, but I feel at times that this harsh style of management/dealing with people is too much for me. I am not perfect, but I am trying very hard and have made so much progress on my work, I just wish PI would recognize this. Almost in my second year of graduate school, and with the school potentially not able to support me with a TA in the future, and with me working in my third lab, I am extremely stressed out by this situation. I feel that, if I do not make it work in this miserable lab, I will be kicked out of the school and then lose my chance to earn a PhD.
What is a good way to deal with this type of advisor and how to keep clam and focused in the lab with this kind of stress? Any advice is appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: First off, I'm really sorry about your situation. It's certainly not a nice boat to be on, metaphorically speaking...
Since you have omitted any information about where you live and work, I don't really know what rules and regulation apply, likewise what the "norm" of a PI - grad student relationship is over there. So I will try to keep it as general as possible.
Let's start by looking at your options, you can:
1. keep wishing that the PI will eventually realize your efforts and give you a break
2. accept the constant stress and harassment (yes threatening someone is a form of harassment)
3. leave the lab
4. communicate your concerns to the PI
(1) and (2) are pretty self-explanatory. Let's consider (3) for a second, why would you want to work in a lab like that? I know that cultures vary and level of respect and fear professors command is scary at certain countries/cultures but I honestly don't get why you would be willing to put up with that. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that working in a lab like that will make you work harder and get better results (and I sincerely doubt this will be the case in the long run), who cares that you got a publication in a fancy journal if you hate your life every day. I am possibly dramatizing it a bit to make my point clear. Honestly if you have been doing research with 3 different PIs and none are sound to work with, I'd consider some other uni/lab.
Lastly (4); communicate your concerns. You have mentioned that other people have similar problems with this PI. Gather some good arguments; enriched with facts, numbers that cannot be easily denied... Then try to get a 1-to-1 meeting with the PI, and simply tell the person that s/he is terrorizing the lab, and it's hurting peoples mood and ultimately effectivity. If you make good, logical points without diving into emotions and thoughts and beliefs, you could actually make your concerns heard right there and then.
If the PI in question completely ignores your concerns, and ultimately tells you "my way or highway" then one option would be go pursue your legal rights. I don't know what the situation is where you work, but in Sweden PhD students are actually employed by the university, and thus by the state (exceptions exist, but that's beside the point). So you have certain rights assured by your employment. Even without a formal employment, i.e. *only a student*, you should have some rights and some representation towards the faculty. The student unions here in Scandinavia are pretty strong and well connected. They actually work together with the faculty and university administration to catch up, and deal with issues like this. I would recommend you to try and see if there is a similar concept in your university.
That's all I got, hope the situation resolves itself soon.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You would not come here, if you thought the situation acceptable. Unfortunately the isolation of the PI will have given rise to a wrong self-perception. If you are ready to search for yet another PI, and again some criticism on *another person* arises, wait (not too long) till you can talk to the PU alone, and say:
* you are the best PI till now, you have gotten,
* I have no experience, but isn't the tone quite harsh? - especially as there are still professional unsurities on the side of the coworkers,
* I am a bit longing already for a bit collegual tone at work
English is not my native language, so formulate the above as short and open as feasible, maybe in question form.
* that you are missing a bit of lightness, humour, in the day-to-day operation,
* whether the current team is a bit disappointing; in what respects.
* Also be sure to give the PI his say, listen: if the PI does not react on a pause: what do you think?
* Stop if the PI cannot reach over (in that moment). Leave the case open "just wanted to air my mind; thanks for the patience".
* On a negative reaction: "you are the best PI I had till now."
I doubt, that such a deviation of normal lab behaviour, will come easy, and the appropiate formulation will be difficult.
Of course this advice is a risk, but all other measures are less direct, being less open-minded towards the world.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Don't walk, run**.
This kind of behaviour should be viewed as entirely unprofessional and unacceptable in any working environment; it astonishes me what gets politely overlooked in the academic world. What you describe is *bullying*. While the work may be exciting, it is doubtful that you will ever be able to flourish as an independent researcher facing daily abuse from your supervisor and suffering the toxic secondhand effect of your supervisor abusing your colleagues. I cannot imagine that after several years of that you will still be able to maintain the same level of enthusiasm for your work, and perhaps for academia altogether.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It really does sound like you are better off leaving. For one thing, since he really does kick people out, what will you do if this person does kick you out later on in your PhD? I'm assuming here what you seem to be implying in your question, but have not stated explicitly - that this lab will be your home for the remainder of your PhD.
I've also suffered abusive conditions, though as a post-doc. (Although the PI in question did not generally kick people out.) I think it is unlikely to get better. These kind of people don't change unless they are forced to, and academia tends to be very undemocratic, and my experience is that department officials are loath to interfere unless they benefit in some way. E.g. if they want to get this person for some reason, they may use his behavior towards his juniors as an excuse, but they won't really care. (Something like this actually happened in a department I was in.) Your setup certainly sounds very undemocratic. Even if the PI is pressured into behaving better (unlikely by the sound of it) it will still probably not be a positive working environment.
If if it already late in your PhD, I suggest you discuss funding problems with your department, and sooner than later. Maybe something can be figured out, but the longer you wait, the more difficult your position will become.
As I said in a comment above, if you do move again, check the PI in question out, as far as practicable.
Also, as Jack said, there is a significant possibility that this treatment will end up ruining your appetite for research altogether. You should take that possibility seriously.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Sorry to hear about your situation. But as others pointed out, based on my own experience, I have following pointers:
1. In my personal experience, there is no way the situation will get better. Your PI is less likely to be punished for her behavior. So when a thief is not caught while stealing from a cookie-jar, the encouragement for the thief is to steal more, and more, and more. So, you should assume that you are in for abuse for a very long time. It would be a wishful thinking that she would change, and you cannot base your decision on something that you can't control (i.e. change in behavior of your PI).
2. The second question: How common are these situations? Answer: Shockingly common. It is one of the biggest shames of modern academia. It really stems from a general culture of immunity and impunity - a "cozy club" in which faculty members operate and protect each other. This does not mean you have to accept it as a fact of life and continue to take abuse. Road accidents are also common. It does not mean we stop driving in a car. The key is to be more careful while driving, more careful while choosing the next PI: do your research, meet students, email former students/postdocs, keep thinking of alternatives. Academia is like a lawless country: if you complain against your adviser, her friends and colleagues would be the judge, jury and prosecutor. There is no hope of a fair trial. During the course of your complaint process, you will face character assassination, slander and even more harassment. So, do not even try to "handle" the situation by going through the official complaint process unless you have resources for legal recourse.
3. Things have gone so bad these days that I see news of lawsuits by grad students every now and then. For example, check these ones out:
<http://chronicle.com/article/My-Adviser-Stole-My-Research/135694/>
<http://www.gwhatchet.com/2014/02/23/in-rare-court-appearance-gw-will-face-former-graduate-student-alleging-emotional-distress/>
<https://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/blog_posts/1747>
As is the case with other fields/sectors, only appropriate laws and legal action can flush the corrupt advisers out. Turns out there is more awareness on such issues these days, and this has not escaped the attention of even some lawmakers. For example, see this:
<http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/photo-gallery/student-right-to-know-before-you-go-act-introduction-and-discussion>
4. Suppose you decide to stay and take the abuse for several years or even a decade. Would that make you a successful researcher? Most likely the answer is in negative. Your PI's exploitative conduct and toxic work environment would not let you think independently. The very fact that you currently think this is a good lab and you are working on the best topics is already a sign of some brainwashing you might have suffered. A lab is not good if its citizens are mistreated. Period. A thesis topic or research field is not good if you work on it in an environment of fear. Period. Compare this with scientists forced to work in a concentration camp: they are mistreated, they don't publish and nobody knows such researchers. Look around you - you will find that most the successful students who came from reputed labs have stories of how good their relationship with their advisers were. Do you have such a story to tell? No. Would you eventually have a nice story to tell? Less likely.
Having analyzed the situation, let's come to the solutions:
1. Is there a way you could quit this lab, say today, and have your studies continued? Is there any such way? If the answer is yes, then you have to "run" to that solution. Like someone said, "don't walk, run". The sooner the better.
2. As a student, you don't want to lose any of your years, and want to build on whatever best you have got. People like your PI know this and take advantage of the student's psyche by making false promises, threats, baits and harassment. You have to liberate yourself from this psyche. If you could transfer to another university, may be credit a few more courses, go through the admission again, it would benefit you as an independent person and researcher. You have to understand that the situation would not improve, and there is a good chance you will get a better PI in a better place.
3. Finally, instead of feeling inferior, you have to realize that your PI indeed likes your work. But she thinks it is beneath her to appreciate your efforts. Also, she has figured out that she can get more work out of you by berating you. That itself tells you two things: you will not gain anything by trying to "impress her", and that you are really good to go somewhere else.
I encountered an abusive adviser in my PhD. It took me five years to come to terms with a sad fact that I was being exploited, that there were no returns or brighter future prospects, and that I was really a good student who could easily transfer to other universities. So, I changed to a better university and benefited a lot from working with the best in my field. Looking back, I feel I could have taken this decision much earlier if there was a stackexchange thread on this topic :-) It is never too late. Run, run and run to something, not away from something.
However, the "clean break" that I was looking for didn't happen: after I quit my previous lab, my adviser tried to take back my thesis citing "national security concerns" (yes, he did play that card). I complained to the Dean, and my thesis was published. My adviser contacted my new advisers and tried to put a negative recommendation. He slandered my character before my colleagues. When he found out that there was not much he could do, he turned to something completely unthinkable: my brother was a PhD student in the same department. My adviser contacted his adviser (who was another jerk) and conspired to kick my brother to out of the university on false accusations - all in broad daylight. I and my brother went through the official complaint process, but nothing happened. No one heard our side of the story. In the meantime, 8-10 more students quit my former adviser's lab in less than two years. A few months later, the university gave the highest recognition to my former adviser. This is what a "cozy club" does.
I wish you good luck. Just RUN.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Here's my quick story with a nightmare PI:
I'm at an R1.
I switched labs after my first year because my advisor was a tyrant. This PI was very unethical and emotionally abusive, and I would have reported her to our IRB in regards to research integrity issues that I saw if my program had a way to do that anonymously (as an aside: it still baffles me that they don't have such a process!). I talked with our department chair who helped facilitate me leaving the lab when I gave her the ultimatum that I'd be leaving the program if I could not move labs. Schools don't like that, especially when you are pre-dissertation because it makes their programs look bad. The department chair basically told me not to speak up to higher levels in the university about what I was experiencing, and quietly helped facilitate meetings with other PIs so that I could move to another lab.
After that, she lost an existing student every semester. Another student took the issues to the Dean, and things seemingly "hit the fan" with this professor and our Department. Two years later she had no students, and was finding it hard to recruit. The thing that still baffles me to this day is that she faced NO repercussions from the graduate school. She lost 5 students in 2 years, and nothing happened to her. They tried to convince her to take an easy high paying administrative position and cruise into retirement, but she refused. Now she has a beautiful lab space that no one occupies, and she still brings in private funding that no one does any work with other than failed post-docs who take a side gig with her as a consultant to move something along for her ever so slightly. I guess this kind of behavior really is tolerated in Academia?
Honestly, I think the best thing to do is leave the lab and go somewhere else. I won't lie and say that it always works out, it might not. Your current PI might make a stink in the field and you might find that moving to another lab doing related work is not possible. You might find that in the department if the PI brings in enough money and has power that moving to another professor is difficult. You have to leave quietly and make it about your interests and a lack of a match in where the work was going, etc. You have to play the hand you have been dealt as shrewdly as you can.
Best of luck to you.
P.S., if your PI is not a rational person then don't expect any direct conversation with him/her to go well. The best predictor of new behavior is...?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/08 | 1,847 | 7,769 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergrad in Australia, and at this stage I want to go on to do further study in maths (or maybe physics/CS, still have a few years till then).
Should I do so, I imagine that I will want to complete a PhD overseas. Possibly at a university in the US or maybe Oxbridge in the UK.
In Australia, PhDs typically take 3 or 4 years, and I would be eligible to go straight into a PhD upon completion of my undergraduate degree (it is research focused and includes an honours year, see [here](https://studyat.anu.edu.au/programs/4660HPHB;overview.html)).
But, much of what I have found for overseas institutions has been in the range of 5-7 years, or maybe a 3-4 year PhD with a few years doing a master's degree beforehand.
Does this indicate that the level of rigour and amount of work produced is significantly different for various PhD programs, or is it the case that some programs are more relaxed and simply spread the same amount of work over a longer period of time?<issue_comment>username_1: The length of the PhD program depends on how the bachelor's and Master's programs are structured, and what additional demands are placed on students in terms of teaching and other assignments.
For instance, in the US, you can gain admission to a PhD directly after a bachelor's degree, but you will also be expected to take courses for one to two years. In mathematics especially, you will likely have significant teaching duties as well. in Europe, PhD programs in math will still likely require significant teaching, but no coursework, since it is presumed you took the requisite courses as a Master's student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @username_1's points, in the U.S. the undergrad degree (B.S. or B.A.) in math is typically rather thin, due to "breadth" requirements, so a year or two of a PhD program is spent catching up, in comparison to most other educational systems in which specialization occurs earlier (and perhaps high school math education is more intense).
Some decades ago, it was the style in elite places in the U.S. to have people finish a PhD degree as quickly as possible, often in three years, as proof of ... something. This was plausible under the hypothesis that students at such places had an unusually good background.
In fact, given the way professional mathematics has evolved, spending more time learning things and maturing before hitting the job market may be wise. In any case, no one is creating artificial obstacles to any student's quick graduation! In my current institution, there really are no "required courses", in the sense that there are some modest proficiency exams in standard material that need to be passed, and courses help prepare for those, or can substitute for proficiency exams to some extent. Thus, a well-prepared student can "test out" of requirements.
One underlying problem seems to be that people take as much time as is allowed, so if it is understood that one may take six years "if necessary", then most people plan to use up that time. Not that they're "forced to" or "kept from graduating earlier". And then there's the reasonable fear of facing the job market that leads to "avoidance".
I would claim that "having to teach" is not a serious impediment to quick graduation. However, its relatively immediate gratification can seduce people away from the far-less-immediate gratification of research and study.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Another aspect that's worth mentioning is that there's PhD and there's PhD. Even though the name of the title is essentially the same when translated to common English, the "content" of the dissertation and diploma could differ significantly. If you have more time to do your research you're more likely to produce more publications (although this is not a given). I would even argue that the potential increase in your publications is not linear to the number of years in grad school, considering the rather steep learning curve.
Similarly the expectations during post-grad applications could also vary based on the degree. You might, and probably will, be expected to do more years of post-doc research before getting a faculty position, in comparison to if you had a longer PhD period (for instance 5 years instead of 3).
Yet another aspect is the funding; most PhD programs are limited in years, because the funding is usually limited in years. In other words, if you have means of sustaining yourself without grant money, or if your supervisor/group leader has the possibility to fix some other source of funding, I am pretty sure actual dissertation time would not be a huge issue (again it depends on the supervisor).
Lastly, none of this is written in stone, and there will always be exceptions to the rule. I would advocate that there is really no shortcuts to success, and instead of worrying about number of years to a particular title, one should focus on getting "really good/competent" at the field of research.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Having moved from the US to Europe (Denmark specifically), I was surprised that doctoral degrees here are standardized. Whereas in the US degree times vary considerably for all the reasons stated in the other answers, in Europe the length of PhD degrees is increasingly zeroing in on three years. Indeed, in Denmark no one is permitted to take longer than three years.
This is due to an international European standard known as the [Bologna process](http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/bologna_en.htm), which aims to standardize academic qualifications across Europe. In order to enter a PhD in Bologna process countries, students must have a sufficient number of ECTS points (equal to a master-level degree), thus reducing the variance in times (common in the United States) due to differences in additional courses (minimal), teaching obligations (minimal), etc. between students, departments, and universities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In the UK system (or similar systems, like Australia) students enter their Ph.D. program with a stronger background due to earlier specialization, and they typically leave their Ph.D. program at a less advanced level than a Ph.D. from a comparable American school. The difference is not in how fast people learn, but rather differences in what a bachelor's degree means and what a Ph.D. degree means.
Note that on specialization for undergraduates the US is the outlier, but in terms of Ph.D. outcome it's the UK that is unusual. For example, [<NAME> writes](http://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/435/1/RedefiningTheDoctorate.pdf), "Across Europe the view prevails that the three-year UK doctorate is too short and thus of inadequate quality compared with the more common four-year doctorate."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: For those interested in why the U.S. is an outlier compared to Europe in terms of PhD length, it's important to keep in mind that European countries used to have not only widely varying standards for doctorates but also widely varying degrees (i.e., many countries had degrees that did not even map onto the BA-MA-PhD system). European countries are now increasingly standardized around a 3-4 year doctorate because all degree programs in (most) European countries are expected to follow the standards set by [the Bologna Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_Process#Qualifications_Framework_of_the_European_Higher_Education_Area), which fix the ECTS credit hours for particular degree programs. As a result 47 European countries (as of 2014) now have relatively standardized and transferable degree requirements, which differ quite dramatically from those in the U.S. higher education system.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/08 | 1,361 | 5,655 | <issue_start>username_0: I am willing very much to make a transition to a scientific position, but I am not sure what's the best way to do it. I would like to ask for your advice.
Let me describe my situation (it is quite specific, but it can be generalized):
* I have completed PhD in Russia (at some provincial university, on knowledge representation and high-performance computing) which I am unfortunately not quite happy with (it could be better and I did it during my work at a company).
* I have some publications, but none in top journals/conferences.
* I have very diverse interests that span machine learning, knowledge representation, AI, algorithms, parallel programming, performance analysis, etc. I am trying to stick myself to just one direction: scalability problems of machine learning of big data sets, but well, there are so many interesting topics! :-) I visit summer schools on these diverse topics.
* I live in Russia (province, so to say) and I still do some teaching and research advise in local university, but I am not a faculty staff and I refused to be one. The reason is that it only involves teaching, but I want to do research. Also, faculty members at Russia have extremely low salary that will not allow me to survive. But there is one group doing research in machine learning there (not a famous one by all means).
* At the moment I am a software development engineer (in one of the top companies) doing research-like work in high-performance computing, but which is very applied. It is not always possible to publish a paper for the outcomes of this work, that's why it is not completely scientific/research. Also there are some software development tasks (previously I did it a lot, ~10 years).
* I have a family (wife + son of 8 years + plan to have another baby in some future).
* At the moment I am trying to do research work during my free time as much as I can, but it is not always very effective of course, because it is not my job. But I am trying to use every minute for this.
My goal: do scientific research. I believe that it is not very effective to do it as a hobby, so I am searching for a way to have a scientific position. I am ready to give a lot for it; I will be happy to have a medium salary, enough to support my family.
Possible ways to meet this goal:
1. Go to Europe/US and do a PhD there. Not possible, because I already have a PhD and I won't be able to support my family.
2. Go to Europe/US and do postdoc work. Somewhat possible, but:
* Need to produce at least 2 good publications first.
* Will I be able to support my family?
* Postdocs are temporary positions. This could mean switching countries and it could be difficult for my son at school (due to language).
3. Join research group at local university. I am going to do this, but it is temporary, I wanted to work with top people in this field. But it's good for the start.
4. Join some research lab or faculty in university in Europe/US. Well, that's a dream, but I need to be more prepared for this.
My current plan is to do 3), do research and write papers on my own or with this group and then... I'll see. Though, doing research and writing papers on one's own is quite difficult, because you don't know what is important.
What could be your proposal in this situation?
My concerns are supporting my family and school studies of my son.<issue_comment>username_1: Since you already have a phd, you don't need to prove your skills, if you are REALLY PASSIONATE about research, then you can do some soul searching to select a field, target a research lab, apply to a university in that country for a Master's Degree on a particular topic. Write to the professor famous in that research. Do your research home, spend 1 year on Masters , write a brilliant thesis on your field of interest. Publish it and try to apply for the lab that interested you. Usually MS students are not preferred, but since you have a Phd and you have a Master's thesis to prove that you are capable of research as well as proof to your passion for research, you can get a research job.
Worth a try, since you wont be spending another 5-6 years on Phd. Also this thesis publication could be your entry to a post-doc.
Regd your family and Son - you should save for your family and work part-time to cover for them. Depends on if your family is ok with you taking a risk for 1 year and leaving them in their own place.
If you indeed get post-doc, thats easily should be your choice. Since your son is only 8 years old, he should be able to pick up the language or teach him the language before you make a move to any country.
Edit:
Always remember that you can always live a normal life after a failure trying to get to top or to chase your passion. So it doesn't make a difference unless your family objects to it. Its just that most people so afraid of failures before even trying it.
All depends on how much you love doing research :)
Good luck with your efforts!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you already have a PhD, and have a strong work experience with one of the top companies with the research-like work, not to mention your published work that you have mentioned, you should be able to get a grant from one of the prominent universities in Russia. If not, then try a country where you can happily continue your research while still supporting your family. As username_1 above has suggested that, with your passion you have nothing to lose, it stands true if you keep trying and not give up just yet. In the meantime you could try to publish your work with the top journals.
Good luck with your endeavours.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/08 | 776 | 3,336 | <issue_start>username_0: I am fortunate to have a very nice, easy-going advisor (the last because I have seen some horrible PhD advisors). He respects me and my work (I did my master degree under his guidance). Then, I went to another university and returned to him again last year. I am a first year PhD student now. However, I have some issues regarding **my research**.
**First,** my advisor does not know much about my area even though he's encouraging me to pursue on it. To make it clear, I can't consult him in my specific area (I do consult him on other things though).
**Second,** he's not aiming high (top conferences) on publications. He mainly publishes on mid/ lower mid conferences and happy with that.
On the other hand, I have met a professor who is a ***big name***, ***expert in my area***, ***affiliated with a top university*** and ***my work is highly influenced by his research***. He also seems to have a very nice personality (I have chatted with his students). I met him several time on different occasions. and he showed an interest to work together for a joint paper.
**Most importantly,** I believe changing university will result in a better research experience **for me**. In particular, I will join a lab with different enthusiastic grad students with critical guidance unlike my current situation where it is only me and my advisor.
About funding, I have external funding and will continue regardless where I am.
I am really wondering which path to take. I am addicted to what I am doing but need the guidance and research experience which I am greatly lacking with my current supervisor.
Update:
**The question is: How to approach this professor for acceptance ?** specially without saying anything bad about my current advisor.<issue_comment>username_1: How you approach the professor for acceptance would be very similar to how you speak to your current advisor (should you choose to\*) about your decision:
* Be objective, there is no need to mention anything about either academic in a personal way, this decision is purely one for an academic reason - you want to be 'closer' to where current *active* research is happening and amongst those *actively* involved in research in your field.
* Related, be polite and direct to the point.
The fact that the professor has expressed interest in writing a paper with you is a strong indication - perhaps accept this offer and at that stage mention that you wish to pursue your research under his guidance and to work within his labs.
Once it is definite that you'd get in and although you are not obligated to explain to your current advisor, it is advisable to explain clearly and positively about the opportunity to work directly with one of the top researchers in the field - I am sure your advisor would understand.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Maybe you can ask your current advisor (the easy-going guy), to be your co-supervisor. This is done by many Ph.D. students and sometimes the co-supervisor is even from a university in a different country. It could be a good solution to work under the supervision of this expert in your area and at the same time maintain the collaboration with your current supervisor with whom you get on so well. That's what my supervisor suggested for my future Ph.D.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/08 | 961 | 3,936 | <issue_start>username_0: I just finished my master and am about to start a funded PhD in October. Thing is that the reason I am doing this PhD is because I missed the deadlines for the PhDs that I am truly interested in. I was thinking that it would be better to do something academic this year and get paid than to do nothing until the next application cycle.
* Is this extremely dishonest to start a PhD without the intention to finish it? Will this put me on some blacklist at that university?
* How should I portray my position in my other PhD applications? I was thinking of saying that I was doing a funded student placement program or something?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is this extremely dishonest to start a phd without the intention to finish it?
>
>
>
It depends if you talk about your situation with your current advisor. If you clearly stated *"I'm more interested in another position, but I couldn't get it, and it's likely I'll try next year"*, then, no, it's not dishonest. If you said you were interested in doing a full PhD there, while you actually were not, then, yes, it's dishonest. You're taking a funding opportunity for someone who would be interested, and in some cases, for instance when the funding is associated with a project, you will leave your current advisor with a partial funding, that cannot be used to hire a new PhD student.
>
> Will this put me on some blacklist at that university?
>
>
>
Again, it depends how you explained the situation, but I would not hope much for any recommendation letter from your current advisor (which is a shame, because recommendation letters can be *very* useful later on).
>
> How should I portray my position in my other phd applications? I was thinking of saying that I was doing a funded student placement program or something?
>
>
>
As I said [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5447/102), lying is always a bad idea. Academia is a very small world. If you want to change position, then you have to explain why.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: For some of us, being able to research as a paid job is one of the best that could happen, for some others its *just another job*. No matter what advise you will get from here, your decision will depends on the way you look at it. From the spirit of your question, I think that you will fall into the later with an *extra intention* that you would be able to contribute to academia.
>
> Is this extremely dishonest to start a PhD without the intention to finish it? Will this put me on some blacklist at that university?
>
>
>
That will depend on the nature of project and the type of contract you would be signing. For me, the contract is for 3 years and the project was designed such that there would be experiments and analysis during these years. As you would expect, the first few months would be learning the necessary tools and methods. If I chose to quit, that will put the whole project in jeopardy and if the group decides to take another candidate for the same project, unless they couldn't find someone who already know the tools to work, it is a huge waste of productive time.
>
> How should I portray my position in my other PhD applications? I was thinking of saying that I was doing a funded student placement program or something?
>
>
>
Well, I suggest you tell the truth. Everything else would be trying to suppress what you had been doing. You really don't like the whole idea, do you?
You will never know if the person who would have been accepted instead could contribute more than you will in your proposed year, is passionate, or just another candidate looking for just another job. I am sure that you got the position because you are eligible for it, and you are in full liberty to choose what you do with it, but as I mentioned the first part, an ethical dilemma occurs when your intentions could jeopardize the whole project.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/08 | 1,314 | 4,923 | <issue_start>username_0: In [this](http://jchyip.blogspot.be/2013/08/the-most-interesting-things-ive-learnt.html?view=classic) recent blog post the author lists several interesting concepts he has discovered pertaining to learning. One thing he mentions is the following:
>
> Mastery is more important than passing grades. You will reach limits
> in learning when you have a "Swiss cheese" foundation full of
> misconception holes. Master each concept before building on top.
> ~<NAME>
>
>
>
(This is actually from Salman's TED talk which you can view [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTFEUsudhfs).) My questions is as follows: I graduated about a year ago with a Master's in Applied Physics from a reputable university. I've been a B student throughout my academic career and I feel like I started building on un-mastered concepts somewhere towards the end of *high school*. Despite obtaining a relatively *tough* engineering degree, I cut corners whenever possible. If I could pass an exam by being able to do all the exercises, I would get to that level and stop there. I would rarely - if ever - go for complete mastery. As a result I feel like I have Swiss cheese holes in my understanding that date back to high school.
If <NAME>'s quote is anything to go by:
>
> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
>
>
>
I'm afraid I can't *simply* explain a whole lot. For instance I would not be able to explain simply:
1. What is the proof of Euler's identity?
2. Why can you express a wave as an imaginary exponential?
3. How does a photon have momentum, but not mass?
4. What is the intuitive understanding of eigenfunctions, eigenvalues and their physical manifestations?
With the wealth of knowledge available today on the internet, I could look up any one of my knowledge gaps, and with some effort I feel confident I would be able to fill them. My question is, would that be worth it?<issue_comment>username_1: First, for context, I'd disagree strongly with a too strict notion that "mastery" is required before "moving forward", for several reasons. It is easier to understand the purpose of something *after* one sees how it is used. It is all too easy to acquire a fake mastery that is not *functional*, but only refers to some artificial tasks created for a textbook, and, all the worse, may be wastes of time. And, finally, the kind of "mastery" we are often led to think we should attain is basically unattainable... That is, unless one keeps ones list of things-to-master really short, very elementary, and uncomplicated, this "mastery" is just unreachable on the terms a novice or even journeyman conceives.
So... don't over-interpret "mastery".
On the other hand, \_of\_course\_ it is good to go back and fill in. And one will find oneself doing this many times, as one discovers, upon "stressing" one's knowledge, that what one thought one knew "well enough" was not quite good enough.
For that matter, even with an excellent memory, things slip out of a person's head.
My bottom line recommendation is to maintain (at least) two "threads", one to review and backfill, the other to move forward.
The latter is surprisingly useful at helping review make more sense! :)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The ancient Hebrew wisdom of Solomon applies here: "Of making many books there is no end, and much study is wearisome to the flesh." (Ecclesiastes 12:12b) There is no end of making books, so we can never completely master anything. Mastery is an ideal that no one ever really reaches; it is more like a compass to steer by. So if those holes are bothering you, why not fill them in as you run into them? You'll never reach a place where there are no holes left, as paul garret implied in his answer. This fact should not stop us from trying, though. Enjoy the journey....
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: When you have collected discouraging quotes from authorities, it is a good idea to find other authorities who have held the opposite point of view. I suggest that the arch-experimentalist [Oliver Heaviside](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside) would be a good match for you.
>
> Mathematics is of two kinds, Rigorous and Physical. The former is
> Narrow: the latter Bold and Broad. To have to stop to formulate
> rigorous demonstrations would put a stop to most physico-mathematical
> inquiries. Am I to refuse to eat because I do not fully understand the
> mechanism of digestion?
>
>
>
Or:
>
> The prevalent idea of mathematical works is that you must
> understand the reason why first, before you proceed to practice.
> That is fudg e and fiddlesticks. I know mathematical processes
> that I have used with success for a very long time, of which
> neither I nor any one else understands the scholastic logic. I have
> grown into them, and so understand them that way .
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/09 | 4,402 | 17,559 | <issue_start>username_0: [Imposter syndrome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome) is a psychological phenomenon wherein an individual is convinced that they do not deserve the success that they have achieved despite (perhaps extensive) empirical evidence to the contrary. Some people with imposter syndrome doubt their own ability level. For me, this usually manifests in the thought:
>
> **I've somehow convinced everyone into believing that I'm actually good at this.**
>
>
>
followed by the horrifying notion that eventually I'll be found out and my world will collapse.
I believe that the imposter syndrome is not uncommon in academia. I'm interested to know how other people here have experienced and dealt with it.
>
> In particular, I'm looking for **actual tactics** that someone might
> use to combat imposter syndrome.
>
>
>
---
*Why I asked this question:*
Beyond the obvious reason that this is something I have struggled with for many years and only recently gotten a handle on myself, there's also some evidence that merely realizing that other people experience imposter syndrome helps fellow imposters. As a grad student, I've managed to meet a fair number of people who are in their own struggles with imposter syndrome; however, the tactics and self-trickery that have helped me don't always speak to them and perhaps someone else's methods might.<issue_comment>username_1: It's hard to even think of a time when I didn't feel like an imposter. I would tell myself constantly that I was succeeding only due to luck, or having spent more time working as opposed to having any actual ability, or the fact that as an international student I had a very different background from my peers and therefore had an unfair advantage, and so on. At some point in graduate school when I came across the phrase 'imposter syndrome' I finally realized that I am not alone and started to get over it, to some extent.
Here are some things that have helped:
1. **Knowing that this is a real thing (I'm not alone!)** The mere fact that there is a name for what I was feeling was a big deal. Imposter syndrome is a documented phenomenon that many people have to deal with. I sometimes go back to the wikipedia page just to remind myself of this.
2. **Knowing that several bigger, brighter academics have felt (or feel) similarly inadequate on occasion**. It's easy to convince oneself that while imposter syndrome is common among grad students, maybe only the 'non-imposters' actually go on to succeed - knowing that even the academic superstars I look up to sometimes doubt themselves helps to remind me that this is false.
3. **Forcing myself to look at the empirical data.** I imagine some other grad student, with exactly the same achievements as mine and ask myself what I think about them.
However, honestly, this is very much work-in-progress for me.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 said, knowing that this is actually a quite common feeling is helpful in overcoming it. Ways you can achieve that include **discussing it with others**, including accomplished researchers, and reading about it. Here are a few texts and resources on the topic, which I recommend heartily to both students and faculty:
* A recent article in the [Chronicles of Higher Education](http://chronicle.com/article/An-Academic-With-Impostor/138231/), which sums it up nicely. And also, some reactions on the web: [1](http://www.hookandeye.ca/2013/04/academic-imposter-syndrome.html), [2](http://ianmilligan.ca/2013/04/16/an-aside-an-academic-with-imposter-syndrome/)
* A personal experience [is related here](http://thebluereview.org/impostor-syndrome-in-academia/)
* The [references over there](http://mentalfaculties.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/on-impostor-syndrome/) make for pretty good reading too…
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The way you have phrased your statement "I've cleverly fooled everyone into believing that I'm actually good at this." makes me think of two different situations.
The first is when you have low self-esteem and simply do not think you are worth much as a person. With low [self-esteem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-esteem) comes also low [self-confidence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-confidence), which is a very common situation in academia -- I recognize it from myself. Self-esteem can be a sign of depression and can in such cases be medicated. Self-confidence is something one can build through positive feedback from others so that the value of ones work is seen. It is possible to have reasonably good self-confidence but still have poor self-esteem. In such cases you have to keep up a facade to seem confident although you do not feel as such.
The second case I think of is more of a psychological (permanent) condition, akin to [narcissism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism) where you deliberately thrive from deceiving people that you are more than you really are. In such cases you thrive to fool other into thinking something and the goal is the manipulation and nothing about the truth. I think we can see some of this as well (of course since it is a human aspect) in persons who try to cheat more or less successfully. I would not be surprised if some of the more famous scientific cheats suffer from this affliction although peer pressure could certainly play a role.
So in the end, regardless of type, you will find these feelings/afflictions because they are all part of the human psyche and becomes a burden if not in balance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This question struck a nerve...I didn't know that this feeling is an actual diagnosable syndrome! As an undergrad who is attempting an ambitious course load, including research projects far beyond what most undergrads in my school tackle, I often struggle with feeling that the praise, recognition, and high grades I receive must be mere kindness on the part of the professors, who surely are just impressed by the amount of effort I put in! I **know** I am not a genius, so those who say I am must be mistaken.
Remembering what the famous inventor <NAME> said is always helpful when I begin to feel like an imposter. "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration." Knowing that I have put in a large amount of 'perspiration', I realize that even if others are being generous in their applause, I have earned **most** of it through sheer hard work, and I can accept the rest of it being providence or luck or whatever it is to which you want to attribute unearned success.
In short, realizing that most success is due to hard work, and accepting that a small part of success will always be unpredictable and unearned has helped me deal with Imposter Syndrome. I realize that depending on the situation and the severity of your symptoms, this may be of no help at all...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I found two practices helped me a lot:
* **Reinforce what you know**. The biggest problem with being an academic surrounded by other academics is that you're constantly being confronted by things you don't know. Even worse, it often seems like everyone else knows something that you don't know.
You don't need me to tell you how demoralizing that is. The fight is to go back and review what you *do* know, and reinforce your expertise in your subject area. Most academics are polyglots; choose some random thing you've studied, learned, or even just considered previously, and review it every now and then. It'll help you view the progress you're making.
* **Engage non-academics**. You don't realize how much you know until you talk to the other 99.99% of people who don't know what you know. (Confusing sentence...) Write blogs, offer to give visiting lectures at a school or workplace, work as an intern or consultant in industry, champion a political cause related to your research. There are so many ways you can make use of your knowledge, and doing so will definitely help massage your ego which has been bruised by many semesters of feeling inadequate.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: The Harsh Reality: They Do Exist
================================
Before I met my roommate, I thought that I was one of the most intelligent people that I've ever met, pretentious, I know, but just being honest. When the material was upper-level undergrad or graduate level, I studied, but even at a top tier university, I got amazing grades with much less effort than most of my peers, which was convenient but in an odd way depressing and isolating; however, my grades dramatically changed after a lot of personal losses (this is relevant, see below).
I'm sure a lot of us are in awe of well renowned professors--if you're an academic, they're like rock stars, at least to me they are. I've always looked up to these people, they make me feel like there's a place for me in this world. Anyway, as a result of being extraordinarily depressed, I lost almost all of my confidence. Unfortunately for me, this was when I met my (now) roommate, which made me feel so much worse.
There are people who say that they don't study when they really do. There are people who appear to be really smart when they're really not. There's a major difference between knowing a lot of facts and actually being intelligent. My roommate is quite literally the most brilliant person I've ever met, including several Nobel laureates. After living with him, I discovered that he actually doesn't study, at least not like most people do. He can read something once, at a ridiculously fast speed--quite literally he can read a full textbook page in under 20 seconds and comprehend everything. This is not limited to any particular domain. There are countless times that I have gone to him with high level mathematics problems from disciplines that he's not too familiar with, and he's able to not only understand everything almost immediately, but he can synthesize beautiful solutions and explain the concepts to me better than my professors who've been in the field for years. I know it sounds unbelievable, but I assure you that it's true.
My roommate was a major stumbling block for me. After meeting him, I began to doubt my intelligence even more. If people like him exist, what the hell am I going to do? How could I possibly compete with him? I went to speak with a few of my professors to essentially ask them if they were like my roommate. If they all were, then I knew that I had no place in the academia. Fortunately, out of all of the professors that I talked to, every single one of them said that they struggled a lot. While some of them knew one or two people like my roommate, they reassured me that not only did they put a ton of work in and struggle, but they also doubted themselves all the time, and most still do.
I guess what I am saying is that sometimes it can make sense to feel like an imposter. Some people are just *geniuses*, and I do not use that term lightly. In the end, 99% of the best of the best of the best still struggle a lot. It's okay to struggle, it's good. It means that you're learning. For what it's worth, if you're accepted into a PhD program or lab or what have you, the admissions committee/PI made a conscious decision to say that they believe that you are good enough. I don't care if you think that you got in because you knew someone, and that person recommended you. (A) that happens all the time, and (B), they actually went out of their way to recommend you. They put their reputation on the line for you. They wouldn't do that unless they believed in you--these are really intelligent people, you didn't trick them. Finally, for the people who only think that they got to where they are because of hard work and not natural intelligence, I say to you (A) that's probably not true (smart people tend to think that because they struggle with stuff and finally understand it, that everyone can and that's patently false) and (B) you're more likely to be successful than someone smarter who doesn't put in as much work. Sorry for the really long answer, but I hope it helps someone. It made me feel better just writing it. Cheers!
**EDIT:**
One last thing, the more one travels down the rabbit hole, the more one realizes just how little they know. This can lead people to question their intelligence. It's pretty ironic, you're becoming more informed and because of it you feel less informed. In this case, you just need to take a step back and realize that true mastery is impossible. It should be a good feeling to learn that which one did not know before. It's doesn't mean that you're stupid, it means you're getting smarter. If you think that you know everything or even can know everything, **then** perhaps you are not that intelligent.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: Personal take on this, or why I don't feel quite as much like an imposter these days.
I've spent years toiling away in the salt mines of my choice convinced that I was just scraping by at every stage that didn't involve a formal "exam" (I'm good at those). Certain that I was surrounded by my betters. Because I'm in big science I got to do this in settings that involved a lot of close work and socializing with my peers; I've worked closely enough with scores of people at various points on their career arcs to get to know our relative strengths and weakness.
And I've slowly come to a realization which has taken (some of) the pressure off:
>
> Yes, I suck and I'm really only good at a couple of the bits of this job and other people make me look like piker in almost everything involved in this work
>
>
> ... but ...
>
>
> with only a couple of exceptions1 **they suck too**.
>
>
> I really am better than average (even among my peers) at a couple of things. They are not big flashy things, they don't draw the admiration of crowds, but they are things that need doing and I'm pretty good at them.
>
>
>
So, I've become content (at least some) to be a worker bee: I've got a part to play in this enterprise, I know how to do it and people will ask me to do it because in these little corners they are even worse.
---
1 The only thing I can say about these folks is that they are few and far between and there aren't enough of them to keep me from getting work. And I try not to think about them. And I think I'll have another drink.
But it is inevitable for most of us. If you are N sigma above the norm, then there is one person who is N+2 sigma for every ten people like you. Unless you one of the ten smartest in the world there are going to be people who make you look like you can barely walk and chew gum at the same time. That is just the way it is.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_8: The more productive question may be, "Is the present situation better with me or without me?" If you believe your participation is actually detrimental, step aside... but in most cases you'll realize that, whether or not you're the Platonic Ideal of whatever you're striving to be, the situation is still better with you there making that effort.
In other words, worry more about the world and less about yourself. Like paranoia, self-doubt is itself inherently somewhat narcissistic.
Or to put it another way: That which we would become we must first impersonate. Viewed in that light imposture isn't necessarily such a bad thing. We all have to fake it till we make it. And a robust appreciation of our ignorance is the foundation of wisdom.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Having struggled with imposter syndrome since what feels like my birth ("How have I fooled everyone into believing I deserve to exist and participate in society?!"), I frequently revisit these answers for a moral boost, especially during conferences, where I fear the concentration of experts looking at my work all at once will somehow trigger my pending demise. (Thankfully, so far, that hasn't happened; quite often, the opposite happens, and I make friends who want to talk more about our mutual interests.)
Since it wasn't mentioned in any of the other answers, I wanted to add something I've discovered for myself.
It's very important to have a life outside of work. This is true for any job, but especially a career in academia, where the work culture can often feel cultish. I've found that it's especially important to have self-improvement goals completely unrelated to my research: training for a 5k, meditating 10 minutes a day, learning a language, forcing myself to break a social rule/take a risk/look stupid/get rejected at least once a day. (The latter is to help combat my OCD, which often triggers imposter moments, through a kind of exposure therapy.)
Investing in other people-- family, friends, scuba diving club, neighborhood clean-up groups-- is also absolutely essential. Anxiety (a sinister companion of imposter syndrome) inherently causes the sufferer to focus on themself and their safety and their needs, often at the expense of others' well-being. So it is also essential to make time for these other people-- e.g., by banning work outside of the lab, avoiding checking work e-mail on evenings and weekends, scheduling appointments and holding them sacred.
The consequence of having non-work related self-improvement goals and people to invest in is that my identity is less wrapped up in my "success" as a researcher. It depends more on who I am holistically as a person, as well as the joy and appreciation I experience from living live more fully in community with others.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/09 | 883 | 3,519 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc and will be up in the tenure-track job market in the near future. Just want to know what the average duration one has to work on tenure-track. Is this duration negotiable or there is a strict rule for this duration?
Thanks!
--Dave<issue_comment>username_1: AFAIK it's usually six years, but people can get extensions due to major personal events like the birth of a child. There's usually a limit on the total number of such extensions someone can get.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There's quite a spread: where I am it's seven years (sometimes extended to eight when someone has a kid), but I've heard of other places where it's as short as four. Six is probably the median. It's not unheard of for people to go up for tenure early if they think they're likely to get it and their department chair (or other relevant people) agree.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I've heard of a (very top) school/department that is fine with promoting everybody to Associate Professors, but the real tenure decision comes about three years after that, and you really have to be an international star to be granted tenure. So in effect, the tenure track is about 9 years.
On the other hand, I was thrown out of the tenure track after three years after my 3rd year review. When you negotiate your contract, make sure that it states the full term, rather than "annually renewable".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The "standard" at Tier-1 Research universities in the United States is 6 years. This is, in principle, negotiable if you have prior experience that is comparable to what an assistant professor does. However, I always think it's inadvisable to do so. First, if you satisfy the criteria for promotion and tenure at a point earlier than your sixth year, then you can ask to go through the tenure proceedings. Departments that recognize that you're right with your request will accommodate this. In other words, you don't lose very much by not negotiating an earlier tenure date.
Second, if you previously negotiated that you should go up for tenure after, say, your 3rd year, but you've run into trouble getting funding or getting results published, then you may not get tenure and have to leave. In other words, you lose a lot by negotiating an earlier tenure date.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The probationary period/tenure-track is commonly six years, with review taking place throughout the 6th year. (Materials are typically submitted by the probationary faculty at or before the start of the 6th year and a decision announced at the end of the 6th year.) Part of the reason for this timing is the following:
"Under the 1940 'Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure,' this [probationary] period [tenure track] may not exceed seven years."
See <http://www.aaup.org/file/RIR%202014.pdf>
The probationary period, as pointed out above, might be effectively extended due to prior tenure-track service at another institution, but this is negotiated at the time of hire, so the faculty member has some say in it.
It is also frequently extended due to child birth and personal or family medical issues because such accommodations are required BY FEDERAL LAW (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993>).
University employers have an incentive to extend the probationary period because probationary faculty are paid less, can be more easily fired, and (therefore) can be more easily controlled.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/10 | 1,286 | 5,371 | <issue_start>username_0: Is the Australian academia following the same system as the US one? i.e., tenure track for a few years, and then tenured? Or it is more like the British one where there is 'probation' period?<issue_comment>username_1: [Australia does not have a US-like tenure system](http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Australia.aspx). Academics at all levels are occasionally
scrutinized, and advancement is not automatic.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Australian Academics do not have tenure. They are either appointed on an on-going basis ("Permanent" staff) or on contract (year-to-year, three-year to three-year) or casual (hour to hour) bases. All three categories of staff can effectively be dismissed at whim by management.
Appointment to permanent positions in Australia is on the basis of:
* Merit selection to externally advertised positions (with a probationary period)
* Corrupt selection to unadvertised strategic appointments (with a probationary period and the possibility of "non-conversion")
* Absence of selection or merit selection to contract or casual positions followed by a lengthy union fought conversion process
While the conditions of appointment to ongoing positions vary from field to field, you should expect that the conditions of appointment for a Level B "Lecturer" are broadly similar to the requirements for either entry to a tenure-track position or achievement of tenure in a tenure track position. (Varies by field and labour supply). Appointment to Level C "Senior Lecturer" often occurs 3 to 6 years after first appointment on the basis of another unit of research output equivalent to the unit of research output required for initial appointment.
Academics may be dismissed at will by forced or "voluntary" redundancy processes covered by weak industrial provisions in Enterprise Bargaining Agreements (site specific industrial instruments). These dismissals need a fig leaf of reduced student numbers or institutional renewal; but are effectively managerial dismissals. Individual academics are constructively dismissed through bullying processes, change fatigue, and general managerialism. Management has the power to entirely defund teaching streams and then claim that positions are no longer required due to the lack of teaching. Australian University management is adept at manufacturing both immediate and long-term funding crises to achieve fundamentally political ends in terms of attacking specific work-cultures or disciplinary research programmes. In addition, freedom of research has been significantly eroded by quantity and quality audits of research output which often involve politicised sub-disciplines indicating their preferences (Consider the Business Dean's journal quality list, for example).
The only defence Australian academics have against management is unity in the National Tertiary Education Union.
Sources: Industry experience, NTEU membership, 40 years of union journal back-issues.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't want to contradict Samuel too much, but his account of what can happen has definitely happened to some people. But it is extremely rare and I would argue a little over-simplified.
For starters, my paycheck from a major Australian university has the word "tenured" on it. So my first point is, yes, continuing positions are "tenured" - but lets not get bogged down in semantics because tenure def means something different in Australia. Indeed I believe the union considers this to be a f(ph)urfy so let's say there is some subjectivity there.
Having tenure does not guarantee that you cannot be fired though. You can be. But as one manager said to me once, it is more expensive to fire an under performing academic than to simply retain them as long as they keep doing their teaching etc. I work with lots of unproductive academics and many have been asked to leave. They simply said no thanks and stayed. The only time I have seen academics forced out, they left with large redundancies and, simply put, wanted to leave. When you read about retrenchments at Australian unis in the newspaper, often more want to leave than are given packages.
Gross incompetence or dangerous behaviour? Yes you can be sacked. But as far as I have seen you cannot be fired on a "whim" as someone suggested. A business case would be made (declining enrolments, lack of research activity, lack of administrative roles)
And yes, as Samuel said, management teams will go after departments at times. But redundancy packages are often generous and often people from an eliminated department will be shifted to another department (good academics stay, crap ones move to a lower ranked uni).
I also don't want to make this a peeing contest, but I have worked in the US system too and the Australian system is more protectionist of staff than the US system. But indeed tenure is probably harder to lose than in Australia.
I am tenured at a Australian uni. I say this to people regularly and no one corrects me. But yes, I know union types that tell me my tenure is not tenure. I heard this a lot 5 years ago, but not recently
In short, to answer the initial question, the Australian system, broadly speaking, is the British system. Tenure with probation (3 years, recently raised to 5 I think)
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/10 | 1,360 | 5,786 | <issue_start>username_0: Following some tips about graduate study, I have contacted the professors before the admission cycle, and managed to secure some appointments with them. I have read through their publications that match my research interests, and prepared some brief write up about my research experiences (though I had sent them my CV beforehand).
I am just confused about what I should expect from such meetings. To be frank, do you think to impress them to the point that they agree to accept me is a feasible thing? Or I should aim for something simpler, like maintaining relationships with them through this semester?<issue_comment>username_1: [Australia does not have a US-like tenure system](http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Australia.aspx). Academics at all levels are occasionally
scrutinized, and advancement is not automatic.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Australian Academics do not have tenure. They are either appointed on an on-going basis ("Permanent" staff) or on contract (year-to-year, three-year to three-year) or casual (hour to hour) bases. All three categories of staff can effectively be dismissed at whim by management.
Appointment to permanent positions in Australia is on the basis of:
* Merit selection to externally advertised positions (with a probationary period)
* Corrupt selection to unadvertised strategic appointments (with a probationary period and the possibility of "non-conversion")
* Absence of selection or merit selection to contract or casual positions followed by a lengthy union fought conversion process
While the conditions of appointment to ongoing positions vary from field to field, you should expect that the conditions of appointment for a Level B "Lecturer" are broadly similar to the requirements for either entry to a tenure-track position or achievement of tenure in a tenure track position. (Varies by field and labour supply). Appointment to Level C "Senior Lecturer" often occurs 3 to 6 years after first appointment on the basis of another unit of research output equivalent to the unit of research output required for initial appointment.
Academics may be dismissed at will by forced or "voluntary" redundancy processes covered by weak industrial provisions in Enterprise Bargaining Agreements (site specific industrial instruments). These dismissals need a fig leaf of reduced student numbers or institutional renewal; but are effectively managerial dismissals. Individual academics are constructively dismissed through bullying processes, change fatigue, and general managerialism. Management has the power to entirely defund teaching streams and then claim that positions are no longer required due to the lack of teaching. Australian University management is adept at manufacturing both immediate and long-term funding crises to achieve fundamentally political ends in terms of attacking specific work-cultures or disciplinary research programmes. In addition, freedom of research has been significantly eroded by quantity and quality audits of research output which often involve politicised sub-disciplines indicating their preferences (Consider the Business Dean's journal quality list, for example).
The only defence Australian academics have against management is unity in the National Tertiary Education Union.
Sources: Industry experience, NTEU membership, 40 years of union journal back-issues.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't want to contradict Samuel too much, but his account of what can happen has definitely happened to some people. But it is extremely rare and I would argue a little over-simplified.
For starters, my paycheck from a major Australian university has the word "tenured" on it. So my first point is, yes, continuing positions are "tenured" - but lets not get bogged down in semantics because tenure def means something different in Australia. Indeed I believe the union considers this to be a f(ph)urfy so let's say there is some subjectivity there.
Having tenure does not guarantee that you cannot be fired though. You can be. But as one manager said to me once, it is more expensive to fire an under performing academic than to simply retain them as long as they keep doing their teaching etc. I work with lots of unproductive academics and many have been asked to leave. They simply said no thanks and stayed. The only time I have seen academics forced out, they left with large redundancies and, simply put, wanted to leave. When you read about retrenchments at Australian unis in the newspaper, often more want to leave than are given packages.
Gross incompetence or dangerous behaviour? Yes you can be sacked. But as far as I have seen you cannot be fired on a "whim" as someone suggested. A business case would be made (declining enrolments, lack of research activity, lack of administrative roles)
And yes, as Samuel said, management teams will go after departments at times. But redundancy packages are often generous and often people from an eliminated department will be shifted to another department (good academics stay, crap ones move to a lower ranked uni).
I also don't want to make this a peeing contest, but I have worked in the US system too and the Australian system is more protectionist of staff than the US system. But indeed tenure is probably harder to lose than in Australia.
I am tenured at a Australian uni. I say this to people regularly and no one corrects me. But yes, I know union types that tell me my tenure is not tenure. I heard this a lot 5 years ago, but not recently
In short, to answer the initial question, the Australian system, broadly speaking, is the British system. Tenure with probation (3 years, recently raised to 5 I think)
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/10 | 1,155 | 4,981 | <issue_start>username_0: I am advising an outstanding graduate student who is currently doing a summer internship with a government agency. He is also applying for a permanent job with the same agency, for which I was quite proud to recommend him strongly. That said, his prospective employer has been the subject of recent news reports which have led me to oppose its work.
I will certainly not renege on my duties as an advisor. But I don't have a good poker face, and I'm afraid that my changed attitude will be all too clear. What would be the kindest course of action? To share my thoughts once and once only, or to keep my mouth shut?<issue_comment>username_1: If your student is very talented perhaps you could help him to find a better position than the one with the government. If you know what your student cares about then find a better use for his skills and propose it to him.
If that doesn't work you could always have a heart-to-heart talk with him to help him to see your concerns.
I believe it is our job to educate our students on more than simply module content (should teach critical thinking, proper citation formats, etc.). I would not recommend cramming your value structure down his throat but I think giving him your ethical perspective to think about is quite reasonable.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don’t really understand what part of your “support” your question is about. In short: is the problem how to support him personally (in your discussions with him, in your work relations in general), or how to support his PhD work, or how to support his job application?
For his PhD work, I hope you are able to prevent outside circumstances from impacting negatively your work. As an advisor, this probably happens at some point with any student… and any coworker, really.
For his job application, you don't need to state to support his future job, just to say he would be excellent at it. Just to give an example, stating that “Dr. Martin has all the skills necessary to excel in numerical simulations of deep offshore oil drilling” doesn't require you have to state “I strongly support offshore drilling”, nor does it imply it. Moreover, most recommendations are done in written.
Finally, regarding overall personal support throughout his graduate studies: that's a bit harder, but you truly have to put it past you, and it may not be easy. The best approach is clearly to be upfront with him: discuss it, preferably in an informal manner (i.e. don't make it a big deal). Points that seem important to mention:
1. I have strong feelings about your future employer, and I think it is best that I am frank with you about it.
2. It shouldn't change our work relationship, and I don't expect it to. I continue to support you wholeheartedly.
3. If you think you notice a negative impact in the future, please come and discuss it with me, we'll work it out.
But honestly, it's not a nice situation to be in. I'm a bit surprised as to how what could gather so much distrust from you that you cannot simply separate it from your work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In my opinion it is a tough situation, and no answer cannot be complete without knowing more details about the situation.
Before deciding there are few things for you to consider. As username_1 said, we should typically educate our students on more than just academical things, but you should also keep in mind that when it comes to many government agencies, opinions vary a lot. Is not necessarily that our opinion about one agency is the right one.
What matters most is your student's goals. If he really likes the position, and it fits his goals for the future, that should matter more than your personal views [there are few exceptions to this rule, if the agency contradicts the basic morale codes of everyone and everything, again it really depends on particulars of the situation].
Last but not least, I should point to you that your student worked there for few months, his inside knowledge about the agency is most probably much more accurate than what you found out in the news. Since he applies for a permanent job there, I would guess that he enjoyed the experience, and he didn't find anything wrong with its work.
As you are the only one to know the specific details of the situation, you should try to find the answers alone, we can try to guide you towards it but don't value too much the very general answers we can give, they might not apply to this situation.
In my opinion there are few things you should ask yourself, answering those will tell you what to do:
* What does the student really wants?
* Is this a good opportunity for the student or not?
* Do you think the student can get a better position? Note that better should be "better" in his opinion, not yours?
* Is this agency really bad, or just your opinion? How much can you trust the news you heard about this agency?
* What does your student thinks about these news?
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/11 | 840 | 3,438 | <issue_start>username_0: Similar to my previous question ["Strategies to overcome “academic-apathy” in the final stages of the PhD?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10969/strategies-to-overcome-academic-apathy-in-the-final-stages-of-the-phd), one thing I am noticing as I am drafting papers and the thesis, I seem to becoming overcome by 'drafting fatigue' - where things that usually don't bother me, for example:
* Punctuation and grammar fixups
* especially when my supervisor (advisor) suggests a change, I make the change, then he suggests changing it back on the next draft.
* wanting to add additional figures
and all things like this. After the 2nd draft, I find I am getting 'over it' (for want of a better term). So, this leads to my question - what practical effective strategies are there to overcome this 'drafting fatigue'?<issue_comment>username_1: Having similar experiences, the only approach I have found effective is to **leave it alone** for an extended period (week to a month typically - with fresher eyes the longer I wait). You can dig into another project for that amount of time, so it isn't wasted doing nothing.
The bullet points jive with my experience as well, e.g. reading the same draft over and over again makes one less likely to see grammer mistakes, minor supervisor input is annoying, and you always want to do *alittle more* (like add in another figure).
For copy-editing sometimes I will ask my wife or a friend for a look over, which is nice because it gives you alittle respite from the draft as well.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: * **Tackle one aspect at a time.** For example, on one pass, concentrate on fixing punctuation and make a conscious effort not to do anything about the other things that will inevitable jump out at you. (You can flag them for later attention if you're afraid you'll forget, but it is important not do too many things per pass.)
* **Vary your focus.** Shift from looking at the big picture to looking at the details. One on pass, evaluate each paragraph in light of the entire paper. On the next, evaluate each sentence or phrase in light of the paragraph; you don't necessarily lose sight of the larger structure, but it is less important on this pass.
* **Ask others for help.** This may mean asking your advisor to critique for you and/or have friends and family members proofread. Another set of eyes is invaluable; I am indebted to those friends and colleagues who have patiently answered my demands for feedback and blunt criticism!
* **Leave it for a while.** To echo the thought of username_1 above, there are times when stepping away from a paper is the surest cure for drafting fatigue. One caveat; don't stay away too long! When you put the paper away, have a clear idea of how long you will be away, what you will do during that time, and what needs to be done on the manuscript when you come back. (Attach a note as a reminder for yourself!)
One final note: YMMV. Every author works differently, and what works for me may not work for you. While I struggle with trying to do everything on one pass, I have worked with others who were fine with the minutiae, but absolutely could not see the problems with the big picture except with help from friendly critics. The tips above work for me,and I offer them in the hope that others may learn from my success without needing to endure my failures! :)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/11 | 465 | 2,044 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a MSc Computer Networking student and I recently became acquainted with the internet of things. I've fallen completely in love with this new area and I would love to base my dissertation on this area.
The problem is, I'm unsure if "The internet of things" falls academically within the scope of computer networking at the MSc level. My school is currently "closed" for the summer break, so getting to a lecturer before September is rather difficult. I'll like to know if this is an "okay" topic for me to base my dissertation on for my course, so as to use my summer to do some deeper reading on the subject.<issue_comment>username_1: I expect you'd have to argue that (some aspect of) current approaches to networking either won't scale to an Internet of Things (IoT), or else will need to be done differently because of device characteristics -- in other words, the networking aspects of IoT will have to be done differently somehow. If you can do that, that could form the basis for a thesis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This question can be better answered in cs.stackexchange.com. I suggest that the moderators move it there if they dont find it suitable.
The Internet of Things is very huge for a Master or PhD thesis. It's like saying I want to solve the problem of the *Internet*. You should be more specific about what you want to solve. The problems of IoT are separated into *layers*. What will interest you the most is the *networking layer*. This layer is very similar to the OSI model of the Internet. There are tons of unsolved problems in this layer, and tons of others already solved (because they are old problems already found in the Internet).
Suggested problem domains: the services in the Internet of Things, naming resolution in IoT, objects integration in the IoT, objects networks in IoT, security and privacy in IoT, ...
or simply look for conferences about IoT, collect a set of similar papers, read them carefully and find an idea of a good thesis.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/11 | 359 | 1,490 | <issue_start>username_0: Obviously being a teaching assistant as an undergrad or a masters student looks good, but *how good does it look*? Is it merely a nice little bonus, or does extensive TA experience have a large impact on one's acceptance?<issue_comment>username_1: It may depend on:
**Where?**
* For instance, teaching is compulsory in most American universities while in the UK you are only "encouraged" to teach, with some exceptions.
**PhD on what?**
* It may not be that important if you are going to do a PhD in theoretical mathematics or a more "industrial topic", while the opposite may happen if the PhD is in Education.
*how good does it look?* It looks good, but it doesn't represent a huge advantage. In my opinion, as long as you get all the requirements, the most important part of the application are the reference/recommendation letters.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From my perspective admitting students to CS PhD programs:
TAing for CS classes will be a small positive signal that you did well in those classes and were well thought of by the instructor (who presumably asked you to be his TA, or at least accepted your application). It might also let you get to know the professor teaching the class better, which will be helpful for your application if he/she can write you a letter of recommendation. But beyond that, it won't be a huge bonus in and of itself -- its mostly a signal correlated with other good things.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/11 | 5,503 | 22,697 | <issue_start>username_0: I did my undergraduate degree in the US and am heading to graduate school here in less than a month, so I myself have taken the Graduate Record Examinations (the general as well as two subjects tests) and I guess it always just seemed as a sort of un-avoidable formality that nothing could be done about, and so I just took it and got it over with.
In the intervening year between undergrad and the start of my Ph.D. work, however, I traveled overseas to Cambridge where I found that I was quite mistaken: the GRE is very, very avoidable. The solution is simple: don't apply to universities in the US.
By the time I had arrived there, I had already gotten it over with myself, but for most of my peers there, this was not the case, and quite a few of them had simply decided to not even bother applying to the US because of the inconvenience that comes along with that in the form of the GRE.
This made me wonder: are admissions committees at US universities aware of the number of highly qualified candidates they miss out on because of the GRE?
I could understand being willing to miss out on the potential recruitment of these students if the GRE were a significant part of one's application, but I have yet to find any US professor tell me that the GRE scores are weighted highly when it comes to making admissions decisions (perhaps I just haven't asked around enough?). In fact, I've often been told it's the *least important* factor when deciding whether someone should be admitted. (Indeed, my impression is that the general GRE is more or less a joke and only serves as a convenient way of tossing out applicants who would have been found un-qualified for other reasons.)
Putting aside for a moment the issue of those who decide not to apply to US universities, let's consider the inconvenience faced by those who do. Once again, if you're from the US, I can imagine simply not being aware of this (I know I wasn't), but I now know of several people who have *had to fly* (sometimes the flights have even been inter-continental!) in order to sit to take a GRE test. And even for those who don't (like probably most of us in the US), there is the ridiculous price: almost $200 for the general and an extra $150 per subject test. I was under the impression that admissions committees encourage people from all backgrounds to apply, rich or poor, but how can they honestly expect this to happen if even those who don't have to fly have to shell out anywhere from $300-$500 in addition to the application fee? (I personally find it a bit nuts that these tests cost several times more than the application itself.)
So, could somebody please explain to me why we still require students to take these things? Do they really add information about the applicant and their abilities that could not be found out any other way?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a good question. I have not been a fan of the GRE for 20+ years, although (through whatever luck I had a good-enough number on it myself that it didn't harm me...) many are. Having been on admissions committees and very much involved with graduate programs for 30+ years, I've had ample opportunity to see the (non-) correlation of success in graduate mathematics with GRE subject-test scores. (The other parts are often useful as tests of English fluency, mainly.)
Of course, the world would be a simpler place if GRE subject-test scores really *could* show talent for higher mathematics. We note that the Educational Testing Service (in NJ, that makes the GRE and other stuff) is a for-profit that has a vested interest in maintaining its products' apparent importance.
The cost is unfortunate, and certainly discriminates against people whose currency doesn't compete well with USD.
The vaguely useful bit of information provided by GRE is that, well, yes, it is the only thing that most applicants will have done, thus, if one insists on "simple comparisons", it is the only thing that allows that. It is clear that comparison of GPAs is even more pointless.
I have known admissions committees that simply ranked applicants by GRE subject test score. There! Done! :)
No, I do not care very much about GRE numbers, but in a way I am glad that some admissions committees do, in a fashion to the way that under-valued stocks are good investment values.
I do think that the elite graduate programs use GRE subject test as a convenient filter, because it selects somewhat for "quickness/cleverness", and they can afford to "lose" some prospects, because they have so many who are "quick/clever".
In the U.S., having a GRE subject test score is also a sign of awareness that people expect you to take it. Thus, it doesn't matter so much what one's score is, but that one \_is\_aware\_ ... even if it is only of "expectations".
But, in summary, no, I see no point in it. But there are economic incentives for ETS to keep making money. And a great number of admissions committees in math have personal predilections that lead them to be fond of (over-) simple numerical quantification, so... there-we-are.
Edit: As @msw observes in a comment, indeed, if GRE measured significant academic achievement cumulative over several years... it would be odd that one could usefully do the "prep" courses ETS provides. :)
Yes, performance on GRE probably *is* a good indicator of how well a kid can do on a multi-hour, timed, multiple-choice test, etc. Yes, if we make subsequent coursework resemble this (!?) then we *give* the GRE predictive power. No, I do not recommend making everything multiple-choice! But, amazingly, some people do believe that this could be done, and purportedly save us all a lot of work.
Sure, these things measure *something*, and produce numbers that can be manipulated. There are people who are inexorably drawn to the possibility of making final decisions in those terms, even when the significance of the numbers is unclear. Meanwhile, reading letters of recommendation and personal statements is obviously not easily quantifiable. Of course!
If it were really the case that "standardized testing" could tell what its promoters like to insinuate, it would be convenient, indeed. But, again, some decades of experience indicate that these tests do *not* indicate whether or not people can sustain interest over 4+ years, work hard for 4+ years, continue to develop scientific sensibility, and so on. *And* the latter issues prove to be vastly more important for completion of a PhD. In direct observation of about 700+ grad students, I'd estimate that fewer than 20 dropped out or failed due to lack of intellectual capacity or lack of prior knowledge. Rather, loss of interest in the subject, or personal issues (mental/physical health) dominate. This "sample" of mine includes a very wide range of GRE scores and even GPA.
More anecdotally, several specific examples stick in my mind, of very low percentile on GRE subject test (bottom 10 percent or smaller...) but exceptional achievement in coursework, prelims, and thesis work. These peoples' potential was easily visible in letters of recommendation and personal statement.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In my department, GRE scores are used mostly as calibration for students who have good grades but are from universities/programs that we are not familiar with and whose quality we are therefore not sure about. For students with good credentials from strong programs the GRE is pretty much irrelevant.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Empirical evidence on the relationship between GRE scores and post-graduate performance
There is a massive meta-analysis by Kuncel et al (2001) that empirically evaluates the correlations between various aspects of the GRE with multiple post-graduate performance criteria.
Based on hundreds of studies and thousands of participants, GRE shows reasonable correlations with post-graduate GPA (i.e., around observed r = .21 to r=.43). Similar correlations emerged between GRE and faculty ratings of the student.
Correlations of GRE with research productivity and publication citation counts were smaller, but still positive. This is not surprising given that these are more distal outcomes and there are many non-academic reasons why people may or may not pursue an academic career or have publishable results.
The authors thus concluded that GRE was a valid predictor of a wide range of graduate outcomes. They also noted that "subject tests tended to be better predictors than the verbal, quantitative, and analytical tests."
In general, selection decisions are assisted by standardisation, and a big part of academic achievement involves measuring baseline ability. Thus, the GRE combines both standardisation and competence measurement.
**Update 2023:**
A new meta-analysis was published by Feldon et al (2023) that reviews GRE correlates with academic outcomes. They report correlations between GRE and GPA of .24 (total), .20 (verbal), .17 (quantitative), and .21 (analytical).
### Response to comments
There have been a few points made in other answers and in comments, which I'll comment on here:
* **Conflict of interest:** @msw wrote that they "consider the cited paper to be junk because ETS provided all available data". In general, I don't find the results in the meta-analysis surprising. Most tests like the GRE tend to have fairly strong correlations with general cognitive ability. It is well established through thousands of independent studies that IQ scores correlate fairly well with both school grades and job performance (i.e., in the r=.50 range; see Neisser et al 1996 for a field consensus review). The results show correlations less than .50, but that's not surprising given some of the issues around standardisation, practice, range restriction, domain specificity and so on.
* **Belief there is no correlation based on personal observation**: Note that if the correlation is around .20, that means that 4% of variance has been explained. That leaves a huge amount of variance in performance to still be explained. It would not be surprising to meet many people that did well on GRE and poor in graduate school or vice versa. Thus, it is problematic to rely on personal experience when it comes to evaluating the validity of tests where such correlations are likely to be only modest.
* **Small correlations are useful**: While a .20 correlation is small, it can still help make selection decisions. In particular, when evaluating the suitability of selection tools, you need to contrast the validity of a given tool with other available tools (e.g., interviews, GPA, references, and so on). I'm not as familiar with results in the graduate selection domain, but certainly in the employee selection domain, which is quite analogous, cognitive ability tests tend to correlate more highly than interviews, references and so on (for a comprehensive meta analysis of employee selection, see Schmidt and Hunter, 1998). That said, the best selection decisions are typically obtained by integrating multiple selection tools. Furthermore, the small correlation also should highlight to individuals who score poorly on the GRE that it is not that predictive, and therefore it shouldn't discourage an individual from pursing post-graduate study.
* **Does training invalidate the GRE?**: @username_4 wrote "many people significantly improve their GRE scores by taking courses with prepping companies like Kaplan. So it seems GRE test does not measure any intrinsic ability/talent necessary for grad. school." I agree that individual differences in training and preparation for the GRE may influence test scores. That said, if you characterise test scores to be determined by true ability, training, and error variance, then I would expect that true ability would remain the much larger source of explanation in test scores. This is based on general observations about testing for ability based assessment. In general, the degree to which training is an issue would depend on how much the test materials teach to the specific test. Overall, I would assume that this would reduce the potential validity of GRE, but that the GRE would still be useful. Furthermore, training and nuisance factors can be used to do better on many selection instruments. For example, people can be coached on how to frame their CV or how to answer questions in interviews. Such training is potentially a source of error variance, but it doesn't invalidate CVs and interviews completely.
* **Why would anyone care about post-graduate GPA? (@JeffE)** @JeffE further notes " in PhD programs, the only thing that really matters is the student's research output.". Some post-graduate courses include meaningful graded coursework and others don't. For the courses that do include meaningful coursework, then such coursework provides a more standardised way of measuring post-graduate performance. So the validity of GRE in predicting such outcomes is not surprising. And thus, presumably we could generalise this to being indicative of how people perform in less standardised aspects of post-graduate performance. Of course, there's an inferential leap here, but in general, performance in related domains tend to correlate (e.g., coursework in mathematics with research performance in mathematics); it's not perfect, but it's still a positive correlation. Furthermore, if the validation study includes some post-graduate coursework where everyone gets top marks and such data is mixed with studies where grades are valid measures of performance, this would only serve to attenuate the observed correlation. Thus, this would suggest that the correlation between GRE and post-graduate GPA is higher than reported by the meta-analysis. Also, the meta-analysis does report correlations with research output and they are weaker but still positive. It also reports correlations with supervisor ratings.
* **Better alternatives to GRE**: None of my comments above are necessarily advocating the use of the GRE. Developing an effective selection and recruitment system whether it be for employment or post-graduate admission is a complex task. That said, most post-graduate selection systems would want to get a reliable and valid measure of academic aptitude. GRE, IQ tests, other ability tests, undergraduate GPA, all have reasonably validity evidence. And in general standardisation and efficiency are important. So, for example, administering your own selection tools takes more time, whereas taking pre-existing measures like GPA and GRE is more efficient.
* **Ethics of requiring applicants pay money to complete GRE:** Several people are critical of the GRE on the basis that it costs several hundred dollars to complete. I think that this is a perfectly legitimate question, but that the question of predictive validity can be answered separately. Such a fee could potentially discriminate against low income applicants. That said, presumably the fee in comparison to forgone wages associated with completing a post-graduate degree is fairly small.
### References
* <NAME>., <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological bulletin, 127(1), 162. [PDF](http://web.uvic.ca/%7Eslindsay/teaching/499/readings/kuncel.pdf)
* <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>., ... & <NAME>. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American psychologist, 51(2), 77. [PDF](http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/research/correlation/intelligence.pdf)
* <NAME>., & <NAME>. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological bulletin, 124(2), 262. [PDF](http://mavweb.mnsu.edu/howard/Schmidt%20and%20Hunter%201998%20Validity%20and%20Utility%20Psychological%20Bulletin.pdf)
* <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME> & <NAME> (2023) The Predictive Validity of the GRE Across Graduate Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Trends Over Time, The Journal of Higher Education, DOI: <https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2023.2187177>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: A couple of issues:
Re Mr. Anglim's comment, a suspect issue re. any correlation between GRE scores and success in grad. school is that many people significantly improve their GRE scores by taking courses with prepping companies like Kaplan. So it seems GRE test does not measure any intrinsic ability/talent necessary for grad. school.
Another issue is that the GRE is a form of forced labor: ETS uses one of the sections in the exam (just which section is unknown to the test-taker) as data for future exams, i.e., the section is not counted for the score of the test. So one is expected , basically, to work for ETS for free, producing high-quality data they would have to pay a lot for, or may not be able to produce themselves. GRE also puts out books to prepare for the exams, which cost above $20 each.
Now, ETS could find a way around this by asking, say, "There may be a section in this test which we use as data for future exams: if there is one, would you be willing to take it, or do you prefer to skip it?". This - asking you to work for them for free - is unethical, IMO, if not illegal. And ETS' BS response to this (I called them) is to tell you: "Well, if you disagree, don't take the test." The problem is some programs require you to take it in order to apply for their grad. programs; ETS is the Frank Burns of testing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: @Jonathan, if you were to ever come to the other side, you will see a great number of glowing applications from top students of the top university in Bolivia or Madagascar. How do they fare compared to the top student of the top university of Idaho? Or a top student from a mediocre university in Massachusetts? If you admit grad students planning to use them as TAs, how do you know that this student from Nepal will be understood by your students in Tennessee, who heartily laugh at both New York and Californian accents?
The GRE fills the role of such a filter, and as such is the cheapest, easiest to use tool available to graduate schools in the US. If you can get any UNESCO money to design and implement a version of it that would be free to international applicants, maybe you can get a *Nobels fredspris* for your efforts. (This is not such an unrealistic idea as it sounds: an alternative, freely available operating system known as Linux has been developed by enthusiasts, and in many dimensions has replaced UNIX.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Explains the quality of our PhDs, doesn't it. I have personally found the American education system far more wrapped up in silly and actually dangerous formalities than schools in Europe, generally speaking. I was surprised to find this out first hand because the common consensus is that Europe suffers from a great deal of pointless formality that the US does not. The problem is that it's a category mistake: elaborate bureaucratic formalities: yes; greater social formality: sometimes, depends; educational formality, not necessarily. Also, there is a difference between formality and rigidity. While titles are more important in Europe when addressing one another, they actually can enforce a very healthy relationship between the student and the professor which enables a healthy flexibility and informality to emerge. The casual "buddy" culture of the US is actually too chummy which encourages disrespect and I think the reaction to it is a certain kind of seething rigidity that manifests in the student-professor relationship which is unhealthy and domineering many times. But I digress. When I experienced American education first hand, it seemed infantile in its execution and the GREs belong to this set of things which contribute to the culture of pettiness (other things include the "publish or perish" doctrine which has resulted in the explosion of BS and CV padding nonsense and the "career academic" (hopefully that translates into English properly). While there are entrance exams in Europe, graduate school acceptance is according to other criteria. It's not always optimal, but certainly less irritating than this test taking nonsense.
Btw, I find the correlations mentioned above to be exactly the problem. They make the same mistake of drawing rigid and often erroneous inferences from a very poor selection of data.
I find that university education everywhere have been ruined by the pressure to put everyone through it. What you have are glorified trade schools in most cases with millions of applicants pushing through as if through a military entrance exam where narrow indicators sacrifice complexity for measures of simple routine. It's highly corporate and prone to the rat race. Graduate school should be the last place where this kind of pettiness manifests, and yet...
Summary: GREs are a result of the culture, of modern (American) university culture like the silly innovations of the German university which sought to label and shelve every person for particular slots in the machine of the the Reich.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: In a word, standardization.
I once asked this question to a colleague, and I appreciated the response I received.
Essentially, the faculty member told me, "What I like about the GRE is that it's the only way I can compare apples to apples."
He went on to explain, "How can I compare a 3.2 GPA at University X with a 3.7 GPA at University Y? I can't. But, at least with GRE scores, I can compare the two students on an even playing field."
My retort was that a high GRE score isn't necessarily a good indicator of potential in graduate school, although it might be a good indicator to determine the amount of time a prospective student spent preparing for the test. (I got a lot of milage out of my *How to Ace the GRE* practice book.)
He readily agreed, and assured me that it's just one piece of the puzzle. An admissions office only has so much to go on: a transcript, a GRE score, and perhaps a "Why I want to go to graduate school" cover letter.
We could throw out the GRE, but then there would be that much less information to base admissions decisions on.
My gut tells me that the negatives include the expense and hassle for the applicant, and a limited ability to predict how the student will actually perform. But I must admit my colleague had a point with his "apples to apples" perspective.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/08/12 | 922 | 4,066 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a undergraduate student who is trying to publish something so as to facilitate my PhD applications in the future.
I have a few seniors who help out in the lab and have been included as non-1st authors in some publications. Basically, what they do is helping the PhD's do some implementations. Thus, actually there is not much real research involved. But at least in the end, they are the authors, although not 1st authors, of some publications. It is quite nice for undergraduates to have such publications.
As for me, I am currently working on an **individual** project under a supervisor, who is extremely busy every day. Instead of being a helper, I am actually initiating the research all the way. I am also working towards publishing a paper to present the work.
Nice as it may sound, I am facing a lot of difficulties. As a undergraduate, my knowledge is so limited, and meanwhile I have to attend lectures. My time is also very limited. **So I am really afraid I can publish nothing at the end of the research.**
Since I have already started the research, no matter the decision to initiate one project my self is wise or not, I have to fight to the very end.
**Could anybody help give some suggestions to make my work get published more likely?**<issue_comment>username_1: I think working on your own project is a very good thing to get started with research, and it is a good basis for publishing something. But when you have little experience with the research and publishing process, it is important to have someone with more experience who is able to invest some time in advising you. As your supervisor seems to be very busy, he probably cannot take that role.
My advice would be to get someone senior, like a PhD student or, even better, post-doc with related research interests on board. It's probably best to get someone from your supervisor's group. You should also discuss this with your supervisor first, maybe he/she can even recommend someone. This would of course mean that you add someone else as coauthor, but it should allow you to learn much more about the research and publishing process than when you do it on your own.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This may not be a magic solution but I would suggest focusing on a project than involves more applications and simulations than theoretical results. You would also need to find a suitable, likely small, journal that replies fast. Note that top journals may take years to get back to you with a first review or even an automatic rejection.
P.S. I got some *interesting* results after googling your profile picture.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One alternate strategy that could help is to see about trying to present a poster of your work at a conference. Even if that doesn't have quite the same prestige as a paper in a journal or an accepted paper at a conference (if you're in CS), it still is a sign of doing significant amounts of research. An especially good sign would be if you could win a "best student poster" or "best student talk"-type award.
However, the important thing for you will be to be able to discuss what you have done with authority in your statement of purpose to graduate schools, and to get a good letter of recommendation from your advisor that clearly outlines your contributions to your project. Having a publication is nice, but it's not an essential component for graduate school admissions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: As some people have suggested, it may be worth your time to see if you can get the research into a conference - while in some fields they're less prestigious than a paper no one is going to scoff at undergraduate research that ends up there.
That being said, I did author several papers as an undergrad, and it was immensely beneficial both to my job prospects and my outlook on research. It's tough, but if you want to do it you can - and no, you shouldn't rely on PhD students to get you a few papers with your name buried in the middle.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/12 | 997 | 4,418 | <issue_start>username_0: I've heard from people saying that while applying for PhD, you need to have past experience in researching something and should have international publications. I was like more concentrated towards practical experience and have't had any publications. If I am aspiring to do PhD and want to apply, it would be impossible if such a criteria exists!<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is it mandatory to have published papers while applying for PhD?
>
>
>
No.
However, if you have any research experience (working in a lab, research you've done for classes, undergraduate thesis, capstone project, etc.), you should highlight that on your application, both in your personal statement and on your resume / CV. More importantly, your letters of recommendation should discuss your **potential** for research. Your recommendation writers should know this, but it would be worthwhile to highlight this in any material you provide to them when you ask them for recommendations, and when you discuss it with them. Trust me, the more information you can give your letter writers, the better their letters will be. I explicitly ask students what their goals are when I'm writing letters of recommendation so I can tailor them appropriately, and you should make sure your letter writers understand that you're applying for a PhD and what your research goals are.
>
> I was like more concentrated towards practical experience and have't had any publications.
>
>
>
If by "practical experience" you mean that you worked on an unsolved problem, then that counts as research. If you simply re-applied knowledge in order to learn how to become proficient in that field (e.g., you programmed a microcontroller to turn lights on and off via voice commands), then the research angle is harder to spin. But, do the best you can to highlight on your applications why you believe you have the preparation to do quality research.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1 here, and I would like to detail my personal situation, as it might be relevant here.
I am about to get my Master's degree in CS and will start my first year of PhD in October with only a four-month experience in R&D (and not really research *per se*) during an exchange program and with no publication. In my opinion, there are three points that played in my favour while applying :
1. Four-month experience is still experience, and you should highlight it in your resume and cover letters. In my case, this experience was at the roots of my choice to get a PhD; reading articles, getting to learn of tons of great ideas on a single subject, then trying to develop your own idea and finally publishing it are the reasons why I have decided to get a PhD. But more importantly, thanks to this experience, I got to know what it was like to work in the industry (through internships) and to work in research, and it allowed me to justify my choice more easily.
2. You have to narrow down the subjects that interest you, as a PhD is a long-term engagement. During my applications, I have specifically targeted the Human-Computer Interactions domain (HCI) and have been lucky enough to find a subject on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) that is related to HCI and to learning sciences (which is great because I want to be a teacher, eventually).
3. Choose wisely your recommendation writers. They have to testify your ability to work in research and academia. I have been accepted for a subject only because the contact knew a PI who wrote a letter.
So the answer to your question is no, but prior experience in research and clear future career goals have to be emphasized in your applications in order to get not only what you want, but also what suits you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a general answer to your question is "no, it's not essential (but it won't hurt!)".
It's important to bear in mind that this will be more true for some disciplines than others. In a lab science, for instance, it is fairly common for undergraduates to show up on the publications of group leaders on whose projects they have worked during some kind of internship. This is in stark contrast to a discipline such as economics, in which most students do not have any publications even at the time of completion of their PhD! Try to find out what the norms are in your discipline of choice.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/12 | 944 | 4,107 | <issue_start>username_0: I am encountering some problems for making my research in English, due that this is not my native language. Even though my ideas are crystal clear in my language I find it extremely hard to express them in English.
For checking issues related to grammar and syntax I have been using Proofread Bot, it is an online grammar and syntax reviewer, but their results are not so accurate. I have been checking some persons that make this task, but their fees are pretty high (almost 200 USD for a 3 pages articles); and I would not like to be paying this amount every time that I want to submit something.
Does anybody knows another software reliable english editor tools online?<issue_comment>username_1: I am sympathetic to your problem since I had (and have) it, too, as a non-native English speaker.
Spellcheckers are easy to use and reliable, so use them everywhere you can. Even as I am typing this answer I get a squiggly line below every incorrect word.
Grammar is completely different though. As far as I know there is no easy way to check it in an automated way. Some software tools are listed in [this thread](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/6333/grammar-checking-tool-for-use-with-latex) on tex.se, but even an intermediate English speaker would find most of them disappointing; they do catch some missing 's', but with so many false positives and negatives that it's hardly worth the effort to go through the results.
My suggestions would be: either (1) find some English exchange student willing to proofread at much cheaper rates, or (2) ignore the issue; it's not so important. I am not a native speaker myself, so I am not in the best position to judge, but your English looks clear enough to me. As long as the paper is understandable to the referees, it shouldn't be a problem if there are occasional grammar errors. After acceptance, the journal's copy editors should make a full grammar check and proofread for you for free as part of the publication process. By going through their correction you can identify the typical mistakes in your English prose and try to improve when writing the next paper.
I work in mathematics; if you are in the liberal arts the situation could be very different though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Whatever spelling or grammar checkers you use, you may rely only on their ability to detect a problem, not on their suggested solutions. Alas, if your paper is not completely trivial, this applies to most human professional editors as well no matter how much they charge or how many years of experience they claim. So, in the end, it'll all come back to you no matter what. I have been writing and speaking in broken English for 20 years and the only people who complained were the undergraduate students who, as far as I can judge, would hate me even if I had spoken with perfect Cambridge pronunciation and Oxford grammar. Just write in short simple sentences and you'll be fine. It will not be an exaggeration to say that, no matter what field you are in and what subject you are writing upon, the probability that an attempt of expressing your thought in an overly flamboyant manner, including all nuances and sideline remarks into a single sentence, and alluding to the arguments described in several previous passages at once (especially when the the latter are structured similarly to the phrase under consideration and the references to them can hardly be called unambiguous), will not throw the reader off for good somewhere in the middle of an elaborate construction you have built with utmost patience and verified against all spelling and grammar tools at your disposal is nearing that of the event that a layman be able to recite a sophisticated ten page legal contract with all details including each and every involved party and covenant therein in a single outpour flowing as effortlessly and graciously as a wide river in a deep valley after a quick look at it, i.e., zero. Just make sure that your thought is clear. Then yor massage wll cam thru evn if wrds r misspld and wrng grmmar.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/12 | 622 | 2,479 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished my B.Sc in CS about 6 month ago and now I am writing a paper for a conference. before when I was a student I put my university and department name below my name as an author. but now I am not a student. I saw somebody put their IEEE membership on the paper something like *"member of IEEE Computer society"* or something similar, but I am not a member in any society yet!
What I used before:
```
<NAME>
Department of Math and Computer Science,
Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran
Email: <EMAIL>
```
What I may use now:
```
<NAME>
Email: <EMAIL>
```
Can I do that? Can I publish a paper just by my name and email (which is a Gmail one) without any institutional affiliation?
**Update:** For information about email address check these questions:
[What should a proper email signature look like for graduate students?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8984/what-should-a-proper-email-signature-look-like-for-graduate-students/)
[E-mail address to use in publications](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2872/e-mail-address-to-use-in-publications)<issue_comment>username_1: The standard practice is to list the affiliations under which the work was performed. If you performed the work as an undergraduate at your undergraduate institution, then you *should* continue to list it in work related to that effort. However, you can "update" your address by listing a "current address" along with the old affiliations.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have published together with authors that only used their personal home address + email address as contact information, so your second option should not be a problem. You can publish in scientific journals without a formal affiliation.
However, if the work was performed at a previous location (e.g. as a student) where you are not currently working, you should include both the previous affiliation along with the current address (as others have also suggested).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Give your former university (where you did the work), and add "now Companyname Inc., Newtown)".
It's only fair to tell the reader (instead of hiding it, which might be suspicous), and your boss will likely love the company name to appear, too. Of course you should ask beforehand.
And your email address doesn't matter, because your professor will be the "corresponding author". Right?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/13 | 691 | 2,921 | <issue_start>username_0: If I read a scholarly paper and find it interesting and beneficial, should I write a short thank you letter to the author? Should I send the thank you letter from a `.edu` email address?<issue_comment>username_1: It certainly wouldn't hurt, and as a published author myself, I would say it would be very nice feedback, particularly if you include details about:
* specifically any particular points/methods you found useful.
* A brief outline of how you are extending the work.
* Perhaps any question you have about the article.
This could be a good way to make yourself known in Academia, especially if the author is an influential scholar in your field. However, a caveat, don't overdo it - in terms of being 'over the top' complementary or too many 'rapid fire' letters/emails.
But, it would more than likely be appreciated as it would be a validation of the author's work.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I want to try to give some background to convey the perspective of the researcher on this matter.
For a scientist, the publishing of a paper is usually the culmination of **a lot** of hard work. The scientist has gone through coming up with the project, implementing it, solving all the problems, summarizing it all into a paper, and then through a long process of peer review. Each of these steps involves major effort.
Then the paper gets published. I personally found this to be very anti-climatic. The paper summarizes so much effort, but you rarely get any personal feedback about the paper, except maybe at meetings and conferences. Since we are all publishing our work openly for the benefit of mankind, I think every scientist would be happy to get feedback from people on his/her paper and hear that it was helpful in some way.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Given that most of the correspondence I get when putting out a new paper goes something like "I have just read your very interesting new paper. I want to inform you of my related works [....]," and thus is very transparently a request to be cited, the rare message that just says something like "I liked your new paper!" is always a welcome change of pace.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Please do. The author will likely be pleased to hear about any specifics you found particularly interesting or helpful.
As a scientist one of the main goals is to disseminate your findings and spur interest in your work.
It is especially good to send a letter if the paper becomes a significant inspiration for your own research. But, in this case you will also complement the authors by citing their work in your papers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I would certainly be very pleased to receive 1 or 2 of such letters but I would hate to make it a standard academic practice (The image of <NAME> reading "fan mail" sends shivers down my spine. Brrrrrr....).
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/13 | 1,724 | 7,355 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm nearing the completion of my undergraduate degree in mathematics. The handful of experiences I've had tutoring students are among the most satisfying ways I've applied math to real problems. My academic record is good but not honors material. I'm convinced that teaching mathematics at the secondary school level is an excellent way to apply my math degree where it's needed.
I am applying to a 13-month Master of Education program at an American university. Through coursework and internships teaching at a local school, students are fully prepared to certify to teach Secondary Education.
This is a highly selective program. Applications, essays, PRAXIS scores, and interviews are all part of the application process.
Does inexperience teaching totally defeat one's chances of admission to an education program? This may also apply to teaching at a university. Is there any way to convince them to see past the inexperience? How does one overcome this?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Does inexperience teaching totally defeat one's chances of admission to an education program?
>
>
>
**No.**
I have direct experience in your situation: I entered a MEd teaching program at a top-5 U.S. university with zero teaching experience. I did have five years of military experience, and I emphasized the leadership skills I gained from that, as well as the personnel management skills I learned. My college grades were mediocre (3.2 GPA in Electrical Engineering), GRE scores were decent but not phenomenal, and I entered the program to be certified in high school physics.
>
> Is there any way to convince them to see past the inexperience? How does one overcome this?
>
>
>
You are in the enviable position of wanting to teach math, and [STEM](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEM_fields) teachers are highly sought-after and needed right now. That isn't to say that you won't be competing against highly-competitive peers, but for what it's worth you will probably be competing against *fewer* peers.
To overcome the lack of teaching on your resume, you should highlight any experiences you have had working with students or children (e.g., did you TA a class? Were you a camp counselor? Think outside the box to find something relevant, but don't stretch it too thin -- e.g., lifeguarding probably wouldn't quite fit the bill, but mentoring junior acolytes at your church might). You should certainly discuss why you enjoyed the tutoring, and how that informed your decision to pursue a teaching career.
Furthermore, you need to demonstrate your passion for teaching -- talk about the middle school algebra teacher who opened your eyes to the beauty of mathematics, or the calculus teacher who gave you the first real taste of a formal proof. Talk about why you love mathematics, and how important you think it is for upcoming generations to get quality mathematics teaching.
The admissions committee needs to see something special in your application that will make you a great teacher, and personal experience means a lot -- do you have 26 cousins that flock around you during family reunions to hear stories (you're a great story teller! This is a fantastic skill for a teacher!). Did you wake up every morning in tenth grade salivating at the thought of fifth period trigonometry class? (you've got legitimate passion! [and may be the only person in the world who loved trig at that age...]).
MEd programs are one of the few programs where I believe a well-written personal statement can truly make a difference in your application, so make it good. Have one or more people read your statement and give good criticism. Write it one week and re-read it a week or two later, and edit it if you don't see the passion coming out. Ask your reviewers to look for passion (or, rather, ask them after they've read it what they thought, and if "passion" doesn't show up in any reviews, re-write it).
Your letters of recommendation are extremely important, as well. You should make sure your letter writers know that you are applying to teaching programs (*not* research programs), and that's what you would like them to focus on. You *don't* want a letter that says, "X is a brilliant mathematician who can focus intently on minute details of complicated mathematical proofs for hours at a time. He has the potential to produce award-winning mathematics." What you want is something along the lines of, "X was one of my most passionate students, who has a knack for coming up with succinct, meaningful explanations for complicated mathematical topics. I routinely saw him during office hours where we had enlightening discussions about the course. I learned as much from him as he did from my own teaching."
Your interview is obviously important, too. I suggest preparing something to teach for five minutes (high school level--if I were preparing something, I might choose compound interest -- you can teach it in about five minutes to a willing audience, and you end up with the beautiful definition of `e` in the end), and practicing it on someone. If I were interviewing candidates, I'd ask them to teach me something (maybe something particular), and if you have something in your back pocket that you've practiced, you'll be ready for the question if it appears. Be prepared to discuss why you didn't have the opportunity to teach (what did you do during your summers? Were there TA opportunities that you could have taken?). Obviously, do a lot of smiling and be as personable as you can without going outside your normal personality. Have a very succinct answer to why you believe you will be a great teacher -- 30 seconds that will wow an interviewer. (one further tip: if you have an interview with multiple people, **remember their names** and address them with their names during the interview--this can make a very good impression).
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Personally what has worked for me is to take small steps toward the profession and use them as evidence of a commitment toward your goal. For example, my state requires CPR, First Aid, Child Abuse training, and specific courses towards a teaching license. Technology training is required also, but treated as an elective in graduate programs (not part of the 5 core courses you need for a license). So I did the training, took the tech course at community college (effective and cheap), and have continued to tutor as a volunteer. I plied that into getting a paid job as a tutor and am I now using that and some spin on unrelated work from three years in another career (i.e. listing parts relevant to the new career), in my graduate applications. It already worked to get me into non-degree graduate study (visiting student status, grad courses without the full commitment) this summer, credits I could transfer directly into whatever program accepts me.
This last part is something worth investigating for future readers. The thing is that many graduate programs cap transfer credits fairly low (6-9 credit hours), but if your undergrad GPA is lower like mine having good grad grades can tip the balance for program admission. These "non-degree" programs are not always advertised so make sure to ask and check with the schools you're applying to to make sure the credits will transfer.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/13 | 530 | 2,238 | <issue_start>username_0: I currently have on my CV a list of conferences I organized, or co-organized, a list of invited talks, a full list of talks, etc. Recently I have been asked to chair a session in a prestigious conference. I am very honored, and thus wondered: is this something I can feature on my CV? If so, would somewhere along with the conferences organized be "standard"?<issue_comment>username_1: The short answer is yes. Anything that can be considered meriting can (or should) be added to a CV in my opinion. I have a heading "Other meriting academic miissions" in my CV where I list things that I consider meriting but do not fit under other headings where the list is longer. this includes, invited talks, tenure evaluations, etc.
My strategy with my CV is to add everything into a "master CV" and then remove parts depending on the purpose of the CV. Therefore, add the meriting tasks you are asked to do. It is easy to remove them if they are irrelevant for the specific purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Chairing a session during a prestigious conference is certainly a good indication that you are recognised within your community (at least to the conference committee) and they value your contributions to the field. It should be definitely part of your CV (and online CV if you do have one).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I see absolutely no reason why not. It fits perfectly well into "other academic achievements, honors, and activities" (or whatever else your title of this part is). Just don't declare it the biggest achievement in your lifetime and provide the relevant details (conference name, level, session, etc.) in a reasonably full and concise format so that people can appreciate what you are talking about.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: These conference chairmanships speak well of your "administrative" ability. Some universities prize this, whether or not they say so. So list at least this one, and possibly others, on your CV.
This don't help your "scholarship" credentials per se. But even scholarship is about networking, and many professors will therefore value you for the contacts you have and the doors that you can open for them.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/08/13 | 1,706 | 6,998 | <issue_start>username_0: In academia, one is forced to read papers that come out. Some of the papers I read are directly related to my work and then it is reasonable to read them in my working hours. Others are completely irrelevant and I read them just for the pleasure and to broaden my knowledge in other areas. These, I think, should be read in one's free time.
But then there are papers that are not directly related to what I am doing but may turn useful for my work, e.g., they may use a method that might come handy although they deal with a slightly different field. Should I read such papers at work as well or should I read them in my free time? How do I decide where the border between work-related and leisure-read papers lies?<issue_comment>username_1: A perspective from (theoretical) computer science:
One of the things that distinguishes academia from some other lines of work is that there is no well delineated line between "working hours" and non-working hours. Since you can probably be better paid elsewhere, academics tend to enjoy research. You seem to as well, since you read papers during your free time.
But that is the great thing about academia. Reading papers that you enjoy is work, since as you observe, reading in a field different from your own can nevertheless give you tools useful for your own work. So, I would say that you can read any paper you like during "working hours" and not feel bad about it.
Incidentally, one can always switch areas. If you feel that you are "forced" to read the papers that come out in your area, but there are other areas that you read for pleasure, perhaps you should work in those areas!
(Disclaimer: needless to say, to have a *successful* academic career, you can't spend all your time reading -- you have to spend some of your time writing! But there is no need to arbitrarily partition the reading into a work and pleasure pile.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There may of course be differences between different academic cultures and systems but in essence you should be free to read whatever you want. Yes, you will of course *need* to read some literature to keep yorself up to date with your field to the extent that you can teach whatever courses you need to teach. I assume teaching is something you are *ordered* to do. Your own research adds the need to read other papers but since you decide your field you also decide what you need to read. If you find other areas of interest (still within your or related fields) then I cannot see that as a problem. There are many aspects of science such as methodology that can be extracted from, for example, neighbouring fields.
In my own case, I find I have a different problem: simply not time enough to keep myself updated to the level I would like. So, reading literature irrelevant to my major field is simply not imagineable.
So in the end the answer will depend on what your job situation looks like and what the expectations are, what you are ordered to do and what is your own initiative as well as what might result if you do not fulfil the goals of your employer.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> In academia, one is forced to read papers that come out.
>
>
>
Not in academia. You are not *forced* to read anything at all after you get your PhD. As a graduate student, you may have regular reading assignments given by your adviser, but those are just like any other class assignments, so I don't think you are talking of them here.
>
> Some of the papers I read are directly related to my work and then it is reasonable to read them in my working hours. Others are completely irrelevant and I read them just for the pleasure and to broaden my knowledge in other areas. These, I think, should be read in one's free time.
>
>
>
One funny thing in academia (if we are talking about academia and not about an industrial job that pretends to be one) is that you *never know* what exactly your work is. Any time a colleague may stop by and ask a question, a paper may come for refereeing, etc., which may give you an opportunity (not "force", because you can reject anything you don't want either bluntly or in some fancy way like "Interesting problem but, unfortunately, it is outside my area of expertise") to think of something you've never heard of before. Another funny thing is that there is no work time (except teaching and meeting hours) and free time. You can wake up at 2AM and work like crazy if you have a good idea, or you can lock your office and go for a long stroll in the town if you don't feel like sitting and bumping your head against the brick wall will result in anything any time soon. I read whatever I want and wherever and whenever I want, and suggest that you do the same, provided that you meet your obligations and do not go on reckless reading (or non-reading) sprees.
>
> But then there are papers that are not directly related to what I am doing but may turn useful for my work, e.g., they may use a method that might come handy although they deal with a slightly different field.
>
>
>
Zillions of them! No chance to read them all, of course, but, by all means, look out and around whenever you have a chance.
>
> Should I read such papers at work as well or should I read them in my free time?
>
>
>
Whichever you prefer. I like reading when lying on a sofa and I don't have one in my office, so I read everything at home. Some people prefer to clearly separate the work and the social life, so they do all their reading at the office. There are no rules and no obligations in this respect.
How do I decide where the border between work-related and leisure-read papers lies?
Currently there is no such border in academia. We enjoy the total absence of the "reading police" and the internet made everything (well, almost: the copyright still spreads its shadowy tentacles far and wide but they are cut out one by one every day) available at a click of a button. The real danger is not in the "legal issues" but in the effective management of your time, which is the reverse sign of the freedom coin. But that is a totally different story...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: My take (for profit company) is anything that clearly improves your domain knowledge in a way that can be tied back to your business.
>
> One funny thing in academia (if we are talking about academia and not about an industrial job that pretends to be one) is that you never know what exactly your work is
>
>
>
This is true in the business world as well. My boss has no idea that we need to consolidate user directories, set up a configuration management system or implement a system that lets us visualize netflow information. He comes to me with problems, I need to read to be able to reply with answers.
So work related stuff is almost always good.
Oh, and xkcd. Anyone should be allowed to read xkcd at work. Except bus drivers, but that should be obvious.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/13 | 1,451 | 6,082 | <issue_start>username_0: I just finished the 2nd year of a PhD program. I was planning to present a poster at the national conference but (probably) need to cancel. Now I'm deciding whether to attend the conference anyway. On the one hand: I'll meet people and probably enjoy myself. On the other hand: I could use the time for other work, would prefer not to spend $$ on the hotel, and I'm years away from being on the job market.
$$$. My plane ticket is non-refundable. My hotel is refundable. So I could save some money by skipping the conference.<issue_comment>username_1: Attending conferences is very useful for several reasons. Usually, the work presented at conferences involve the latest developments in the field. This may provide you with new ideas or tools for your own research. It will give you a good overview of what is happening. You will also become familiar with who is doing what. In addition to this you also have the possibility to get in touch with colleagues and strike up new contacts with persons working on questions for interest to you. This can become useful in the sense that you can possibly start up collaborations or simply become known to others in the field. The latter can be important, for example, when you publish since reviewers might easily be someone you meet during the conference. Obviously, presenting something makes this even easier but being there is far better than not.
The reason I can see from not going is if you do not think the conference is of major interest or if you do not think you will meet people interested in similar questions to yours, in other words if you cannot see any academic benefits from going. Saving money is of course also a valid question if you think you can use that money more wisely on, for example, another conference.
But, in general, go to good conferences regardless of whether you have something to present or not.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I prefer to rely upon the grapevine, the internet, and the personal communication more than on formal meetings but if you like socializing, by all means go. Just make sure that
1) You know which talks you want to attend and to which people you'd like to talk and are prepared to both sitting through the talks and the conversations. Nothing is as meaningless and time-wasting as sitting through a talk in which you understand only the speaker's name and affiliation, and nothing is as pathetic as a graduate student who tries to communicate with some expert and either has no idea of what he (student) is talking about or has nothing more interesting to say than "My name is ..., my adviser is ... , it was nice to meet you".
2) If you've made a poster already, take it with you anyway. Even if it is not displayed in the main hall, you may still have an opportunity to show it to some people (of course, it shouldn't be 8 by 10 feet in this case, so you may want to downsize it a bit).
3) In spite of what I said in 1) and 2), do not take the whole affair with beastly seriousness and have some ideas about what to do in the town or nearby for fun.
As to work, in most conference places you may find a quiet room or two (in the worst case scenario, just return to your hotel) where to spend some time alone between the events that really interest you. Unless you fly trans{atlantic/pacific}, you can reduce the wasted time to just a few hours, not days. As to the job market, if you are any good, the earlier you appear on the radar screens, the better. As to dollars, it should be your own decision: I suspect you'll not end up in the bankruptcy court or become a millionaire either way :).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It also depends a lot on your field.
In my field (mathematics), I largely agree with everything [username_2 had said](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11869/94). Having been to (and organized a special session for) a big national conference, I found that the best part about it is the social aspect, and some of the cool stuff you get to see at the vendors. In terms of talks I listened to they generally fall in one of two categories:
1. Someone I know (or know of) speaking on a subject I am (quasi-)familiar with at a level that is slightly lower (more general) than what they would say in a seminar or smaller, more specialist oriented conferences and workshops. Which is rather comforting to hear but often I don't learn much (though there are a few wonderful exceptions) more than what I already know.
2. Someone whom I don't know speaking on a subject I am unfamiliar with at a level that is slightly lower (more general) than what they would say in a seminar or smaller, more specialist oriented conferences and workshops, yet still flies *entirely over my head*.
In some fields conferences are a lot more plentiful, and missing one conference, even a "national" one, will not be that big a deal. And if you are short on money, you may well want to be picky about how and where you travel.
But in some other fields (take Geology for example), *the* [National Conference](http://sites.agu.org/meetings/) (fully deserving of the capital letters) is the place to be and everyone in the field, from graduate students to emeritus faculty, who doesn't have a very good reason *not* to be there tends to be there. (The AGU fall meeting attracts more than 3 times the participants than the [largest mathematics meeting in the world](http://jointmathematicsmeetings.org/jmm).) If your field is anything like that, I'd say you probably should make an effort to participate.
Lastly, when it comes to money (though this may be a bit late), many of the national conferences have special funding set aside for graduate students, and in addition many graduate programs have some limited travel funding provided. You may also want to talk to your advisor about travel funding. Both my wife and I are in academia, and neither of us have ever paid out of pocket for conference attendance as graduate students. (Of course, in your field the situation may yet be different.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/14 | 291 | 1,227 | <issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper at a conference and it is currently under review. Can I use this paper as a 'scientific report' (asked to assess candidate's writing skills) for a Ph.D application ?<issue_comment>username_1: So long as this is for an internal evaluation process that doesn't involve any form of "publication," it's hard to see how this could be a problem. You retain rights as the author of a paper, especially if it hasn't been published.
If you have concerns over whether it is allowed, you can always ask the conference organizers if it's acceptable. On the other hand, if you are concerned whether the department you are submitting to will accept it, **ask the department**.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Submit it as a preprint in ArXiv and cite the corresponding document (I am assuming it has the minimum quality to be submited here). Producing preprints is a good practice (specially for countries with limited access to co$tly journals).
In my opinion: do not cite "submitted to TOP JOURNAL" papers. Only [Tyche](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyche) knows what is going to happen with that submission (e.g. maybe the referee is your arch enemy).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/14 | 2,142 | 8,481 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm trying to submit a latex document to a SAGE journal using ScholarOne.
I'm having a hard time.
The (poor) documentation says that it accepts tex files, but the pdf it produces says that it cannot turn my tex into a pdf.
>
> Note: The following files were submitted by the author for peer
> review, but cannot be converted to PDF. You must view these files (e.g. movies) online.
>
>
> response.tex
>
>
>
Is this just what it does with tex files? Should it compile them? I don't know. If it is not compiling, how do I get the error message?<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I know the Scholar One Manuscripts (S1M) system can convert Word files into pdf, it does not contain a LaTeX engine but will accept PDF files. In the journal I work (which uses S1M), we accept LaTeX manuscripts but explcitly ask authors to produce a pdf of the document for reviewing purposes. It is a mistake or omission by the journal to not explain that the file for review must be either Word or PDF. The LaTeX files can be uploaded but must be marked as "Not for review" which means they are not included in the file sent to the reviewer. You need to check with the journal how they prefer to handle it. In my case, I do not need the LaTeX files until the final revised manuscript so uploading them is of minor use; this, however, might vary between journals.
I do not know of any commnercial manuscript system in use that produces PDF from submitted LaTeX files but then I do not know all journals. In any case, the proper way with S1M should be to submit your files in LateXed PDF format (e.g. PDFLaTeX).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [This might be more ontopic at tex.stackexchange.com.]
What you received sounds like an error, but is vague. First, of course talk to technical support if you can get hold of any. These systems are often set up to only accept a minimal set of LaTeX packages. If you are using any non-standard packages, see if you can remove them or include the functionality in the document itself. And of course talk to technical support if you can get hold of any.
See also [Submitting a journal article as a single tex file](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/12554/submitting-a-journal-article-as-a-single-tex-file).
EDIT: Peter says the system is not trying to convert at all, and he should know. However, I'll leave this answer here for now. If anyone thinks it should be removed, let me know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Both the Royal Society of Chemistry journals and the American Chemical Society journals use ScholarOne Manuscripts™ as their web submission platform. In both cases, **the system is able to compile LaTeX documents into a PDF file**. There are, however, strict requirements about the type of LaTeX document you can use. These are spelt out in a specific help section entitled *“Preparing and Submitting Manuscripts Using TeX/LaTeX”*.
>
> ACS Authors have two distinct options for submitting work authored in TeX:
>
>
> FAST Submission: Submit your own PDF file—and provide the native TeX and figures in a .zip file—and your own PDF file will be used for the review process.
>
>
> STANDARD Submission: Submit a complete and properly styled TeX file, figures, and references using the achemso style package. The TeX files will be converted to PDF by ACS Paragon Plus and used for the review process.
>
>
>
The help further states:
>
> When you upload your TeX/LaTeX Manuscript File, the system will analyze the file, and identify additional resource files referenced within the file (such as image files and bibliographic files) that are necessary to complete the document.
>
>
>
and
>
> Manuscript files prepared in TeX/LaTeX (Version 2.02 and earlier) will be used in journal production provided you adhere to the following guidelines:
>
>
> * Use only LaTeX2e. Use of plain TeX and RevTeX is discouraged.
> * Use generic style files whenever possible. Minimal formatting is all that is required in the document.
> * Include all sections of the article in a single file. Include the list of references within the LaTeX file. Captions must be created in the TeX/LaTeX document.
> * References should be cited in text using `\cite{}`, and the list of references should be itemized using `\bibitem{}`.
> * Use `\frac` to build fractions. Do not use `\over` or `\stackrel` to build fractions in displayed equations.
> * Use `\sum_{}^{}` for summations and `\prod_{}^{}` for products.
> * Use the array environment only to build true matrices, not for aligning multiline equations.
> * Use characters/symbols in the generic LaTeX character set only. Symbols from other sets may not translate correctly.
> * Avoid extensive use of `\newcommand` and `\def .
> * Some style files (text and bibliographic) that are available in the public domain may be used for most ACS journals, e.g., jacs.sty and jacs.bst; jpc.sty and jpc.bst; achemso. The use of the achemso style package is strongly encouraged. Please note that the ACS does not provide support for using these files.
>
>
>
A further requirement, which is not actually listed, is that all figures should be in the same directory (you cannot upload a directory structure). And, as noted, if you use bibtex, you have to run it manually and include the content of the `.bbl` file into your `.tex` file before upload.
---
So, in conclusion: **ScholarOne Manuscripts™ has the capability to support LaTeX compilation**. Whether this is enable or not for your specific journal/publisher, I cannot know. In any case, check the documentation! (or ask the editorial office)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: For me, ScholarOne (Wiley submission) did not accept PDF upload and did not convert the latex sources. My solution was to convert the PDF to PS using pdf2ps (GhostScript). This was then properly converted back to PDF by ScholarOne. I absolutely do not understand why they are using such a stupid and confusion submission system, sorry...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I finally figured this out after about 3 hours. Thing is, even though the system tells you there was an error, it actually HAS uploaded your files. You can see this if you click "Update file order", and here you can download the LaTeX log to see what went wrong. In my case it was because the system didn't have all the figures yet, because it only lets you upload 3 files at a time. Once I'd uploaded all the figures, and deleted all the extra files I'd uploaded in frustration, I was able to force it to compile by clicking "View PDF". Finally submitted. I hope this helps someone, somewhere.
Worst. Manuscript. Submission. System. EVER.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I encountered this problem while trying to submit a manuscript to Publications of Astronomical Society of Australia (PASA) via ScholarOne. When I uploaded the latex source from Overleaf, the submission system complained "Unable to find any suitable files to generate the proof". It is sad that this old problem still exists.
The problem seems to be with ScholarOne's latex compiler. I have found it to be more restrictive than other similar systems and tools like overleaf. The problems are the following:
1. ScholarOne does not work well with .bib files. Their tech support told me to add the citations directly to the main .tex file rather than putting them in a .bib file. This amounts to replacing the `\bibliography{}` command with the contents of the .bbl file generated by BibTeX. This is quite surprising since the PASA template in overleaf uses a .bib file for bibliography.
2. ScholarOne does not work well with `\include{}` statements. I had to create one big .tex file by manually copy-pasting the contents of the .tex files which are `\include`-d in the main .tex file.
3. ScholarOne does not use pdflatex. This means that if you add PDF or PNG images in your manuscript, the compiler won't be able to determine its size. The safe option is to use images in the EPS format. I also had to flatten the EPS files (using Photoshop/GIMP) since their latex compiler can't deal with layers. I also added `\usepackage{epstopdf}` to the preamble.
4. File names can't have spaces in them. (Which is in general good latex advice.)
5. Some packages may not be supported or may not work as expected. In my case, the tcolorbox package did not work.
TL/DR: ScholarOne needs a lot of handholding to compile any decently complex latex document.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/15 | 358 | 1,429 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the best way to conduct a training seminar inside a computer laboratory without a projector?
Is there an existing software program that could achieve the same results as conducting a training seminar with the aid of a projector?<issue_comment>username_1: CLI or GUI? If GUI, you can have everyone watch your screen w/ a remote desktop client. Other solutions for CLI too (screen program) but I guess you're using a GUI.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Put your seminar material online, and just have people view it at the same time as you talk. It can be any easily readable format, like PDF file or simply series of web pages. If you are not sure that people will follow, just put large bold numbers on each page, and announce what page you're at when you change page. (A bit like kids' audio book!)
Either that, or hard copies of the material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not sure I get the situation:
Does "no projector" (and no whiteboard) mean
* You do not want to use a projector (nor a whiteboard)?
=> IMHO you should then know what you want (and tell us why), without that we'll not know what to answer
* Or: just there is no projector available
=> borrow projector somewhere
* or is it no possibity to project to a suitable space
=> borrow projector and screen,
* no possibility for placing a screen, neithr
=> or go for a different room?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/08/15 | 752 | 3,402 | <issue_start>username_0: My friend submitted a paper to a well-known computer science conference. One of the reviews was very short - only 2.5 lines of text, extremely general and vague, and rejected the paper. The review is so meaningless, that the author cannot even respond to it, or use it to improve the paper. Additionally, the review includes little justification to the rejection recommendation.
The other two reviews were balanced - there was one positive and one negative review.
The author feels that the short review should get a smaller weight in the final decision. How can he communicate this to the conference organizers? Is it a good idea to contact them directly by email?
The conference is organized by an automatic web-based submission system that allows the author to write a single response to the reviewers, but it is not clear if this response gets to the organizers or only to the reviewers.<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately, when submitting to a conference, you don't have control over the process to the detail you are talking about. It will probably be the case that the useless review does indeed get less weight during discussions (unless the reviewer happens to be one of those reviewers who holds a lot of sway and can get a paper rejected with a vague and general review!).
I would urge against sending an email to the conference chair / organizers -- unless you are extremely tactful, any attempt to sway them with this method will come off as whiny and will only hurt your case (or, rather, your friend's case).
The best option is to write a rebuttal as you normally would: fix all the critical comments from the other reviewers, address each comment specifically in your rebuttal response, and thank the reviewers for their consideration. The good news is that you got one positive review. While this is not normally sufficient for a paper acceptance at a very competitive CS conference, you have the chance to improve the paper as much as you can, and send in your rebuttal, and you should make the most of that opportunity.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It reminds me of a review we got recently, in which, among other (reasonable and meaningful) things there was the phrase
"5) The argument at the top of page 7 is not as clear as it should be."
My immediate response was
"The referee's remark in section 5 is too vague to take any action upon it."
(I believe, my co-authors finally put it in a slightly nicer form, but the meaning stayed).
I completely agree with Chris that your friend should just ignore the "content empty" review and act properly upon the other two, but, before everything, ask yourself honestly whether the paper in question is good enough and written well enough? I don't want to know the answer but you should know it yourself before you proceed in any way or give him any advice. Only one positive review out of three is a clear signal of trouble unless your friend had quarreled with each and every influential colleague of his by the moment of submission.
The last thing: whatever your friend *feels* the organizers *should* do, most likely, trying to convince them of that directly won't accomplish anything. I believe that the indirect comments like the one I quoted above yield better results (especially if your friend's tact and sense of humor are not as terrible as mine :)).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/15 | 1,113 | 4,715 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a 2nd-year grad student in a US PhD program in one of the social sciences. Coursework has forced me throw out the initial ideas I had about research, which I proposed in my application nearly two years ago. Now I'm actively hunting for the "right" topic.
People ask me all the time, "what's your research on?" and I'm not sure how to answer.
This is not about "how to pick a research topic" as much as **how to professionally present one's very tentative research idea(s) before one has a topic.**
Should I:
1) Preface any response to the question with "I'm still early in my program and haven't written my dissertation prospectus yet, but I'll probably focus on ..."
2) Should I be honest about having multiple ideas or just pick one in order to better focus the conversation?
Any advice probably differs across contexts -- i.e. talking with peer, talking with senior scholar. All tips are appreciated!
I know this question is subjective, but I think about the situation every day, and I feel like I need some advice.<issue_comment>username_1: You should be honest for sure. If you don't know something, do not pretend you do because you may face a person who really knows what you try to talk about and then, if you have only a superficial grasp of the subject, you are toast. Just say straight that you've heard that X is an interesting subject, that you have already read , that you want to learn more about it and, perhaps, try a research project in that particular area, and that you have this and that idea and wonder what can be made of them. That will get you the warmest response you can expect from the person you are talking to ("the warmest" doesn't mean "warm", by the way) and you may get some good advice or help this way from a "complete stranger".
I admit that many people fail to understand that knowing and openly delineating the limits of one's knowledge and powers is "a professional behavior". Nevertheless, those whose respect you should really earn during your academic career (whether they are your professors or your fellow students at the current moment) will judge you from this standpoint. The opinions of the rest may make a lot of difference on the short run but none on the long one.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Should you be honest? Sure.
Should you talk about all ideas you have? Most likely not, but it depends on how much time you have. Many people have multiple projects (some simply ideas, some less so) at most times.
Try picking the most promising one. If you have no clue, just pick one, and observe the feedback you get. I believe you need a focused discussion to get useful feedback. If you have enough time with the same person for multiple focused discussions, great! But that's not the assumption.
Finally, you need to take both positive and negative feedback with a grain of salt. Listen to negative feedback! But if they tell you "this is a bad project, because X", listen to the X but think on your own whether it can be fixed by improving the idea or you should actually change completely (or something in between). The same logic applies even when papers are rejected (see for instance [Does some degree of stubbornness help for a researcher?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/13357/8966), or [discussions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1799/which-soft-skills-for-research-career#comment2877_1801) of "learning from criticism" skills).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Before you answer such a question, first decide whether you want to have an extended conversation or not.
Most of the time, you'll only want a brief conversation. The other person may only want a brief conversation, too. Many people ask as a matter of routine because one's research topic plays into our social categories, much like "Where are you from?" (born, raised, etc). The question can also be a limited sign of interest, i.e. equivalent to "Give me a brief summary of what you are working on". In cases like this, you can answer with *any* one or two line answer that is both true and comfortable, but you *don't* have to give the full story or answer unambiguously.
When you want to have extended conversation, giving a clear answer isn't the highest priority. Often the value of those conversations is in the feedback you get or in the opportunity to hear yourself explain your ideas. Rather than give an answer in terms of specific research topics, you might talk about your latest thinking about what interests you and why, and where you are in your decision-making process. You might then ask the other person for their point of view on the alternatives you are considering.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/15 | 2,035 | 8,531 | <issue_start>username_0: I was a little bit surprised to read [this comment thread](http://chronicle.com/article/Week-One-on-the-New-Job/141009/) on the Chronicle of Higher Education, which suggests (among other things) that faculty shouldn't fraternize with grad students. I think this site has a different slant than CHE, so I thought I would bring up the question here. Is there anything wrong with faculty socializing with grad students?
I agree that professors should definitely avoid getting romantically involved with grad students, or getting drunk with them. Moreover, I agree that a heightened sense of boundaries is important.
But is there any reason for a professor, who would otherwise be interested, to decline offers to attend parties thrown by grad students, or to go hiking with them, or to play soccer with them, or to go to bar trivia with them? I've observed this to be common in math departments, and appreciated by faculty and students alike.<issue_comment>username_1: In answer to your main question: NO
Depending on the rules of the faculty, there is nothing particularly wrong with academics interacting with grad students, particularly if the boundaries you suggested are adhered to.
I am fortunate enough to see this from the perspective of being a high school teacher and as a grad (PhD) student - in the grad-professor interactions, both parties are adults, professionals in their fields and are largely working together on the project. The supervisors/advisors are not teachers in the traditional sense, but as their role states - advisors (supervisors in Australia) - often as co-authors of mutual papers, effectively a colleague.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I suppose it depends on whether one views grad students as *hoi polloi* who need to be kept on the other side of a "class boundary" (as the CHE comment put it), or whether one views them as colleagues who just happen to not be as far along on their academic journeys. I prefer to see them as colleagues.
For what it's worth, when I was a grad student my advisor often had us (his research group) over to his house for dinners and drinks, and I'd often play racquetball with one of my dissertation committee members. This made us feel appreciated and made it much more palatable to put in crazy hours when needed to meet a proposal or paper submission deadline. And now, as a tenured faculty member, I take my students out to lunches and dinners and beers and hiking trips (alas, I'm too old for racquetball now). I enjoy getting to know my students as whole individuals, and find that the socialization engenders a sense of community that makes things more pleasant for everyone.
Socializing with students is very different from being "buddies" with them: the relationship between a professor and an advisee is very different than that between friends. But IMHO this is no different than any other professional relationship with any other colleague: there are some things that are fine to share and others that are best left unexplored.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A rather emphatic "**No!**"
I socialize and have socialized with my advisers and other related professors many times. In fact, its rather encouraged in our department.
We have an informal departmental event *almost* every week called **HBI** (Human Beer Interaction - yes, rather cheesy given the HCI focus of our department) where graduate students and faculty in the past have been known to hang out and talk about different things.
Different professors socialize differently. Some professors have movie nights with their lab. Others organize dinners/lunches/pizza making sessions at their houses. Its a great opportunity to meet their better halves and families. Its also really great to go to the major conferences (CHI/CSCW) in our areas and hobnob with the professors there. I found the linked article to be rather out of sync - at least as far as our department of information science is concerned.
Anecdotally, I know that in other departments in our university, there have been co-ed professor-student intramural soccer/softball teams, ice cream sessions, beers, dinners etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There might be a problem here. Now this is somewhat related to what happens in corporate . If the student is a brown -noser then that is ok. He might be doing this(socializing ,which often leads to doing personal favors for adviser) to further his career. But if he is a backstabber ,he might get away with that crap , because he is close to that adviser and adviser completely trusts him.
I have personally seen cases where the grad student would go to an adviser's home ,babysit her kids , do her some personal chores and then speak crap about other students .And since the adviser thought this student was sincere, she would believe in whatever he said sans verification.
It is always better to have a friendly relationship with peers but with an Adviser you should be a friendly acquaintance ,but not a friend . A manager (in this case an adviser or mostly lab supervisor) should always keep his distance from his student.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Just know the boundary between "socializing" and "fraternizing" and you should be fine. I've seen a few examples where crossing this boundary was rather detrimental to the PhD advising process (though nobody got fired or expelled; it just got very difficult to force the student to meet her obligations and to carry out the required assignments because the student got an idea that she had a right to argue with and to question everything she was told to do). However, I don't think that maintaining some "class hierarchy" makes much sense at the PhD student level or even during extracurricular undergraduate activities like Putnam training, etc. though I'm all for it in the low level undergraduate classes ever since the time I was being kept on teaching nothing higher than engineering calculus for four years in a row, and the idea of introducing some kind of "faculty uniform" like in the military is not altogether alien to my mind.
One thing to remember however is that no matter how friendly you are with your students outside the classroom, when you are lecturing, you are the boss and they are subordinates. The joint soccer game or beer jug yesterday should not become an excuse for not turning in the homework today. If this principle is understood and followed by both parties, I guess that's all "hierarchy at the graduate level" we need.
As to the journal article in question, it was written by an administrator, albeit a clever one. Most advices he gave are excellent but at some places you certainly get the feeling I had some twenty years ago when I was pulled over for speeding by a policeman, asked him what would be the maximal speed they would allow in that state (North Dakota), and got the reply "Sorry son, but all I can tell is that if you go under the posted limit, we won't bother you").
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Answering as a student: No.
My teachers and the students at my institute (Life sciences, for reference) socialize a lot. We have a yearly volleyball tournament in which my teachers participate, have drinks with them sometimes, are allowed to call them by their first name and I had dinner at their house for an article in the school newspaper. You could almost describe the relation between the two groups as informal. This isn't always the case at the other institutes at my university.
My point is that socializing helps a lot with the work ethic and morale. Because we know our teachers and professors better, it's easier to have meetings and productive discussions. We also tend to work together as a team more (where the professor has the lead obviously). We're all adults after all.
An important factor is that we never forget the **professional distance** between us. They are the professors/teachers and we are students. At the end of the day, the faculty still has the lead and determines what goes down. There's nothing wrong with students and professors getting to know each other a little better but that barrier must be crystal clear.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: One of the issues I have encountered is that PhD students and even professors sometimes like to use their positions as a weapon to prey on younger students, especially the females. For this reason, it is better safe than sorry for anyone older than 30 to keep away from the younger students.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/08/16 | 649 | 2,715 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently won a scholarship related to my career focus. I was chosen as a winner in part because of a recommendation from a former professor. She is now asking me to draft a press release about winning the scholarship. I am hesitant because I do not want to appear press-hungry, but I would like to allow a write-up to be used as a means of increasing the visibility of the college and this professor. **I do not want the focus to be on myself and my accomplishments.** How should I handle this?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I do not want the focus to be on myself and my accomplishments.
>
>
>
While many of us (hopefully) have a modicum of modesty, **there will be many times in your career where it is in your best interest to triumph your accomplishments, and this is one of them**. In this case, it is a no-brainer: your former professor asked you explicitly to write the press release, and you should do it. Your university home page or newspaper probably has a news section that demonstrates the type of press release you're talking about (e.g., a short story with a picture and a description of the research and/or accomplishments).
The press release will be primarily about you (if you are the only winner at your school), but you should also include a paragraph about the scholarship itself and about the college and how it relates to the scholarship (e.g., "The X Scholarship has been awarded at Y College for the past 10 years, and was funded through the generous donation of so-and-so, who graduated from the college in 1954...). If it fits in, you can mention your professor's relationship to the scholarship and your involvement (how did she know to recommend you? Was it her impetus or yours?).
If you're concerned about how to write the press-release, I would reach out to someone with journalism experience, whether it is someone who works for the school paper, or the news-section of the school website.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, look at previous press releases from your institution and department. This may give you ideas.
But use the press release as an opportunity to speak to the public about things you deserve to be publicized. You're right, it doesn't have to be about you, but getting the fellowship is the award that gives you an opportunity to speak up about things you care. Press releases often contain quotes. In this case these could be quotes of other people talking about your involvement in a program you helped launch, or a quote of yourself praising whatever it is you want to praise.
In short: **use that opportunity to promote something you believe in**, in addition to pro outing yourself!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/08/16 | 958 | 4,202 | <issue_start>username_0: 1. What is the difference between termination and suspension?
2. Are there "neutral" ways for a graduate student leaving his graduate
school without completing a degree? Is a student voluntarily leaving his graduate school called termination?
3. When applying to another graduate school, will the student be asked
if he has ever received a probation and termination? How will that affect the student's chance to be admitted to the new school? For example, he
received a probation because he didn't manage to find a research
direction and research advisor in 2.5 years, followed by a termination a few months later because he didn't
pass his PhD qualification exam without "protection" from an advisor?<issue_comment>username_1: There are basically two ways to leave an academic program permanently: *withdrawal* and *termination*.
* **Withdrawal** is a *voluntary* process, which can occur for any of a number of reasons: academic dissatisfaction, financial, psychological, medical, or family are usually the most common of these. The key factor here is that withdrawal is normally initiated *by the student*. It is "neutral" in the sense that normally the student hasn't done anything wrong, and could have continued in the program had she so chosen.
* **Termination** is an *involuntary* process initiated by the supervisor or department. Usually, under such cases, the reason is inadequate performance or violating departmental policies. For instance, one might fail a qualifying examination, fail to pass required courses, committed "academic dishonesty," or violated some other regulation. This is the sort of "black mark" that you are referring to. Depending on the situation, this can have catastrophic effects on the student's ability to apply and be accepted elsewhere. It all depends on the nature of the situation, and what the student's role in the situation was.
On the other hand, *suspension* or *probation* are serious issues that require disciplinary action but are not so serious as to require termination. Probation may or may not need to be reported, but an action which leads to a suspension—or temporary removal from the graduate program—probably would need to be reported, if asked about it.
It is not necessarily a given if you will be asked about this in a graduate application—it depends very much on the particular program or school to which one applies.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> When applying to another graduate school, will the student be asked if he has ever received a probation and termination? How will that affect the student's chance to be admitted to the new school? For example, he received a probation because he didn't manage to find a research direction and research advisor in 2.5 years, followed by a termination a few months later because he didn't pass his PhD qualification exam without "protection" from an advisor?
>
>
>
It sounds like the student is simply not prepared for graduate school, or at least that graduate program. (Moreover, the department was irresponsible for letting them stay so long without an advisor.)
Unless the student has a *very* compelling story about *why* they could not find an advisor, *why* they did not pass quals, and *why* neither of those circumstances will repeat in a different department — with all three explanations backed up in the student's recommendation letters — this will almost certainly kill their chances of admission anywhere. Admissions committees are looking for students with strong evidence of research potential, and failing to find a research direction, secure an advisor, and pass quals is a rather strong signal of the opposite.
In light of this answer, the student may be tempted to lie in their application, by claiming not to have been kicked out, or not to have attended the other graduate program at all. **This is a *VERY* bad idea.** Unexplained gaps in an applicant's academic record are *extremely* suspicious. And even if the student somehow got admitted, if the dishonesty is discovered later, they'd immediately get kicked out (again), and possibly asked to pay back any financial support they received.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/16 | 1,708 | 7,494 | <issue_start>username_0: My research supervisor is a quite strict person who constantly criticizes me for my faults (such as slow progress, or always asking others for help on programming issues).
I don't blame him being a bit too strict with me, because anyway supervisor is here to supervise and give constructive suggestion. I really learn from his lessons for me. In fact, I am very grateful for him being willing to teach me some lessons. His comments are always very helpful.
During the last meeting, he seemed not very satisfied and happy with my progress. I have previously told him about my plan of submitting a paper in November. It seems that he thought this kind of slow progress would fail the aim in the end.
At the end of meeting, after criticizing me for asking others for help too much instead of solving the problems myself, he decided to schedule the originally weekly meeting to two weeks later.
Obviously, I am quite worried as the submission deadline is just in November. Given my poor performance, I have no right to suggest getting the meeting every week.
It seems that my research indeed gets stuck here. I kinda need the supervisors' advice to move on. What may I do to save this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: There may be several factors at work here:
* First, the advisor may simply have other commitments that prevent meeting on a weekly basis. I know that as my group has gotten larger, I tend to meet only with new members of the group weekly; older members are on an every-two-weeks or as-needed basis (per mutual agreement).
* Second, the advisor may be cutting back on the frequency of meetings so that you learn to become more independent. I know that the big breakthrough in my own graduate research came at a time when my co-advisors were both completely out of the picture for a while (one was on sabbatical and the other was on a temporary leave of absence). This might not work for everybody, but it can make a big difference if you "take off the training wheels" and start working things out for yourself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: "Once every two weeks" is actually "quite frequently" for an individual research project. Your supervisor, probably, just noticed that more often than not you could not tell him much after just one week of work (very few students can, actually) and decided to listen to your "progress report" once in two weeks. If you are really doing your work and aren't just dragged by him through it, this shouldn't slow you down in any way and I bet 10 against 1 that if you get something interesting to tell him tomorrow, he will listen to you the day after tomorrow no matter how far the scheduled meeting date is.
The idea of operating from a "submission deadline" in an unfinished research project looks totally ridiculous to me. The whole difference between a research project and house cleaning is that you never know how much time you'll need for the former and whether you'll be able to pull it through at all. In my own work, the failure to success ratio is 9 to 1 and that is generally considered quite good. You have to learn that things take time and that you may fail completely when doing research. It is *normal* and there is no reason to freak out about that. Even in the case when you see the general way to do things and are certain that it must work, the "little details" may take forever.
You can request direct help now and then but the request should be not in the form "I just don't know what to do next..." but in the form "I've done this. Now, for the next step I would need something like this. Unfortunately there is this particular obstacle in the approach I am currently pursuing. Do you have an idea of how I can overcome it or I should try a different route altogether?". You supervisor may share the "bird's view" of the road with you (and it is sort of his duty) but to go around trees, to jump over brooks and to climb hills is your job unless you really face an impenetrable thicket, a fast deep river, or a steep mountain on your way). Telling you how to do every little thing every time is no fun for him and takes the most important part of the research experience away from you. Passing the *routine* work (like programming of a known algorithm) to others is a no-no at your current level. You may "outsource" your own work only when you can do it faster and better yourself, but there is yet another task at hand that nobody else can do at all. You may (and should) seek general information, but not ready solutions to your particular problems even if the latter are as trite as "Why does this stupid while loop stop one step earlier than it should?".
So, my general advice is to relax, to forget about all deadlines, and to proceed on your own and at your own pace however slow it may seem to you. Just don't stop altogether and give up unless you are ready to declare an official failure and quit completely.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your supervisor is treating you like a grad student. This is very likely a good sign, but it can also be quite hard. Many of the problems you listed are very similar to my own early grad school experiences.
>
> My research supervisor is a quite strict person who constantly criticizes me for my faults (such as slow progress, or always asking others for help on programming issues).
>
>
>
I also tend to receive mostly negative feedback from my very amiable supervisor. In the early days he would start out by saying something positive first. As time went by, the positives got mentioned less and less, until they essentially stopped. Now that I am almost done, the negatives have slowed down to a trickle as well, AND I MISS THEM. I learned to appreciate the importance of someone taking a close look at my work and giving feedback which helps improve the end result. Because it's not about me - it's about doing high quality work. Dealing with mostly negative feedback is a typical experience for a researcher, and it takes some time to get through the soul-crushing part of it and start valuing the informational part. The way around it is to have a passion for the truth which overrides the need to feel valued for being right. It takes a while to get there.
>
> I have previously told him about my plan of submitting a paper in November. It seems that he thought this kind of slow progress would fail the aim in the end.
>
>
>
It sounds like you set yourself an unreasonable deadline, and that your supervisor could see that you're not yet quite at the level where you can write a paper. But that's OK. It just takes time. Imagine that you're to work on your next paper all alone. Which are the things that would be terribly difficult to do without others? Those may just be the things you need to work on right now. Programming is often a crucial skill for researchers, but it can be really difficult to get through that first period where you get stuck for hours over trivial things such as proper syntax. But that's simply what the learning process looks like. It truly gets easier with time.
All that being said, I am not saying that you're *wrong* to feel bad in this situation. It could be that your supervisor isn't particularly good at giving feedback and that he has a bad intuition on how difficult it is for a newbie to get into programming. But you're not alone, and you're getting a potentially valuable glimpse of the grad school experience right now.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/16 | 557 | 2,286 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper with my teacher and his teacher. I don't know the standard of writing authors name, affiliation and email in the paper. I am using **IEEEtran** template for an IEEE conference. If the authors are in different department or university there is no problem we can use column author name like this:
```
Author one Author two Author three
Department one Department two Department three
University one University two University three
<EMAIL> <EMAIL> <EMAIL>
```
but what if two of them be in a same department and just two of them has a .edu email address? In this situations we can use another style like this:
```
Author one*!, Author two*! and Author three^#
*Department One, University One
^Department two, University two
!{<EMAIL>, <EMAIL>
#<EMAIL>
```
or it should be like this?
```
Author one*, Author two* and Author three^
*Department One, University One
{<EMAIL>, <EMAIL>
^Department two, University two
<EMAIL>
```
My question is this: What is the right format in this case when different authors with different affiliation, department and email should be on a paper?
In my specific, we all are from the same Univ. and Department but they both have .edu email and I don't have one.
Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Just look up previous conference proceedings and do the same!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: We had a similar complicated case in our [paper](http://eswc-conferences.org/sites/default/files/papers2013/hees.pdf). I'd suggest this as a good way to do it.
For your own case, add a comma after the braces, followed by your email.
Here's how it would look like:
```
{Author.one, <EMAIL>, <EMAIL>
```
I am assuming your username tells the reader that it is yours (has your lastname, initials or so). Additionally, do your best to sort the emails such that they follow the same order of authors.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/16 | 631 | 2,770 | <issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a paper to a reputed Computer Science Journal. The reviewer has a lot of constructive changes, in addition to that he also suggested citing a few more papers, all by the same author. Since this is a double blind process, we don't know each other's identity. So, is it common for reviewers to suggest references in this field or any other field ?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd say it is a common practice, and I have both been given reference suggestions in blind reviews and given reference suggestions in my own reviews. If you are concerned about a reviewer trying to promote his/her own papers by the suggestions, I'll just say that if the recommendations are apt (i.e., if you read the suggested papers and they do appear to be legitimate references), then it makes sense to cite the papers regardless of whether there is a seemingly disingenuous motive by the reviewer. Even if you don't specifically use the prior work, it makes sense to mention them in your "Related Work" section. If you don't cite the suggested papers, provide a legitimate reason in your rebuttal.
Indeed, if a reviewer is chosen well, he or she should be an expert in the topic of the paper, and most likely does have apt references under his or her name.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **It is very common**. In fact, some journals explicitly ask the reviewer to answer the question *“Are the literature references appropriate and up to date?”* (in addition to other reviewing criteria).
Proper citation is an important part of academic publishing, and it should not be treated lightly. It is also the reviewers' job to make sure that you did not, in good or bad faith, forget to cite relevant work in the field. As such, **it is common (and desirable) for reviewers to recommend citation of some papers** that the authors may have forgotten, or not know of. It has also happened to me in the past, as a reviewer, to **recommend deleting some references which I believed were irrelevant or too numerous**. (In particular, some overly enthusiastic self-citation or friend-citation).
Now, it may happen that many references you were required to add are from the same author. Maybe it's the reviewer, maybe it's not, but it shouldn't matter to you. Read the papers, and if they're relevant, cite them. **If they're not relevant**, and you really believe citing them would not be correct, then simply **don't cite them and explain your position in the reply to the editor**. Don't make accusations (*“the reviewer is trying to improve his h-index”*), simply state that you do not believe the references to be relevant for reasons X and Y. Remember, the editor is the one making the final decision, not the reviewer!
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/08/16 | 1,706 | 6,737 | <issue_start>username_0: There's been a case of alleged data manipulation in a recent *Nano Letters* paper (initial report [here](http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2013/08/13/alleged-data-manipulation-in-nano-letters-and-acs-nano-from-the-pease-group/); now-retracted [paper](http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/nl400959z)):
*You can surely make your own opinion on whether the images have been digitally modified, given the above snapshots (look for gray rectangles around the rods); I was careful to write “alleged” because the paper’s PI threatened legal action against the blogger who reported the issue.*
---
Now, this case lead to a large number of comments [here](http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2013/08/13/alleged-data-manipulation-in-nano-letters-and-acs-nano-from-the-pease-group/) and [there](http://blog.chembark.com/2013/08/14/some-very-suspicious-tem-images-in-nano-letters/) about whose responsibility it was to catch this issue (reviewers or editor). I tend to agree that the reviewer should probably have caught it, but this lead me to wonder:
**As editor of a scholarly journal, what measures can I implement to prevent image/photo manipulation? And what about data manipulation?** *Organic Letters* has made the news two months ago when they [hired a in-house data analyst](http://blog.chembark.com/2013/06/07/organic-letters-on-the-lookout-for-data-manipulation/). Is that the way to go? Are there other measures one could take to reduce the threat of image and data manipulation?<issue_comment>username_1: "Kill the chicken, and make the monkey watch"
Institute an editorial policy by which all convicted offenders are banned for life from the publication in question. Convince other publications to share such info, and act in the same way after definitive proof is presented. No second chances.
Publicize these events far and wide.
That will probably take care of 60-70% of the problem, at least the blatant cases such as the one above.
Unfortunately few publishers have the conviction to do that.
EDIT:
To answer your question: "Who do you ban among N coauthors?" To first approximation, all of them as co-authorship implies shared responsibility. However, that can be more accurately determined on a per-case basis as the result of detailed investigation.
Detecting instances fraud is trivial if crowdsourced. Blatant image manipulation as the one shown above would eventually have been noticed by a reader of that paper. Same applies to other similar kinds of fraud. Relying on a single overburdened editor and a couple of bored referees for that task makes it much more difficult. Hiring staff to essentially redo part of the research reported in manuscripts submitted to the journal is just laughable.
The point is to demand ethical standards as a publisher, and raise the stakes so high that the penalty of getting caught, guaranteed loss of professional reputation and possibly employment, offsets any gain from publishing a single or a series of papers.
Relying on automatic detection schemes is inherently unreliable. Smart people will always find creative ways to cheat more effectively. To illustrate my point, consider the unending arms race between virus writers and antivirus software companies.
To conclude, and since you seem to be quite green, I suggest you give this a thorough reading: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schon_scandal>
It won't take many Schönen to drive the point home...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me the only possibility is to subject all or particularly important images to an analysis detecting [variation in noise levels](http://www.cs.albany.edu/~lsw/homepage/PUBLICATIONS_files/ICCP.pdf) (see examples [here](http://www.errorlevelanalysis.com/); service unfortunately closed). I personally do not know if such an analysis could be automated in an electronic submission system or be used as a tool by the editors. How much effort should be spent looking for fraud will obviously depend on assessments of, for example, how critical images are for the publication(s), the likelihood for fraud (random tests?) and the cost in terms of time and money for doing the testing.
It seems to me there would be much use to have a tool to do such an analysis for all submissions. The problem is of course that the noise level detection also identifies all kinds of manipulation and so it would seem reasonable to ask authors to provide a very detailed account of what has been done to each image so that the analysis can be set in a perspective.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a search term for this type of manipulation detection is **image forensics**. [<NAME>: Notes on Digital Image Forensics and
Counter-Forensics](http://dud.inf.tu-dresden.de/~kirchner/Documents/image_forensics_and_counter_forensics.pdf) may be a starting point.
**What can you do?**
I think a first step is to communicate clearly what image manipulations\* are acceptable and which are not:
* is it acceptable to adjust brightness and contrast?
* correct unequal illumination?
* whitelight correction based not on a whitelight measurement but on parts of the image?
* digital sharpening or other enhancement filters?
* where's the border between an inset picture and a fraudulent manipulation?
and so on.
**Who should detect this?**
I agree that the reviewer should have commented and asked about the pictures above, however my experience as reviewer is that I often get pictures in ridiculously low resolution (I comment on that). I'm not sure, but I think that the publishers may ask for high resolution pictures when they spot such problems in the production process. However, that would mean that the reviewers may not have seen the actual picture that is used for printing.
---
\* *manipulation* in the data analysis sense: calculations that change the information content (e.g. enhance contrast), and cannot be easily undone (as opposed to a transformation where the back transformation is easily possible, e.g. rotation), *not* in the sense of fraud.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: There exist softwares dedicated to this. Journal of Cell Biology seems to have been a precursor in this [in 2002](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/science/24frau.html?_r=0).
A first simple check suggested in this paper is to open images in a image manipulation software and change "controls" (I guess: contrast, luminance, etc.) The problematic regions can then appear clearly.
I would say that, like plagiarism, this is the publisher to check or provide software to the editorial board, as this is technical and not scientific assessment.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/16 | 1,306 | 5,496 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it OK to have a letter of recommendation from a senior lecturer rather than from a full professor? The lecturer knows me well (I took two of his classes and I'm TA'ing for him) and he really likes me. Unfortunately he is not involved in research, but I should have two other letters from research profs.<issue_comment>username_1: "Kill the chicken, and make the monkey watch"
Institute an editorial policy by which all convicted offenders are banned for life from the publication in question. Convince other publications to share such info, and act in the same way after definitive proof is presented. No second chances.
Publicize these events far and wide.
That will probably take care of 60-70% of the problem, at least the blatant cases such as the one above.
Unfortunately few publishers have the conviction to do that.
EDIT:
To answer your question: "Who do you ban among N coauthors?" To first approximation, all of them as co-authorship implies shared responsibility. However, that can be more accurately determined on a per-case basis as the result of detailed investigation.
Detecting instances fraud is trivial if crowdsourced. Blatant image manipulation as the one shown above would eventually have been noticed by a reader of that paper. Same applies to other similar kinds of fraud. Relying on a single overburdened editor and a couple of bored referees for that task makes it much more difficult. Hiring staff to essentially redo part of the research reported in manuscripts submitted to the journal is just laughable.
The point is to demand ethical standards as a publisher, and raise the stakes so high that the penalty of getting caught, guaranteed loss of professional reputation and possibly employment, offsets any gain from publishing a single or a series of papers.
Relying on automatic detection schemes is inherently unreliable. Smart people will always find creative ways to cheat more effectively. To illustrate my point, consider the unending arms race between virus writers and antivirus software companies.
To conclude, and since you seem to be quite green, I suggest you give this a thorough reading: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schon_scandal>
It won't take many Schönen to drive the point home...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me the only possibility is to subject all or particularly important images to an analysis detecting [variation in noise levels](http://www.cs.albany.edu/~lsw/homepage/PUBLICATIONS_files/ICCP.pdf) (see examples [here](http://www.errorlevelanalysis.com/); service unfortunately closed). I personally do not know if such an analysis could be automated in an electronic submission system or be used as a tool by the editors. How much effort should be spent looking for fraud will obviously depend on assessments of, for example, how critical images are for the publication(s), the likelihood for fraud (random tests?) and the cost in terms of time and money for doing the testing.
It seems to me there would be much use to have a tool to do such an analysis for all submissions. The problem is of course that the noise level detection also identifies all kinds of manipulation and so it would seem reasonable to ask authors to provide a very detailed account of what has been done to each image so that the analysis can be set in a perspective.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a search term for this type of manipulation detection is **image forensics**. [<NAME>: Notes on Digital Image Forensics and
Counter-Forensics](http://dud.inf.tu-dresden.de/~kirchner/Documents/image_forensics_and_counter_forensics.pdf) may be a starting point.
**What can you do?**
I think a first step is to communicate clearly what image manipulations\* are acceptable and which are not:
* is it acceptable to adjust brightness and contrast?
* correct unequal illumination?
* whitelight correction based not on a whitelight measurement but on parts of the image?
* digital sharpening or other enhancement filters?
* where's the border between an inset picture and a fraudulent manipulation?
and so on.
**Who should detect this?**
I agree that the reviewer should have commented and asked about the pictures above, however my experience as reviewer is that I often get pictures in ridiculously low resolution (I comment on that). I'm not sure, but I think that the publishers may ask for high resolution pictures when they spot such problems in the production process. However, that would mean that the reviewers may not have seen the actual picture that is used for printing.
---
\* *manipulation* in the data analysis sense: calculations that change the information content (e.g. enhance contrast), and cannot be easily undone (as opposed to a transformation where the back transformation is easily possible, e.g. rotation), *not* in the sense of fraud.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: There exist softwares dedicated to this. Journal of Cell Biology seems to have been a precursor in this [in 2002](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/science/24frau.html?_r=0).
A first simple check suggested in this paper is to open images in a image manipulation software and change "controls" (I guess: contrast, luminance, etc.) The problematic regions can then appear clearly.
I would say that, like plagiarism, this is the publisher to check or provide software to the editorial board, as this is technical and not scientific assessment.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/17 | 672 | 2,644 | <issue_start>username_0: I live and teach at a university in S. Korea. I may have an opportunity to complete my PhD in TESOL or English linguistics at this university. However, I am reluctant because I have heard that PhDs from non-Western universities (in particular, Korea) are not valued or equatable to US PhDs. Anecdotal evidence from my department supports a similar notion: all the PhDs in my department were received in the US. So, my question is, how are PhDs from non-Western universities perceived? Would a university rather hire someone with a US PhD rather than a US citizen with a Korean PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Would a university rather hire someone with a US PhD rather than a US
> citizen with a Korean PhD?
>
>
>
Presumably you mean a US university and not a Korean university. The school from which you obtain your PhD has some impact on the hiring process at US universities, but not much. Having a PhD from a top rated department with a "famous" advisor can be beneficial, but a PhD with an advisor from a university (whether it is a US university or a Korean university) that the search committee isn't familiar with is pretty common. For research intensive universities the most important factor is your future ability to publish and secure external funding.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I may have an opportunity to complete my PhD in TESOL or English linguistics at this university
>
>
>
If you decide to do PhD in English linguistics, I would advise you to do it in an English speaking country. The reason is simple, how do you convince others that PhD in English linguistics in S. Korea, where English is a foreign language, is worth something?
On the other hand, if you decide to do PhD in TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages), where that "other language" is Korean, then I think a Korean university may be a reasonable choice if the quality of both the PhD program and the university are quite good.
Your job opportunity in Korea after you obtain your PhD may not be good if you stay in Korea after you graduate. However, you may actually have advantage over somebody who receives PhD from a Western university because their lack of practical knowledge - teaching English to Koreans if you go to countries other than Korea.
I met many Chinese/Koreans in the US, who had gone to English schools. Many of them told me they wish their English teachers had trainings in their native languages so they would have less difficulties while learning English. I deeply believe those English teachers should have gone through trainings by the PhDs like you.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/17 | 1,431 | 6,125 | <issue_start>username_0: My current situation is that I am stuck teaching in a couple of universities that do not support the research at all in my country of origin. I am 38 years old and I have finished a MSc degree in Europe (one year ago), but I find it pretty hard to get a funded PhD position until now.
Sometimes I really feel discouraged and depressed because I really like to do research, but is pretty hard to do it without economical support; and more difficult to share ideas if my current place of work has that null approach to research.
My question is, how I can get feedback from other professors around the world and expose my ideas? Maybe with the hope that they will like to guide me in their field of specialty or maybe doing a paper together. I know that a lot of good professors in their own field are pretty busy, so I think it would be not polite to approach to them, by email, tell them about my ideas and ask for academical support (not monetary, but about guiding and feedback).
The field that I like to do research is Computer Science. I have only 5 publications in different areas, but I would really like to do more.
Any suggestion?<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, 5 papers on completion of your Masters is pretty good (for comparison, I had 1 rejected paper at that stage). Even though they are in different areas, they demonstrate your researching skills.
Secondly, in regards to the PhD and in particular, funding - I have a few suggestions:
* Research not only what the academics' specialities are, but also the scholarship/funding opportunities that the universities have on offer.
* Contact the academics, asking about *their* research, this way you'll express your interest without giving away all of your ideas. Once you build a rapport with the academics, then enquire about co-authoring a paper.
* Perhaps look into working at a university (library, research assistant etc), so, look at the job opportunities.
* most of all, don't give up!
This is, by no means an exhaustive list and I am sure, other members here will provide more in depth answers, but it something to think about.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Set up a webpage where you put your CV, papers, projects, *everything* about yourself as a professional. The people should be able to access this information at a click of a button, not through long search or e-mail exchange.
2. Go to conferences and other events where you can meet people and get acquainted with them. Try to give a talk there or, at least, to present a poster. Hang on the CS Stack exchange and other professional sites. About 10% of my knowledge of who is who comes from MO interactions and I suspect that many people there would never hear of me otherwise either.
3. Use the grapevine. Tell your friends about the situation, they'll let their friends know, etc.
4. Direct E-mail is also possible but you'll have to put something on the table at the opening move. Ideally, it should start with "Dear Prof. ... You asked on/in .... whether .... is true. The answer is .... (see my attached paper)." Then you may confidently end with "By the way, I am currently looking for ... " (just do not request too much) and nobody will be able to resist. You can put a few lower cards on the table as well but starting with "I have this wonderful idea, I just don't know where to apply it" will, most likely, earn your mail a guaranteed permanent position in the trash box with possible honorable mention in the spam filter blacklist.
5. Get into the habit of spending some time every day looking at what's going on in the field you are interested in and reading.
6. Read the job advertisements regularly. With math. all you need is to go to mathjobs.org I don't know if there is a CS analog of it but you can find that out. You never know what and when may come your way, so be always ready to move quickly when an opportunity presents itself.
In short, get noticed and get your past achievements exposed plus look for every opportunity to engage into a communication and joint ventures with everyone whose work looks decent to you. Remember, however, that, at least in your position, you will need to think of what other people like and are doing, not try to seduce them to think of your own ideas and projects! (By the way, I find this modus operandi very beneficial regardless of one's status). People will go out of their way for you only if you demonstrate that you can go out of your way for them first.
I would advise against applying for grants, etc. until you get known at least a little bit. Rejections won't help you in any way and the free money is so scarce nowadays that even people with established reputation don't always get their awards.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the situation described applies increasingly in most countries. My university doesn't fund me for research (in fact some years back our government said - you do 30% research do you? and took 30% from the university budgets and made it grant funding). My standard working week goes quite easily on teaching, supervision and administration. You have to make time for research, you have to do research in your own time as well, and often the writing (papers and grant applications) will mostly be done in your own time.
The short answer is, just do it. Read in the areas of your interest. When you see a problem or an opportunity, jump on it. There are many areas of research where you can work totally on paper/computer (it seems you have access to both paper and a computer). Start with what you can manage yourself, then propose projects that students can work on, then leverage these to get small grants (or just buy small bits of equipment yourself - I do). Then publish, starting at workshops and conferences (where you can meet people and get feedback) and working up to transactions (short papers) and major journals (long paper). These runs on the board will allow you to get increasingly better publications, increasingly bigger grants, better support fro your university, and more chance of getting a job elsewhere.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/08/18 | 905 | 3,752 | <issue_start>username_0: So, without giving out the details about the school. I joined a graduate program at school X, because I was really interested in work of professor Y. I met him during the graduate school visit and I accepted the offer to join school X.
Though Prof. Y did not officially accept me as his graduate student, he said come and meet me when school starts and we can figure out your research direction. Now, when I came to start at this school; I found out the professor Y has left and joined a different school Z.
I don't know what do now. My decision of joining school X was based on my intentions to work with Prof Y. Also, on top of that the school X now just has one faculty working in my interested area.
To be precise I am starting the PhD program now (Fall , 1st sem). I am not sure what my next step should be? I would appreciate any suggestions on the given situation.<issue_comment>username_1: Yeah, this happens. :(
I would recommend applying to school Z during your first year at school X. This would be very natural under the circumstances, and nobody (in particular, not those at school X) will think less of you for it.
Further, I'd recommend:
* E-mail and ask Prof. Y if he'd be willing to vouch for you with the graduate admissions committee at school Z.
* Simultaneously apply to a couple of other programs that might be more suitable for you than school X. This goes especially if Z is substantially more selective than X, so you are far from sure that you'll get in.
* Kick ass in your first year at X. This will keep you sharp, enable you to get a letter of support from someone at X, and better prepare you for the program at Z if you go.
* Keep in mind that you might not get into Z, or you might find a research area you like at X and decide you prefer to stay. (Another reason to kick ass in your first year at X.)
Good luck to you!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: While you may very well want to transfer to school Z in order to work with Professor Y, I'd consider the following point. If you expressed strong interest in working with him, and he made comments in writing that you should talk to him when you arrive at the school, then he was remiss in notifying you that he was no longer, in fact, at school X. Do you *really* want to work with an advisor who's packed up and moved without letting you know in advance?
However, I would also recommend, as username_1 does, that you see if there's anyone in your current department who you would be interested in working for. If so, I'd pursue that option alongside the possibility of transferring to other departments. However, I'd also recommend that, *before* you accept an offer in another department, that you ensure that you have **multiple** potential advisors available to you, if you're working in a field where a commitment is not required before you enroll.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My PhD student was in exactly the same situation when I was moving from Michigan to Wisconsin but I told him that that move would be likely to occur even before I became his adviser. He just transferred with me (asking me only to confirm to the chair of the new department that I'm, indeed, interested in having him there).
The morals are:
1) Arranging a transfer is not a big headache.
2) You should be sure that not only you want to interact with prof Y, but also that he wants to interact with you before making any drastic move.
Given that Y didn't inform you about his move in any way, I would start with getting a clearer idea of where you stand as far as the second point is concerned. It doesn't imply that you should stay at X, but it may turn out that your best option is really to move to V to work with W...
Upvotes: 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.