date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/09/09 | 803 | 2,953 | <issue_start>username_0: I took the GRE and my analytical writing score wasn't what I hoped for. During the exam, I thought my answer was good. Having read about argumentation and practiced writing, I wonder if there is a reputable service that will score essays and give feedback?<issue_comment>username_1: You've got a few options:
1. See if your school has a GRE preparation course (you may have to pay for this) or other writing tutorials.
2. As Tirath said, look at [ets.org](http://www.ets.org) for strategies.
3. If you're still in undergraduate school and have at least another semester, enroll in a writing class. The practice you get from the class should improve your overall ability.
4. Look online for test preparation courses. These can be expensive, but sometimes they have "guaranteed results," and you can probably figure out the best ones by looking at reviews.
5. Advertise on Craigslist (or similar) for a tutor. If you are in a college town, you may find someone willing to tutor you relatively cheaply.
6. Look online for GRE writing samples, and read as many as you can.
7. Practice writing every day. The more you practice, the better you'll get (and read as much as you can, too).
Keep in mind that while you always should strive for high scores, your field of study will partially dictate how important the writing score is. If you're going for a history PhD, you'll need a high score, but for a science degree this tends to be less important (for admissions--being able to write is important for any PhD!).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: How about joining a MooC by UC, Berkely on eDX :
"College Writing 2.1x is an introduction to academic writing for English Language Learners, focusing on essay development, grammatical correctness, and self-editing."
Link - <https://www.edx.org/course/berkeley/colwri2-1x/college-writing-2-1x-principles/1194> or <http://online.berkeley.edu/news/introducing-latest-mooc-college-writing-21x-principles-written-english>
Its a 5 week course and requires 5-6Hours/week effort. The course will be taught by <NAME>. And will be starting from November 8, 2013. So enrol now soon.
And one more, English Composition by Cousera :
English Composition Part 1 - <https://www.coursera.org/course/composition#>!
And then you can move on to part 2 ;-)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Ets offers a service to rate your essays. They charge approximately $10/essay and they rate the essays as in the actual examination. You could check the service by logging in your GRE account.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: What I wound up doing is hiring a tutor through WyzAnt. I found someone with experience in this area, and wrote a few essays based on sample prompts from GRE study books. I emailed them to him, he estimated a score for each of them and made comments. We went through a second round of the same. My score did improve the second time I took the GRE.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/09 | 2,268 | 9,295 | <issue_start>username_0: There are two closely related questions here:
1. If a student submits their assignment and is unhappy with their mark, are there any dangers (which I might not be seeing) in allowing the students to do so? If I would offer for one, I would offer for all, but **should I be offering it in the first place?**
2. If resubmits are unavailable, some students ask me to 'pre-read' or 'pre-mark' their assignment. The end result is that when they submit officially, that may actually be the second submission. Clearly doing any 'pre-marking' or the like takes time and energy and, so far, very few students have taken advantage of this until right before the submission deadline (at which point I stop because I don't have THAT much time to offer them). **Are there dangers in 'pre-marking' assignments?**
Note: These assignments constitute either 50% or 100% of their total mark.
One of my concerns is that the student would have lower motivation to maximize the quality of their original work and just correct what was marked as a problem area - like a production worker depending on a Quality Control Inspector and not paying as much attention to the quality of their work the first time around. Are there other issues as well?
**EDIT:** I should add that these are business management subjects so student answers are not easily right or wrong but more about how they justify their analysis. Therefore, there is not an issue of "giving the right answer."<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding the first scenario: if you give out solutions, there's obviously a problem. But if you hold off on giving out solutions, then the remaining students have to wait longer than might be reasonable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Should I be offering it in the first place?
>
>
>
Dangers:
1. You spend even more time on assignments, limiting your time for other endeavors.
2. Students might get into a "grade grubbing" mode where they simply re-submit marginally better answers in order to improve their grade.
3. Students do a poor job initially because they know they will have a chance to re-submit, and they might as well take their chances that you'll give them decent marks for inferior work.
Benefits:
1. Overall, students spend more time on the assignments, leading to better knowledge and ability to do the work.
2. You can provide helpful information to guide them to better answers (because you're seeing first-attempts). This level of grading also takes more time.
3. Students are happier because the stress of a hard deadline isn't so bad.
I think the benefits outweigh the dangers if you're willing to put in the extra time to re-grade. As I've said in other threads, I've used auto-grading homework for a some classes (probably not relevant in your case), but I've used the strategy that I'd have deadlines for all the assignments but that the week before the final I'd re-open all the assignments and tell the students they can re-do any questions they missed. I don't tell them I'm going to do this until I do it, in order to keep students from simply waiting until the end to do all the assignments.
>
> Are there dangers in 'pre-marking' assignments
>
>
>
I think it's great that you're being creative with the assignments (e.g., pre-marking, resubmittals, etc.). Again, it comes down to your time -- if you have motivated students who want pre-marking and you have the time, I can't see a problem with it. It wouldn't surprise me if the best students are the ones who want pre-marked work, but then again I've had some less-capable students jump at chances like that to do better.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think the problem lies in what expectations the students have. With a clear set of grading criteria (c.f. rubrics) you could probably avoid some or many problems. In the second case, you could say that pre-grading provides a preliminary grade which. at best, will be raised by one notch upon successful resubmission. Then, the student will get feedback and know where they are and make a decision of putting the effort it worth it. Clearly, this simple example is not thought through so I believe this case may need a serious think and discussion with peers on possible side effects. But, the point is that if you make the grading clear then there will be less complaints.
Your first case is perhaps trickier. The same idea applies, you need to apply some clear rule of what happens with a resubmission. It is possible that if your design of the criteria for case 2 is good, then as a side-effect case 1 disappears. You should also consider reducing grades for late arrivals etc.
Although this reply is not very precise, I think setting up criteria that makes the grading process clear will help. By putting in an optional pre-assessment, you make the students decide what they should do. Note that the criteria for the assignment also have to be clear so that the grades you set can be explained in terms of learning objectives.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A suggestion that I have used quite successfully in regards to your point no. 2: premarking. This would depend on the dynamics of your class, but if at all possible to have the students perform a peer-review pre assessment of each other's work.
With peer-reviews, the students become more aware of is needed to fulfil the criteria and requirements. Alongside that, each student can also do a self review with a criteria based self-review pre-assessment.
There is always a risk of copying, but I have found that this to be no more than what would occur with the normal procedure (and tools such as turnitin can help with this).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's certainly tricky! There are a number of pitfalls, I've found, that usually end up making it not worth the effort:
* A lot more work for you. Grading twice may be no biggie in a class of 10, but a class size of 200 or 300 would be prohibitive.
* The students will, in all likelihood, not try as hard the first time around, since they know they automatically get an extension.
* Grade inflation. This may not be a big deal to some (it's a minor crusade of mine) but it can be a major issue. If the entire class is getting >90%, your superiors may be suspicious.
* Similarly, the more successful kids are liable to get annoyed. What's the point of busting your hump to be an A-student if the B- and C-students can resubmit and do just as well?
That being said, there are some good work-arounds; nothing you can do about class size, but here are some ideas:
* Don't tell them beforehand! This is a bit devious, and you can only do it once and not on the final, but most people will, after a hard midterm or something, appreciate that hugely. This will ensure most everyone works their butt off instead of slacking first time around.
* Give them half credit for resubmitted answers. That is, if a student gets an 80%, but the resubmit is 100%, give him/her a 90%. This can be a good (enough) balance: The poorly-performing students get a sufficient boost, but not enough to threaten or annoy the high-performers. This also reduces the overall grade-inflation risk.
* In the vein of pre-marking, since there's no "right answer," you can accept "drafts" and then spend some time going over some of the more and less successful avenues students chose. Everyone may end up doing something similar, but students will end up thinking more about their answers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Occasionally, students will ask me to pregrade or review an assignment prior to submission. I am always happy to do so, but I don't give them a grade, just feedback on what is good, what is lacking, and what needs improvement. I find this is a good compromise.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Since the field you're in is different from mine (mathematics), what I am about to describe may not work for you, but perhaps some variant of it could work.
I am quite fond of allowing students to make corrections to assignments (especially quizzes and exams), with the following rules:
1) Students may only resubmit an assignment once.
2) The corrected solutions must be flawless. There is no partial credit on resubmissions.
3) The students can earn back half of the points that they lost on their first submission. So if they scored a 4/10 on a problem the first time around, and if they submit a flawless corrected version, they will improve this to a 7/10. They cannot do any better, and there is nothing in between.
It has been my experience that this is a great way to get students to correct and learn from their mistakes, and I cannot find a downside to it. After all, my goal is to get the students to learn the material!
Since your assignments do not have clear-cut answers (as you describe in your edit), this might need some tweaking. You may need to replace "flawless" with "would have earned very high marks" or something to that effect. But the point remains: I think that allowing students to resubmit assignments is a valuable tool.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: One advantage of allowing resubmits that hasn't been pointed out is that it allows you assign more challenging material without scaring the students too much.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/09 | 776 | 3,312 | <issue_start>username_0: I don't want to bore anyone so long story, very, very short:
* This is for the Computer Science / Software Engineering industry.
* I am combating laziness and extreme procrastination due to depression.
* Not doing very well in my studies as a result.
Based on the two above I wonder if a degree with some tainting in the first year of my units would still be enough to get me a good job (in the industry).
Is experience worth more than my grades alone?
I say this because I often find that I do better by doing than just by reading the course material for Discrete Structures or Databases etc....
Should I not worry about my (past) bad grades and make the best of the situation and just develop a good portfolio?
I want to fix what I have gotten myself into, and I hope someone in the industry or with some kind of related experience can give me some insight.<issue_comment>username_1: Of course, it's no problem to tell people "Hey, I was lazy in school but I'll work super-hard for you." Unfortunately, people won't buy it.
From my time in the software industry, hiring quite a few people, I would actually not normally even look at their grades, unless they were borderline in the interview. Even then, if there was another candidate who was better in the interview, that borderline candidate would not even get a callback.
Some people will care about grades but for computer science 'guys' I find that what most people in industry really care about is what you can do for them. Can you help them more than someone else can help them? If so, then you'll likely land a job.
If you shape up, pull out of your 'funk' and get down to actually learning, you will likely be OK. If you let depression pull you under water, you'll drown.
You've started your degree, you should finish it. However, don't let the past dictate your future. This is the first day of the rest of your life. It's always darkest before the dawn. I'm sure there are more sayings along this line but in the end, depending your area of IT, you can do fine even if you had a bad start to school. If you have a strong finish, it's easy to explain that you should be judged on your 'exit velocity' rather than the start.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer might change from a country to another, but you have to remember that when applying for a job in the industry, you will meet the HR first. Most of the time, that particular person would not know anything about the technical aspects of the job you are applying for and would probably not ask you for your grades.
However, it is still your first contact with the company and you should not neglect it. Indeed, what he/she will do is to ask about your previous work experience (or at some point when you just freshly graduated, about your school projects) and your ability to work in a team. If you are not aiming too high, your human skills are sometimes more important than your technical ones because it is easier to learn new technical knowledge than to learn how to behave.
Last point, in any kind of job application process, always remember to ask as many questions as possible regarding the company, the team you might join. You always want to know where you will be working everyday for quite some time.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/09 | 987 | 4,043 | <issue_start>username_0: When having fund for hiring postdoctoral fellow, it is tricky to find highly qualified applicants, since they can get aware of the opening position by chance. For almost any postdoctoral position (it should apply for any position, but more severe for post-doc), there are better candidates who were also interested, but did not hear about the opening.
Possible approaches are not very effective.
* Spreading by word of mouth through colleagues is very limited.
* A few applicants may browse research group websites for checking
opening positions. Moreover, search engines do not index and rank
them quickly to reach the deadline.
* Posting on academic job websites is good, but most of them are paid
websites. For faculty positions, universities have enough fund to pay
for advertisement, but it is difficult to cover the advertisement cost
by the limited fund of a postdoctoral position.
* Free job websites are not very common for academic positions.
How to find more effective ways to inform and encourage more potentials candidates to apply for a postdoctoral positions to have a better chance to select a highly qualified applicant?<issue_comment>username_1: There are sometimes subject-specific mailing lists available on which one can post job advertisements. Examples that I am currently subscribed to are All-Acad.com (<EMAIL>) and allstat (<EMAIL>).
I can't say whether this is a more effective way to advertise, though.
ADDENDUM: Actually, I think it would be useful to expand the question in the following way, that would be useful for both prospective employers and job-seekers. This could be a community-wiki style question. So, the question could be: what resources are available for job advertising? And each answer could be for one subject, and divided into free and non-free sections, and within each could be web sites, mailing lists etc. I don't know whether such a question would fall within the scope of this site. I do know the SE sites vary in their policy wrt such "list" questions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In some departments it is common practice to publish available postdoc positions in other institutions via the departmental mailing list. You can try mailing administrators/faculty in relevant departments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I second both Faheem and username_2's options of **mailing list**, in two different manners:
* Each field (and subfield) has its own “go to” places for vacancies advertisements. In my field, people typically subscribe to [CCP5](http://www.ccp5.ac.uk) and [CCL](http://ccl.net) mailing-lists (the first one offers a choice of UK-only, Europe-only or worldwide postings). Some of these mailing-lists include a fee, but it may be reasonable (shelling out $50 is not much compared to 12 months of salary).
* You can send it to group-, department or institution-level mailing lists in places where you know people who will act as a local relay. I personally find that this is the best way to advertise a position, and I got great candidates this way in the past.
Other options available, both of which can have good efficiency:
* Some countries have national website, such as [jobs.ac.uk](http://www.jobs.ac.uk) (UK) or [ABG](http://www.intelliagence.fr) (France). Sometimes, advertising through them is even mandated by your funding agency or institution!
* Post it to job sections of high-level journals, such as [Nature Jobs](http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/) or some highly-read journal in your field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Possible outlets I can think of include:
* Field-specific e-mail lists
* Department email-list forwarded through collegues at other departments
* Adverts inserted in talks/presentations held by people at your department (e.g. at invited talks, conferences etc.)
* Job ad websites (national and global)
* Advert at research-focused web communities/forums, such as Researchgate and Academia.edu, as well as LinkedIn.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/09 | 578 | 2,507 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently completed my PhD and I'm now looking for a job in the chemical/pharmaceutical industry. Either in production or in research.
From somebody on the inside (senior position in research in a **major** pharma company), I was told that actually nobody gets hired without PostDoc experience. However, PostDoc is no guarantee, I was also told, for a position. My feeling is that I rather spend the time on the job, learning what is important for the company. Simply put, I don't want to do PostDoc because I don't feel like that (but that's another story).
Here the question is: Has anybody gotten into chemical/pharma industry without PostDoc and without using inter-personal connections (that means only by directly applying for positions stated on the website of the company)?<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes**, it is definitely possible, as I have students who did it. But it really depends on the type of position sought: position advertisements usually list a **“level of experience required”, so be sure to check it** before applying, and possible taylor your application/interview in response to that.
---
PS: Regarding *“without using inter-personal connections”*, I'm not sure how to interpret that. Surely during your PhD, and your job search, you have met (will meet) people at various places. Why would you refuse to use these people to help your application, or your inside knowledge of position openings in a given company?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Five years ago, I would have said that you need a postdoc to get a job in industry. Now, I know an increasing number of graduate students who are getting industry jobs right out of grad school. However, my experience is mostly in biotech, not chemistry.
I know several graduate students who went straight into biotech jobs without doing a postdoc. For some, they had a contact at the company where they were hired who knew their skills and personality. For at least one, he had a very specific skill set and applied online to a Scientist position at a company and got the job (he was their 5th employee and is still here 5 years later).
Do a postdoc if you still need to build skills that will make you more marketable, or if it's in a lab that is industry-friendly where you can form great industry contacts. If you already have a good skill set, work now on growing your network for the types of jobs you seek. Having a great network of contacts is a key to a successful job search.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/10 | 2,210 | 8,990 | <issue_start>username_0: If a student, soon to complete a PhD, is not ready to enter academia **is a year of travel a good option**? Assuming that academic route is still interesting after the year will post-doc positions (leading to tenure-track) still be a viable option?<issue_comment>username_1: Although I envy a PhD graduate who has the funds left after obtaining a doctorate to pursue a year of travel, I don't think this is a good idea (unless your degree is in anthropology, in which case it's probably a great idea!) Some thoughts:
1. You are at a tenuous position in your career -- you've reached a peak (not necessarily the top-most peak), and you are very prepared for academia (although possibly not mentally, as you allude). Your degree has a half-life of sorts -- others will continue to do research in your field while you jet-set the world, and your own work will start to get stale. Now is the best chance you're going to have to convince people who may want to hire you that you're a candidate at the tip of the spear, so to speak.
2. While a year is not too long, your letter-writers aren't going to have as fresh a picture of you from which to paint their glowing recommendations. You can mitigate this by asking for letters now, but you'll want them to review the letters a year from now (and change the date!) when they do submit them for applications.
3. Academia can be a fierce environment, as you've probably learned during your candidate years, and possibly why you don't feel you're ready. But, removing yourself from the process for a year doesn't help your case in academia, except to possibly calm your spirits in order to be reinvigorated in a year. Although not universal, the people working the hardest get the best jobs.
All of that said: do what you feel is best for you. If you're not ready for academia, by all means remove yourself from the process for as much time as you need. Better to have a harder time getting a post-doc in a year than to spend a year burning out on something you're not prepared to do.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I can answer your question because I was at the similar situation.
1. It all depends on the type of your field, and how well you did during your PhD. For example, you did your PhD in electronics, and your supervisor is a well known researcher in this field. In this case I would say do not take one year off and look for a job/postdoc.
2. However, if you did your PhD in a okish manner, your supervisor is kind of well known, and you didn't publish high rank papers and journals, DO NOT do a postdoc right away. This is because most definitely you will not get a good postdoc position from a high rank supervisor and you will waste your time running around trying to please your postdoc boss (saw many cases like this). In this case you MUST take a year off, and think about your life in general. Doing a postdoc is not the solution for a person with a weak background in his/her field. It is much better to do a 9 to 5 job in industry than to do a postdoc with uncertain future.
Be honest with yourself and choose between these two!
Good luck
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Maybe this is a difference between fields (my experience is math in the US) but this sounds like a totally insane thing to do. Having a year with no job or affiliation your resume looks terrible, and it doesn't matter if you tell people that traveling unemployed was your choice, no one will believe you. Actually, it's probably better if they don't because if they do believe you, it will just make you look like more of a flake.
It sounds like an especially bad plan, since there's an obviously superior option, which is wait another year to get your degree; I'm not sure I recommend this either (it depends a lot on whether it will annoy your advisor), but in general taking a year off before graduating is much better than taking a year off afterwards. When you complete your degree is your timestamp; it will stick with you for the rest of your career.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I am doing math, and I took a gap year last year. From a purely scientific viewpoint (I do not know about career/hiring committees/politics) I think sabbatical holidays are possible, and even advisable in some cases, if you have a solid and "marketable" research project, and if you can work alone.
In math, most of your value is derived from the theorems that you proved, not from the places you spent your time.
Do you think that Perelman would have solved the Poincare conjecture if he took a postdoc (or some other position in academia)? Postdocs would have been harmful for him: teaching loads, seminars, academic responsabilities, annoying colleagues...
I obtained my best papers during my gap year (almost solved an open problem). My productivity is skyrocketing, and this is why I will take a second gap year this year (I turned off "good" postdoc offers, with good money, but in quite boring countries, which I would have had to leave after 1-2 years anyway, no opportunity to settle, waste of time). No teaching, no seminars, no interferences. Supervisors can sometimes give bad advice, try to disturb you, and I have a good research project, I prefer to work on my own (but I come back every 3-6 months to my advisors at home to show him my new theorems, and I am going to spend 1 month at a university in the US, to get recommendation letters, and meet people).
If you cannot get a post-doc at Princeton, NJ (which is probably a boring place anyway), I think the second best working conditions are probably in Pattaya, Thailand (or some other place of your dreams), you will find inspiration and a stimulating environment (notice that math conferences are always organized in touristic places, for this reason). You will be happy, and therefore, inspired and scientifically ambitious.
There are universities almost anywhere in the world, with smart and educated people, so if you can give some lectures at the local university, they will be happy to meet a foreigner, a fellow scientist, and even sometimes, give you unexpected job opportunities (not competitive for the 'global academic market', but still decent for local life, and probably still better than being a high school teacher in your home country). Local scientists are probably as useful as colleagues of your postdoc: it is like doing a "non-paid" postdoc.
So besides traveling to countries I like, discover cultures and people that I like, develop myself as a person, in countries where life is amazingly cheap, meet some people happy (and others not so happy) with less than $200/month, I think I can also develop my research projects, and even broaden my job opportunities.
Mentally speaking, 1 year of holidays, doing nothing, is too much anyway (I cannot take more than 2-3 months of holidays in a row), so you will need some kind of intellectual activity, do something of your day (if no distraction is around), and you will naturally get back to your scientific pursuits.
Postdocs are short-term contracts anyway (it is not as crazy as dumping a permanent position), they are used as disposable commodities by senior mentors for their own scientific interests.
Postdoc traps are denounced by everyone, so I prefer to fall in my own 'holiday' trap. There will certainly be gaps in my CV (filled with great papers anyway), some hiring committees will not appreciate (probably out of jealousy), but it puts even more pressure to do good work (to justify my "holidays", to my consicence at least). Hiring committees are very random anyway, so they are not worth sacrificing my happiness: it is now or never.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: * Does it need to be a whole year?
* Maybe a certain creativity and a good grasp of when there is a chance to take a longer break helps:
+ After graduation (Diplom/master) I went abroad to work for half a year, and then took off 2 more months for traveling before returning to my old institute. My professor made me sign the contract for afterwards before I left for those 8 months.
Maybe you could apply for a postdoc, but put the possible start of the affiliation some months later.
+ Later, I managed to get one free month when changing positions. Took quite hard negotiations (the new institute actually wanted me to start 4 months earlier, i.e. 3 months before the end of the old contract).
+ One other time, I negotiated for a similar break, but it didn't work out that way.
+ A postdoc colleague of mine managed to get 3 free months between two projects.
* Obviously this depends very much on how strong your position in the negotiations actually is.
* What about putting a bunch of visits to other groups into the travel schedule? Enough, so that you also get a bunch of research stays and a whole lot of networking out of that year. In my field, few people object to visitors who come on their own money and sincerely try to start collaborations.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/10 | 1,823 | 7,447 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing my master's under the supervision of an assistant professor. He's brilliant, professional and an amazing mentor. He is supportive but at the same time knows when and how to be tough on me enough to challenge me intellectually and push me to get out of my comfort zone. For all these reasons, he would be the perfect supervisor for my Ph.D. The only problem is that he doesn't work on the same topic as me (and doesn't really have much experience with it either) and seeing that it's a new and tricky topic, I need someone experienced in this particular area.
I spoke to him several times about my plans for my Ph.D. and mentioned that I planned on applying to several major universities and that I was looking for supervisors working on my field of interest. He would keep bringing up the Ph.D. programme at his departement and would tell me that I could work with him and also someone else from another university (co-supervision). I said it could be a good idea, but of course, I was still considering the Ph.D. programmes at other universities (which, I think is normal, I'm only keeping my options open). Of course, he knew that I could enroll in better programmes elsewhere, but he still asked me to stay, more than once (which is flattering since I respect and admire him). The Phd programme he's suggesting is the best option for me ONLY in terms of funding, because it has a special offer for foreign students paying extra fees (which he also knows...).
Now, I recently had a meeting with him and I mentioned that I wanted to do an internship in one of the universities I'm interested in. He said "It's a good idea and if you like the experience, you can decide to stay there for a Ph.D.". That was one hell of a slap in my face... He basically told me "Hey, I changed my mind, you're not a worthwhile student, finish your master's, then you're out". So at the end of our meeting, I decided to be honest and asked "okay, so if I understand correctly, you no longer want me to stay here for my Ph.D.?", to which he answered "No, I do. But I want you to explore your options. I don't want you to stay just because you think it's your only option but because you believe it's the RIGHT option for you."
So now I'm confused. Does he want me to stay or does he want to get rid of me?<issue_comment>username_1: As Peter said in his comment, ask him.
However, having said that, and based on what you have said, it is very clear that he is not 'kicking you out' at all - on the contrary, he is demonstrating a very positive and constructive approach - by telling you that you have to pursue what is best for you.
Having said that, you need to consider a key question:
* What is/are your goal(s) after you complete your research?
The professor is, as you say not an expert in the field you are interested in, and what he is suggesting is that, as this is the case then the internship may lead to opportunities that are more in line for your plans.
He is also seemingly suggesting is to pursue the internship and *then* decide where and what you want to study for your PhD.
Ultimately, the decision is yours to make - he is helping you to help yourself in this regards.
But, a piece of advice, do not assume to know the intentions of anyone - take his advice on face value and in the spirit that it has been given.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your supervisor just wants to make sure you make the right decision. Therefore, it might seem wiser to stay where you are now with him (plus another co-supervisor) if you know you get on well than go to another (even more prestigious) university where you might not find people you really want to work with (although they are in the field you are interested in). On the other hand, internship gives you the opportunity to meet faculty of different university and see how you can get on which is just as important as academic qualities of your new supervisor. Your current supervisor sees that as a great option for you to see where you want to do your Ph.D.
I think this is not such an uncommon thing in academia. Although it would help your current supervisor if you stayed (you can teach some classes, more research gets done in his group etc.), he can also see you as a possible future collaborator. From this point of view, it is important for him that you get the best from your Ph.D. even if it means leaving your current university.
I myself was in a similar situation a while back. Although my supervisor would like me to stay for Ph.D. he knew that there are universities and research groups where I can learn more and he did all he could to help me choose the one that would suit me best.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: One of the biggest temptations for many advisors is to hold on to a productive student or postdoc a little bit longer than is necessary just to reap the benefits of a productive worker. Against the personal gains of the advisor need to be set the goals of doing what is in the best interests of the student.
That means that a good advisor will try to make sure that the student can explore all of her options. I'm sure that he would be more than willing to keep you around, if he's mentioned co-supervision. But if you really want to go elsewhere, then he really doesn't want to be seen as trying to strong-arm you into staying. That could build feelings of resentfulness that could poison your future working relationship.
Now, on the other hand, if you complete this internship, and then decide that the project with this advisor is *still* the route you want, then you have done your due diligence—which is what a good advisor would want you to do in any case!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> "It's a good idea and if you like the experience, you can decide to stay there for a Ph.D."
>
>
>
Just adding my two cents because this sounds like a quote of mine! If you are a great student it is more important for me that you have a chance to find a great environment to develop into a fully fledged researcher, than that you keep working with me. Of course I would be super happy if the two things coincide, but if you find and test a place which looks great, then I would not insist any further. This should not be interpreted as a rejection, but as an approval! And I feel that, communication skills aside, this is a pretty common point of view, unless you are dealing with a very jugglery person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This in an ancient question, and there are many answers that give good advice. But for posterity, I don't see any that answer the actual question, so I'll try to do that.
The question was:
>
> So now I'm confused. Does he want me to stay or does he want to get rid of me?
>
>
>
OP also tells us:
>
> I...asked "So if I understand correctly, you no longer want me to stay here for my Ph.D.?", to which he answered "No, I do. But I want you to...stay...because you believe it's the RIGHT option..."
>
>
>
Given that, it is perfectly clear that the professor wants OP to stay. I don't understand the suggestions that OP should ask him -- they already asked him and got an unequivocal response. As others have pointed out, the professor is clearly (and admirably) trying to walk the difficult line between attempting to retain a good student and helping the student to make the best choice for their career.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/10 | 583 | 2,174 | <issue_start>username_0: I read the answers to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10510/cite-same-reference-in-two-successive-sentences), however I'm searching for an elaborated answer on how two (or more) sencentes are obviously from one source, and hence can be cited with one citation at the end of all sentences.
Example to reduce a really long sentences:
>
> The thing varies in dimension A, because of . Consequently, it is categorised as 1,2 or 3 [Mr. Twit,
> 2013].
>
>
>
Are linking words like *consequently*, *therefore* and so on enough to signal that is originates from one source? Can I swap the dot (.) and the citation [Mr. Twit, 2013] to indicate that the citation does not only belong to the last sentence?
Bonus question: If I write a whole paragraph and add one citation at the end, does this imply that the whole paragraph is quoted?
In general I'm trying to reduce he-said-she-said structures, as they are akward and hinder the information flow.<issue_comment>username_1: Read what you have written, and check. Altering the order of punctuation and citation might seem a logical way to do it, but many style guides actually impose the respective order of those elements, and not logic.
In the end, I'm afraid you have to choice of either:
* accepting ambiguity of your example
* using the author's name to make things clear: *“Twit et al. demonstrated that […]. As a consequence, it is categorised as X, Y or Z [Mr. Twit, 2013]”*
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Every "idea" you introduce that is not your own needs a reference. It doesn't matter how many sentences it takes to express this idea, you only need to add the reference at the beginning/end (depending on your citation style) of the idea. If it takes more than a couple of sentences to express the idea, you may want to use a quotation.
In your example it seems like you have two ideas so you need to reference each idea. Often, it is better to provide context of each idea you introduce so the ideas are generally not back-to-back. Sometimes you have to have a list of ideas, in which case you put a reference after each idea.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/10 | 1,747 | 6,807 | <issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if there is a general consensus as to the suitability of epigraphs in a thesis, either a single one at the start of the document, or an appropriate quote to begin every chapter.
For example, at the start of a technical chapter describing some code, I could write
>
> Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. - <NAME>
>
>
>
I am lucky to have complete freedom over how I choose to typeset my thesis (Master's thesis in astronomy) and I like the idea of a thematic quote to begin a chapter. However, I am wary of seeming unprofessional or tacky so I am curious to get some more thoughts on the matter.<issue_comment>username_1: Well-chosen, non-frivolous epigraphs can enhance a thesis.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It cannot hurt to have epigraphs, and they do not specifically have to be about your research topic or about research. Epigraphs are indicative of the state of mind of the author at a particular point in time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: One can perhaps distinguish two major categories of epigraphs:
1. "Serious-tone" epigraphs, which usually the author uses in an attempt to positively influence the reader on his upcoming arguments through a usually wise (or wise-looking) or ingenious (or so the author thinks) quote from a well-known and respected (or so the author thinks) person.
2. "Light-tone" epigraphs which serve the same purpose but they supposedly do it using the additional weapon called humor.
The author may also honestly believe that the epigraph sums up some of his upcoming arguments (or opens the gates for them) in a way that surpasses his capabilities, and uses the epigraph with true respect and admiration.
But the "influencing strategy" seems to be the thought that comes up to people's minds... which means that usually, only "respected persons" can get away with using epigraphs of other "respected persons", without the risk of looking like they are trying to manipulate their readers...
On the flip-side, who can resist a great epigraph?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It depends on their frequency - personally, while I do enjoy one nice epigraph at the very beginning of a thesis, I consider one on each section (or every ten pages) overkill and rather disturbing the reading flow. But on a divide, e.g. between the introducing theory and your own contribution, a second epigraph is surely ok as well.
Ultimately, it really is a matter of your own taste; an epigraph may make the reader smile, but they can easily skip it if they just need raw facts at that moment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: To paraphrase an old joke, and risk the disapproval of username_1 and <NAME>: What do you call someone whose PhD thesis contains a frivolous epigraph that they spent a while finding? Answer: **"Doctor"**!
Keep in mind that to first order, **nobody will ever read your thesis**. Ok, you will, and your advisor will probably read most of it, and perhaps some of her future students will look through it for ideas. And your family might flip through the first few pages to be polite. Otherwise, what people will read are the papers you publish based on it. Therefore, it doesn't really matter very much whether you include an epigraph or not, as few will read the thesis, and fewer will notice the epigraph.
Personally, I enjoyed choosing a "frivolous" epigraph for my thesis; it did take an hour or two that I could have spent writing, but nobody can spend all their time writing, and it was a good stress reliever. I don't think it enhances the thesis, particularly; I don't really think it affects its merit at all. But it was one more little thing that helped me get through the process.
Certainly, your epigraph should be in good taste, and not offensive to anyone. Don't use it as a way to make the thesis sound more impressive; that's a waste of time, because nobody will be impressed. And if your advisor notices it and objects for any reason, apologize and meekly remove it - they may or may not have a point, but it isn't worth your time to argue about. But otherwise, if you have fun with it, I can see no reason to object.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: The other answers are certainly good, too, and/but my reaction is that choices of epigraphs are like poetry or philosophy written when one is young... just seem silly later. Now, yes, the same seemingly-proscriptive criterion can be applied to almost all human activities... but/and the question really becomes whether one plans to be indulgent, later, of the young self, or whether one will be annoyed or regretful or embarrassed. Meanwhile, other people, at their own analogous stages, will perceive youthful choices of epigrams as just that... probably not as necessarily either greatly entertaining or profound, any more than philosophizing or humor of every age-demographic seems insightful or funny to other demographics.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Epigraphs are never suitable. They are distracting and unprofessional. Stick to the subject of your thesis and nothing more. Time spent researching epigraphs is time better spent researching and writing your thesis. If a quote is relevant to your work, such as the Knuth quote, then put it in the thesis and explain its relevance to your subject.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Epigraphs are an excellent feature to enhance a thesis.
I asked my advisor when showing him the first version of my epigraph --- that could be a kind of precondition to do that (if you wanna be sure that your advisor agrees with your intention).
Naturally, a (serious / scientific) context must exist between an epigraph and your concent. Too many funny qoutes could be declined by readers.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: Relevance is king in such questions. However, I remember, many years ago, to have read a nice epigraph, or actually two, paraphrased here from memory:
"The thesis must be an original work of the candidate." (PhD Examination Regulations, University of xxx)
"There is nothing new under the sun." (Ecclesiastes)
Both on one page. I thought that was wise and humble, and actually quite ironic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: My opinion, and for theses in science or engineering:
* *Avoid* multiple epigraphs in your thesis. Use either no epigraphs, or one in the introduction and/or one for the summary/conclusion. Many epigraphs in a thesis always see to me to be a little... overly presumptuous, perhaps a little self-aggrandizing. And sometimes you even come off as being a smart-ass rather than well-read.
* *Consider* epigraphs in a book or book chapter (e.g. one based on your thesis), where more narrative flair is appropriate in general.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/10 | 635 | 2,623 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm working in an international collaboration (Germany and Netherlands). It happens quite often that I'm asking technical questions to fellow postdocs by email, just sending the email to this single person. When I receive the reply, I almost always see that the head of the group has been put in CC.
I'm wondering why this is done. Is this some kind of etiquette I'm not aware of? I imagine that as a group leader you get flooded with emails, so why would you request more?<issue_comment>username_1: It is a fairly normal practice to cc: your boss on correspondence that is outside the organization, especially if he or she has a vested interest in the response. As you note, though, it does require some judiciousness to keep from overpopulating your boss's inbox. I'd say it is more rare in the case of technical back-and-forth, but I have seen it before.
I have also seen the "cc the boss" mentality from people who want the boss to know they're keeping busy -- I wouldn't suggest this kind of toady behavior, but it does exist.
The bottom line is that you shouldn't be concerned to see others do this on their correspondence, and you could certainly ask the head of your group if he or she wants to be cc'd on correspondence from you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, that sort of etiquette (CC'ing the PI of each involved partner in a collaboration, even for exchanges at lower level) exist in some groups. It is particularly true of recent collaborations, either because they have been established recently or because the research is still in its infancy. In both case, I suppose it is nice to help PI's stay on top of how things are progressing, both on the science and on the interpersonal relationships (like, is everyone acting professionally).
It's not universal, but it is common. It depends a lot on the nature of the relations between the PI's and their groups. I tend to ask students/post-docs to keep me in CC of the first few emails to our collaborator after they arrive/we start the project, then after sometime I tell them to drop me when it's evident things are going well.
In your situation, the safest course of action is to keep people on the CC list. You didn't CC them, but someone did, so don't drop them unless they ask for it. Also, ask *your* own boss how he likes to do things.
---
*“I imagine that as a group leader you get flooded with emails, so why would you request more?”* — Whatever you do, you will be flooded with emails. You don't read them all, but you may skim those for tone/content, keeping an eye on things.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/10 | 650 | 2,625 | <issue_start>username_0: I've encountered lots of chalkboards through my career, and they vary widely in quality. Some write smoothly and erase cleanly; for others, the chalk squeaks and the eraser just smears.
I assume there are differences in the materials they use, the construction techniques, how the surface is prepared or treated, and so on. But I'm clueless as to what these differences might be, and how they affect the quality. If I'm looking for a "good" one, what questions should I ask?
(Academics are one of the few groups these days that use chalkboards on a regular basis, so I hope this question is suitable for this site. Please note that I'm not asking for specific product recommendations, just general information.)<issue_comment>username_1: Just a partial answer, since I am not discussing materials and building techniques but only giving a couple of tips.
Chalk squeaking should depend on its length; break it into two parts to avoid it. Not sure if this has been studied rigorously, but it seems to work in my experience.
As for erasing, I am personally a fan of using a damp towel rather than dry-erasing. It takes some more work and preparation, but the results are much better.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The good chalkboards appear to be made of porcelain enamel fused to a steel core. See [this site](http://www.madehow.com/Volume-2/Chalkboard.html) for more details on the manufacturing process. As JeffE mentioned in a comment on another answer, cheaper chalkboards are made by painting wood or chipboard with a special chalkboard paint. Although these are good for crafts, they are NOT the kind you want to have in a classroom. They [have to be primed with chalk](http://www.ellaclaireinspired.com/2013/01/chalkboard-maintenance-101.html) before the first use and after being cleaned with a damp cloth. Also they will often have to be given another coat of paint after being used for a while.
For non-squeak writing, break long pieces of chalk in half--this will **usually** take care of the problem! I have noticed that regular, i.e. daily, sponging with an all-purpose cleaning solution also helps to prevent smearing while writing/erasing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The best chalkboard, if you can afford it, is slate. It is the combination of grain consistency and durability that allows the consistent accretion of chalk on the surface of the board. The only reason it is not used is that it is prohibitively expensive and either heavy or fragile, depending on the depth of the slate. I suppose this could be improved with a non-flexible backing.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/10 | 1,333 | 5,806 | <issue_start>username_0: I have discovered that I enjoy computer science immensely and I would like to pursue a masters degree in computer Science.
My undergrad was Neuroscience (biology) with a minor in Bioinformatics. I have a 3.2 gpa, and an 77 percentile GRE, which I understand is not amazing but ok.
But, I've gotten all A's in any computer science class I have taken, (data structures, algorithms etc.)
I would like to get into the best possible program, for example MIT, I understand this may be unrealistic with my grades and would like to ask what are my options and what should I do to get ready?
Ideas:
* Retake the GRE get better score
* Take a Comp Science GRE subject test
* get real life experience
* put code online, open source
* Get work experience
* Screw the masters get a job
I'd love to hear what you think is the best choice for setting up a successful career in computer science. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Many departments do not require you have a Bachelor's in CS to pursue graduate studies. They might have a stipulation of a minor in CS, though. You'd have to check with the individual departments. Bioinformatics is similar to CS in some schools, so they may waive that minimum requirement. The main reason for their requiring a minor is to ensure you've had a sufficient foundation to build upon. Taking more courses in a local school first would fill any gaps you have.
In the end, it comes down to what the department says. Contact some of the ones you like and see what they say. They may want you to take more math, for instance, over anything else.
**Edit:** Removed statement about GRE subject test in CS.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Many schools will require you to take remediation courses if they do not feel you meet the course requirements for the graduate program. They will be fairly upfront about what they think you would need, but it will mean taking more Bachelors level classes at cost before being accepted to the program.
In general I would show any additional work you have done to improve your programming skills, including code you have written.
A lot of qualified people do not apply to top schools (I.E. MIT) because they do not believe they would get in. But I would not recommend focusing on any one school and instead find a few programs you like and apply to all of them.
Some schools will allow you to take classes as a non-degree seeking student, which would provide both a way to prove yourself and also gauge the program and its suitability to you. I would check with the program to see how many credits they accept through this method though.
As an aside, I am in the same boat. I majored in Mathematics with a minor in Physics but have been working as a programmer for the last three years. I am now looking into online masters programs in Computer Engineering or Computer Science.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: *"Many schools will require you to take remediation courses if they do not feel you meet the course requirements for the graduate program. Some schools will allow you to take classes as a non-degree seeking student, which would provide both a way to prove yourself and also gauge the program and its suitability to you. I would check with the program to see how many credits they accept through this method though."*
Correct. Also, many programs would let an individual in as a provisional student. You would take undergraduate courses in areas of perceived deficiency, however, they would not count towards your degree program of course so your degree would cost a little more than folks that took the necessary classes as part of an undergraduate CS program. Typically its no more than 3 to 5 classes from what I have seen on average. If you are good enough, you can also test out of prerequisites which is another way to demonstrate mastery.
Admissions tend to focus on both math (most will not let you in without at least 3 undergraduate credits of Calculus and 3 credits of Statistics) and computer science classes -due to the fact that many programs are aligned/attached with their respective engineering programs. Each school is a little different. A few that I found worthy of perusing: Arizona State University, University of Chicago -Urbana/Champaign, DePaul University.
Also since you mentioned MIT here is a snippet of their offerings and policies:
<http://tppserver.mit.edu/53/54.htm>
Current programs include:
Biomedical Engineering
Computation for Design and Optimization (CDO)
Computational and Systems Biology (CSB)
Medical Engineering and Medical Physics
Molecular and Cellular Neuroscience
Program in Polymer Science and Technology
The following interdepartmental programs are affiliated with the Engineering Systems Division (ESD):
eaders for Global Operations
Supply Chain Management (Center for Transportation and Logistics)
System Design and Management
Technology and Policy Program
Technology, Management, and Policy
Academic excellence is demonstrated by university grades, as calibrated by the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) that establish a rough comparison between schools. The grades are examined in detail, giving preference to recent performance and subjects relevant to Technology and Policy.
For North American candidates, a minimum average of B plus is expected. This threshold may be different for other countries where the grading system is harder. For example, a B minus or C plus level from the major French Grandes Ecoles appears comparable. The faculty evaluates the record subjectively, recognizing the diversity of grading practices and personal experience.
Strong candidates for the program typically score in the top 10 percent of all three GRE areas (verbal, quantitative, and analytic writing).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/11 | 1,549 | 6,690 | <issue_start>username_0: I study mathematics at a large state university. My professors sometimes teach two courses in a given semester, usually two undergraduate or one undergraduate, one graduate course. Typically they hold separate office hours for each course.
I come up with questions about what I'm learning at various times throughout the week, and often it's more convenient to ask this question in the office hours for the other course the professor is teaching, i.e. the course I'm not in. Perhaps it's the fastest way to get my answer, perhaps the office hours for my course have passed for the week, whatever reason.
Would you consider using office hours for a different course (but same professor) bad etiquette? (I do try to give priority to students of the other course, and try to avoid taking up too much time if there are students waiting.)
(Note: most of my professors have a open-door type policy, so I don't think they really mind. This question is more on a general level, i.e. including professors that don't have such policies in place.)<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think the professor minds too much, but you should of course be prepared for him to decline if he chooses to. Though I myself could hardly care less, I have colleagues who would definitely think unsuitable (because it's not *how it's planned*).
However, I think the other students might mind, as you noted, if they began to see it as you “stealing” time from their limited allocation. As always, sharing is no problem unless the resource is scarce :)
So, in short, I don't think it's a big problem, *given that you are mindful of others*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Until a student comes into my office, it doesn't matter what course my office hours are for: I am not preparing for them in any way. Most likely I am trying to do "side work": i.e., short, routine tasks that are easily set aside as soon as a student steps in. If only one student comes in, it doesn't matter what class they're taking. In fact, it probably doesn't matter if they are taking any class from me at all: if a student wants to stop by my office for any quick reason (e.g. to sign paperwork), then I often tell them to come during my office hours because I know I'll be there.
The only issue occurs when multiple students arrive. Whenever this happens one has to decide how to "process" the students: serially, in a group, all at once, alternately, and so forth. This is where designating an office hour as being for a certain class becomes useful: when the student flow is expected to be sufficiently large. (If I really think the flow will be minimal, then I am not averse to provisionally scheduling office hours for multiple classes at the same time. E.g. if one class is a graduate class then students will probably stop by very rarely, and if they see I am busy they have an office in the same building and can easily come back after a short time.) If for instance a student from one class came by right at the beginning of my office hours designated for another class, then I would probably warn them that they could get interrupted at any point, and when the students from the other class came I would give them priority.
From the student perspective, office hours are affected by the distinction between research universities and liberal arts colleges. As a professor at a research university, I *do not* feel obligated to "generally" be in my office during business hours, and if I am I may not keep my door open. (In my department, there is a bit of a split between faculty who are generally available in their office and those that are not. I have found that being in your office with your door open invites a lot of wasted time.) However at a liberal arts college, many faculty are in their offices whenever they're not teaching or out to lunch, with the expectation that students can and will drop by at any time. I visited an old friend at a research college a few years ago, and the situation there was amusingly extreme: the math department student study area was in the center of a beautiful split-level space, with glass blackboards, study materials....:the works. Lining the periphery of this lovely oval were....the faculty offices. Continuing the glass theme, the interior walls of the faculty office were made of glass. Thus: you can't leave your office without walking by the students (who are few enough in number that you know most of them personally), and a student can see at all times whether you're in your office or not! In this kind of setting, coming in during some other class's office hours would be unnecessary and is probably a little rude.
Students can schedule an appointment to meet outside of office hours. My own attitude to this is that if someone contacts me on Day N, then I will offer them an appointment on Day N+2 at the latest, and on Day N+1 unless I will be away from my office or my whole day is booked solid with specific appointments (which is rare). In many cases I would rather book an appointment even a few hours in the future than be interrupted from what I'm doing in my office at that moment. This is mostly psychological, but no less true for that. I'm not sure why students don't do this more often. In fact, having booked appointments, students fail to show up an annoyingly large percentage of the time. That kind of spaciness wears a lot better once you have a PhD.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If the professor has specifically announced that certain hours are for each course, then I would expect showing up with your questions during the *other* course's hours to be deeply unfair and annoying to the students of that course who have shown up as they've been told to. And I would *not* expect the professor to guide you in this, a lot of professors will happily ramble on in response to whatever question comes their way.
And many of the other students will be struggling to keep up with their own course and quite mystified on how to make sense of the material you're covering.
If you show up at the other course's hours and find nobody else there, or wait until those students really have no further questions of their own, then I think it'd be fair to ask if you could introduce material from your course. Be very sensitive to the other students' response and allow a period of dead-air before you ask further questions. Assume that any of them who stick around during your question actually do have questions of their own they're waiting to ask.
You might also ask the professor if an e-mail discussion would be possible, or if there are additional times that can be scheduled ad-hoc.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/11 | 527 | 2,389 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just got my first paper accepted to a reputed IEEE (say X for generality) conference. Now, one of the authors have registered for the conference as a student member of X. I have applied for student membership, but probably won't receive the member card before registration deadline. In that case, I have been informed that only the author attending the conference would be getting the certificate.
So I have the following question:
1) Do I need the certificate to proof that I have this publication in future ? (My dept has procedure of submitting copies of all certificates that you earn during the semester, and my co-author would definitely be submitting his there.)
2) Is it worth to register without availing student discount so that I may get the certificate ?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. You don't get a "certificate" for publishing something. The fact that it is available online at the journal's website (which can take a while, depending on their publishing speeds) and has a doi (which you should receive soon after acceptance), is sufficient proof.
2. Most societies don't have a membership card either. They might send you a welcome letter, which you could use as proof of membership.
Most places accept different forms of proof of claim when a formal one doesn't exist. In your cases, the following should be just as valid:
1. An email from the editor, accepting your paper for publication (you should have this)
2. An email from the society, thanking you for your interest and membership
3. A screenshot of your member page, showing validity
4. A screenshot of the web copy of your paper (some journals throw a rough version on the web which serves till the final version is typeset).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As the previous answer speaks about journal, I just wanted to clarify for conference.
The proceedings are prepared by the Programme Committee and submitted to IEEEXplore library. They can appear there before the conference or after the conference, depending on the arrangementes chairs made with IEEE. Once the proceedings are there, you'll be able to locate your paper and print a screenshot and/or the paper in case you need to proof the publication.
The e-mail from the PC you received should also serve as a proof of publication, as long as it mentions the authors of the papers.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/12 | 448 | 1,832 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that was accepted and is already in press (you can download a PDF online), and I have already filled out the copyright transfer.
The publisher allows uploading preprint versions (including revisions after reviewer comments) to repositories such as arXiv, but is it ok to do so at this stage?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a situation where you have to read what the copyright transfer agreement the journal had you sign (physically or digitally). That document is part of your publication contract so it is what you officially agreed to.
The last time I read one was, I think, an AIP journal and it had a paragraph on pre-print servers in general and arXiv in particular stating exactly which version of the paper was permissible to post. The language was "the author retains the rights to post [such and such version]..." so I could have posted that paper to arXiv after publication legally.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> *The publisher allows uploading preprint versions (including revisions after reviewer comments)*
>
>
>
If you're allowed to do it, you are allowed to do it. **To be 100% sure, check the text of the copyright transfer agreement**, where these policies are spelt out. Or, if you don't like reading legal text so much, **it is summarized for many publishers in a nice color code at [SHERPA/Romeo](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php)**.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Depending on your legislation and the exact circumstances (funding sources), you may have retained certain rights for secondary publication regardless of what the copyright transfer says.
This is the case e.g. in [Germany](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11226/725).
So in addition to the copyright transfer, check your local copyright law.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/12 | 807 | 3,452 | <issue_start>username_0: It is common that people add their [LinkedIn](http://www.linkedin.com) profile in their resumes. On the other hand, they add profiles (like [ResearcherID](http://www.researcherid.com)) counting publications, citations, and showing factors such as `h-index`.
[ResearchGate](http://www.researchgate.net) is something in-between, but I have not seen if anyone add his/her [ResearchGate](http://www.researchgate.net) profile link in resume. Is it because [ResearchGate](http://www.researchgate.net) is young and not popular, or it is not technically convenient?<issue_comment>username_1: The different services such as Researcher ID, ResearchGate, LinkedIn have not generally caught on in application processes (I am sure there are several exceptions). I am, however, sure these will become more common. To use the *h*-index provided in ResearcherID is one way to get a relative standard measure, compared to one calculated by each individual. Hence, I am sure these linkable sources will become more common in application procedures.
I use researcherID in my CV and am now on ResearchGate and will use their measures as well. Since they are official checkable soures I think they serve well in CVs. In my case, however, I have noticed that maybe 5-10% of the citations I can find in Web of Science cannot be found through Researcher ID, this is because some references occure as several entries due to errors in peoples reference lists etc. I believe it is possible to send in error reports to Web of Science to get corrections made. This means that the total number of citations through, for example, ResearcherID may be smaller than what you think you should have. But since this problem likely affects everyone in a similar way the values are still comparable, at least that is howI think about it.
So, I think it is fair and very useful to list these measures that can be independently checked. You could (should) check your field to see what services are often used and perhaps focus on those first.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the reason ResearcherID is sometimes used on CV's is because **it's a quick way to link to (and host centrally) your publication list as well as bibliometric information** (h-index, number of citations, etc.). I also see people use Google Scholar as an alternative service for that, although the quality of citation data is not as good.
For **LinkedIn**, it may be field-dependent. I see a large number of people around me (chemical engineering, both academic and industrial) semi-actively using it, i.e. maintaining a network of peers and getting the occasional introduction/reference through it. I do not often see it used in CV's, however. It is clearly used for **networking**.
**ResearchGate**, as you stated, is neither here nor there. It's not very widely used yet, and rather aims to be a "Facebook for researchers": it is centered around papers, comments and discussion. While it can be used to host a publication list, **the metrics it offers access to are not commonly used and, one must say, rather opaque**. I think that's why it has little value to add to a CV.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: IMHO it would be better to have a web page containing the links to all the professional profiles you have (ResearchGate, LinkedIn, etc.), and give a link to this web page (rather than several links to separate profiles) in your CV.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/13 | 3,244 | 11,150 | <issue_start>username_0: I understand that the salary of a postdoctoral fellow depends on the field, project, contract, and so forth, but I am curious how much is the normal range for a fellow. Someone told me that he prefer to continue postdoctoral fellowship, as he gets the same salary of assistant professorship with less official duties.
In my experience, the range of salary for a postdoctoral fellow is much less than an assistant professor, something between $25,000 - $50,000. In Europe, it is in the lower side, but it is usually higher in the US.
I am curious to know what is the actual rate, and is there a norm for estimating the salary of a postdoctoral fellow?
In other words, when looking at postdoctoral openings, how much is an excellent/good/normal deal?<issue_comment>username_1: @All,
I can only give you some examples. In most areas in physics, in the USA, the postdoc salary ranges from 36000-45000US$ for most universities. Some high-ranked universities pay as much as 60000$ too to their physics postdocs, with an exception of Simons Center which pays 70000$. On the other hand, national labs pay around 70000$ for their physics postdocs - I don't know why the difference between the university payscale and the national lab payscales in the same country for the same field!
In the UK it is fairly uniform for any field, at least in science and engineering. It is usually between £29000 to £33000 per year. Where you lie in this range depends on how many years you have passed after your Ph.D.
In Australia, they usually pay 60000-70000 AUD + 9% (if the contract is for short term - I don't know if the short term means 1 year or less than 3 years though) or 17% (if the contract is for 3 years or more) superannuation, i.e., retirement fund. Again, there are precise rules on where you lie in this range depending on years after the PhD date.
In South Africa, it is somewhere between 180000-240000 Rand per year tax-free.
In New Zealand, you may expect the salary around 50000-60000 NZ$.
In Germany the salary levels seemed complicated to me when I was applying as there are many kinds of taxes and you may avoid some if you are married and have child etc.
In Brazil, you may expect around US$14000 for the national postdoc fellowship (52000BRL). With month life cost of US$1073 (3966BRL )
If you ask me, the postdoc life is miserable if you are in most universities in the USA and have even a small family to support. In my experience, Australia or the UK where the salaries are uniform and above the national averages for the fresh engineers (or other professionals), your life can be much more pleasant - well unless you are in the expensive area in Sydney or London!
Brazil seems excellent too but I can't speak Portuguese !
Edit: Forgot about Ireland. The salaries are around €35000 per year. I used to get paid around €43000 per year (each every expenses like insurance, taxes, 'levy' which was another kind of tax, etc. were on me though) in 2009-2010, however I would think the salary levels have gone lower after the credit crunch in which Ireland has been affected the most.
I should also mention that most postdocs in Math departments in the USA are paid 48000-55000 US$ per year but they have to teach 2 courses a year or so whereas the physics postdocs don't teach at all (if they teach then they get more money than their salary).
Also in Japan and South Korea the salaries are around US$40000 (converting. their local currencies)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's find some official numbers and statistics. From [this article](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23512-postdoc-payday-salaries-for-fellows-are-on-the-up.html#.UjLASBbvaE0):
>
> As a baseline, in 2012, **the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Research Service Award (NRSA) postdoctoral stipend for new postdocs was $39,264**, increasing to $54,180 for those with seven or more years of experience. Funding levels at universities are broadly similar.
>
>
>
Post-doc salary guidelines depend on individual institutions, and benefits vary widely from place to place. In addition to salary, checking the benefits is important in the US, but less important in more civilized/socialistic (strike out the inapplicable term) countries.
[A job site](http://www.salarylist.com/jobs/PostDoctoral-Fellow-Salary.htm) that gathers salary information from US job advertisements has the following for post-doctoral fellowships:
>
> Post-Doctoral Fellow average salary is $39,302, **median salary is $38,000** with a salary range from $20,779 to $961,896.
>
>
>
I think it's safe to say that $961,896 is an outlier, but apart from that, the median matches the NRSA number. It also shows that there is a broad range of salaries, even by browsing the job listings on that site.
---
For Europe, as I've said the situation is heterogeneous. I know how to find numbers for **UK**, at least. If you look at [jobs postings from jobs.ac.uk](http://www.jobs.ac.uk) for post-doctoral positions, the range appears to be **£28,000 – £37,000** (apart from a few outliers). This would be roughly $44,000 – $58,000, but you have to adjust for taxes, health insurance, and then cost of living (which can be quite high in UK).
In **France**, [CNRS](http://www.cnrs.fr) is the largest scientific employer, and its [post-doc salary](http://www2.cnrs.fr/sites/band/fichier/w_2007_gb_web.pdf) is:
>
> The gross monthly salary of a CNRS postdoc is **2,500 €**
>
>
>
---
*As an anecdote, when I started as assistant professor, my salary was significantly lower than my post-doc salary. And even some of my post-docs in my group had higher pay than me (as well as some industry-employed PhD students). But money's not everything…*
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In math in the US postdocs generally pay between 40K and 70K with the bulk between 45K and 60K. The AMS has [survey data and graphs](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/2009Survey-StartSal.pdf).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: To give a lower-end answer, the worst position in France is "demi-ATER": it is a half position in the sense that you have half as much teaching duty than professors (about 4 hours a week on average, for about 24 weeks), but you are usually expected to work full time, research included.
It is paid less than 1200 Euros per month, net before taxes.
The full ATER position is as much teaching as professors, with a month salary of approximately 1600 Euros.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The answer to this *very broad* question depends on many factors such as (but not limited to):
* field: I can't really say if the same position in one field makes more than another but it's very possible.
* country: see other answers; North America or Western Europe are waaay to broad to be clumped into a single bucket. (see below for approx figures from Sweden)
* university/city: bigger and more expensive cities usually call for larger figures, but in practice you don't get richer on that due to higher cost of living (particularly rent)
* financing: postdoc but where? ... at a company/university/independent research institute? In certain systems it's also possible to apply for [postdoc grants](http://www.vr.se/forskningsfinansiering/bidragsbeslut/internationellpostdok.4.41c4c50b1195b50750780002260.html) (ref in Swedish), I know some people who have gotten grants that include their own salaries. Getting such a grant means your financial burden on the employer is much less.
* tax: some countries have special, time-bound tax classes for "visiting scientists" or something like that, I have heard that Denmark has a such a policy
That being said, I have got a figure of [approx 32500 SEK/mon](http://www.saco.se/Yrken-A-O/Larareforskare-vid-universitet-och-hogskola/) (ref in Swedish) which corresponds to roughly €45000 per annum (The source is a labor union for university employees).
Hope that helps
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Some anecdotal data from (theoretical) computer science:
* A Simons funded postdoc gets ~ $70,000
* A "normal" postdoc funded by a faculty member from an NSF grant seems to get between $50,000 and $60,000 around these parts.
* A postdoc at an industry lab (say, Microsoft Research which I think is the highest paying lab, but numbers at other labs like IBM are not so different) gets upwards of $130,000.
Of course, part of the reason that these comparatively high is that the outside industry options all pay more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Just adding information for some countries omitted above. For useful links find my answer to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2346/after-my-phd-how-much-salary-should-i-expect-as-a-professor-of-computer-science/2453#2453). For Germany, you are interested in the E13 scale (grade depending on you experience = the number of years from your PhD. start/defense - depends on the position), which boils down to somewhere around 40-50k EUR brutto. For Netherlands, you are interested in a salary scale 10, or 11 again depending on your experience, generally the grade corresponds to the number of years from your PhD. defense. The end result again lies somewhere between 40-50k EUR brutto. There are however significant tax reductions for "knowledge workers", which could significantly increase your net salary.
---
Later edit: adding few sources
Information about the "30% ruling":
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_Netherlands#The_30_Percent_Rule>
<http://www.iamsterdam.com/en-GB/living/official-matters/thirty-percent-ruling>
most universities also provide information about this, for instance TU Delft here:
<http://www.tudelft.nl/en/theme/international-staff-and-students/staff-guests/procedures-prior-to-arrival/immigration-procedures/30-rule/>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: In Ecology in North America, $45K is generally considered a good salary. $55K is possible via a competitive NSF post-doc. The lowest I've seen was I think $38K. Many post docs are funded via NSF grants and I believe there is an automatic cost of living adjustment implemented by the NSF. The lowest post-doc salaries I've seen are generally at universities in more rural areas.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I am not going to research this in detail for you, as you can find almost all of this online, and there are many western European countries.
For western Europe it really depends on the country, you can expect to earn roughly 2.5x more in Switzerland (86k CHF) compared to Portugal or Spain (€33k), with most of the other countries in between (Germany €50k). The cost of living also changes, but still you end up with more $$ in some countries.
In most countries there is a collective agreement, meaning that you get payed according to a table. For example in Germany all postdocs earn E13, with the exact amount depending on the years of documented experience, and you only get to E14 if are directly managing 3 persons that are in E13. So for a lot of places you don't have to worry about getting a bad deal on your salary.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/13 | 719 | 3,120 | <issue_start>username_0: Endowed professorship is very common, but the financial endowment normally comes from external sources. Is it also common that a professor/research endow his/her position to establish a research group in the target university?
It should be an excellent approach for mid-level professors/researchers who can establish a research group in a top university (where it is normally hard to get that position) and get research fund from external sources such as industry and funding agencies.
This is of mutual benefit for both the university and professor, but I have not heard about such positions. Is it uncommon or just through private contracts?
UPDATE: Apparently, I confused endowed and named chair with research professor. I asked the question about research professor [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12640/how-to-get-a-research-professor-position). However, I still do not see a contradiction between research professor and self-endowed professor. Does a endowed chair must be necessary result of a huge donation to university? or a foundation can merely fund a professor position. If it is the latter case, one should be able to fund his own endowed position too.<issue_comment>username_1: What you describe sounds like a **[research professor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professors_in_the_United_States#Research_professor)** in the US system:
>
> A professor who does not take on all of the classic duties of a professor, but instead focuses on research. At most universities, research professors are not eligible for tenure and **must fund their salary entirely through research grants**, with no regular salary commitment from internal university sources. In parallel with tenure-track faculty ranks, there are assistant and associate research professor positions.
>
>
>
The obvious drawback is that it puts enormous pressure on grant finding, with no tenure and thus no job security.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Endowed professorship typically are the result of a large donation of money to the university that allows them to fully fund a position in perpetuity based on the earnings on the initial donation. This is generally much larger than what an individual can bring in from external sources. If you manage to bring in that type of income, you will likely have little problem obtaining a permanent position.
I am aware of one independently wealthy individual who made a large enough donation to establish his own professorship. Basically he spent a small fraction of his wealth (which would be a large fraction of the wealth of most academics) to become a full professor with minimal teaching and service duties. His research was funded from his charitable foundation and I believe the foundation paid the standard overhead rates. He was reasonably productive throughout his entire career and probably could have obtained a professorship without using his personal wealth, but given the competitive nature of the job market and limited availability of positions, probably not at the institution of his choosing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/13 | 595 | 2,488 | <issue_start>username_0: In my thesis there are 7 chapters. Each chapter contains many nomenclatures and symbols.
**Nomenclature:**
Chapter 1
`Monte Carlo (MC)` simulation is wonderful. `MC` is a stochastic process.
Chapter 2/3/../7
Do I need to re-expand the nomenclatures at the beginning of each chapter or expanding at the chapter 1 (or first occurrence) is enough?
**Symbol:**
Same question applies for Symbols also. For example, `Temperature (T)`
(Note: Apart from the above, the list of abbreviations and symbols is a must in the thesis as per institute guideline.)<issue_comment>username_1: What you describe sounds like a **[research professor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professors_in_the_United_States#Research_professor)** in the US system:
>
> A professor who does not take on all of the classic duties of a professor, but instead focuses on research. At most universities, research professors are not eligible for tenure and **must fund their salary entirely through research grants**, with no regular salary commitment from internal university sources. In parallel with tenure-track faculty ranks, there are assistant and associate research professor positions.
>
>
>
The obvious drawback is that it puts enormous pressure on grant finding, with no tenure and thus no job security.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Endowed professorship typically are the result of a large donation of money to the university that allows them to fully fund a position in perpetuity based on the earnings on the initial donation. This is generally much larger than what an individual can bring in from external sources. If you manage to bring in that type of income, you will likely have little problem obtaining a permanent position.
I am aware of one independently wealthy individual who made a large enough donation to establish his own professorship. Basically he spent a small fraction of his wealth (which would be a large fraction of the wealth of most academics) to become a full professor with minimal teaching and service duties. His research was funded from his charitable foundation and I believe the foundation paid the standard overhead rates. He was reasonably productive throughout his entire career and probably could have obtained a professorship without using his personal wealth, but given the competitive nature of the job market and limited availability of positions, probably not at the institution of his choosing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/13 | 429 | 1,922 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a piece of work, mainly studying some theory developed in a particular article. I did my best to be clear whether it was one of my own comment concerning the subject or material, eventually rephrased, coming from the article.
But now, I *need* to copy a large section from the article. There is no point in modifying the section, it is actually a list of hypothesis written in a mathematical fashion, and rephrasing it would be unclear. So well, maybe I changed a bit the formulation of a few things, or changed the order of the list to fit the way I present the things, but really cosmetic changes.
How should I cite that ? I guess (as it is not exactly copy/paste) no "", but then what ? I already mentioned that the whole work was closely related to the article, but I feel uncomfortable copying the section without knowing how to reference it.<issue_comment>username_1: Copying is of course not good. But, it is always possible to use a quote. This can be done by either use quotes or in your case to state that you are providing a copy of the list provided by the author.. In your case I think you can easily say something like "Following "cited author" (yyyy) we can define the problem as ..." and then follow up by rewriting the list you mention. It should then be very clear that what you write follows what the cited author has written. The exact phrasing might be slightly different but along the lines I outlined.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You likely will need to check the copyright requirements of the journal, and contact the publisher and/or author. Very often, quoting or copying more than a few sentences or one or two figures will require direct permission.
Permission may not be necessary, but you don't want to open a big bag of trouble by publishing something that violates copyright - better safe than sorry.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/13 | 753 | 3,384 | <issue_start>username_0: Since universities do not normally pay the salary of a [research professor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professors_in_the_United_States#Research_professor), and salary along with research funding comes from external resources, this not a paid position. On the other hand, a few people are interested in a job without a secured salary (or a few researchers are confident enough to get enough funding to secure their salary too).
As a result, universities do not advertise for hiring `research professors` (at least, I do not see in job websites). Therefore, it should be based on private negotiation. Logically, universities should not have limitation for the number of research professors, as they do not pay their salaries. If they can obtain fund, it is good for them, if not, the university loses nothing.
In the aforementioned circumstances, I guess, potential researchers should start this negotiation. If yes, how this negotiation is normally started? A potential research professor contacts the university President, Vice President for Research, Dean, Department Chair with a proposal?
What is the procedure for hiring a research professor?<issue_comment>username_1: Different institutions will have different procedures. Some of them handle it case-by-case, but in other places there are actual formal recruiting procedures and call for applications. See, for example, [Texas A&M’s guidelines](http://dof.tamu.edu/content/research-professor-hiring-guidelines) on hiring research professors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The first thing to realize is that within the same department a tenure track/tenured position is usually more desirable than a soft money position (what you are calling a research professor). Soft money positions tend to have less responsibilities (e.g., teaching and service) but at many research oriented universities TT staff can use grant money to buy out of teaching and service. In fact those on soft money positions often pick up the residual work thereby making their grant money go further.
Also realize that most departments do not want lots of soft money staff. There are often physical space constraints. Soft money staff can potentially push a department in a direction it is not interested in which can lead to social and political issues. There is also the issue of graduate students. Most people on soft money positions want to have access to graduate students but this can syphon off students and funds from TT staff and provide less security for the students (e.g., when the soft money runs out).
Finally, realize that most departments actually care about their staff. When soft money positions have a gap in funding, the members of a department often try and cover the shortfall. The ability to attract the best soft money candidates depends on the past history of how soft money staff have been treated.
Now to answer you question, at the highest I would contact the Department Chair. No Department Chair wants to hear from the Dean that they should consider someone. No Dean has the time to read CVs of candidates that are not good enough for a TT position. Even better is to contact a TT staff member in the department that you would like to work with. the best soft money positions are ones in which the individual is not isolated from the rest of the department.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/13 | 782 | 2,529 | <issue_start>username_0: In the past (historically), `A+` was a bonus in transcript and had an effect on the cumulative GPA too, but it is no common these days (at least I do not see around). If some universities/colleges use `A+` in the transcript, but it is equally considered as an `A` in calculating the GPA.
Is `A+` obsolete in the US universities/colleges? or because they use it for rare occasions, we do not normally see it?
In other words, are there still universities using `A+`, and equaling it to `4.3` in calculating the GPA?<issue_comment>username_1: I think A+ is used, but not very often. For GPA purposes, A and A+ are usually equal, but A+ is a rarer grade. Sometimes, A+ is used for 96 and higher. Personally, 97 and higher would merit an A+ if I was doing the grading, but that's just my opinion.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: How an A+ is treated varies from school to school. In the traditional American grading system, an "A" contributes a 4.0 to one's GPA, an "A-" contributes a 3.7, a "B+" contributes a 3.3, a "B" contributes 3.0, etc. In many universities, 4.0 represents the maximum possible GPA, and so an A+, although it may appear on the transcript next to a course, also only contributes 4.0 to one's GPA. At other universities (such as e.g. Columbia), an A+ contributes 4.3 to one's GPA.
None of this matters very much of course.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I am a student at State University of New York. For my first semester (I transferred from a community college) I got 4.03 GPA. I got three A's, one A-, and one A+.
So to answer your question: A+ is equaled to more than 4.0 GPA (I do not know if it is 4.3), it is rare and probably depends on your professor, but it is definitely not obsolete.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I know that, out of top 20 schools, at least Stanford, Columbia, and Cornell give "bonus" credit for A+ (4.3). I'm sure many other schools do as well, though it is not really the norm.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I am a student at Arizona State University, I have a cumulative GPA of 4.0. However, my term GPA is 4.17 because I had an A and am A+! So, at ASU, if you got all A+'s you would have a Term GPA of 4.33, but probably still have a cumulative gpa of 4.0.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: At the University of Oregon, you can get an A+. Only some courses actually offer A+'s, however, if you do receive an A+, it counts as a 17.20 QP's and a 4.3 (instead of 4.0) towards your GPA.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/14 | 467 | 2,068 | <issue_start>username_0: In a conference, where I am an author, I noticed that there is a substantial fees for registering as a listener for the conference.(10-30% less than the fees for professionals, students etc but it is still on higher side).
Is this justified given that as an author I would like my work to be presented in front of as many people as possible and receive comments for the same. Is this common practice in conferences across Computer Science or any other field ?<issue_comment>username_1: The main reason for fees is that there is a cost for renting the auditoriums and perhaps other services (refreshments, facilities etc.). Under such circumstances all participants need to pay to support the conference. Exactly how the pricing is done differs widely but in most cases it is based on costs divided by a certain number of projected participants in different categories. There are conferences which I have attended that seem horrendously expensive and are held in luxurious places with organizing services and then there are those run by a smaller society where making a cheap efficient meeting for the members by the members is a priority. In all cases you pay just to get in.
So pricing will vary depending on venue and organiser. Depending on how the conference is organized you may be able to gain some insights into how the costs come about and then make constructive comments to the organisers on how it should change; particularly if the organisers are a membership organisation where you are a member.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Is it justified? Well, if people pay it, then yes. If they don't, then no.
I don't think it's any more complicated than that.
Conference organisers want to earn a living by doing their job. Just as you do.
Some will seek to make as much profit as possible. The market will decide whether or not they are succesful in this.
It's just the economics of the private sector within a mixed economy. So looking for a moral dimension is like dancing about architecture.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/14 | 744 | 3,250 | <issue_start>username_0: I am doing research in an industrial organization. Now, I have written a paper describing my work and outcomes. The idea was completely envisaged by me and the paper was written solely be me. It was an outcome of a funded research project, but the research done was no where in the scope of the work, and I managed to squeeze time to do this work.
Now, I am confused on whom to include in my co-authors lists.
I have only one teammate, with whom I worked in the project but didn't take any help for doing this area of work and writing the paper. But I think he deserves to be a co-author since we discussed various related things.
I also gave the paper for review to my reporting officer who gave a few grammatical suggestions and tips on paper writing.
Now, the problem is, I have two more level of hierarchy above my reporting officer one of them being the director of the organization. Would it be ethical to include their names as co-authors when no discussion was made with them regarding this or should they be acknowledged ?
Note: The usual practice in my organization is to keep your superiors name before yourself(some red tapism probably), and I have already violated that by keeping myself as first author(thanks to ASE).<issue_comment>username_1: Regarding your teammate, it seems that you had exchange of ideas with him, and it is up to you to consider whether that consists of a scientific contribution to the final paper. Regarding your reporting officer, the description your currently have (*“a few grammatical suggestions and tips on paper writing”*) do not sound like **significant scientific contributions** (which
is the commonly-used threshold for authorship determination; check with the journal or publisher's guidelines for your specific case). Your hierarchy, well, this doesn't sound like they contributed at all.
That being said, there is real life to consider, your organization's policies and customs, and your own contract. In a way, it might actually be easier for you not to have your teammate as co-author, in which case it is clear that the paper is *yours* (while the outcome of the work itself was the company's).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: People who have made no intellectual or scientific contribution to a paper should not be listed as authors. So, unless your upper-level supervisors have had an active role in designing the project, carrying it out, or writing the papers, they should be excluded. This is the practice normally carried out in corporate environments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The guide lines suggested by the [vancuver Protocol](http://www.research.mq.edu.au/about/research_@_macquarie/policies,_procedures_and_conduct/documents/Vancouver.pdf) lists what should be the norm. It is evident that not everyoone abides by this protol and in some cases deviations may be fine. Take some time to study the protocol (the one linked or some other version) and make your mind up how you should abide. It is not always easy to know who to include and excluding peoplemay be evenharder because of a variety of reasons from personal to financial. The protocol at least provides a platform against which any such decision can be judged.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/14 | 551 | 2,427 | <issue_start>username_0: Assume you are reading two academic papers every day. What strategies can I use to decrease the possibility of confusion between the two?<issue_comment>username_1: I do of course not know what your current work strategy looks like so I can only provide what I think are generally helpful tools.
Note-taking should be a priority, not only to avoid confusion but also to help you get an overview. set a target to summarize the paper in a about a page and try to capture the following:
* What is the major question covered by the paper?
* Why is it important?
* What was done (experiments observations data)?
* What are the major conclusions of the paper?
* Did you find any new information of particular interest to you?
You may come up with similar or different key questions depending on th epurpose of your reading. The point is to make such short summaries of the papers.
Once you have the summaries you could consider organizing them in some fashion. There is no exclusive model to use and in fact the organization may depend on the purpose of your reading. You may find that after reading a number of papers a possible way to organize them can become clear. The main purpose of this step is to bundle papers that have specific points in common.
You should also sort your papers (printouts or files) with your notes. There are many ways of doing this rom the analogue to data bases. Try to use a free reference data base system to get everything organized.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As JeffE has suggested, some confusion with reading papers is both expected and desirable -
I can always tell which paper's I've read closely, versus skimmed for a little bit of information, because they've got scribbles in the margins.
And therein lies my recommendation: Thoroughly, carefully interact with each paper. You're not just "reading" them in the same way one reads a good novel. Annotate. Take notes. Find places where the author seems to have taken a leap and make sure you agree with them. If they don't show the steps for something, see if you can puzzle them out for yourself. If you don't understand a bit of math, etc. work it out until you do.
It may also help to read from two related but distinct fields, so that your papers don't feel "the same". For example, one empirical and one theoretical paper. Or a wide scale review and a single study.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/14 | 474 | 2,153 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a co-author in a paper. How can attending a conference be beneficial to career and resume since I am not sure whether to attend it.<issue_comment>username_1: Since conferences are the places where new science results are typically first presented, going to conerences can be very rewarding. You will most likely get an overview of the area within which the conference lies. You will meet and hear many researchers you may only have heard about or read. You also have the opportunity to network and find others that are working on similar or related topics. So there are several reasons for going and if you intend to stay in academia you should make it a habit to attend at least one per year (depending on costs and travel etc.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Unless you are *presenting* a paper at a conference, there isn't much advantage for your résumé. From a professional and educational perspective, however, conferences can be very informative, for the reasons Peter outlines.
I would go a little bit further than Peter, however, and recommend that, if possible, you try to attend *multiple* conferences per year, particularly if you are relatively early on in your career. At least one should be a relatively large meeting, where you can make many contacts in your *general* field; and one, if possible, should be a smaller meeting or workshop, where you can interact with your peers in your *specific* field. That way, you get the benefits of learning about the overall field—which is important for networking and job-finding, as well as the close-up exposure to work related to your own.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Conferences provide opportunities to learn about the latest research in your field. Additionally, conferences also help in networking. Networking often increases your chances of collaboration in future projects. You should attend as many conferences as possible as this will make you a known figure in academic circles. It will also be beneficial for your CV as it will create the impression that you are an active member of the academic community.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/14 | 434 | 1,917 | <issue_start>username_0: US universities seem to have assistant professors go through a reappointment process before tenure. It seems like a similar review, complete with letters. Except unlike tenure, almost 100% of people get reappointed. In fact I do not know of a case in which a professor failed to have their contract renewed at reappointment.
Since it seems pro-forma, why do it at all?<issue_comment>username_1: It is not totally pro-forma; I do know of examples where the contract was not renewed, though it certainly does happen less often than a tenure denial. I think the standard is basically "is it reasonable to hope this person gets tenure?"
I think the purpose is to try to get people ready for their tenure review by having a look at their case early, and trying point out where they are doing OK and where they could do better. If nothing else, it focuses the minds of people in the department who might have let things slide otherwise. It seems pretty logical to me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 points out, it is not entirely pro forma (I know a couple of people who did not get their contracts renewed). I agree with his points, but here's another aspect:
In departments where tenure denials are common, it's extremely valuable to get a preview of how strong the letters will be. If they aren't compelling enough, the department will probably still renew your contract, but they'll warn you that tenure isn't likely. This gives you several years to find another job, which is valuable because job hunting is more difficult after a tenure denial: universities that might have been interested when they thought they were competing with University X may not be as excited about taking what they perceive as University X's rejects. So the information from the reappointment process may be very useful in ways that are intentionally invisible from the outside.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/14 | 466 | 1,887 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a master's student doing research in the field of the cognitive psychology of language and I would like to do an unpaid 4-month research internship in a different university. I am preparing cover letters to send to different professors within whose projects I would like to work. I want to include in my cover letter a description of what I plan to do during my short internship, so I want to know what research interns usually do. How can they contribute to an existing research project? Also, can I say that I want to learn how to use a specific research technique (like for example a neuroimaging technique) even if I have no experience with it?
Do you have any general advice on how to best ask a professor to accept me as an intern within their research project?<issue_comment>username_1: You need to have an insatiable hunger for learning and adding knowledge or contributing to the society. If you have bad grades, you need to present yourself well and prove to your professors that you've got more that good grades to offer. Be inspired and work your way to the top without getting gunned down by pressure.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **Networking is key**--check out [F'x's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5066/7921) to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/5065/7921). Find people in your university who are willing to recommend you to the other researchers in the field, whom you would like to work with. Take advantage of the connections your faculty members have developed.
Then **write a killer cover letter**. aeismail notes that [a compelling 'cover letter' email](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5071/7921) was the only reason he even considered an individual for a research internship. Research the PI and tailor your letter to his/her interests and current project.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/15 | 956 | 4,071 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a first year PhD student.
I'm in my first stage (doing a literature review) but I face problem in organizing the papers I read and the notes I take for all papers. Should I put all that in one MS Word file for example, or different MS word files, or maybe use a different software?
I don't want to come after month from now and get confused about the way I organize my papers and notes in.
So, any helpful ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, a graduate *school* is a learning process so finding what is perfect from you from the start is a valiant endeavour but not necessarily sure fire.
You should start to use a data base system, some (mentioned in comments) that come to mind are [Mendeley](http://www.mendeley.com/) (free), [EndNote](http://endnote.com/) (commercial), [RefBase](http://sourceforge.net/projects/refbase/) (free) to mention a few. If you consider going into LateX (which many of us swear by) then I can recommend [JabRef](http://jabref.sourceforge.net/) (free; BibTeX format). There is also a [Wikipedia comparison page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software) that can be of assistance.
To sort your references concerns managing some form of structure where you group or "mind map your articles. In the old days you simply kept them in piles. With a data base software you can start providing key words in the data base and also keep some short notes for each paper which makes everything searchable and ready for sorting. I think the process or sorting articles is one that changes with different tasks and also persons so you are best of taking some advice from others and looking into it. Hopefully you also have peers around who can provide their insights. In the end you will develop your own set of tools that suit your needs and to keep trying different ones at an early stage, and discarding many of them, is far better than trying to do it later when the mass of information is much larger. Another option is to simply start using something and sticking with it regardless of weaknesses.
The bottom line is that with experience you will rely less and less on note-taking and be more efficient at seeing structure in what you read and so keeping a reference database is the main tool you will use. Even if this may not sound very constructive, I also say that the time you spend now on testing different solutions will pay back later, putting it off is only pushing problems forward.
A final personal note. If you want a free, platform independent, and completely versatile way to author documents you should look into LaTeX-writing (for example through [TeX.stackexchange](https://tex.stackexchange.com/)). I recommend it to everyone unless you are in a complete Word-environment, being alone with a different system can be hard. You should nevertheless look into it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I electronically highlight and comment my papers in the program Xournal. I used to then organize them somewhat in a program called Zotero (in some ways similar to the Mendeley mentioned above I believe). However, I recently stopped using Zotero because it was an additional hassle.
So currently I just mark up papers in Xournal and then organize them into different directories within my Dropbox account. I'm happy with this, and have been doing it for about 4 years now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I used to use a journal to keep track of my readings as I could take the journal to the library with me. If I were doing a similar thing today, I'd use a wiki to keep track of my notes and research as that would let me re-organize things as needed, host PDFs of the journal articles when available and allow for searching.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm a first year myself, so I can't say "this works" so much as "this is what I'm trying"... But what I'm trying is using Zotero & Zotfile to hold notes on individual papers, and after reading each one I to try to fit it into a structure in a mind map (I use X-Mind).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/15 | 590 | 2,569 | <issue_start>username_0: I have two related questions, which are similar to my other question
[Should I simultaneously apply for multiple jobs in different ranks at the same university?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12414/should-i-apply-for-all-jobs-that-a-university-offer)
The first one is say a school is opening a tenure position in the Associate Professor rank. I like to know how the job committee will view the application from a candidate who is currently a postdoc?
The second one is that say the school opens both a tenured-track Assistant Professor and a tenure Associate Professor. Should a candidate who is a postdoc apply to both or only to the tenured-track position? If he/she applies to both, whether that affects his/her application negatively?<issue_comment>username_1: No. Unless you have proved the Riemann hypothesis or cured cancer, you won't be hired into a tenured position straight from a postdoc (in the USA). You should apply for tenure-track assistant professor positions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I actually do know of examples of postdocs being hired with tenure. They were people with very strong records, though certainly not solving the Riemann hypothesis (or even necessarily future Fields Medal) caliber. However, I don't think applying for the tenured in addition to TT job will increase the probability of this happening. This something that a university will do if they really badly want you and are worried you will get a TT position somewhere "better," not because you asked politely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Under most circumstances (not an exceptionally brilliant candidate or a field that is very difficult to recruit in), if a postdoc applies to what is advertised as a tenured associate professor position, then I would interpret the application as asking whether the university might consider hiring at the assistant professor level instead. That's not unreasonable, since job openings do not always get filled the way the department had in mind. The chances are lower if the department is hoping for something else, but it's not impossible.
I'd recommend being explicit about this. If you are actually trying for tenure straight out of a postdoc, you should say so, but it will be a waste of time unless there are unusual circumstances (and it may make you look arrogant or out of touch). If you would like to be considered for a tenure-track position should the department decide to hire at that level instead, then you should make that clear.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/15 | 1,669 | 6,965 | <issue_start>username_0: I was actually thinking about submitting one of my papers in a conference which is to be held in Spain (LATA 2014) but alas I might not be able to do so since the registration fees for this conference is 400 Euros (discounted since I'm a student) which is virtually impossible to afford (since in addition to the registration fees I will have to travel to Spain as well). In fact just to get a sense of how much money this is, this 400 Euros is almost equivalent to half the salary (in terms of basic pay) a senior professor earns in my country (India) and I see that this conference is not the only one when it comes to such high fees. What are the real reasons behind such high fees? Isn't this in some away discouraging genuine contributions in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: Typically the fees are to cover the facilities of the meeting including services attached to the venue. In addition there may be administrative costs for the conveners to be added to that. My experience says that everytime you let a professional conference center and staff organize a meeting it becomes very expensive. this may seem like a bad ideabut what is often not seen is the work volounteers would have to put in if you tried to organize a large conference without such help. Free help is usually not easy to muster these days.
So while I agree that conference fees may seem ridiculously high at times the reason is that it would be hard to organize them otherwise. It may be easier for recurring conferences since they can build a knowledge base and tools to help but for a one-off the ask can be too large without professional help.
By keeping a discussion open about these costs we can perhaps put the spotlight on the problems and realize that we cannot both have the cake and eat it. In order to reduce costs meetings may have to be organized in simpler venues and by more volounteers from the community.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Unfortunately, it is expensive to run a conference. You have to rent the venue, provide food, possibly pay for a keynote speaker, and pay for other incidental costs.
Furthermore, as you note there is a disparity in salaries between developed and developing countries, and this can price out participants from developing nations.
I don't believe there is an institutional discrimination against academic contributions from developing nations, but your inference that it is harder to make these contributions because of a wage/price discrepancy and the need to attend a conference to be published in it is valid.
One option that might be helpful is to try to publish in journals, which do not incur travel fees. Not the best answer, I admit, but something to consider.
Finally, this is a discussion that you should have with your university -- it is in their interest to help faculty and students get published, and there may be money for travel and conference fees that the university can help out with. Furthermore, research grants (often also harder to obtain in developing nations, unfortunately) should be set up to pay for conference fees and travel, and faculty members should do everything they can to compete for grant money.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: First, some practical side notes.
* I'm in a field with high conference fees as well. However, my professor once complained with conference organizers when student fees were 250 € saying that no student (and no institute paying for the student) could afford that. I got in at a much reduced price.
However, I once attended a conference in Africa where many "speakers" didn't show up after they had tried to make the organizers completely waive the fees *and* pay their travel a week or so before the conference. The organizers felt blackmailed and refused (I believe they had a developing countries discount from the beginning, but I'm not entirely sure. Europeans paid about what you'd pay for a conference in Europe)
* You may be able to negotiate a discount for not attending the conference dinner, tourist program, etc. (though I recommend attending if possible: this is where you can talk and get to know people)
* Some conferences and/or professional societies have travel grants for students. Some universities have travel grants as well. They would usually help towards both conference fee, flight ticket and housing at the conference location. Ask around.
* In my field (analytical chemistry/spectroscopy) in terms of conference fees for students I found that conferences in the US had *much* lower student fees compared to Europe.
Some more points on the costs:
* you mention that the 400€ is half a months salary for a prof in your country. But the costs of living and the wages are not the same all over the world. You don't get as far in Spain with 400€ as you'd get in India. Unfortunately I guess from India most good conferences will be in crazy expensive countries.
* However, I've seen conference announcements in southeast Asia and northern Africa, and the fees were not that much lower compared to european and north american locations.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I just had a discussion about this last night and the conclusion is that it's pretty much a reverse Robin Hood thing: tax the poor (with no grants) to pay for the elite (who have major grants). Meaning, a large part of the exorbitant fees consists of money to pay for the travel and lodging of the plenary speakers -- Plenaries in my view being the least interesting part of the conference, as the speakers, who have won the popularity contest, are generally not any better speakers than anyone else, not talking about my specific niche, and not talking about their own niche intelligibly enough for an outsider. Just a 20 minute torture extended into one hour and paid for by the unfortunate masses in their registration fees.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Here's the budget from a recent conference I attended, surprisingly published in the conference program. Woohoo for transparency! What surprises me are the absolutely lunatic catering costs (14%): the catering was abysmally bad, just coffee and water in the breaks, and a conference reception with almost nothing served. (And true to US conferences, the hotel was ludicrously expensive with no breakfast included, unlike in Europe.) Definitely not worth the $71 USD that 14% of the $510 registration fee is (for minisymposium organisers--even more for regular participants). Also a lot of paying into SIAM's bureaucracy. The invited speaker costs are 8.5%, so quite a bit, but less than I expected. They filmed this conference to be distributed online, and I guess that is a lot of the 13.5% AV cost (SIAM did not even provide computers for the talks, session organisers had to bring their own)--in my opinion a total waste of participant money.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rdBuC.png)
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/15 | 1,057 | 4,698 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a beginner in research papers and doesn't know much about registration and presenting.
Can two authors register for the same conference and present the paper (together)?<issue_comment>username_1: Registration and presentation of a paper are two somewhat separate issues. Normally, presenters at a conference must register, but there is no rule that says only one author of a paper can register for a given conference.
In general, however, papers normally have only one presenter, as the logistics of a conference normally work against having multiple speakers for a single presentation. (The presentation time is not that long, transferring a microphone between speakers, ensuring proper "flow" of the talk across the change in presenters, and so on, all tend to work against the idea of multiple presenters for a given paper.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1 said, registration and presentation are two separate things. I don't have a *vast* conference experience, but from what I've observed/done until now:
**Registration**
Registration is more about attending the conference.
Most conferences require at least *one author* of a paper to *register for a "full" fee/participation*.
To explain, I've seen reduced fees for students or options to win a free/reduced stay sponsored by the conference (this usually requires a motivation letter or things like that). So, the conference usually requires one registration at full price, and then other authors can register and attend at a reduced fee if they're eligible. Reduced fees (about 10-20%) for members of various organizations (e.g. IEEE members) still count as full fees.
**Presentations**
It's very uncommon to see two people presenting. And it's substantially harder for them -- for the reasons @username_1 said; it's hard to get the dynamic right and you will potentially loose a lot of time on the switches.
However, *it can be done*: I did it. Just as in @ChrisGregg comment, I had a truly collaborative paper with a colleague: we joined our substantially different work in a single application, and knew only the basics about the other ones contribution, so we decided to present our own contributions each.
It required more work and preparation than any other oral presentation (conference or otherwise) I ever did. We had to really know what we were doing, we both needed to know each others slides and their contents well. We had to practice being *really good at presenting our own parts*, and then *practice presenting together*, especially the switches. The switches had to be fast and natural. We actually switched two times I think (person A - person B - person A) (or even three times, not sure?). But *every presenter's part had to be a whole "chapter" all in it self.* There's much less room for improvisation (even the tiny ones within one slide can confuse the other person). The flow of the presentation is also more constricted -- what is the most natural way to present a work might require way to many switches. So, you have to ensure a minimal number of switches while still keeping the presentation flow natural and concise. And, I did feel kind of out-of-place just hovering around waiting for the switch while my colleague was presenting.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I and <NAME> did exactly that on the last IMC meeting (though it wasn't a single paper but a survey of a series of related papers) and nobody had any problem with that. We just felt that 50 minutes is a bit too little to tell everything we wanted in an understandable way and split the presentation into two parts. Of course, nobody wants to listen to the same talk twice, but if your paper can be split into two more or less independent parts (making some cross-references is OK as long as you avoid vicious circles and state clearly what you refer to), then I see no problem whatsoever with you presenting one part and your co-author another one. Just make sure that people who go to only one of these talks still have a chance to understand something.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I've occasionally seen a situation where, in a conference session divided into short talks (say 20 minutes), two co-authors will speak back-to-back on the same paper (though each focuses on different aspects). This obviously needs the consent and cooperation of the organizers to get consecutive time slots. The talks normally have titles like:
* Integrability in quantum category theory I: Applications to the derivation of isometries
* Integrability in quantum category theory II: Connections to an example of Banach
to make it clear that they are closely related.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/15 | 743 | 3,321 | <issue_start>username_0: To expand on the question, I recently (as in yesterday) posted a question on Math.SE and also wrote my answer in the post, claiming that my answer was wrong. One answerer pointed out that I was correct, but simply needed to do a quick deduction step, after which I edited that question with that deduction step.
So if I use this answer now in my assignment, will it be considered an academic offense? None of my university's resources are helpful at all in this regard. I'm a student in the sciences, and all the 'resources' of the university are towards arts students. I'd like a clear cut answer because informing my instructor that I posted my own interpretation of a question on an assignment is really out of the question, since I don't know if consequences exist for that.
I'm already looking for an alternative answer, but I'd like to know if using my current answer would be an academic offense. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: The offense lies in taking material without consent or proper acknowledgement. In your case, you can simply acknowledge the comment so that it is clear that you received feedback to improve or correct your work. I think this help can be equated to peer review. Hence I do not think consent is necessary as long as the person providing the help is explicitly acknowledged.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I'd like to know if using my current answer would be an academic offense.
>
>
>
It's impossible to determine this without more information about your university and course policies. If you're honest about what happened, then I doubt you could get in a lot of trouble for this, but of course I don't know the policies and potential consequences in your case. At my university different courses can have different policies on collaboration (regarding what's allowed and what sort of acknowledgment must be given), but they should be explained at the beginning of the semester.
If I were teaching the course, it wouldn't bother me that you got advice on this problem, since it looks like you did most of the work yourself and learned something from the feedback you received. However, I would be unhappy that you posted the homework problem and a complete solution online, thereby making it easy for other students in the class to copy your solution if they know about math.SE. If the grader detects several solutions with nearly the same wording as the one you submit, then you may all be accused of cheating.
If you can't find a clear statement of the relevant policies on your course or department website, then I strongly recommend asking your instructor how to handle this. In theory that could end badly, but I don't expect it to. Bringing it up yourself is almost certainly better than letting the instructor discover it, and it would mean you could stop worrying.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **Only your instructor can answer this question.**
If you were a student in one of my courses, consulting Math.SE and using the comments/replies you received would be fine, provided you cited them properly and you rewrote them in your own words. But I believe I am in the minority. Most faculty in my department would consider consulting a StackExchange site in the first place to be cheating. You just have to ask.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/15 | 584 | 2,693 | <issue_start>username_0: In writing a literature review, assume you have the paper X and the paper Y. The two are similar in the study and the results. How can I write a review in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: Without knowing all the details it is not possible to provide equal amounts of detail in an answer. Since we (you) do not know the background of these papers it is also problematic to try to say anything to separate them. It is, for example, possible that they were mde independently bt one wtook much longer through review. we simply do not know. We cannot therefore cast judgement. I think it is ffair to simply list them both in a citation without saying anything about who was first, the publication date will definitely put one before the other.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It looks that it is an example of two independent studies that obtained similar results so you might comment that this reinforces the claim that the reported results are correct. However, most probably the studies weren't exact replications so it might be good to mention the differences between the studies.
It is also a good idea to investigate the journals they were published in - maybe the earlier paper was published in some obscure journal and the second one appeared in a high impact factor one? Have you looked at 'cited by' numbers (in Google Scholar)? Which paper got more citations? Maybe there are some publications that mention both papers? This might give you a clue how the community finds both papers and which one made more impact. It is also plausible that one paper got bigger publicity simply because of more known authors/research group.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would just say "We have the following result in the following setting", tell the scientific part of the story, and finish with "see [] and [] for details". No matter what you do, my advice is not to try to claim that someone "did it" and the other one "repeated it" or "did it later" or that the results were "obtained independently". With a three year difference in publication time (some papers take longer to prepare and to review and it certainly takes more for an average paper to get "widely known"), you never know what exactly happened and it is neither your duty, nor your right to make any "educated guesses" on that account unless you have some tangible evidence at your disposal.
This is basically the same as Peter said (only in stronger language). You may launch a small "private investigation" along the lines username_2 indicated to satisfy your own curiosity, of course, but it is definitely way beyond your reviewer duties and nobody really expects that.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/15 | 2,628 | 10,578 | <issue_start>username_0: This question may be too specialist to be on topic here. If it is off topic, please feel free to transfer it to another SE site, or close it, as
appropriate.
I am planning to publish an applied statistics paper. This paper
develops an algorithm and then applies this algorithm to some data. I
obtained most of this data from the site <http://www.imgt.org>. The data I am
using are immunoglobulin and T cell receptor nucleotide sequences, in
the form of FASTA files. I'm using around 200 of these.
Here is an [random example](http://www.imgt.org/IMGTlect/?query=201%20M38103) of the data I am using (click on [6 Sequence (FASTA format)] to get the FASTA file).
Now, I have a problem. In [Warranty Disclaimer and Copyright Notice](http://www.imgt.org/Warranty.html), is written
>
> The IMGT® software and data are provided as a service to the
> scientific community to be used only for research and educational
> purposes. Individuals may print or save portions of IMGT® for their
> own personal use. Any other use of IMGT® material need prior written
> permission of the IMGT director and of the legal institutions (CNRS
> and Université Montpellier 2).
>
>
>
I just heard from Prof. <NAME> and she replied:
>
> I have no objection that the data you retrieved for your work from
> IMGT/LIGM-DB be made available to the reviewers, but unfortunately we
> cannot authorize a script or a distribution of the IMGT/LIGM-DB files
> with your code to the users.
>
>
> You can provide the users with the list of the IMGT/LIGM-DB accession
> numbers you used, with the source of the data clearly identified:
> (IMGT/LIGM-DB version number) and reference to NAR 2006.
>
>
>
Well, this just made my life more difficult. To start with, I'm
puzzled by this. Isn't biological data like this public domain? Is it
really possible to treat immunoglobulin and T cell receptor nucleotide
sequence data as proprietary information?
I just wrote back and asked <NAME> what license the data was
published under, which I had not done earlier.
Additionally, how does one make data available to reviewers and not to
users? That is awkward, to say the least.
Also, the data is inconvenient to download. As you can see
from the example above, the FASTA file is displayed in a web page, and
is not downloaded by that button. One needs to clean the web page to
get the FASTA file, which is a pain. As you can see Prof. Lefranc also
disallowed the use of a script for doing this. What this most likely
means in practice is that no user will ever actually test the code,
because obtaining the data is too difficult.
I realise that the users of this site may not be comfortable offering
what is essentially a legal opinion, and if so, can anyone suggest a
more authoritative source to ask about the legalities of this? Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, **it is making your life a little harder, but it doesn't mean publication of your work is impossible, nor does it make IMGT's action unethical**. I cannot comment on the legality of IMGT's copyright claim on the data, but contesting their claim doesn't sound like a great idea in the first place. In any case, talk it through with **a lawyer from your university's legal department**, before you do anything that deviates from what IMGT asks for.
Now, how can you move forward? Well, separate your existing code (which does the scraping and the analysis) into two separate parts:
1. The IMGT website scrapper/parser, which will download data and write it to files named after each query (`M38103.txt` for query “M38103”).
Do not publish that part (but keep it around, it would be a shame to throw away code that you have already written, and that works: you never know, IMGT's policy may change in the future).
2. The bulk of your analysis code, which takes these query results as text input files.
You now publish #2, and give the referees access to the files (journal submission websites have an option for *“supporting information for reviewers only”*, although it may be called differently). In the paper, you indicate clearly (but not aggressively) that “because licensing restrictions do not allow us to redistribute IMGT data, we provide a script that requires query results as text input files”.
You're not the first person to publish valid research results that come from analysis of a proprietary data source. There is no ethical issue here, because **the reviewers have enough information to accurately review the validity of your work**. Moreover, even the readers will be able to reproduce your work, though it will require a separate download step (and definitely depends on IMGT keeping its database online and freely accessible).
So yeah, **it makes your code is little harder to use for others, but it doesn't diminish the values of the results you have obtained with it!**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 already said, from a scientific perspective there is no problem.
The data is available, just not automatically and from you, but from the original source (via the ID numbers). So editor, reviewers and readers can get the data, given they are not too lazy to download it from the original web site. That is much more than is common in many fields of physical/experimental science.
Considering that you are talking about biological data, not having an automated download is so much more convenient than trying to reproduce experimental data (although I have to say that it is a sensible and under-used mid-way checkpoint) ...
However, here are a few more thoughts:
>
> Isn't biological data like this public domain? Is it really possible to treat immunoglobulin and T cell receptor nucleotide sequence data as proprietary information?
>
>
>
* *Facts* cannot be copyrighted. But the measured *data* is subject to copyright. If I go through the effort of doing these measurements, I'm the owner of that data. Just as you are the author of the program code you wrote and the paper you wrote.
But, as you cannot forbid that someone else to write another program doing the same, or another paper on the same subject, just because I have the rights to *my* measurements, I cannot forbid you to make your own measurements.
Of course I could donate my data base to the public domain, just as you can put your program under a FOSS license.
* Copyright varies considerably depending on jusdiction. So IMHO this question cannot really be answered without taking into account where the database comes from (EU) and where you are located.
Now, in the EU we have a database copyright given you put enough effort in making the data base (it is not enough to grab an old encyclopedia and scan pages from that. But carefully curating a nucleotide sequence database is clearly enough). Again, this copyright is for the database, not for the facts stored in the database.
For your nucleotide sequences that means: if you choose to use *their* nucleotide database, you have to stick to their rules. But again, you are free to measure the nucleotide sequence yourself and use that data set instead.
---
>
> how does one make data available to reviewers and not to users
>
>
>
You can use the letter to the editor to tell the editor that you'd be happy to supply the reviewers with the curated data set you acutally used for the analysis.
---
>
> the data is inconvenient to download. [...]
>
> I realise that the users of this site may not be comfortable offering what is essentially a legal opinion
>
>
>
While it is certainly a good idea to learn about copyright, I cannot recommend going for legal loopholes against the database owner's expressed wishes. They do allow enough for you and other scientists to do science. Why would you want to upset them?
I think it would be better to talk to them. What about this instead of asking them to allow scripts, you could offer to produce for *them* a second version of the data base that is suitable as machine-readable input, and kindly ask them whether they would be willing to make that version available via their server.
In addition to learning about copyright, maybe you could ask them for their reasons for their download policy. There may be a whole lot for you to learn in that answers as well.
I come from one of the physical sciences where good measurements take lots of effort. Here are some reasons why a data base ownder may say that people should download the data base from the original source:
* The name of "owner"/author of the database is associated with it. As author you may not want to run the risk of getting associated with derivatives that do not follow your strict high-quality policy.
* One very simple way to ensure that people actually get *your* data base when they think they do is to tell them always to download the original
(there are alternatives, such as signing a version for distribution etc.).
* In addition, the owner may want/need to have at least a rough overview of how many people use the data base. Such information is at the very least extremely helpful when you need to show that you are not doing useless stuff for your wages.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The copyright is probably on the full database release flatfile and the formatted entries ... you will find similar conditions for UniProt/SwissProt so it is not so unusual.
The restrictions on scripts are common to prevent server performance hits from a large number of requests.
You can simply invite reviewers to download the data from some other server, for example from the EBI SRS server. The URL for entry A00673 would be
"http://srs.ebi.ac.uk/srsbin/cgi-bin/wgetz?[IMGTLIGM-ID:a00673]+-view+FastaSeqs+-ascii"
You can also use a list of accessions, for example A00673 or A01650
"http://srs.ebi.ac.uk/srsbin/cgi-bin/wgetz?[IMGTLIGM-ID:a00673|a01650]+-view+FastaSeqs+-ascii"
If downloading many entries you should pause between requests, but putting lists into the URLs may reduce it to few enough not to cause a problem. I doubts EBI would be upset by 200 requests - they would be concerned about thousands.
There are various fasta formats available for IMGT data, you need to find a server that produces fasta files compatible with your input requirements.
Alternatively of course your reviewers could download the whole database from IMGT or any of the other servers (including <ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/imgt/>) and generate their own fasta subset from the list of accessions/ids
Hope that helps!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/15 | 853 | 3,363 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an *undergraduate* student at the University of Waterloo. I'm writing a paper potentially for IEEE Security and Privacy, which is a semi-academic magazine. Basically, papers follow the abstract, body, lots of references format, and read like research papers, but apparently generally exposit some random software gadget produced by the author's research etc, so not a super-academic journal.
My question is, how should I put my name on the paper? Should I just write "<NAME>" or "<NAME>, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo" or something else? I don't want to be misunderstood to be a faculty member.<issue_comment>username_1: You should put your name, your university, and (if appropriate) your department. Sometimes it can be difficult to figure out which department to put. When I was in undergrad, I listed the departments that were paying me, or in which my concentration (i.e. major) I was. If when you were working on the project, you were employed by some professor or received an award (say NSERC) through your department, then that is the easiest affiliation. In your case, this means that you would go further than "Faculty of Mathematics" and say something like "Department of Combinatorics & Optimization, University of Waterloo" (I am just randomly guessing a department in the faculty, replace appropriately). Sometimes, it might make sense to instead of placing a department to place the name of the lab on which you worked, but for that ask your professor.
Further, if you plan to stay in academia (or go to grad school) then you should decide at this point (I am assuming this is your first publication) what your academic name will be. Search Google Scholar for your name, and see if somebody in your field is already using it. If it is a common name then it might be worthwhile to add an initial to disambiguate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Grad students often write "PhD candidate" on their websites, etc., so you might consider "<NAME>, BSc candidate, School of Computer Science (or whatever your department is), University of Waterloo".
Edited to add: I was curious, so I checked the [author guidelines](http://www.computer.org/portal/web/peerreviewmagazines/acsecurity). They don't indicate how to specify your affiliation, so I would either ask the editor or look at some articles from the most recent issue and copy their style.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The answer to this and all such similar questions is in two stages:
1. first, check the journal's guidelines for authors. The answer's probably there.
2. If the answer isn't there, ask your editorial contact at the journal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To answer the title question:
**Yes, you should include your university affiliation.** (Particularly important if you plan to stay in academia or go to grad school--and at this point I would advise at least keeping those options open.)
Consider something like this:
>
>
> >
> > "<NAME>, Student, Department of Mathematics, University of Waterloo."
> >
> >
> > OR
> >
> >
> > "<NAME>, Candidate for BSc, Department of Mathematics, University of Waterloo."
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
This clearly indicates *where* you have done the work, as well as specifying that you are a student rather than a faculty member.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/16 | 1,056 | 4,616 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a post graduate engineering student (computer science). I have only one conference publication (not very good) as a first author.
One of my senior labmates worked on a very good research project a few months ago and wrote a paper. I have been approached by him to generate a few more results for his paper and proof reading and extending his paper with a literature survey and elaborate explanation of results. I have been offered co-authorship (second author) for this paper.
Now, though I can dedicate some time to do that work, I wonder whether being the second author is worth it.
I would like to ask in general as well, that is: Is it worth it to put effort in papers to become the second author, given that the paper is not related to my primary area of research or rather work, as opposed to dedicating time to one’s own research and getting papers as a first author?
Note: I have seen that in academia (where I want to go), usually advertisements call for applications from people having some number of papers as a first author.<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, I would evaluate the quality of that paper (so far) first. If the quality is good, I would join him and become the second author. If the quality is poor, then walk away.
You have only one publication thus far. Have another one, even the second authorship, is definitely better than nothing. Not to mention your first authorship paper is not very good by your own evaluation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If the paper is well-written, contributes non-trivial knowledge to a particular field, is peer-reviewed, and you contributed significantly enough to the paper to be listed as an author, you should put your name on it. In the case of fields where pre-prints are common (i.e., it won't be peer-reviewed, at least initially), it is also worthwhile.
What you don't want is to be an author on a poorly written paper. In other words, you should be proud to list a publication on your CV even if it isn't exactly in your primary research area. Especially at this stage in the game, having a few good papers will help your case, even as a second author (and keep in mind that some fields, such as theoretical computer science, should have the authors listed alphabetically and all authors are considered primary).
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In the end, each paper counts. I would not hesitate to get second authorship unless I felt I deserved to be first author on the paper. What you need to consider is if the time you spend is worth it. If the paper is going to a good journal then is more acceptable than if it goes to a low rank journal. When your cv is evaluated, number of papers, journal impact, and citations on the papers are most frequently looked at. First authorship is an important factor as always but having second authorship (I am assuming among several co-authors) shows that you have been instrumental in the paper (I am again assuming authorship order reflects contribution). As long as you have first authorship on a sizable fraction of papers no-one will think twice about coauthoships, particularly not early in ones career.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I think you have to do a cost/benefit analysis. It's always good to have another paper, even if you are second author. A hiring or review committee may ask you to describe your own contribution to the paper. As long as you can do that honestly and point to some substantive contribution to the paper, it will be to your benefit. If it will take you a significant amount of time then it is probably a substantive contribution. The fact that it is not completely aligned with your own research may be an asset...it shows that you can collaborate and are willing to get outside your comfort zone.
So, what would you be doing instead if you did not contribute to your colleague's paper? If you have another paper that is at a critical stage then it may be reasonable to turn down your friend. Otherwise, I'd say go for it. It's hard to say what will catch the eye of a hiring committee.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It always depends on how much effort you need to put relative to the quality of the paper. HOWEVER -
This may be an urban myth, but I keep hearing from faculty that not having any second author papers is seen as a slight negative (this is in biology). Both in academia and in industry, the ability to collaborate and work in groups is seen as important. The only method they have of guessing what your teamwork skills are is - second author papers.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/16 | 637 | 2,574 | <issue_start>username_0: We are looking for a solution to manage our literature (citations and corresponding PDFs) in our workgroup (~15 persons). Everybody should have read-write access, so a solution having a shared library would be the best for us.
**Which workflows do other groups use for a common literature management?** We've checked out EndNote, Reference Manager and Mendeley so far, but are not happy with the "workgroup" options these softwares provide.<issue_comment>username_1: I'll go with **group-level Wiki** on that one. Give every member of the group read-write access (or IP-based write access), and have maintain lists of references (and attached PDF files) by topic and sub-topic. If you want to include some notes on a paper, create a new page for that paper, and put your notes there. People can add their own notes to the same paper later, by editing the page.
Search capabilities will be important, so choose you Wiki software so it has decent search support. Or export all the PDF files of papers as a read-only network drive, thus allowing for full-text search of the whole database through client's OS (which is what I do myself).
For examples of wikis run by research groups, see for example [professor Hero](http://tbayes.eecs.umich.edu) or [SklogWiki](http://www.sklogwiki.org/SklogWiki/index.php/SklogWiki%3aAbout) (on which papers are ordered by topic).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you run your own server, then there are some open source, web-based reference management tools like [refbase](http://www.refbase.net/), [Aigaion](http://www.aigaion.de/) or [WIKINDX](http://wikindx.sourceforge.net/) which seem to me most suitable for your purpose:
* You can share a reference library plus file attachments (and quotations in the case of WIKINDX) and
* all have import/export functions for RIS and BibTeX, so that all users can upload their own references and download the collective library independent of their reference manager of choice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Swiss Academic Software (I work for them) has a solution called "Citavi for DBServer" where the data is saved in a MS SQL server. The software "[Citavi](http://www.citavi.com)" is installed on the client computers to access the data. You can set different rights (Project manager, author, reader).
It is also possible to install the SQL Server on Windows Azure, allowing cross-organizational collaboration in a private cloud.
Caveat: Citavi is Windows-only (but a platform-agnostic web version is being developped at the moment).
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/16 | 673 | 2,713 | <issue_start>username_0: I must admit that although I deeply believe museums, no matter how small, play a very important role in almost any sort of research, proving their scientific character can be sometimes quite awkward. Is there any set of fixed criteria that would allow a museum to be considered as an academic institution if met?<issue_comment>username_1: The [OED definition of academic](http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/880?redirectedFrom=academic#eid)
>
> Of, relating to, or characteristic of an educational institution or
> environment; concerned with the pursuit of research, education, and
> scholarship; scholarly, educational, intellectual.
>
>
>
has a focus on education. The [wikipedia definition of academic instituion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_institution)
>
> Academic institution is an educational institution dedicated to
> education and research, which grants academic degrees.
>
>
>
also has a focus on education and a requirement to grant academic degrees. To me degree granting is critical to being an academic institution. I do not think of any non-degree granting institute as being academic. Places like the German MPIs and US National Laboratories are cutting edge research institutes, but not academic-institutes.
Non-academic research institutions often have a grants office, just like their academic counterparts. Further employees at non-academic institutions that wish to conduct research can often get a research appointment at a local university.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My answer is "localized".
* In France there is a distinction between museum of arts (arts in a broad sense, antiquities being arts for instance) and museum of natural sciences (biology, paleontology, etc.). The latter is considered an academic institution: part of the people working there have the title of associate or full professor, and they can have PhD students.
* In some european countries (France, UK, belgium at least), some museums are part of a university, so I think we can say that they are academic places.
The real question may be then "are you an academic if you work in an academic institution", and I guess the answer is no.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a better definition of an academic institution is whether they contribute to peer-reviewed research.
If museum staff often have *academic* input to peer-reviewed research, then perhaps they could be called an academic institution (in a pragmatic, not legal, sense). However if the museum staff merely serve as a repository of knowledge rather than a source of original ideas, then I would hesitate to call the museum an academic institution.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/16 | 1,537 | 5,996 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm trying to write my first introduction sentence, which should be catchy. I came up with a sentence along the lines of "imagine the world without this super thing, all these things wouldn't be possible". Obviously, this case will not occur in the next million years and I guess I won't be able to find any paper supporting my claims. However, the described consequences still seem realistic.
As the rest of the introduction is very technical and dry, I think a fresh start is quite nice, but I'm worried someone might say that this first sentence is not scientific as nobody can back up my statement.
Is having a bit more colloquial or lurid kick-off sentence considered to be a "good" or "bad" scientific writing style?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is having a bit more colloquial or lurid kick-off sentence considered to be a "good" or "bad" scientific writing style?
>
>
>
**It depends.** If your attention catching statement is relevant, true, and tasteful, then it is probably "good" scientific writing style. However, if the connection to the rest of your paper and its findings is not immediately apparent, the veracity of the statement is in doubt, or it might be considered *not tasteful*, then it would be "bad" scientific writing style.
See also Eykanal's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/493/7921) to [this post](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/492/7921) about the appropriateness of humor in academic writing. These points apply here too. Don't compromise the integrity of the results--is it relevant? Use this type of statement sparingly. And last but by no means least, this may best be reserved for someone who is fairly well-known in their field--don't jeopardize your career!
I would add one more point to Eykanal's excellent advice above. **Don't be afraid to be *interesting*!** Just be sure that your interesting statements are in good taste.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there is a **non negligible chance that this will make a bad first impression on the readers**.
Don't get me wrong: I love it when people depart from the dry and oft boring “academic style” of writing and try to invigorate their papers: more concise writing, less use of conditional, more direct statements, use of active voice, stating one's opinion when need be, etc. But this should be done with the goal of making your paper easier to read, and not hyping it. **If you start with a broad claim that has little to do with your actual conclusions, you may alienate some readers** (*“hey, I read the paper because the first line said that a world without gluons would be beneficial in the long term, but then it's only a boring particle physics paper!”*).
---
To give a specific example, when I read papers dealing with physical and chemical properties of water, oftentimes the authors think it wise to start their introduction with a broad statements like:
>
> Water is the most abundant molecule of the human body, and the second most common molecule in the Universe. Its presence or absence has dramatic consequences for human life and civilization: droughts cause famines and floods cause death and disease. Though it has a special relationship with our everyday lives, there is still much we need to learn about it.
>
>
>
and then end with:
>
> In conclusion, we reported the most accurate measurement yet of the bending vibration frequency of heavy water, with an uncertainty of 10–9.
>
>
>
It annoys me.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I once wrote a journal paper[\*] whose abstract was in the form of a limerick:
>
> The analysis of control flow
>
> Involves finding where **return**s may go.
>
> How this can be done
>
> With items LR(0) and (1)
>
> Is what in this paper we show.
>
>
>
The reviewers seemed OK with it (which is to say, none of them took issue with it in their reviews), but the editor nixed it on the grounds that ACM's indexing software wouldn't deal with it properly.
The moral of the story, I suppose, is that humans may not be the only "readers" of your paper, and non-standard writing styles may confuse such non-human readers.
[\*] The paper showed that algorithms for computing LR(0) and LR(1) items, used in parsing context-free grammars, could be used for control-flow analysis of tail-recursive programs. I still think it's the best abstract I've ever written. :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: With regard to citations: Generally, statements that are "common knowledge" don't require citations. Nor do statements that are purely conjectural, or are not intended to be taken literally. The opening sentences you have in mind seem to satisfy at least one of these criteria.
I won't venture an opinion on whether or not a creative opening sentence is a good idea or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: First of all, a good (not catchy) title catches readers, not a first sentence in an introduction. The problem of trying to be catchy is that people's opinion about catchy may not be the same as yours, in which case it backfires. yes, science can be dry and the temptation is large to be catchy or funny, but it rarely works. Rarely, partly because each paper is read by only a few, and partly because the diversity in opinions.
The introductory sentence should try to provide the interesting perspective within which your results fit. It is difficult to get right but since it is not the first you write, you can use the results and your hopefully thought through title to ponder what is the perspective you wish your work to fit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: it's well known in writing that you should "murder your darlings", which is excising the unusual phrasings you think are so sparkling, i.e., your darlings. there are many, many web sites covering this tactic. when you edit this way, the result is a clean text which will better accommodate OP's tendency to playfulness.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/16 | 807 | 3,433 | <issue_start>username_0: Some fields like Economics and Maths have their work in progress published as "working papers" with notes like "work in progress, do not cite or quote without the author's permission."Sometimes they upload these to their own websites or to their universities websites. I don't see much of this going on in my own field (sociology). I have heard from people that are afraid of having their work scooped or that fear that work published in this way will not be considered as "unpublished" by journals and conferences.
What are the advantages of making work in progress available in this way?<issue_comment>username_1: The advantages are that you get to stake a claim to some sense of ownership of the work; it's a way of inviting feedback and collaboration from others by showcasing your work in progress; and it's a quicker way to publish your work than submitting to a journal or conference.
So when do you publish your work as a working paper?
When the following conditions are met:
1. You've done some work.
2. **And** some combination of:
* you want feedback on it from a wider group than your immediate colleagues;
* you want to showcase your work to get new collaborators, new funding, or improved career prospects
* you want to publicly stake a claim to the work you've done
3. **And** some combination of:
* the follow-up work is something that you've already got sufficiently far advanced that it is very unlikely that you will get scooped by your competitors;
* you're not bothered about being first to publish the follow-up work yourself.
4. **And** publishing your work in a working paper won't prevent it from appearing (possibly in modified form) in a journal.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your first paragraph's implied question and your formal question are different.
The first concerns an already finished work, which is just unpublished, and the second a work in progress. I'll comment on the second one as the more interesting one to discuss.
When you make your work in progress public, you just let people see your ideas and use them or comment on them. I perceive a publication of unfinished work as an invitation to take a look and try to answer questions like
1) What else can be done this way?
2) Can you do it better (find some shortcuts, generalize, whatever)?
3) Do you see how to finish the project or why it is a dead end?
4) Are there any mistakes in what is done so far?
etc.
The advantage is, of course, getting a few more brains engaged, which has the potential of enhancing the quality of the final product drastically. The "disadvantage"
is that you agree by default to share the credit with anyone who contributes something of value. Which one is more important for you is up to you to decide.
Outright scooping is not something I would be particularly afraid of; not in my field at least (my usual mode of operation is to send what I know to a few "experts" and ask what they think rather than to put unfinished works on arXiv but that is primarily because I do not want to clutter my arXiv list of papers with half-cooked stuff some of which will never be finished and some of which makes little sense). Most people who get interested in your project share their thoughts with you on exactly the same basis you share yours with them: if you go open and supply your ideas for free, they pay back with the same coin.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/17 | 591 | 2,300 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for software for macs geared towards organizing and referencing the text in notes. I'm currently studying pathology and would like to be able to "tag" a topic/heading within my notes (not the entire note itself) with a keyword that is searchable. For example, if I have Rheumatoid Arthritis, I'd like to be able to highlight it, and tag it with multiple keywords or hashtags such as "hypersensitivity reaction type IV" or "#hypersensitivityrxntypeIV" and be able to search those keywords and have any of those topics I've tagged show up in the results. Anyone have any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: You may be interested in using [MaxQDA](http://www.maxqda.com/maxqda-for-mac), they are just now preparing to release a mac version. Although it is a software geared towards textual analysis and qualitative researchers, it can tag pieces of text pretty much like you say you want to do.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: MaxQDA and others such as [Dedoose](http://www.dedoose.com) are useful and powerful qualitative software packages to tag and sort snippets of text in this way.
However you might want to try the free trial of [Quirkos](http://www.quirkos.com), which also has a Mac version, but is designed to be simple to use and quick to get started with.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Dude, try Evernote. They have a free and payed version, thats work very well. The most incredible feature is that you can search words (or Tags) in a pdf file. Try This.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: For regular note taking, I use [Evernote](https://evernote.com/) and Google Drive. Both tools are very useful for writing when you are 'in the wild' (e.g. at meetings or observing cultural behaviour). If tagging the specific file is sufficient, Evernote is brilliant for just this purpose.
However, for analysis purpose I have recently grown very fond of [MaxQDA](http://www.maxqda.com/products/maxqda). Among a bunch of great features, this tool allows for 'coding' (tagging) paragraphs within notes and transcribing recordings. You can try it for free for 30 days.
I believe in using the right tool for specific purposes and will therefore recommend Evernote or Google Drive for note-taking and MaxQDA for the actual analysis.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/17 | 1,361 | 5,775 | <issue_start>username_0: As far as I experienced, research is the most important factor for promotion, as it represents different features of an academician/scholar, which are needed by higher education institutions: teaching at graduate level, supervising academic projects of graduate students, attracting research fund, fame for the university, etc.
Publications is normally the main measure for research of a professor. Thus, one expects to see a proportional relationship between publications (both quality and quantity) and academic rank.
People can be promoted with less publications, probably because of other activities. But, I wonder why there are some academicians whose rank is far behind their publications. For example, I have seen people with 50 papers but are still assistant professor, or over 100 papers but still associate professor. I am referring to the US universities.
What keeps an assistant/associate professor with a strong publication record from appropriate promotion?<issue_comment>username_1: Remember, a promotion/tenure review package is just that: a package. While you are correct that a record of strong publications is the driving factor, there are still a number of items in the package that could lead to a tenure/promotion denial:
1. Weak letters of recommendation. You need to get your name out in more ways than just cranking out a lot of papers. This includes presenting talks at other institutions, sitting on program committees, and making sure that prominent people outside your institution write you good letters for your package.
2. Lots of publications ≠ good publications. You need to be published in reputable, peer-reviewed publications. Some of those professors may list a ton of publications that aren't particularly notable.
3. Poor record of graduate student supervision. A professor who never has any students, or who hasn't graduated a student in years isn't going to be competitive for promotion.
4. Poor fundraising. If you're not applying for and getting grants (in many fields), you aren't going to be able to sustain a good research lab. It's tough to keep publishing relevant work without money coming in, although over time you can still build up a fair number of publications (many of which may be mediocre).
5. Poor teaching record. At some institutions, good teaching is more than just something the admissions office declares in all of its trifolds. If you've had consistently poor teaching evaluations, or if students have complained multiple times to the Dean or department chair, this could hurt your chance at promotion.
6. Personality. Your department has to make a recommendation to the tenure/promotion committee, and if you're genuinely not liked around your department, they aren't likely to make that recommendation, regardless of how strong your publications are (within reason).
Bottom line: publications are a part of the larger promotion picture in academia.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are multiple reasons why someone might not get promoted or receive tenure, even with a strong publication record:
* Poor fundraising efforts (even if you publish a lot of papers, if you don't bring in enough grants to satisfy the department, you're unlikely to get tenure)
* Poor relationship with departmental colleagues (if you've burnt a lot of bridges with your more senior colleagues, again, much less likely to get tenure)
* Administrative/budget actions: a hiring or promotion freeze can kill otherwise promising tenure cases, just because the university won't allow the cases to be heard
The first two tend to be applicant-specific issues; unfortunately, the last is usually school- or university-wide. In such cases, there's not much you can do, but it is at least announced "publicly" within the university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Note that "over 50 but assistant" and "over 100 but associate" are meaningless for another reason. It's all relative. In a field where any assistant professor can rack up 50 papers, having 50 is not a sign that you should be promoted, *leaving aside all the other reasons why paper counts are not useful*.
But another point is that in some universities, promotion to full professor is triggered by an application from the candidate (rather than after a fixed period of time like for tenure). So if the professor can't be bothered to apply, they might not. This is not common, but it's not inconceivable, especially if
* the pay differential at the institution isn't that significant
* full professors are required to do a lot more service work than associate professors.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The assumption implicit in many of discussions (such at these) about 'promotion' always seem to revolve around the premise that there is some sort of institutional impediment to promotion.
But, there is another reason that never seems to be discussed: perhaps the associate professor isn't promoted because they have no interest in being promoted. Seriously, who cares? I'm an 'Ass Prof' at a school famous for ivy on the walls, and I am quite content to 'stay put'. I have tenure. I work on what I want. That's sort of the point, isn't it? If I get promoted as an outcome of doing what I want, then great. But... to 'want' promotion, such that you might actually engage in activities you're not particular interested in? Why? The only reasons for 'wanting' to become full professor that I've seen in 25+ years of working in academia are (i) money, and/or (ii) ego. I already get paid plenty, and who gives a rats orifice about your title? If someone's academic existence is culminated by having a somewhat more 'important' sounding title, then life must be rather sad for that person.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/17 | 2,649 | 11,412 | <issue_start>username_0: I very recently came across a [blog entry](http://crypto.junod.info/2013/09/09/an-aspiring-scientists-frustration-with-modern-day-academia-a-resignation/) which was about a PhD candidate quitting a few weeks/months shy of completing the degree due to frustration with the way academia works in general.
Now you may agree or disagree with the notions put forth, but both the anonymous letter and the long row of comments it has attracted certainly provides an interesting and lively discussion, relevant to many academics if not all.
One particular subject it got me thinking about is the choice of projects, safe-and-uninteresting vs daring-and-interesting. For those who do not feel like reading the discussion in the blog, essentially it's about how many researchers go for projects that have little to no impact practically, in fields where a lot of the "interesting" work is put forth. Such projects are essentially after small incremental additions to the literature, more often than not special case scenarios, or replication of previously demonstrated results with other methods than previously reported.
I am currently at a large conference, and I started reflecting on this subject. I noticed how the "better" speakers claim of excellence, or ground-breaking research, the-whole-picture type projects (e.g. "mapping out the entire human kinome", or "developing antibodies for each and every human protein"). Currently I am sitting with my iPad observing people passing by my poster from some distance. Just like I suspected most people just pass by and barely even stop to read more than a sentence. That's how poster-sessions work you might say, but I am confident that a major contributor to this is the fact that the project I am presenting is inherently not that interesting; it's about a rare disease, effecting mostly elder patients, and does not involve the newest and hottest instrument or technique. I can only imagine that editors and reviewers will be equally unimpressed with the manuscript when we submit this study.
That being the case I got into thinking whether or not it's actually worth getting into such a study. I feel like I have put a lot of time and energy into something that's not really my field of study and not liekly to have a rich "return-of-investment". Before I go to my supervisor and have a serious chat about this I would like to get some feedback on whether or not this is a common phenomennon, within the biomedical sciences/academia in general. As scientists-to-be is our primary responsibility to ourselves, to our bosses/departments, or to science itself?<issue_comment>username_1: You have different but overlapping responsibilities to all three; you can't say that one "overrides" the others.
You have the responsibility to do "good science." By "good," I do not mean "high-impact" or "prize-winning" or anything like that; I mean "ethical": you carry out your experiments or calculations without trying to achieve a desired outcome to support a preconceived model or explanation.
You owe your advisor and yourself the same level of professional conduct: do the science properly, and let the results be what they are. You also have the responsibility to respect and properly use the resources your advisor provides: money, facilities, and time.
Finally, you have a responsibility to yourself: do work that you feel satisfies you, and that keeps you motivated. Don't do research in an area just because that's what's "hot" right now; fads come and go, but good research survives that. Second-rate research likely won't survive.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> As scientists-to-be is our primary responsibility to ourselves, to our bosses/departments, or to science itself?
>
>
>
I'm not even sure what this phrase means. IMHO, the only principles are
1) Do what you find interesting and try to get good of it.
2) Never publish junk (BTW, no medical research that works is junk: even if the disease
is rare and affects only few "old people" and you found a cure, you improved this world quite a bit; the junk is something that either doesn't work or is perfectly clear from what everybody knows already and I should say that many papers involving "hot techniques" fall into that category).
3) Watch out a bit so that your can live and support yourself and your family on your salary (but don't try to fight for promotion, etc. beyond that level).
4) Never tell other people that what they are doing is not worth doing unless you can easily do it yourself and never listen to anybody telling you something like that unless he can demonstrate that he can do it himself better and faster than you.
5) Don't envy anybody. There is always a bigger fish in the pond (a lot of them, really).
As to "losing belief in academia as something useful to the world", since the linked letter uses quite a strong language, I'll use equally strong one to answer. It is not greedy and irresponsible academicians that make the beautiful world worse but the rather disgusting world that makes academicians greedy and irresponsible. We work for God but have to deal with people and I can quite understand the attitude of <NAME>, which, if I understand anything about him, was "I'm here to get us all to the Moon and my time is short, so if you make it impossible without sending people to gas chambers, it is your moral problem and not mine". Whether you want to share this attitude or to protest against it most fervently is your choice. The point is that this is not a choice a scientist invented and forced upon the world but the choice the world invented and forced upon a scientist. So, I don't buy the rhetoric about scientist's responsibility to the humankind unless I see some reciprocity. Making the most brilliant rocket engineer of all times a Nazi is quite an unforgivable crime and it is not the only one the academia can charge the humankind with. So, if somebody insists that we are not up to expectations, I'll retort that the world should be grateful that the scientists still work for it at all, not judge them from the viewpoint of idealistic moral standards or their utility for its purposes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The first comment that comes to mind is "If I knew what I was doing, it wouldn't be science". Much of the science will out of necessity be at a basic (and therefore perhaps perceived as uninteresting) level. Ground breaking work originates primarily from two things: luck or huge funding (thinking of human genome as an example). As a PhD student you are not likely to tap into huge funding although your advisor may do so and your PhD might then get a ride on that gravy train. It is not the norm. Luck is not something one can hope for either. It is of course possible to argue that finding a good research question can be a third alternative but again getting the results to break through or the money to fund it usually ends up being the limiting factors.
Along the lines of username_1's answer, a PhD is about so much more than just a flashy product, it is about learning the basics of science, the attention to detail, the ethics of research and the research process. this does not preclude high profile results but more often than not it is about basic science and about providing or contributing to a firm basis upon which higher profile science is built. Put differently, with out that ground work the rest would not exist. So there is a drive in all of us do do as best as we can and that this some day will reach the headlines. but, I would argue that doing high-quality science is something almost different to high profile science. There is not necessarily an equal sign between the two. And with research you do not necessarily know when or where the breakthroughs will appear.
As an example, I worked with a group of colleagues trying to prove an hypothesis through experimental work. We found something completely different and hitherto unknown and it was not by design. this gave us a publication in Nature (whether this is the pinnacle of good science I will not say) from a project that otherwise would have been looked upon as fairly middle of the road.u
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think the points Peter is mentioning in his answer should be told to everybody before thinking about to start a PhD odyssey or at the beginning. Unfortunately, isn't. Especially, when the only bigger "scientific" project before entering a PhD was a bachelor thesis, many PhD students probably have rather big misconceptions about the essence and benefit of a PhD, personally and for the society.
In germany, during the much longer master thesis you gain more experience, how exhausting it is to produce incremental progresses that can be published.
So my first advise is, when you are **unsure to enroll into a PhD program, rather think about earning a master degree** and gaining more experience. After this you can still decide for a PhD, but with much more knowledge on your personal interest and ability.
The second advise I would like to suggest is that one has to understand, for academia much more than for industry, to have a successful academic career culminating in a tenured professorship depends on many factors you cannot control. The factors you can control demand discipline, a lot of work, but also **searching and taking risks**, e.g. by reading literature from neighboring fields or visiting broader conferences. Especially the latter becomes more and more important (in my humble opinion and being myself in the postdoc phase) due to increasing number of researchers and competition. The "safe-and-uninteresting" PhD work you describe is unlikely to facilitate you an academic career, only with extreme luck. So, at the lastest at the end of your PhD or beginning of the postdoc phase you should start thinking about and looking for interesting risks in your field. There is also a reason, why you only have a high likelihood or in some countries are at all allowed of being granted funding, when you have a PhD. Before, you are not really considered a full and independent scientist by the community.
To close this answer, my PhD work developed from initially incremental work over time towards quite interesting/exciting to me and maybe also very helpful to society at the end of it. The potential for this was enclosed in the object of my studies (I was aware of this) and the idea to realize it technically came up at a disuccion while presenting my poster with someone from a very different field. And I work in a field that doesn't need big teams to conduct experiments vs. clinical studies or particle physics demanding even bigger personal patience and sacrifices. I wrote an application and got funding granted. **To write a successful application needs a lot of this sometimes very uninteresting and incremental work and experience one did and gained during his PhD** (knowing your field, research methods, state of the art, communicate your results/ideas...) This is in my opinion the deeper and hidden essence and point of a PhD, also only a minority of PhD graduates will ever start writing their own research proposal for submission to a funding source. But it explains quite well to me, why so many Q&A's here stem from frustration/misconception of doing a PhD and it feels often like odyssey.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/17 | 1,535 | 6,722 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just read a recent paper in a well-respected journal. The work is technically sound and the results interesting. However, the authors comment their main results as unexpected and “extraordinary” (in the abstract and in the text), while it is an instance of a very generic and well-known phenomenon, which has been experimentally confirmed (and theoretically explained) in a large range of systems in the last decade. The author do not seem aware of the literature on this phenomenon.
Now, I am somewhat conflicted between two courses of action:
1. Raising the matter with them privately, making them aware of the literature they have missed so that they do not repeat the mistake, and telling them (nicely) that their claims of extraordinary behavior are not valid.
2. Doing the same thing, but through a formal “Comment” published in the same journal. This does not only bring the matter to their attention, but also to other readers of the journal. *Right now, I favor this option, because I think it improves the scientific record.*
The journal in question does publish comments, its policy on the matter is the following:
>
> These are a medium for the discussion and exchange of scientific opinions […] For publication of a Comment or a Reply, they must be judged by the referees to present new insights and be of interest to our readership.
>
>
>
Moreover, a Comment in the journal will necessarily include a “Reply to the Comment” by the original authors, as per journal policy.
---
So, **how do I choose between contacting the authors in private, or submitting a formal “Comment” to the journal?** What factors should guide my choice?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing stopping you from contacting the authors directly. In fact that might be polite. It may, however, be unfruitful. Submitting a comment is not considered less polite than contacting the authors directly first. Remember, the authors have, in your view, published poorly referenced/researched work (reviewers and editors are partly also to be blamed). By writing a letter/comment, you perform a scientific debate where you wish to correct a problem with said paper and that is clearly within the realm of what we can and should do as scientists without feeling impolite.
Before you do anything you should perhaps solicit colleagues to discuss the matter over. Since the results have been published, some form of publication discussing the problem must also appear in a publication. It is for this reason you should carefully discuss the matter, start writing a "letter to the editor" of the journal where it was published. The letter should contain the information that puts the "novelty" in perspective. Under such circumstances the authors will have the possibility of a rebuttal which typically is published at the same time as your letter, it is their opportunity to "defend" themselves. This is what typically is done.
Now several things might happen, for example, the authors get angry, the editor refuses to publish your letter. This is why you are better off not being alone behind anything you write. If the letter is refused, then publish it elsewhere. But, remember, the point of writing a letter is to set the faulty perspective of the paper in a more correct one so that the paper is not taking credit where not credit should be had. Do not stray from this endeavour.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe that these two choices are not mutually exclusive.
Authors should be given the benefit of the doubt. Contact them privately first, to see if they are aware of your concern, and if so, whether they have a reasonable response. You should say, in that first contact, that you think it's enough of a concern that you're preparing a formal comment to submit to the journal. Perhaps it's a bit too nice, but I would rather be allowed the opportunity to publish my own comment or even a retraction, rather than being publicly "called out" without warning.
However, I believe that if your faithful attempt to privately contact the authors fails—if they do not respond within a reasonable amount of time, or they blow you off without a satisfying explanation, or they say that they'll do something but don't—then you should move onto publishing a formal comment.
I agree that something needs to be put into the public record, and the sooner the better, but it doesn't need to be so quick that you don't even attempt to contact the original authors. Everyone should get the benefit of the doubt.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would advice you to be careful. Not citing other sources is **quite** common in the academia as a mean of making your result look more innovative, more important, and more appealing. Then, if you tell these researchers "Oooooh, I know your dirty tricks!" (even if you do it in a polite way), they might feel offended and could probably take revenge when they come across one of your manuscripts as referees.
I understand your frustration since I often come across papers like the one you mention, written by reknown researchers and published in important journals, while they are basically reinventing the wheel. I have also come across papers where the authors do not cite their previous *extremely related* papers. *C'est la vie*.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I'll add here, for the record, what I ended up doing. After reading the advice here, and discussing with a few close colleagues, I decided to write and submit a comment, without first discussing it with the authors.
The reasons behind the choice are the following: I assume good faith on their part, and that they simply didn't know that the phenomenon they observe, and which might seem counter-intuitive, is actually a specific manifestation of a quite common behavior. They didn't know the literature well enough, or didn't realize it; at least two reviewers also didn't realize that. Thus, it is really good to “educate” the community on this, and publishing a comment in the same journal appeared to be the best aim to achieve it.
The reason I didn't contact them privately first is two-fold:
1. They will get the well-polished comment for them to reply, through the editor. A journal editor who is a friend of mine suggested that **she (as editor) would prefer to see all communication go through her,** rather than come at a later point and have to “referee” a dispute he hasn't seen half of.
2. If I wrote to them first, and they then wanted to write a correction to the paper themselves, I couldn't be sure exactly what they would say, and **my message *as relayed by them* could be less clear than what I intended to say**.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/17 | 1,493 | 6,315 | <issue_start>username_0: This [big info-graphic](http://www.geekosystem.com/shady-scientific-research-is-rampant-infographic/) (at the end of the question) explains that biomedicine and psychology have greater rate of data fabrication/falsification/mishandling than other fields. A similar effect was reported a [PLOS ONE paper](http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005738):
>
> Once these factors were controlled for, surveys conducted among clinical, medical and pharmacological researchers appeared to yield higher rates of misconduct than surveys in other fields or in mixed samples.
>
>
>
and
>
> it suggests that misconduct in clinical, pharmacological and medical research is more widespread than in other fields. This would support growing fears that the large financial interests that often drive medical research are severely biasing it.
>
>
>
However, the paper does not offer any further discussion of the field dependence of data manipulation. So, have there been explanations proposed about why these fields are "special"?
---
<issue_comment>username_1: I haven't read the paper you mention, but I can definitely see why falsification could be more common in these fields.
I think the factor that affects data falsification the most is not ethical differences between fields, but rather simply how difficult it is to identify the falsification.
In fields where experiments are simple to replicate, false results will be discovered easily. In clinical/pharmacological research, for example when testing an effect of a medical treatment, studies on human subjects are extremely costly to perform, so they are difficult to replicate. Even if they are replicated, there is such intrinsic large variance in the results that it would be difficult to conclude that results from a previous study were purposefully falsified even if they are different.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your quotes from the Plos One meta analysis highlight problems in clinical, medical and pharmacological, but your question is about biomedicine and psychology. The meta analysis paper found no evidence for increased rates of reporting misconduct in either biomedicine or the social sciences suggesting that those fields are not "special". The authors then present a reasonable conjecture about why the reports of misconduct in medicine might be higher
>
> However, as all survey-based data, this finding is open to the
> alternative interpretation that respondents in the medical profession
> are simply more aware of the problem and more willing to report it.
> This could indeed be the case, because medical research is a preferred
> target of research and training programs in scientific integrity, and
> because the severe social and legal consequences of misconduct in
> medical research might motivate respondents to report it.
>
>
>
I think base on the meta analysis I would argue that data falsification is NOT more usual in some fields than others, but simply that reports and sensitivity to it is more usual when a field specifically trains individuals to recognize it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'd be careful with the assertion that some fields are more prone to scientific misconduct than others. To make that claim I would like to see a study comparing different fields, while keeping, e.g., the stage of the researchers (PhD student, PostDoc, Professor) comparable. And let's hope that this study about data falsification does not contain data falsification.
Then there's the **stage of the discussion about scientific misconduct**. Psychology and other disciplines had a couple of highly visible cases of scientific misconduct (e.g., Stapel). They put the discipline, or at least the subdiscipline (social psychology) in question. So now there are people actively looking for ways to detect misconduct, e.g., by looking for statistical inconsistencies that happen when people fake data. So it might just be that a field is more sensitive to the issue and thus more prone to detect cases. The current "house-cleaning" might expose the misconduct that still lies hidden in other domains.
But there also might be differences between fields because it might be easier to get away with these forms of misconduct in some compared to others. Looking at the fraud triangle ([see posting here, my blog](http://www.organizingcreativity.com/2014/08/using-the-fraud-triangle-to-explain-scientific-misconduct/)), you need a motive/pressure, a rationalization and the opportunity to commit fraud.
* **Motive:** I know no scientific field that isn't dominated by publish or perish, so there's a motive. In some fields you can make a lot of money or the alternatives to an academic career look especially bleak (after all, it's impossible for all PhDs/PostDocs to stay in Academia, even if all were excellent researchers). And while all research is risky (no-one can guarantee that your experiments work), some domains may have a higher failure rate. So motive might differ.
* **Rationalization:** The rationalization might be higher in more fuzzy/soft domains, where it might be easier to convince yourself that the theory is sound, but the data is skewed (so many possibly confounding variables). There might also be "personal experience" as a bias, e.g., when it comes to evaluating therapies ("But I know that it works, I have seen it.").
* **Opportunity:** Also the opportunity might be higher in some fields where you alone have access to the data and it's virtually impossible to reproduce exactly the same results (again, confounding variables). Not to mention that replications are rare, esp. with more "interesting but not so relevant" topics.
So while it's an interesting question, it's also a highly complex issue. And there might even be the desire to point to other disciplines to avoid addressing the issue oneself ("misconduct never happens in science ... in our domain ... in our sub-domain ... at our institute ... in our workgroup ..."). Instead, science needs better controls for scientific misconduct, no matter the discipline.
Edit: P.S.: As for the flyer highlighting misconduct in (clinical) psychology -- well, consider the source. ;-)
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/17 | 745 | 3,271 | <issue_start>username_0: Some time ago, I went to a workshop/conference on the specific topic in my field. It was a small event, with not proceedings published. I would like to discuss it in an upcoming paper, in order to state that:
>
> it was discussion with X and Y, spurred by the workshop on Z, which initiated this new direction of research.
>
>
>
in the spirit of giving credit where credit is due. Now, I could leave it in the text, or cite it as “private communication from X at Z”, or cite it directly in my references:
>
> Workshop on Z, Big City, Country (2012)
>
>
>
Journal style doesn't say anything of this, but generally calls for references with superscript numbers. So, what is the best option to cite a whole workshop/conference? (and not a specific presentation)<issue_comment>username_1: Typically, only *published* sources should be referenced. Exceptions may be *personal communication* and reports. Quoting, for example, a discussion during a meeting is therefore quite difficult unless you can quote the persons (and that meeting) as personal communication. The problem is that the discussion or statement(s) are not officially recorded somewhere. There is of course nothing wrong with simply printing out the occurence of the discussion at the meeting in full text. I am not sure if I have seen it but something along the lines your first example with names (and titles) clearly indicated. Just remember to clear the statement with the persons you quote and do not forget to state the date of the conversation/conference.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The issue here is that conversations are not normally "on the record." The point of a citation is verification: you are giving credit by citing the "original source" that you are using. Since you would not really be pointing them to material actually associated with the workshop, you should cite "Private Communication" with the involved individuals—although you could cite the event as the "location and date" fields for the communication.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You could mention the people with whom you discussed in the acknowledgements "thanks X and Y for helpful/... discussions" and cite the conference in the text.
To cite it in the correct style, I would recomment that you contact the editorial office and ask. I once asked about the style of referencing a thesis and recieved an answer very fast, so this is the safest way in my opinion.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Discussions with peers are the most common way to produce new ideas, insights, and actual work that gets published.
* Peers that have been crucial for the paper are co-authors
* Peers that contributed to some important ideas that spurred the paper, but not the actual paper, should go in acknowledgment section:"The authors wish to thank <NAME> for..."
* Peer whose unpublished ideas are quoted in your work should be referred in a citation as "Doe,J, private communications".
If you want to specify that the workshop X has been particularly helpful, then you can cite "Doe,J, private communications at workshop X".
Of course some journals may ask you to revise this logic, but you can stil use it as a starting point for submission.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/17 | 1,012 | 4,301 | <issue_start>username_0: I am taking an advance course in Computer Science so the class size is pretty limited (8 to be exact). The faculty is very senior and well respected in the field. For past few lectures, I have been asking questions that make the faculty a little uncomfortable which I can guess from the way the answers are given (I am also on a psychology class :-) )
For example, to understand a concept, I say "why X has been used ?". He tries his best to answer "because of A,B,C reasons". During this explanation, occasionally I can sense high level of uncomfort in him and the answers are ambiguous. So, now I have doubt that "if X, then why A ? " and so on. Should one continue with these kind of questions when you know that the faculty won't be able to answer the questions perfectly or isn't comfortable enough to satisfy your inquisitiveness. I do not doubt his competence at all and respect him very much. But how does a faculty feel in this kind of continuous poking (if it is so) or should one resort to personal interaction so that he may feel more comfortable ?
Does that hold negatively for the student that student is trying to humiliate the faculty ?
Note: Questions are not non-sense but are somewhat basic and supported by logic.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, there is nothing wrong with asking questions. But, asking the same one may be perceived as badgering the professor.
Perhaps a course of action would be to:
* As Faheem suggests, talk privately to the professor, not only about how they feel about the questioning, but the question itself.
* Offer to perform some research on finding an answer - this could be an opportunity for you to potentially perform new research that could answer the question.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You're studying psychology. That doesn't make you telepathic.
There's a wide variety of possible reasons for what's going on:
* you are mistaken, your lecturer is not uncomfortable. Crazy, I know, but you just might be wrong.
* your lecturer has indigestion, or piles, or tight shoes
* your questions indicate you're missing basic knowledge
* the questions take the group away from the core material that the lecturer has to get through, and answering them will slow the teaching down
* your lecturer doesn't know the answer, and can't bring themselves to say as much, and doesn't have the nous to turn it around and ask you or the rest of the class to find the answer. That's quite a failing in an academic, to be unable to say "I don't know".
Note that repeatedly asking "why A?" "So why B?" "So why C? ..." is something that toddlers do, it's often just time-wasting and attention-seeking and is likely to annoy a lot of people; even if those aren't your motives, be aware that it could come across as that. So instead of just asking questions, look for some answers yourself. You are doing a higher degree, after all, so you should be looking for answers yourself, as well as seeking help from staff and other students.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes you should keep asking questions. The main goal is learning and it is good you are curious. There is no way to tell ahead of time what will or will not make a teacher uncomfortable. (Anyhow, is a teacher's discomfort your responsibility?) Should you be disruptive, interrupt and ask picky detailed questions repeatedly that require long answers and are possibly going off topic? No, because that isn't fair to the other students class time. Also providing students with answers can be like giving fish away instead of teaching them to fish.
There are a lot of different ways to solve computer programming problems - it may your questions can be answered by a number of ways or don't have simple answers and require deep thought. It could also be the professor doesn't know or can't explain the answer well. Personally, I have no problem saying to a student, "I don't know, why don't you look it up and share the answer with us."
If you are studying psychology then you are perhaps familiar with cognitive load. It might be difficult for the teacher to stay on topic, stay focused on his/her learning objectives and answer questions mid-lecture. I would suggest asking your questions at the end of the lecture.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/17 | 750 | 3,287 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been reading a paper and in the Background section the author said something like:
Recent studies suggest that...
and then gave a citation.
I went to that references section, took the name of the other paper and downloaded it.
what was a surprise for me is that this paper also in the literature review section refer to the same studies.
I thought that the first paper refer to this second paper. So, is this allowed on literature review without considering secondary citation?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there's anything too unseemly going on here, *unless* the cited paper that also lists the other papers does not actually produce the results that follow "Recent studies show." In that case, there's a problem.
Otherwise, however, you do have to give some deference to the fact that there are only so many papers out there on a given topic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't say that this is wrong per se, but I think it's bad form.
What I try to do is to cite either the first paper to show a particular result, or at least a seminal paper in that area, then then point to the review explicitly. For example:
```
Then people were like, hey, maybe timing matters?
STDP was born (Bi & Poo, 1998; see Sjöström & Gerstner, 2010 for a review).
```
If the paper's already been published, well, not much you can do. If you're reviewing a paper, I might suggest they change it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with username_1 in that there is not anything out of the ordinary going. On. To have two chronologically separated papers citing the same material and the later also citing the older is perfectly fine, in fact I would say necessary. What is not ok, is if the author of the later paper read the older paper and simply took the references from that without actually reading the original papers. This is far from unheard of and the main problem is that the later author relies entirely on the formers judgement and interpretation. The risk is that errors in interpretations propagate without proper critical scrutiny of original studies. So one question you should ask is whether the later author have cited everything with or without such critical review. If the papers are separated by years and you know more papers have been published but are not referenced by the later author, then there is a chance (but not a certainty) the later author may have been just lazy. But if more papers are added then it is less clear. To make the case even worse, that two authors cite the same sources for the same conclusion(s) can also be seen as sound, that both have found and read the pertinent literature.
So, what you should do is to make sure you have critically read all the papers so that you can judge if the formers interpretations are sound. If they are sound then none of them have contributed anything negative to science. If they are not sound then you have the opportunity to rectify a problem by doing better or in this case suggest improvements in the review. The problem is tricky and requires quite a lot of work from a reviewer to possibly rectify if a problem really exists. this is likely why some errors propagate through scientific literature for sometimes quite a while.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/17 | 1,922 | 8,060 | <issue_start>username_0: People are interested in tenured positions to have a secured job, as they do not need to worry about their contracts. Tenured position gives a professor security that s/he cannot get fired easily (e.g., simply not renewing his/her contract). But, what is the actual obligation for the professors? In return, what is the motivation for a university to offer tenured position, which is accompanied by less flexibility from HR point of view.
Apparently, tenure is just for the sake of `academic freedom`, and has no real benefit for the institution, except a one-way service to professors (probably satisfying more applicants). Am I right? Then, a university must prefer not to offer tenured positions at all, as HR has more freedom with non-tenured positions.<issue_comment>username_1: If I understand the question you're asking, there is no obligation for a tenured professor to remain at the institution that gave him or her tenure. Professors changing institutions happens quite frequently. In many cases, such moves occur because of career advancement—for instance, one might be offered a position in the university administration (chair, dean, or provost, for example).
However, in such cases, the professor typically has the obligation of "winding down" her group at the old institution "gracefully." Usually, that means that the advisor is still responsible for supervising any students that chose not to move with the professor. In some cases, depending on location, there may be teaching duties leftover—for instance, a tenured professor left my university here in Germany not too long ago to take a position in another country. He still had to return once a week for an entire year to fulfill the teaching obligations he had under German law. (Professors' minimum teaching loads are regulated in Germany.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you might be misunderstanding the purpose of tenure. While your view from the teacher's side might be correct (wanting to avoid worrying about contract renewal) the purpose for a school to offer tenure is *supposed* to be putting an educator in a position where he/she can teach whatever they feel is best without worrying about being fired if the school doesn't think it politically appropriate. For example, if someone was teaching about communism during the 1960's in the US, the school might want to fire that teacher. Tenure shows that the school believes in scholarship over politics.
As a side note, recent studies show that this is not at all what happens. [Students learn more from non-tenured teachers than tenured ones.](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/09/09/study-finds-students-learn-more-non-tenure-track-instructors)
As to your question, the responsibilities are the same as any other professional position - do your job. You certainly can leave if you find better opportunities - it's not a prison, it's a job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Given the relative two fisted brutality of the unitary Australian system in industrial relations terms on the average (as opposed to "appointed") academic staff; and the early death of "tenure" in Australian contexts:
* The only limitation on institutions offering positions is industrial
* We can see this in field specific peaks of casually taught classes reaching 80%
* And society wide casualisation of about 50%
* Academics have incredibly low rates of militancy in the face of massive erosion of work conditions
* "Research," the unique product of on-going appointments in Australia, has consistently been treated by institutions as a "Luxury" product (AUR reports on cross subsidisation of research by teaching).
* Employer preference is the only basis on which any on-going positions exist, and this seems to be directly related to either Degree program related academic administration ("Who's in charge of the BA's pedagogy?") or to inter-Employer status game ("We have 100 more HERDC points than you, and are therefore a better university").
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think there are some odd accidental assumptions in the question. For the U.S. system, although there is substantial drift in the last 10 years, the idea was not only that people should *teach* what their best judgement indicated, without worry of censure or loss-of-job, but that also their *research/scholarship* should reflect best-understanding rather than politics... especially given the transience and partisanship of politics.
There is also the idea that in otherwise-profitable enterprises people might not want to put any effort into teaching at all, thus not want to participate in a "university" (with students), without an otherwise-extraordinary promise of more-or-less-endless job security. Some smart, able people, not terribly interested in money, beyond a certain point, can be ensnared by the "care-free" aspect of a tenured faculty position.
"Even" in the U.S., in recent years there has been a push to "contract" faculty positions, indeed. In happy times, these seem to be no worse than tenured positions. However, obviously, in the next economic downturn the administration will have the easy option of terminating as many contract employees as seems convenient.
Yes, this is part of the increased corporatization of U.S. (and other) colleges and universities. Of course, we should understand that we are at the end of a sort of "golden age" between the pre-WWI times that only the upper-classes' children "went to college", apart from seminary students, and after the post-WWII time where the "GI Bill" financed returning veterans' college educations to avoid flooding the job market... which was already in disarray after all the women who'd been "allowed" to work in factory jobs and such in wartime were expected (or forced) to quit and "go home"... so there was an artificial surge both in the numbers of college enrollments and in the socio-economic goals.
And more complications currently...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Institutions offer tenure, not (just) because of high-minded abstractions like "academic freedom", but because it makes good business sense. The benefit of tenure to the institution follows from the benefit to the individual:
* From the faculty member's perspective, tenure makes it possible to pursue high-risk/high-impact research ideas without having to worry about having to keep short-term bean-counters happy.
* This makes institutions that offer tenure more attractive to strong researchers because those researchers want an environment that best supports their ability to pursue their research ideas.
* Such researchers, in turn, are very often also the ones who bring in the big grants. Their high visibility also enhances the reputation of the institution, which attracts more students and alumni donations, etc. etc.
For these reasons, given two otherwise-identical institutions where one offered tenure and the other didn't, the one without tenure would find itself at a significant competitive disadvantage.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: One more point is that tenure *per se* is a huge perk which lets the universities get away with the salaries considerably lower than in the industry and keep many smart people nevertheless, at least in the fields where leaving academe for industry *is* an option.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Just to add an international perspective: In Denmark (and some other, especially Northern, European countries), tenure is not unique to academia. Here an employer is obligated to offer you a permanent contract after three years or discontinue your employment; academia operates on this general principle. "Tenured" faculty here have permanent contracts just like someone working in any other field, as opposed to the fixed-term contracts held by postdocs, assistant professors, and temporary employees elsewhere in the marketplace. So, at least in some countries, tenure is a general workplace guarantee, not something special to university faculty.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/17 | 1,302 | 5,546 | <issue_start>username_0: Normally, the credit of a scientific paper is equally distributed among authors. In the real world, it is almost impossible to write a paper with equal contributions of all authors. Usually, one author is the main one who is the idea maker or discoverer by subtle analysis of data.
In most cases, contributions of some authors are trivial, e.g., consultation on a specialized area, analysis of a part of data, etc. With this system, there are many famous professors who are co-authors for tens of hundreds of papers.
Why when judging the research records of a researchers, only the quantity and quality of papers are considered, and no one cares about how much s/he has contributed to those papers?<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that using simple publication or citation counts is prone to a range of problems. One important class of such biases relates to differential levels of involvement of an author.
In terms of some basic corrections for this, there are ways that individual papers are evaluated to assess relative contribution.
* In some fields being first author (and to a lesser extent, subsequent positions) suggests a greater level of involvement in a given paper.
* In a few cases, proportion of contribution is explicitly stated.
* In some contexts, some form of proportional analysis is performed such that if you are one author among two, then the paper is weighted more than one author among ten (I've seen this in some university workload models).
However, generally, when evaluating the publication achievements of a researchers, a more holistic approach can be taken.
* An overall program of research will be evaluated in order to assess a sustained contribution.
* To some extent, over time researchers would be expected to play a range of roles from lead to secondary contributor. Therefore, often an overall sum of papers may balance out such varying levels of contributions. In particular, if you have a reasonable balance of first author papers and the number of authors per paper is similar to other researchers in your field, this may reinforce such a perspective.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have to disagree that all authors are credited equally. Since there are several ways in which authorships are counted, the position of your name will provide different signals. In my realm, first authors are simply assumed to have done the most, such papers count higher. Other authors are considered to have done less in falling order, unless stated otherwise. In some fields the last author is the "important" one. In some fields authorships come through contract, e.g. CERN consortia authorships (see link in the reply on [coauthorships](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/12032/4394), the answer there may also be of help). Hence authorships are treated differently.
Ideally everyone should follow the [Vancouver Protocol](http://www.research.mq.edu.au/about/research_@_macquarie/policies,_procedures_and_conduct/documents/Vancouver.pdf)) in which it is clear that some contributions simply should not warrant authorship but rather a mention in the acknowledgement.
So in the end when judging the authorships of papers, each field applies their own "standard".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: My opinion is that, contrary to what you say about "one main contributor", in most cases, it is absolutely impossible to judge "the level of contribution" from any objective standpoint. Let's consider a (not hypothetical, just missing real names!) example.
A and B spent about a year thinking of a problem and devising a scheme for solution they could not make work.
A discussed the question with C.
C, who wasn't much interested in trying it yourself, passed it to his collaborator on a different project D.
D found an approach that gives fairly good result but not quite what was wanted and told it to C.
C passed it to A and B and during the two week visit of D arranged that A,C,D have a few discussions about it that resulted in some extra ideas but not a full solution yet.
Meanwhile B tried to combine what he knew himself and what he was told by C and obtained an even slightly better result than D (though still short of the exact statement wanted) but under more restrictive assumptions. He sent it to D.
D, upon reading B's draft, realized that the initial scheme of A and B could be made to work after all (what he was missing was in that note from B and what B was missing was a part of D's "general knowledge"), finished it off, and sent the solution to A,B,C, who have read and verified it.
Now, I suggest you try to tell the "level of contribution" of each person keeping in mind that
1) If not for C, D would most likely not hear of the problem at all and it is doubtful that he would come into direct contact with A,B.
2) It is possible that A and B would make their approach work eventually without D.
3) What was a "general knowledge" for D and allowed him to finish the problem off, would hardly come into the mind of A,B,C at all.
4) Without B's draft, D would, most likely, stop at the "partial result" he obtained first.
5) Both A and C participated in the discussion during D's visit and, while everybody remembers all the ideas that surfaced, nobody remembers (or cares much about) who said what.
6) A,B,C,D all argue that the rest 3 could surely do the problem without him, just in longer time, so the current idea of "author credit" C and D have is to publish the whole thing under the name AB CoD.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/18 | 622 | 2,838 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes online application systems ask for uploading recommendation letters as supplementary documents (scanned copies). In this case, it is possible to get general recommendation letters (addressed as `To Whom It May Concern`) and submit them for different applications.
1. Is it bad to submit a recommendation letter, which has not been addressed for a specific application? Assume that the content will be the same.
2. If it is OK, is it bad to attach some recommendation letters for an application when it is not requested?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm actually surprised that whatever system you're using has you upload the letters yourself. Typically (maybe this is field specific?) an applicant should not even get to look at the letters, since any negative (or neutral) comments the writer includes might strain their relationship, and so excluding the applicant means the writer can, in theory, be more direct and honest.
That said,
1) This is bad. A generic letter is obviously better than no letter at all (if one or more is required), but not always by much. It indicates that you are interested in a position *somewhere* rather than interested in a position *there*. If your other qualifications are superb this might not matter, but you can give any application a really significant boost by showing the people who will be reading it that you are interested in them and will be a good fit. This doesn't mean totally different letters for each application, but you will have to help your letter writers to tailor small changes, for each letter, that "personalize" your applications.
2) This is probably bad too; if they didn't request letters, then they don't want them. At best they'll ignore them, at worst they'll be annoyed that you don't follow directions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, as username_1 says, you should not be uploading the letters yourself. Usually there's someone in your dept. who can accept letters and send them out if there's no way for the letters to be uploaded directly.
Second, senior letter writers already spend a lot of their own valuable time writing letters for dozens of people. Asking them to write separate letters for dozens and dozens of applications for each person is completely unreasonable. In Math for research jobs in the US, letters for job applicants are not school specific. (Though they do usually say "postdoc" or "tenure track position" since obviously a strong postdoc candidate would often be a weak TT candidate.)
(For teaching letters for liberal arts schools my impression is that the situation is somewhat different and some specialization may be expected. But I don't have first-hand knowledge. Of course, for those letters, it's less likely that one person is writing 50 letters a year.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/18 | 1,296 | 5,319 | <issue_start>username_0: This happened quite recently to a friend and colleague of mine.
Another colleague made an off-hand 'joke' about a friend (an academic) potentially behaving inappropriately with his students. This was said in front of my friend's students (over 20) and within hearing range of his students, as my friend heard them laughing soon after the 'joke' was said (his own students apparently had shocked looks on their faces).
The situation was that he was setting up an experiment demonstration that required the lights turned off and curtains drawn (physics - lasers). Understandably, my friend was very angry, hurt and terribly embarrassed and could not bare to even look at his colleague who 'triumphantly went back to his own class' soon after.
Just a point I want to make here, the reason I am saying 'joke' in inverted commas, is because this kind of infantile rubbish can and does cause unwarranted mud to stick - and is potentially a lot more damaging for male teachers/lecturers. Also, it is a lame, disgusting, low-brow attempt at humour. (I have been a butt of a joke like that myself a few years ago and it inadvertently caused quite a bit of trouble, despite being 100% innocent and proven so).
There is no question of his innocence of any wrong doing, and being the true professional, he redirected his students back to the demonstration and completed the lesson.
He is the kind of person that does not like to make waves and does not like to make a fuss.
In summary:
* Lecturer X about to start his class requiring the lights to be off and curtains drawn for an experiment. Lecturer Y comes in unannounced and made the 'joke' about X potentially doing something inappropriate with the students in the darkness. This was in front of both X's and Y's students.
* Lecturer Y went back to his class.
* Lecturer X was justifiably insulted, but continued his lesson.
What course of action should he (Lecturer X) do? Particularly to protect himself from any potential future trouble regarding allegations etc from this 'joke'? (Which as I said, can occur).<issue_comment>username_1: This is a very unfortunate event for your affected colleague. Usually the proverb "where there's smoke, there's fire" has some truth, but when artificial smoke is generated without the fire, it is very detrimental. As you state the comment may stick and through the grapevine it may attain any proportion.
What then to do? Well, first, I think the teacher should tell his (in this case) students that he feels the 'joke' was totally inappropriate and the he was hurt by it and also explain that this sort of action is not to be tolerated by anyone. This will set the record straight with his own class. It could spark a short discussion about political correctness and even if it takes time out of the subject teaching it will be worth it. It is a good lesson that should be taught.
The next step is to actually step up to the person who made the 'joke' and explain that it was uncalled for and inappropriate, particularly in public and at his expense. I understand that this may be difficult to do but unfortunately the choice is to do it or let it be and face the fact that the issue is unresolved.
A third step is to bring it up at a departmental level and try to turn it into a general discussion to eventually also involve students. The university/department probably has rules about (mis-)conduct and correctness. It can be fruitful to provide an opportunity to have a discussion on how people (faculty and students) should conduct professionally,it does not even have to bring up this 'joke' in any way.
Finally, being affected by a situation like this is about the worst that can happen, particularly if the 'joke' propagates without any control. It may be that there are officers within the university that can provide advice on what can be done and help defuse the situation in case it will propagate into rumours, etc. The students will therefore also be involved and can be good support if brought in to discuss the matter from a correctness point of view.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on the local laws and policies, that joke itself might constitute harassment of you and of your students, thus, the "jokester" might already be culpable. Certainly they are visibly culpable, but/and possibly so depending on the incisiveness and (in a good sense) subtlety of your local laws.
The usual counter-argument that "oh, it was just a joke, don't be so uptight", is just a disregard and attempted dismissal of the issue... which might have been orthodox and acceptable "back in the day" when the opportunity for various bonus intimidations of subordinates was an understood "perk" of senior positions.
To the students, one could comment that that exemplified the reasons such behavior is against policy: not that anyone was immediately injured, perhaps, but ... here's the point ... it was a *distraction* from the real goals of the situation, namely, learning/education/teaching. Even if everyone in the room knew that there was no chance of the "joke" being relevant, certainly most would know that there is a potentially very serious issue there, and, thus, raising a fake-serious issue burns far too many mental CPU-cycles. A big waste!!!
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/18 | 997 | 4,464 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently considering to use a in line (in text) listing style, such as:
'Some things are quite good. **(i)** Thing A can do this and that, which is awesome because of this and that. **(ii)** Thing B can do, ... . **(iv)** Some people also say that this and that, therefore thing Z is great.'
I've got more important points already highlighted through bullets, therefore I don't want to use bullets again for this minor information, plus I want to logically link the single points through sentences, but still provide an easy way to pick out the key words quickly.
**First question:** I've seen this style in quite a few papers. Is it considered to be a "good" style, or are there any downsides to this approach? Should I not use this style? Does the reader get confused by this?
**Second question:** Shall the brackets and latin number be bold, only the number, or nothing?
**Third question:** Should I place the enumeration element right infront of the keyword, or at the beginning of the sentence containing the keyword?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Yes it is a good/acceptable style. At least in the fields where I have looked the format is standard. in fact bullets or numbered lists should be used more sparingly and I think the following is a good guideline: use bullets/itemization when there is a lot of text going into each. 'Lot' in this case is a complete sentence or more. Use the format you mention when you need a word or partial sentence for each item.
2. there are several ways to do this you can use 'i)' or '(i)' or (1)' or '(a)' etc. The choice may differ depending on what else you have in your paper. If you have figures that contains several panes, for example, a, b, c, d, you may decide to use Roman or regular numerals for your lists. if you have several lists you should avoid repeating the same item descriptor and, for example, use Roman numerals for one and Arabic for another.
3. This depends on the context. you should place them where it is appropriate to read them. this means before each part of the construction. In your example you have divided everything into separate sentences but I think you should make a construct with semicolons instead: "There are three things of importance: (1) thing A; (2) thing B; and (3) Thing C."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * If the numbers are never used, or if the technique is overused, then this can be considered bad style. I would not use it in the example above, for instance.
* You can use whatever style you want. There is no reason that they are bold. Sometimes the leading parenthesis is dropped, sometimes both. It's best to consult the style guidelines for the relevant publishers.
* Put the enumeration element in front of the sentence or phrase under consideration. Try it out, if you put it near the keyword, then you'll have spurious sentence elements in illogical positions.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You probably want to check your sytle guide about seriation rules. The APA style manual defines rules for
* sentence seriation without a hierarchy and elements not having internal commas,
* sentence seriation with a hierarchy and elements not having internal commas,
* sentence seriation without a hierarchy and elements having internal commas,
* sentence seriation with a hierarchy and elements having internal commas,
* paragraph seriation without a hierarchy, and
* paragraph seriation with a hierarchy.
The previous sentence is a properly formatted example of sentence seriation without a hierarchy and the elements not having internal commas. If there were internal commas, then the comma at the end of each element would be replaced by a semicolon. Sentence seriation with a hierarchy follows the same rules except there is no line break between elements and the bullets are replaces with a letter within parentheses. Paragrpah seriation without a hierarchy follows the same rules as sentence seriation without a hierarchy except the element ending comma is replaced with a period and the list is "introduced" with a colon. Paragrpah seriation with a hierarchy follows the same rules as paragraph seriation without a hierarchy except the bullets are replaces with an Arabic numeral followed by a period.
Since each element of your example is a sentence, you would need to apply paragraph seriation and hence your formatting is not compliant with APA (and I believe MLA and Chicago).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/19 | 1,653 | 7,088 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a senior PhD student who greatly appreciates learning about allied fields. I had been a huge fan of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and I believe some of them steered the course of my life towards grad school. However, I am more and more getting impatient in lectures. I am a Mathematician but I like to study Economics and Computer Science for fun. My university pays for any courses I would ever want to take as a PhD student so I try to enroll but I am losing my patience. I feel the instructor is taking up too much time explaining things that I could grab off the textbook in much lesser time and in the process, form the connections better. Is this normal?
As someone who has had 20 years of schooling since kindergarten, is it normal to get impatient and want to do things by myself. I know I am implicitly making the assumption that one is motivated enough to stick by routines but that's fine.<issue_comment>username_1: You have to take into account that many of the courses you attend are not made for you. They are probably made for people that have a lot less experience. Even though you might not have a lot of knowledge yet regarding the topic you are attending a course in, you have much more general knowledge and acquired learning skills throughout your PhD.
If you want to learn these new things through courses, I think you just have to suck it up as the focus of these courses is probably on less experienced people. Alternatively, you could pick up some text books and start learning like that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If your level is far beyond the level of the other students in class, then this is hardly surprising.
Or perhaps, the teaching methods of the professor need to be improved.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it normal to get impatient and want to do things by myself?
>
>
>
[*Autodidacticism*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autodidacticism) is a cornerstone of being a successful academic, and hardly surprising for PhD students.
There are number of goals of classroom teaching, e.g.,
1. Directed learning from an expert in the field (professor, lecturer, etc.)
2. The opportunity for students to ask questions about the material, and to have discussions about the material that goes *beyond* what is in a textbook or online.
You would presumably benefit from point (2), but unfortunately, you have to be patient with point (1), especially if the other students are expecting a lot of guided learning.
Instead of enrolling in courses, I suggest seeing what *seminars* are available in the fields you are interested in. You may have to prepare to get the most out of the seminars by reading up on current research, or learning a lot of the background material independently, but I think you'll get more out of the experience than sitting through formal classes.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience as a professor I have with some regularity encountered students that are impatient with my classroom lectures and exercises.
**The Problem**
In virtually all of these cases it was because the student was missing the point of what we were trying to do in the class. In most classes, content delivery is only one of the learning goals (and not even the most important one, since as you point out the information is available in texts and other sources).
The other learning goals typically are associated with trying to help students think critically about the content consistent with the best practices of the field. Students with a experience in another field can find this frustrating because it requires that they relax their comfortable assumptions about how information is acquired and evaluated. (True learning is always disruptive because it requires that we reconcile our current understanding in the face of new information, not just stockpile facts).
**Suggestions**
First, I would look at the syllabus of the courses that you are taking. The learning objectives of the professor are probably listed. If they are not, just ask him or her about what they want you to get from the course. My guess is that it goes beyond simply understand the material in Chapters 1 - n.
Second, relax. Don't be in such a rush to simply acquire content. It sounds like you are good at picking up new material but you may be too quick to assume you "get it". I am a biology professor and I regularly encounter this with the teaching of photosynthesis and other "elementary" processes. Students get the details quickly because they have heard it since elementary school but they rarely delve into the deeper implications. You may be missing some of the more subtle aspects of the subjects because you are in a rush to move on to new material.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You sound like a fast learner who grasps concepts easily. It also seems like you have a fair amount of self-discipline and initiative.
Assuming those are true, it makes sense that lectures wouldn't be an ideal way for you to learn something new, and that you might thrive in an online environment, where you have a bit more autonomy and can dictate your own pace through much of the learning.
Lecture halls have a lecturer – who tends to teach at a certain pace – along with a group of students. Some students may find the instructor's pace a little too slow for their liking, and a few who might find that pace excruciating slow.
A good lecturer should sense when the general mood of the classroom dictates a change in pace, slowing down when students are getting lost, or speeding up when students are getting bored. Unfortunately, there are plenty of lecturers who don't process the cues very well, or are simply not interested in doing so. Still, the students are individuals who make up an aggregate; it's not unusual for a classroom to have some who would prefer the professor speed up sitting alongside others who would rather the professor slow down.
I always enjoyed lecturers who taught at a relatively fast pace. Those who didn't got me multitasking; I often doodled in my college notebooks.
To answer your question, I think your restlessness is indeed "normal," particularly for students with your abilities, and your learning style.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You are impatient in lectures because they are fundamentally not a good way to teach. If universities were about teaching then lectures would already be nearly obsolete - MOOCs are orders of magnitude more efficient. But, for students, universities are about *certification* and MOOCs aren't trusted enough in that capacity.
This has nothing to do with your being a PhD student - the vast majority of lectures add nothing beyond what can be found in the textbook. Well, perhaps a little, as a PhD student I would assume you actually read the textbook, and therefore have no need for the lecture.
This is not a popular point of view among those who must give lectures, but it is *far* more widespread among those who must attend them. And, really, who are you going to believe?
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/19 | 2,135 | 8,483 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently got a request for an article I'm a coauthor on, which reads:
>
> Dear Dr. NAME REMOVED:
>
>
> My name is <NAME> and I am contacting you on behalf of the
> Central Library of Medicine Foundation. Dr. SANTIAGO ATEHORTUA has
> contacted us asking for a reprint that you wrote. He is a Terapia
> Intensiva and Dr. is in need of your article as Dr. is making a
> research on this subjet .
>
>
> JOURNAL NAME 2013;XX(YY):ZZZZ-ZZ On the Reasons Why This Is Clearly A
> Paper That Needs To Be Read, Cited, And Manifest Itself In Fame And
> Fortune For the Authors.
>
>
> If my request is possible, please send it to the following e-mail
> address or by fax so I can send him or another doctor on the same
> situation the article.
>
>
> Thanks very much in advance for your response.
>
>
> E-mail: <EMAIL> Fax: (+34 91) 133 30 81 Post Address:
> B1638 CAA Central Library of Medicine Foundation. Zufriategui 627 8º
> (D4D7) - Vicente Lopez Buenos Aires Argentina
>
>
> Sincerely yours, <NAME>
>
>
>
I'm not really clear on the legality of this request. I know many people are fine with sending PDFs to particular people, but this sounds like sending it to a clearing house, and that makes me a little nervous. Beyond that, I'm not the corresponding author, 'fbcm.md' doesn't resolve to a webpage, and well...this feels like many, many scam journal requests, but this time as a paper request.
Has anyone encountered this? Thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: After googling for the Central Library of Medicine Foundation, I found the [following post](http://www.uni-muenster.de/ZBMed/aktuelles/2527) on the University of Muenster site (note I used Google Translate to translate the piece from German to English):
>
> Recently, faculty members have received many article requests from a
> "Central Library of Medicine Foundation", which was apparently
> acting on behalf of South American doctors.
>
>
> While researchers are usually happy to accommodate private, direct inquiries
> from colleagues, there is naturally some skepticism, since we do not
> know if this service costs the requesting physician or how much
> the "Central Library of Medicine Foundation" receives.
>
>
> After some inquiries with South American and Spanish-speaking
> colleagues the following picture emerges: the website [www.rima.org](http://www.rima.org) (The
> "Central Library of Medicine Foundation" aka "Fundación Biblioteca
> Central de Medicina" aka "Red Informática de Medicina Avanzada" (RIMA))
> is a non-library organization based in Buenos Aires that offers physicians
> and researchers to get an article for a given fee (the exact amount is unknown). RIMA neither
> buys the article from the publisher nor copies it from a local library (which
> presumably cannot afford journals), but services the requests by directly
> forwarding them to the authors, in many cases, Münster faculty members.
> This probably the name "Central Library of Medicine Foundation" is
> used to simulate the unselfish non-profit library.
>
>
> Everyone must of course know how to handle it themselves. To send a
> reprint by email costs only a push of a button and it helps indeed
> ultimately a colleague who is certainly not as well supplied with
> magazines as oneself. On the other hand, you will be benefiting a commercial (?)
> intermediary organization, which may not help you,
> either. But maybe it is just a clever business idea of 10 unemployed
> Argentine doctors, to help them earn a living. . . .
>
>
>
So it seems that this Central Library of Medicine Foundation is a business that charges a fee to its clients for obtaining a paper, via you. Although this is probably not really legal or moral, this fee is probably lower than what, say, Elsevier is asking for the same paper. I think this situation makes a good argument for open-access journals.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Received a similar solicitation from the same person. She says she is in Argentina, the country code to her phone number is for Spain, and the webpage is a Moldova domain.
This all seems a bit dodgy.
I'd prefer to help colleagues out as much as possible...I certainly have no problem sending a PDF to an individual upon request. But this seems to be a (possibly for-profit) enterprise and I'm certain it would violate the copyright of the publisher.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The Central Library of Medicine Foundation is a legally supported organization
The Central Library of Medicine Foundation (CLMF) is an institution of public good with transparent proceedings and a non-profit foundation. It was founded in the last century.
The CLMF has developed multiple systems to assist health professionals in clinical decision-making based on best available medical evidence. All its services are free of charge.
Our institution is independent from Governmental and political interests as well as from commercial interests of the pharmaceutical industry. It is supported by donations and sponsorships of private companies from Argentina as well as other countries.
All members of the Foundation's advisory board, of which I am the general director, are unpaid honorary positions.
The Foundation purchases from publishers a large quantity of subscriptions to the best journals in each specialty and a limited number of copies of articles from these journals are provided to medical investigators by request. In a few exceptional instances, when a physician asks for a reprint that we don't have in our library, the CLMF contacts the authors directly for a copy and then forwards it to the requesting doctor at no cost. This service does not have any profit-making or commercial purpose. Additionally, as a proof of our transparent procedures, our institutional data such as the name of the foundation and the postal and email address are always included in the request letters submitted to authors.
Under no circumstances a reprint sent to us by an author is reproduced or distributed in any way on a larger scale and in no way do we profit from this occasional service. In the same way, it is also important to note that the above mentioned procedure of reprint request to authors is really unusual and of little significance compared to the rest of the CLMF services and activities aimed at promoting continuing professional development.
The Central Library of Medicine Foundation is supported by the most recognized scientific societies of Argentina as well as the Pan American Health Organization, regional office of the World Health Organization (WHO).
We´ve created the “RIMA Award for Excellence in the Medical Scientific Update" to recognize the work of the doctors that keep updated and to improve the quality of their clinical practice.
Among the numerous awards and honors received by the Foundation for its work to support the Continuing Professional Development, is the "Sadosky Award for Argentine intelligence " given by the president of the National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET) of Argentina.
Rather than being a group of unemployed doctors who makes profit by commercializing copies of medical articles, we are an organization, which expends considerable efforts to meet the continuing professional development physicians’ requirements, despite our limited economic resources.
We believe that it would have been more appropriate to contact us to clarify any question before posting comments that could jeopardize our institutional reputation and public image without any real foundation.
Our organizational culture is centered around strong values such as innovation, respect, honesty, excellence and independence. We are very proud of what we do to contribute to a better quality of patient care.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I just received a similar request, but this time it was from a person named "<NAME>" at the same institution as above. This whole enterprise does not seem legitimate. Normally, a researcher contacts you directly and asks for the paper, or their institution pays for the paper directly. If you have a desire to fill the request legally, most journals allow you to post a version of your paper: usually the final version you submitted to the journal that was accepted for publication (double-spaced word document or PDF, with figures and tables at the end).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/19 | 594 | 2,660 | <issue_start>username_0: I am looking to join a masters program for next year. Unfortunately, I've found that comparing masters programs is difficult since the information is not displayed the same way in every university page. My question is: what is the best method to search masters, gather their information and analyze so as to make the best choice?
Other questions about searching masters is the following one, which is directly relates to the previous one: does exist any webpage, document or reference sorting masters and giving unified information about them?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I've gathered quite a bit of information on the website [phds.org](http://phds.org). It is specifically suited for researching Ph.D.-granting institutions, but there is also an option for ranking Masters-granting institutions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When searching for programs I found that I overlooked a lot of good programs when looking at "database" type sites. They are useful for getting basic data and narrowing the programs you look at, but also consider getting advice from people in (or near) your field and (if applicable) looking at publications in your interest area to see where the research is coming from. I also found organizing the information that was the most relevant to me in a spreadsheet useful, even if it is time intensive.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You can also find search tools specific to regions, such as [MastersPortal.eu](http://www.mastersportal.eu/). If you just need the same sort of general information that you will find on a program's Web site, all in one place, this will be useful.
If you know of a specific major that you want to study, many professional associations or organizations will put a long list of programs on their Web sites, see for example [this list of linguistics programs](http://linguistlist.org/teach/programs/) at the LINGUIST list or [this database of schools](http://englishlanguageprofessionalsresourceguide.com/) from the TESOL International Association. Sometimes these lists include detailed overviews of the programs, courses offered, and estimated costs, but usually not enough information to know about the quality of instruction.
For thorough student reviews and comparisons of schools, see [StudentsReview](http://www.studentsreview.com/). This Web site has various tools for searching for and comparing the various details of schools, based on your personal requirements, such as the [University Comparison](http://www.studentsreview.com/compare.php3) and the [UltraSearch](http://www.studentsreview.com/ultrasearch.php3).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/20 | 1,263 | 5,557 | <issue_start>username_0: The main criteria for academic promotion to associate/full professor includes, research projects, publications, grants, administrative services, and such things. These are achievements that one can obtain regardless of timeframe. Logically, one with required achievements must be able to be promoted. However, most of universities need a certain period of time before promotion application (usually 5 years).
Why one must wait for promotion, when he is already qualified?
One who is associate professor for two years but qualified for full professorship must wait another 3 years to send application for promotion. Strangely, if that person apply for a full professor position in other university, he will be appointed as a full professor (if qualified) without waiting for another 3 years.
NOTE: the only criterion which seems to need time is teaching, but I think a strong/outstanding teaching records for different courses over 2 years is comparable with teaching the exact same courses over 5 years.<issue_comment>username_1: From my experience and what I have observed, the time frame is time for the academic to "*earn* their stripes", so to speak.
Some more factors that I have noticed that are considered, that *do* take some time to notice, namely:
* The person's character - how well do they work with colleagues and/or students.
* How the person performs under pressure and during 'down' times.
* How much initiative the academic shows can only be observed over a period of time.
*note: the above is not usually formally documented, but are important in any profession for someone going for promotion.*
Also, as the university will be making a considerable investment in the academic, it would seem that they would like to see that the academic is willing to make a considerable investment (time, expertise etc) in return.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Exceptions are generally possibly, and there are many examples of people who have been promoted faster than the usual timeframes at their universities. Often the easiest way to achieve this is via a counteroffer to an offer from another university, but that's not always necessary.
On the other hand, standardizing the process with an expected timeframe makes some sense. Implicit in your question is the assumption that the required achievements for promotion can be judged objectively, but that's not always the case. For example, it's not easy to quantify the difference in scholarly perspective and experience between an associate professor and a full professor, and there's no way to measure this objectively without distorting it. One approximation is to say "for most people, the difference amounts to seven years of experience." This is far from perfect, but it's not clearly worse than the alternatives. Ultimately, any workable policy is going to be a patchwork of several approximations, and a sensible department will allow exceptions in cases where the approximations are clearly inappropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: First of all, in all places I worked so far you could apply for "early promotion" if you felt like you were strong enough to qualify for higher rank before the official consideration time and some people were even encouraged to do so.
Second, it takes two things to be a good scientist: brilliance and persistence. If someone is in my field, I can usually estimate the former pretty accurately after looking at just one paper of his. However, to estimate the latter, I would need at least a 5 year record, which is pretty close to the standard "probation period" before promotion.
Third, the university administration, like any other management, wants to keep us on our toes for a while before loosening the reins. Whether that is beneficial or detrimental varies from case to case but one can hardly deny that it is more or less universally accepted management policy used almost everywhere from WalMart to NASA, so you'll need to put together quite a convincing argument to explain "why not in academia".
Fourth, even if one is a good scientist (according to the above definition), one still has to prove that he is a "good department citizen". In 5 years, you will actually face all "reasonable" situations and take most "normal" roles in the department except some extreme cases when one cannot predict anything about anybody anyway and establish stable (whether good, or bad) relationships with most other department members, so you'll become a "known evil" rather than "a cat in the sack" at the very least.
The only remaining question is "Why a cleverer person who is just hired has much lower salary than a less clever person who's been there 20 years?". In the European system, it is, indeed, almost always so but I should say that the US contract negotiating system is quite flexible here and I've been in the situation when the chairman recommended to several full professors on the hiring committee not to tell the (unusually high) salary that would be offered to a coming assistant professor not only to other department members but even to their colleagues on the committee itself with lower salaries to avoid unnecessary frictions, so the life is not so bad here as well.
These are the arguments "in favor" of the waiting period. I realize that there are ones against it too and can bring up a few myself but since the question was "Why is it there?" rather then "List all pros and contras", I'll hold the other half of my 2 cents in the pocket for now :).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/20 | 2,048 | 7,544 | <issue_start>username_0: I came to a web page where it says beneath:
>
> Updated 3 September 2011 (first published August 2002)
>
>
>
When I cite this should the year be 2002 or 2011?<issue_comment>username_1: In the sensible future where updating and correcting on-line documents is not surprising, much as editions and re-printings of books has been understood for a long time, surely one should give *all* this information, much as what you quote. I think that the fact that many "standard" citation formats do not incorporate this is insufficient reason to ignore the reality.
Conceivably one could hope that the original version as well as all revisions are archived, but this currently seems not quite the case, although Google and other engines do a certain sort of archiving. If the archiving were "perfect", perhaps all versions of a document would have their own "doi" or other universal identifier, but at the moment this is simply not the case.
In particular, for an essential reference, one should probably create a local mirror, with due acknowledgements and disclaimers. I seriously think this is the new/future reality of "reference".
Edit: in response to the question "so which year, 2002 or 2011?", my point is *both*, with explanation. If there is a format constraint, try "2002/2011" or "2002/11". If the format constraints insist on four decimal digits, then you are in a minor circle of heck, and have other difficulties as well, ... :) ... On one hand, I'd suggest *not* allowing oneself to be constrained by such dysfunctional stylistic requirements, but I understand that one may have already chosen some software system that is shortsighted.
In the worst-case scenario, give the year of the version you used/saw. Pity if that cannot reflect the real story, simply for random formatting reasons. Reminiscent of the "y2k crisis", entirely that the Cobol programmers c. 1970 did not imagine that they'd be writing code that would still be in use by 2000.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Many citation styles will tell you what to do. For APA 5 the format was:
>
> Author, <NAME>., & Author, <NAME>. (Date of publication). Title of
> document. Retrieved month day, year, from `http://Web address`
>
>
>
In APA 6 the format changed slightly to be
>
> Author, <NAME>., & Author, <NAME>. (Date of publication). Title of
> document. Retrieved from `http://Web address`
>
>
>
with a clause that you should include the retrieval date if the source material may change over time. The page you are describe clearly falls into the may change over time category so you would essentially use the APA 5 style.
For your particular example the date of publication is 3 September 2011 and the date of retrieval is whatever date you visited the website. The August 2002 date is irrelevant. Think of it like citing a book with a 1st edition published in 2002 and a 2nd edition published in 2011. If you use the 2nd edition, you cite the 2nd edition.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I searched for your question and found these content which may help you. I found that, in citation of web pages or online resources, it is *better* (not a must) to cite with the updated date and the date when the reader has accessed the online content.
In this web pages about [APA](http://ia.juniata.edu/citation/apa/apa05.htm), [Chigago](http://ia.juniata.edu/citation/chicago_notes/chicago-online.htm) and [CSE](http://ia.juniata.edu/citation/cse/cse05.htm) styles, under the *update date* it is written:
>
> This date is when the page was last changed. The last update date of a
> web page is usually given at the bottom or top of a page. A posting
> date may also be given on the page one level higher (such as a page
> that is an index of articles).
>
>
>
Also, as a recommendation I read the following content on [this webpage](https://library.lafayette.edu/help/citing/webpages):
>
> **Date of publication or date of last revision**
>
>
> * The date a Web document was created or last updated is frequently listed at the bottom.
> * If a document includes both a date of creation and a date it was last updated, *use only the latter*.
>
>
>
It seems that as there is no general rule about the date included in online resources, the writer preferred the revised date.
However, I also checked the following book
**The Chicago Manual of Style**, **sixteenth edition**; essential guide for writers, editors and publishers; ebook, The University of Chicago press,
2010.
and in this section on the 1700th page of the PDF file,
```
14: DOCUMENTATIONI: NOTES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Chapter Contents >>
Source Citations: An Overview >> Considerations for Electronic Sources
```
the following guide is presented; as we see in the index of the document, this guide applies to `websites and web pages`:
>
> **14.8 "LAST MODIFIED" AND OTHER REVISION DATES**
>
>
> Some electronic documents will include *a date on each page or screen indicating the last time the document was modified or revised*. There are no accepted standards for this practice, and for formally published material the date of publication is generally more important. A revision date should be included, however, if it is presented as the de facto date of publication or is otherwise the only available date. Such dates may be particularly useful for citing wikis and other continuously updated works.
>
>
>
On the contrary it seems that in the APA style, the preferred date is the update date rather than the publication date in the previous quoted text. In the [apastyle website](http://blog.apastyle.org/) under a blog content about [The Generic Reference: When?](http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/01/the-generic-reference-when.html) we read:
>
> **Online Documents**
>
>
> Online material can be tricky to date properly. If the date is not
> apparent at the beginning of the document you’re citing, look at the
> end (e.g., [APA Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic, and Culturally Diverse Populations](http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/policy/provider-guidelines.aspx) was finalized
> in 1990, so that’s the date to use).
>
>
> But look out for a footer that says, “This page was last modified on
> [date].” This is not the date to use! It could be the date that the
> document was published, but it’s more likely to be the date it was put
> online or the date when the webmaster added code for a dancing Freud
> to the page.
>
>
> Some sites place a copyright date for the website at the bottom of
> every page. Check a few pages on the site; if the identical statement
> appears on every page, it’s a site-wide footer, so that’s not the date
> you’re looking for either. (See "Zip, Zero, Zilch," below, for the
> best solution.)
>
>
>
As a conclusion; I found that if you want to cite an online content, pay attention into two dates; the date when you visited the online content and the date the content is created. If you have the date when the content is edited and updated, use this newer date. However, I recommend you to read the instructions of the style which you are using, they may have specific recommendations and guides on this issue. Also, be aware, it happens sometimes that the online content is written on an older date when the website update date is globally mentioned in the footer of the website's pages, you should use the date the page you are referring to is created or edited, not the date all the website is updated.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/21 | 694 | 3,018 | <issue_start>username_0: I am just beginning a research project with a fellow student. She is always 10-20 minutes late to scheduled meetings and has a very hard time making any sort of deadline. She freely admits that she is a procrastinator, and acknowledges that chronically being late is a problem which she has never effectively dealt with.
We are going to be working together for several months, perhaps longer, and I know that her chronic lateness will eventually become irritating. (I am always at least 10 minutes early, and consistently complete tasks before the deadline.) I enjoy working with her in a more casual setting, but I am concerned that her procrastination may become an issue in an academic collaboration. How should I approach her about this? Are there any ways to work around it? The collaboration was her initiative, so I am hesitant to confront if there are more diplomatic options.
**How should I deal with her procrastination and lateness?**<issue_comment>username_1: There are a couple of options that you could consider:
* You may have to put your foot down (in a nice way), and gently remind her that it was her idea to collaborate and that such collaboration is difficult unless you both adhere to the deadlines set. If it still persists, **tell her** that the procrastination, particularly with the tasks are making the collaboration untenable.
* If this is not a critical aspect of your work, take a more relaxed attitude yourself to it - in terms of punctuality and task-completion. The rationale for this is that if she does not place the collaboration as a high priority, then why should you? This second one you would need to be careful about, the approach would be to put your other work before it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As you are both students and she approached you, then the answer is simple: Walk away nicely. Explain to her that your working styles do not mesh and therefore the collaboration is becoming too burdensome. Then you need to work with her to setup an exit strategy where you clearly agree on what it is you will do. You also will probably want to (re-)discuss authorship of any possible publications.
As a fellow student it is not your place to try and change her behaviour or working style. As you were not asked to collaborate with her by your supervisor, you are only letting her down and realistically it is her who let you down.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: First an optimistic scenario, maybe it turns out to be a non-issue in the end. You can find something else to do while waiting for her to turn up. Who knows, maybe not everybody has to be organized. It is up to you to decide. But it seems that pessimistic scenario is much more likely to happen. There is nothing more disturbing in your work than a collaborator you cannot rely upon. In short. The quicker you seriously talk about your worries the better. And certainly being late yourself when the other person is late is not a solution.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/21 | 703 | 3,129 | <issue_start>username_0: Being a western (white) teacher at an Asian university I constantly have to worry about being the subject of gossip and rumors between students (and others). So, I do need to be more careful about my actions with students and how my intentions are viewed by others.
What if I see a student has a strange blink pattern? Should I consider that (potential need for glasses) integral to the learning process and pull that student aside to tell them or is it generally considered that teachers in my situation should only consider issues directly related to the subject matter?<issue_comment>username_1: Strange blink patterns are not necessarily a sign of a need for glasses, one of my students has similar symptoms as part of Tourette's Syndrome - there are a myriad of other reasons what this could be a symptom of. Having said that, asking the students how they are individually as they enter class may give some insight.
Beyond that, I would ask your supervisor or someone in administration first if something has already been documented about the potential condition the student may have. If not, then it is your superior, the nurse or someone in administration that should be informed of your concerns, this will do 2 things:
* save any potential embarrassment for you and the student.
* provide evidence of you chasing-up the concern through official channels
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I am answering this question from my own point of view. My opinion may not represent the majority of Asians (although I am an Asian myself).
I think one of the reasons your school invited you to teach there is for internationalization and diversification besides your excellent academic credentials. They would like to have not only your expert knowledge but also the views you can bring to them.
@UV-D gave an excellent answer. The strange blinking pattern could be a medical issue, so you need to take it to somebody else’s attention. I think he is right. However, as you noticed, you need to take care of the issue carefully.
Fairness and consistency would be the keys. Suppose you are a male professor and the student happens to be a female, there is a possibility this could become a gossip, something like “Our teacher likes that girl”. The gossip would spread until the next time you do the same or similar thing to a male student. Everybody would then say “Ah, he is just a very nice teacher, take care of everybody”.
I think people (not only Asians) would like to be treated fairly. Consistent actions between multiple events will make people think you are being fair. So, my point is, you’ll be fine as long as you keep your actions fair and consistent and do whatever you think is right.
An important note. Be extremely careful when dealing with the students outside the classroom. I noticed in your question, *pull that student aside*. This could potentially become a harassment case. Talk to an authority may be a better way to handle it. A western white lecturer in an Asian university is always the focus of the students and the faculty.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/21 | 715 | 3,038 | <issue_start>username_0: Take grad schools for instance. Their acceptance rate is 8%, or seems to be so. Basically, suppose you have 100 randomly selected across the USA grad school applicants. 50 don't know what to do with their lives, so really the acceptance rate goes up to 16%. Then the other 25 will be out for unusual circumstances, so roughly, there is a 33% chance, or 1 in 3 chance of getting in. (yes, even my numbers are a bit skewed, but reasonably better)
So is grad school really that hard to get into (If you are on top of your game)?<issue_comment>username_1: You are missing a fundamental aspect of probability theory. The acceptance rate tells me what the chances are that if I randomly select an application, from all the applications to my program, that it will belong to a student that gets accepted. What you are interested in is more like the probability that an applicant applying to a randomly selected school gets accepted. The two probabilities are NOT the same. Going back to your question
>
> So is grad school really that hard to get into (If you are on top of
> your game)?
>
>
>
If you are talking about getting into a top graduate program with funding, then the answer is still "yes". Top grad schools only accept students at the top of their games and they always have more applications than spots.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Acceptance rates are nearly meaningless as isolated numbers, for exactly the reason you describe. They are averaged over the entire applicant pool, and therefore they imply very little about any particular applicant's chances.
If you are trying to estimate your own chances of admission, then you need more information. If you attend a school that regularly sends students to a given university, then you can form a decent estimate based on feedback from faculty and comparisons with your peers. Otherwise it's harder to predict. At top grad schools, it really depends a lot on what your recommenders say, how seriously the admissions committee takes their letters, etc. You may have a faculty mentor who can help you arrive at a good estimate, but you'll get at most a crude approximation from grades, GRE scores, counting REU publications, etc.
>
> So is grad school really that hard to get into (If you are on top of your game)?
>
>
>
For people who are genuinely on top of their game and have made sensible decisions about where to apply (based on their accomplishments), getting into grad school is not that hard. They might not be admitted to their dream schools, but they'll be admitted somewhere reasonable. On the other hand, thinking you're on top of your game doesn't imply that you are.
This makes it difficult to give universally applicable advice. Some applicants should stop stressing out and have faith that it will work out OK in the end, while others need to start worrying and rethinking their plans. We end up back in the same situation as with admission rate statistics: it all depends on your personal circumstances.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/09/21 | 1,973 | 8,935 | <issue_start>username_0: For any kind of academic application (from graduate admission to professor position), recommendation letters have a major impact on the outcome. The basic idea is understandable: *discovering what others think about the applicant*. It can help the review committee to decide about the applicant.
However, recommendations letters cannot be statistically reliable. For instance, when all recommendation letters of an application are highly positive, this cannot guarantee that all colleagues think highly of the applicant. Instead, it can be the result of only a few friendships.
In a typical example, if someone has three socially close friends (including current colleagues, coworkers, past professors), then, his applications are always supported by strong recommendation letters. For example, one could have conflict with his entire university, but having close social connection with three persons who can recommend him.
So, why are recommendation letters relied upon so highly, given these limitations?
**UPDATE:** I do not mean friendly recommendation letters. I mean influence of friendship on a professional recommendation letter. As an another example, Applicant A who has good relationship with 20 professors of his department is an ideal academic with professional relationships at workplace. BUT applicant B who has serious conflicts with most of his colleagues (professors of his department), but having only three friends among his department professors will get better recommendation letters. Those three professors will write recommendation letters based on the applicant strengths by ignoring his weakness in the light of their friendship.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> In a typical example, if someone has three socially close friends (including current colleagues, coworkers, past professors), then, his applications are always supported by strong recommendation letters.
>
>
>
No, that's not what "strong recommendation letter" means.
First, strong recommendation letters do not simply state the author's high personal regard for the student, but provide **specific, personal, and credible detail** supporting the applicant's potential for excellence. I don't just want to know that someone thinks you'll succeed—I assume they wouldn't write you a letter if they thought otherwise. I want to know **why**. I want **compelling evidence**, not mere opinion.
Second, **recommendation letters have more weight if they come from credible sources.** At a minimum, the author should work at a credible academic institution. The best letter writers are themselves experienced, visible, active researchers, with documented experience mentoring and/or selecting candidates for admission/hiring/promotion at departments similar to the candidate's target. For faculty promotion in my department, letters are essentially *required* to be from full professors, preferably in named/endowed positions, in top-10 computer science departments, and there is a strong preference for ACM/IEEE Fellows, NAE or NAS members, and major award winners (Turing, Gödel, Dijkstra, <NAME>, etc.).
The intersection of these two aspects of strong letters is **direct comparisons with the applicant's peers.** An ideal PhD recommendation letter for my department includes sentences like "Among the 13 undergraduates I have mentored who went on to top-10 PhD programs in computer science, I would rank [applicant] roughly 3rd, well below [famous person who proved P=NP], but on par with [successful person] at MIT, [successful person] at Stanford, and [successful person] at CMU."
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The fact that applicants choose their letter writers definitely means the letters are a biased sample of opinions. In certain cases departments take big steps to address this issue. For example, promotion and tenure committees ask for some letters from people not suggested by the candidate, precisely to avoid this source of bias. Nobody worries quite as much about graduate admissions, but there are still several safeguards:
1. If someone writes recommendations that seem unreliable, biased, or misleading, they will lose credibility and their letters will carry less weight for everyone. This is a strong incentive to keep bias in check, since professional reputation is a critical aspect of academia, and nobody wants to be thought of as a fool or scoundrel. Of course there are still some bad recommendations, but admissions committees really keep track of credibility: when we evaluate an application, one thing we discuss is what we thought of students recommended by these letters writers in the past and what we think of their judgment.
2. Having multiple letter writers also helps. Finding one recommender who is strikingly biased is easier than finding three.
3. Admissions committees sometimes solicit opinions from other faculty members at the applicant's university. If the applicant's letters seem questionable or difficult to interpret, or we're concerned about credibility, then it's easy to call or e-mail to get a second opinion.
Overall, I believe the system does a good job of minimizing conscious bias or manipulation. It's not perfect, but I think you are underestimating the strength of the incentives. If an applicant can find three people with a lot of credibility who are willing to hurt their reputations by writing unreliable letters to help the applicant get admitted, then they can take advantage of the system, but this is not so easy.
If anything, I'm more worried about the safeguards being too strong. One severe drawback of the letter of recommendation system is how it handles unknown letter writers. If the committee knows nothing about a recommender, has never seen a letter from them before, and doesn't expect to in the future, then the recommender has very little credibility. If an application includes only letters from unknown recommenders, then the chances of admission may be low even if the letters all say wonderful things. This isn't fair, since some applicants just don't have access to any other recommenders, but it's unavoidable under the current system. (It's not just a matter of bias or honesty, but also of whether the recommenders are even capable of judging who would be a good candidate for admission.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Recommendation letters for associate and full professor positions (both in hiring and promotion) do not come exclusively from writers that the candidate selects. Instead, the department will solicit letters from independent sources in the candidate's field. Furthermore, the references named by the candidate cannot have close personal or professional ties to the candidate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: While it may be redundant to write an answer after 3 people already have, I think the other answers have not actually tried to answer the question, but to disprove the OPs hypotheses. I agree that the OP overstates the degree of bias and favoritism in the system of using recommendation letters, but those are serious issues. As the other answers point out, a letter written largely on the basis of warm personal feelings will not be very convincing, but I think the personal attitude of the letter writer will influence the reader (does anyone doubt that it's easy to write a letter that spikes almost any candidate's chances that it is still professional and accurate?). If you read a book like ["Thinking Fast and Slow"](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/dec/22/how-dispel-your-illusions/?pagination=false), and then look at how people actually make decisions about academic hiring, you will slightly horrified at how much we ignore the plain facts of social psychology.
People rely on recommendation letters because they are monkeys (OK, actually apes, but for rhetorical purposes give me this one) whose brains evolved in one sort of social situation that encouraged certain kinds of mental heuristics. One essentially universal fact about humans is that we prefer to make individualized judgements based on intuition rather than rely on any kind of impersonal rule. We are overly confident that we know when to make an exception, and we feel better seeing a mistake made based on human misjudgment, rather than some sort of numerical calculation. This is evidenced in lots of places: for example, people actually try to actively invest in the stock market when any look at the facts shows it is essentially impossible to beat passive investing in the long run.
That said, I think for academic positions, it's also probably true that there is important information in recommendation letters which is hard to get anywhere else. In a lot of cases, I'm not sure what we would look at instead. I doubt they are going anywhere, and people will strongly resist switching to any "harder" metrics, as doing so just "feels wrong."
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/21 | 337 | 1,561 | <issue_start>username_0: I am applying to an MS program in CS. I have not published any technical papers, mainly because I had little opportunity to do research and I did not want to write a paper just for the sake of it. Will I be rejected for this reason? Also, do I stand a less chance of admission than my friend who has written an average technical paper (dumb topic IMHO)?<issue_comment>username_1: There is no way to predict whether you will be accepted or rejected from any graduate program. Graduate admission is a random process. You have some influence on the expected outcome, but the variance is set differently by each department, and you only get one trial per department per year.
That said, as far as I know, there are no CS MS programs that restrict admission to applicants with prior publications. There **are** PhD programs where most students in some research areas had published (or at least publishable) results as undergraduates—algorithms at Princeton, for example. But even in those programs, and in those research areas, publication is not an actual requirement for admission.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is a little bit of a simplification (and an avoidance of your actual question), but in general the only reason applicants get rejected from a graduate program is lack of space and funding. Being rejected generally doesn't say anything about you or your application. All you can take away from a rejection is that the department ran out of space and funding before they got to your excellent application.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/21 | 387 | 1,835 | <issue_start>username_0: I am applying to an MS in CS program. I know most people apply for AI and Machine Learning. Does a university have a fixed number of slots for AI students? Or is this true for the Ph D program and not the MS program?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends largely on the admissions policy of the program to which you are applying. If the program directly admits candidates to the PhD program, and has them go through the master's program first, then there is quite likely a cap on the total number of students who can be admitted. On the other hand, if the master's program is functionally separated from the doctoral program—that is, if students can apply to the master's program without any connection or expectations for applying to the doctoral program until later—then it is much less likely that admissions will be limited.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Admissions are **always** limited, because students consume finite resources: classroom space, lab and computing equipment, advising and grading time, funding, and more generally faculty attention. Even in online professional masters programs, admissions are restricted to students with a certain expectation of success, because failing students make the program look bad. For research oriented MS and PhD programs, money and advising time are probably the most limited resources.
Different departments approach the limits differently. Some define strict quotas in advance, depending on number of faculty and available funding levels. Others (like my department) have softer quotas, which are influenced by prior belief that specific students will accept admission offers. Others accept every student with a high enough GPA and GRE scores, and let the students fight each other for advisor attention. But there are always limits.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/22 | 644 | 2,955 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in knowing what percentage(a rough estimate) of **admitted** phd applicants in top-60 university have peer-reviewed papers.
I'm particular interested in theoretical computer science.<issue_comment>username_1: While there might be reasons for wanting this data, I am not sure what it will tell you. There may be some data out there (I don't know where) that may show a correlation between the number of publications and the chances of getting admitted to a PhD program. While publications may correlate with admissions, I doubt that it is causative. The Phd admissions process is all about trying to assess the ability of an applicant to conduct research. A publication goes a long way towards demonstrating that ability, but there are many other ways (e.g., strong reference letters).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't have statistics on that particular number, but my **anecdotal evidence is that most PhD students in my field (chemical engineering) have zero publication when they start**, while a small (but nonnegligible) fraction has one paper.
However, **you can gather such statistics yourself!** Publications are, by definition, public... And you can sample admitted PhD students by looking at current PhD students. So, take a random sample of CV from PhD students in your field (from the web) and look for publications prior to PhD start in their publication list.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Having publications when you apply for graduate school is typically unusual. The reason is that it takes time to get something published (review process). What I have experienced is that students may have a publication in preparation based on their bachelor or masters work. It is rare that these are more than manuscripts by the time they apply for a PhD program (they get published during the first year, perhaps). It is only those who may have worked between their earlier degree and the time of their PhD application that may have something. It is, however, easy to see if that is the case (a year of work rather than going straight from one to the other) so it is easy to understand why someone has come a little further than someone else. I therefore doubt it has a major impact.
To widen the perspective: In the application process, the fact that someone's earlier degree might result in a paper can be covered in a personal reference/recommendation letter. Keep in mind that all studies done at a lower level may not be publishable (because of time constraints for the work). It is hence important to have someone evaluate your efforts since the quality of the research at lower levels may not necessarily be best judged by a publication alone and a good word is always taken seriously.
So published papers are rare and when they occur there is usually a clear reason for why this has been possible to achieve when moving from one stage to the next in the education.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/22 | 1,478 | 6,437 | <issue_start>username_0: A friend of mine is enrolled as a master's student in Computer Science and considering to convert to a PhD at the same university. My guide acknowledges that he has excellent interpretation, understanding and deduction skills. He is also very good in implementing ideas as code.
He has been able to score just around average grades in all the subjects primarily owing to class projects. The problem he attributes to is that he is not at all good at reproducing things during the examination. In fact, while studying, he tends to ignore all the information like names of techniques, methods etc and just focus on what and how things work. In fact, he doesn't like to write the exam at all and usually just focus on the most tempting or the most thought provoking questions in the paper. (and just writes something to other questions for the sake of writing).
Now, he is just falling short(by 0.2) of the CGPA criteria set at our university to convert to a PhD. So, not being able to properly write examinations and not being able to score good grades, makes him a weak potential candidate for a PhD or does it affects his chances of successfully completing a PhD ?<issue_comment>username_1: Let's map what you've written about your friend, onto the sort of things we might look for in a promising PhD candidate, to see why, although exams and PhD research are very different beasts, we **might** learn about one thing from another.
* Meticulous? No.
* Demonstrates good grasp of the substance and relevance of theory? No.
* Can perform under pressure? No.
* Can follow protocols? No.
As you can see, although you say the grade point average is only just below what is needed to convert to a PhD, there are a few warning signs that this student might not be appropriate PhD material; **both the student and the decision-making body should pay heed**.
I appreciate that this may not be easy for you to hear, as they are your friend. But really, PhDs aren't for everybody: there are lots of domain experts who are not PhD candidates; and there wil be lots of successful Computer Science PhDs who will never be such good programmers as your friend. A PhD is a measure of academic research skills, not of industrial skills or life skills.
Computer science and software engineering are two different disciplines, though they are related. Different institutions will teach them with varying degrees of overlap. But they are distinct. Maybe your friend is a talented software engineer who needs to specialise there, rather than in computer science.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with EnergyNumbers's top-level conclusion—bad performance on written examinations **can** have a detrimental effect on a graduate student's career—but I will disagree with most of his lower-level arguments.
Examinations at the graduate level do show some correlation to the ability to do well in a doctoral research program, but it's only a weak correlation at best. Having a perfect GPA indicates that you are good at taking tests, and that you might have the *aptitude* to be a good PhD student. But that is by no means a perfect correlation: I've seen students who can ace exams who would make horrible graduate students, and I've known quite a number who are not so good at taking tests, but are outstanding researchers!
The reason the poor performance is a problem is that it means additional "intervention" is required to save the student's candidacy. That is, someone within the faculty will probably have to speak out actively to defend the candidate's record. "X is not a good test-taker, but she's been doing an outstanding job on her mini-project in my group, and I'd like to act as her PhD advisor. Keep her!" Without that internal support, the record is all they have to go with; when that's weak, the odds of doing well are *not* good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Some people have a specific weakness with exams, for example because they don't work well under time pressure. It sounds like the issue here isn't exams themselves, though, but rather your friend's approach (not learning what things are called, being unwilling to work on any exam questions except the most thought-provoking ones, etc.). As an advisor, this would worry me and I would want some evidence that it won't be a problem in other areas.
The problem is that a successful scientific research career requires more than just scientific ability. You have to be willing to do things that are necessary even if they aren't fun. (If you are sufficiently brilliant, you might be excused from doing things that are required of other people, but this is not something one can or should count on.) Some people have plenty of scientific ability but are not temperamentally suited for a research career and are not likely to be as successful as their ability suggests.
For example, you have to read other people's papers and cite them appropriately. You have to work out details carefully, rather than just giving an impressionistic account of the main ideas. You have to write down and publish your work, not just keep it in your head. You have to publish the papers you can write, rather than holding out for years waiting for the perfect paper you might someday be capable of.
Most people are fine with all these things, but some people just hit a psychological wall and can't bring themselves to do something. This is a major career impediment. It's not worth preparing someone for a career they are going to derail, so it's important to try to predict who can do what they need to and who can't.
To return to performance on exams, getting high scores is partly a demonstration of knowledge, but also partly a form of jumping through hoops. Hoop jumping is of no value in its own right, but it's a demonstration that you are willing to do what you have to do. When a student refuses to jump through hoops, I sort of admire the stubbornness, but at the same time I wonder what else the student will be unwilling to do.
Supportive letters are critical for grad school admission. You mention that your guide has a high opinion of your friend's work, which is a good sign. If your friend can find letter writers who make a compelling case for why he will be successful, then I expect many admissions committees will admit him despite the exam grades. Otherwise, getting admitted will prove difficult.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/22 | 867 | 2,998 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm not native speaker so I always have some problems with academic writing and speaking. Any good book for English in the academic context generally or for Computer Science in particular (writing or speaking)?<issue_comment>username_1: It would be useful if you wrote your research area. For a mathematician, <NAME>'s "[Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences](http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~higham/hwms/)" is a good choice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: English is not my first language either, but have taught myself through "academic-immersion". Here are a couple of recommendations that may be of help:
["Computer Science Writing"](http://dblab.cs.toronto.edu/~miller/Research/writing.html) - this is a website with an outline of good practice and links to various other sources.
["Writing for Computer Science"](http://books.google.com.au/books?id=J3hCp9G7mSIC&dq=english%20writing%20skills%20for%20computer%20science&hl=en&sa=X&ei=w54_UtT8GYb8iQLCpoGIAw&ved=0CEcQ6AEwAA) (Zobel, 2004) - this book has a couple of high reviews.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: For English for non-native speakers I strongly recommend:
>
> <NAME>. & Sakaduski, N.., 2011. Scientific English. A guide for scientists and other professionals. Third edition. Greenwood, Santa Barbara CA.
>
>
> <NAME>., 2012. Science research writing for non-native speakers of English. Imperial College Press, London.
>
>
>
Both cover general writing in English. In addition, it is difficult to avoid
>
> <NAME>r & <NAME>., The elements of style. Fourth Edition. Longman, New York.
>
>
>
The latter is a classic usually referred to as just Strunk & White.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I can recommend
* English for Writing Research Papers
* English for Presentations at International Conferences
* English for Academic Correspondence and Socializing
all written by <NAME> and published by Springer.
The author shows examples from his work as a reviewer and a language teacher/professor and corrects them, so he writes an original version and the revised version. In some cases he mentiones specific problems of people from several countries with the English language.
The author wrote also a grammar book, but I don't know it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You may consider the following books:
* On Writing Well : <NAME>;
* The Elements of Style : Strunk and White;
* Sin and Syntax : Constance Hale;
Source: SciWrite: Writing in the Sciences.
You may also take the online course i.e. *Writing in the Sciences* at the following website:
<https://class.stanford.edu/courses/Medicine/SciWrite/Fall2013/about>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Loved Alley's book because it focuses on scientific/technical writing as a craft and highlights quality criteria of scientific writing:
>
> <NAME>. (1996). *The Craft of Scientific Writing* (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/23 | 1,108 | 3,971 | <issue_start>username_0: Obviously I am asking this because I am worried!
I am a theoretical physics grad student at one of the top places in the US. The following is a brief history of my last 2 years and I would like to know of opinions and suggestions regarding the path ahead.
---
I did the most advanced courses (relevant to my interests) during my first year and worked on some project ideas through very high-profile external collaborations (but the projects didn't work out and I had to can the drafts) During my second year I tried working with some other profs but the projects were never really interesting.
[..though I have a (single author) paper on arxiv from my 2nd year work and may be I will get one more...]
Towards the end of second year I started meeting with a very brilliant scientist who will be joining my institute as a faculty in January 2014. With him the projects are very exciting - but interactions are difficult since he is still mostly not in campus.
---
Of course this unstable path happened since I had to join a grad school which didn't have people in my subject of interest. But over the last 2-3 months things have been looking up as this new person came in...<issue_comment>username_1: It would be useful if you wrote your research area. For a mathematician, <NAME>'s "[Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences](http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~higham/hwms/)" is a good choice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: English is not my first language either, but have taught myself through "academic-immersion". Here are a couple of recommendations that may be of help:
["Computer Science Writing"](http://dblab.cs.toronto.edu/~miller/Research/writing.html) - this is a website with an outline of good practice and links to various other sources.
["Writing for Computer Science"](http://books.google.com.au/books?id=J3hCp9G7mSIC&dq=english%20writing%20skills%20for%20computer%20science&hl=en&sa=X&ei=w54_UtT8GYb8iQLCpoGIAw&ved=0CEcQ6AEwAA) (Zobel, 2004) - this book has a couple of high reviews.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: For English for non-native speakers I strongly recommend:
>
> <NAME>. & <NAME>.., 2011. Scientific English. A guide for scientists and other professionals. Third edition. Greenwood, Santa Barbara CA.
>
>
> <NAME>., 2012. Science research writing for non-native speakers of English. Imperial College Press, London.
>
>
>
Both cover general writing in English. In addition, it is difficult to avoid
>
> <NAME> & <NAME>., The elements of style. Fourth Edition. Longman, New York.
>
>
>
The latter is a classic usually referred to as just Strunk & White.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I can recommend
* English for Writing Research Papers
* English for Presentations at International Conferences
* English for Academic Correspondence and Socializing
all written by <NAME> and published by Springer.
The author shows examples from his work as a reviewer and a language teacher/professor and corrects them, so he writes an original version and the revised version. In some cases he mentiones specific problems of people from several countries with the English language.
The author wrote also a grammar book, but I don't know it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You may consider the following books:
* On Writing Well : <NAME>;
* The Elements of Style : Strunk and White;
* Sin and Syntax : Constance Hale;
Source: SciWrite: Writing in the Sciences.
You may also take the online course i.e. *Writing in the Sciences* at the following website:
<https://class.stanford.edu/courses/Medicine/SciWrite/Fall2013/about>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Loved Alley's book because it focuses on scientific/technical writing as a craft and highlights quality criteria of scientific writing:
>
> <NAME>. (1996). *The Craft of Scientific Writing* (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/23 | 1,932 | 8,428 | <issue_start>username_0: I can see an enormous amount of videos on Youtube about helping to learn high-level knowledge that is usually taught at universities. Even though I'm only at the beginning of the time I'm going to take at the university before graduating, I have a desire to teach what I've learnt to others - for free, through the internet.
I believe that knowledge is global and free; however, I think sharing my knowledge wouldn't be fair for my teachers, or any other university teachers and professors.
Is sharing this knowledge fair - or ethical?<issue_comment>username_1: I do not see that sharing your knowledge would in any way be a problem *per se*. What could become a problem is if you also share copyright-protected materials. It is virtually impossible to list what might or might not be such materials but to take other persons presentations, images, data and then sharing it would be clearly illegal (and unethical) unless they are provided with a "license" stating they are free. If you take the knowledge you gather and then put it together somehow (including making your own presentations on your own material), it should not be such a problem. In any circumstance where you want to use other peoples materials, it is always best to ask for permission. Not only does it save you possible future problems, you may find friends in the process. Watch out for materials published by commercial interests and use open source material (but do give credit to those who made it - attribution is required by licenses like [CC-BY-SA](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/) and it is also a nice gesture to acknowledge the work and time by the original authors). Much material is given out for public (but not commercial) use.
A final advise, attach an open source license to your materials. I am not fully aware what licenses may apply but am sure many has good suggestions for you (check Academia.sx or ask another question on that).
So to sum up. I think it is a nice idea and perfectly fine, but be aware that you must be 100% sure you do not publish materials so that you break copyrights or abuse licenses (protect the open source practises).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I believe that knowledge is global and free
>
>
>
That is essentially academia in a nutshell. ;-)
I believe – *strongly* – that anything that runs counter this freedom also fundamentally runs counter academia, and humanity’s best interest (or, economically, the country’s best interest).
From a more legal perspective, (University) teachers are paid for *teaching*, not for the knowledge they posses. So you are fine, as long as you don’t disseminate copyrighted material.
This used to be different, when much knowledge was coveted, closely guarded and only handed down from teachers to their apprentices, under an agreement of privacy (see for instance the [Hippocratic Oath](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath), which regulates this, among other things).
Nowadays, knowledge cannot generally be privatised. Instead, we have the concepts of copyright and patents, but neither prevents the dissemination of knowledge. Exceptions only exist in certain circumstances, e.g. for a method that is currently being developed, where you may be asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement; for classified governmental documents, dissemination of which may make you liable to prosecution, and the publication of know-how that falls under weapons regulations.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: What you have learned in the Academia is your knowledge, and you can do whatever is pleases you.
The material that you had access in the academia is copyright of the producer, except for those that were blessed with some form of *copyleft*. So, unless you have some authorization, you cannot use it, in some countries. (For example, in some countries you can reproduce part of some material, for learning purposes, given that all credits are given to the proper authors, and so on. Example: reproduce some piece of some article to analyze it and study it with some students).
In some countries it's possible to have a patent on a *idea*, and so some ideas might be patented, and that patent might or might not be valid in your country.
And, finally, it's possible that you signed some non-disclosure agreement, and then what you learned that's covered by that contract might not be transmissible to someone else.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You are paying the university for instruction and access to materials and facilities not available to the general public, not knowledge. As long as you are not violating any confidentiality agreements, copyrights, etc., you are not doing anything wrong from a legal standpoint. From an ethical standpoint, I think you would better support an educational institution's mission to make the world better by sharing your knowledge than by keeping it to yourself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I disagree with some of the answers, only when asserting that you are primarily paying for instruction and materials. Typically, you are paying for a document that states you understand a specific subject, often with the intent of proving to a future employer that you understand said subject. Your school is responsible for helping you to pass the required exams to demonstrate this understanding, which in part involves access to instructors and materials to help you learn. A school that consistently fails to produce document holding students will not be a strong school for long.
Watching YouTube videos will not give you a document, so while you may have gained the instruction and materials for free, you still lack the main reason people attend higher education -- paperwork. Producing a list of your recently watched videos will also do little to entice future employers.
Unless you're directly releasing information that was obtained as part of a research project through the facility itself or (as stated previously) copyright materials, without permission, it's doubtful you are conflicting with the interests of the school. In fact you may encourage people who get interested in a subject to sign up at your institution, and be good for business. (MIT did quite a bit online for free)
When in doubt, get permission. This IS your future at stake.
*Not to discount self learning, you could learn the equivalent of a doctor as far as I'm concerned, if you were driven enough, and bright enough, by simply reading publicly available information. However I won't know if you were driven or bright enough, so I'll stick to people that proved it on an exam -- for now.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I think I understand the point: you spent $50,000 (or whatever) on college, and you worry that if you teach others for free, you are depriving someone else of income.
Simply put, it doesn't matter. People don't go to college to learn things. *They go to college to get a piece of paper that says they learned things* so that they can get a job in their chosen career.
Anyone can learn libraries, the Internet, and their own research. When I went to college to get my Computer Science degree, a good 90% of what I was taught was stuff I already knew. So why did I go to college? To get the paper that says I know how to do what I already knew how to do.
Yes, it's true that people actually do learn things in college. However, people pay for college because a degree makes them more employable. That's not something you can deliver through YouTube, and so your free education efforts will not replace the college system and will not put college professors out of work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm a university professor who puts lots and lots of time into developing course materials and trying to figure out better ways to explain ideas to my students. Other answers seem to cover the point that you should be careful about redistributing the materials from a course.
I would like to recommend that you contact the professor who taught you the course and tell him/her of your plans. I would be very glad to hear that my course motivated one of my students to want to teach the material to others. **In fact, if the student does a very good job, I might want to see about using the videos/explanations/examples in my own course or at least pointing future students towards the videos.**
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/23 | 735 | 2,969 | <issue_start>username_0: **It is a concern to me that I may look unattractive to potential employers because I went so far beyond the original budgeted time for my PhD (50% over time)**. I am currently searching for a job in industry, where there may be no understanding of the difficulties of my research and I expect to recieve no sympathy from prospective employers.
I feel that on my CV I must somehow find a way to hide that it took me so much time to finish my PhD. However I will not blatantly lie on my CV. **Does anyone have any advice? Or any suggestions as to how I could explain this extra time on a CV? I hope I am not the only one to have ever been in this mess?**
The time I studied for my PhD went to 6.5 years, which is far beyond the typical 4 years for PhD studies in Europe (I study in London). In growing desperation (for applications to jobs based in Europe) I consider replacing the first two years of my PhD with a job, possibly titled "research assistant" or something similiar, and placing it under employment history. On the CV it would then appear my PhD took 4.5 years, a more typical length. Any thoughts on doing this? Is it correct that in the United States and Canada that 6.5 years is close to the typical length (or time required) for a PhD and therefore I would not be discriminated against?
Any advice and suggestions are appreciated.
PS it genuinely took 6.5 years to finish this PhD, it was impossible to finish in 4 years.<issue_comment>username_1: Whatever you do do not fabricate or conceal the truth. I am not sure someone would worry about finishing "on time" as much as looking at the quality of the work you have achieved. In my system there is also a 4-year research time limit (in terms of calendar time it can be extended by including teaching, maternity/paternity leave or whatever is applicable). Regardless of whether you apply for a job in academia or industry the criteria for the employment will be much more than finishing on time. So issues like quality, number of papers published, social skills, other relevant skills will be measured. If you have a reasonable explanation for the extended period of your PhD, just spell it out. Do not make a big story about it, just cleanly provide an explanation that makes the period understandable and reasonable.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure I understand (and this might be a US centric thing). What does it even mean for a Ph.D to go "over time" ? It takes as long as it takes, and that's pretty much it. While taking inordinately long (8+ years) might raise some eyebrows, 7 is still within the "normal" range, albeit on the higher side.
In fact, I've often suggested to students that the benefit of staying an extra year to strengthen their CV (if there's a path to doing so) far outweighs the potential cost of taking "longer" to finish, in terms of future job prospects.
I suspect Europe (or parts of Europe) is different.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/24 | 550 | 2,339 | <issue_start>username_0: Like the title says, are there any downsides to receiving BSc, MSc, and PhD all from the same university?
My university is not very well known outside my home country. I did not enter the PhD program yet. If I would stay here, I would already have many good contacts (~10 professors/academics). Also, because I perform quite well, I assume I could get to do exactly what I want. On the other hand... I think I could get into Europe's top-ten universities.<issue_comment>username_1: There is an obvious downside of staying at the same university—you will only work with one set of advisors and contacts throughout your career. That will mean that you may not benefit from the experience and diversity of viewpoints and philosophies that comes from working with different groups of people across the length of your career.
However, if there is a *compelling* reason to remain at your school, that's a different situation. This could be financial, personal, or educational. For instance, a family member may have a job that makes it difficult to relocate, or a new project may be starting up that provides a unique educational opportunity.
Beyond that, though, I would lean towards going somewhere else for your PhD program!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A top university has many advantages. Better universities provide better Professors, better academic environment, better scientific connection, better equipments, better laboratories, they can get better grants, they can give better scholarship, etc. You can find better friends and get better reputation.
@username_1 has very good points on the reason you may or may not stay in the same university for all your academic carrier.
Some universities has large department and so many professors. there is a chance you don't even know them yet after 6 years being there. They work on different fields and you can work on different field if you want. but that's not true for all universities.
Despite all of this, consider that you will carry your university names forever in your CV! This will affect your feature job opportunity a lot, in industry and mainly in academic world.
But as one my professor says: "*sky is the same color everywhere*" ;)
All said I suggest you going to a better university. At least try to.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/24 | 714 | 3,062 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to have more than one corresponding author for a conference or journal paper?
Useful question about corresponding authors:
* [who should be the corresponding author](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12423/who-should-be-the-corresponding-author)
* [corresponding author implied meaning](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10062/does-corresponding-author-carry-an-implied-meaning)<issue_comment>username_1: Being corresponding author does not primarily concern the journal publishing process. The role of the corresponding author is to handle communications with other researchers once the paper has been published, to respond to questions concerning the research as a whole, methods, results. It is typically the most involved person who takes on this task and in many cases it is implicitly understood it is the first author. So for you to take on the corresponding author task means much more than the communication during the publishing process.
I can see reasons for there to be more than one corresponding author, although I have never encountered it. This would be if the paper contains material where two (or more) authors are experts on separate parts and it is necessary to contact each for specifics on their specialty. As I said, I have never seen it and am not sure it has ever been done. Perhaps we might find out through comments to the answer...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **It is possible**, and at least in my field (chemical engineering) it is quite common. One example: [in this paper](http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v12/n10/full/nmat3763.html) there are two authors, and both are corresponding authors! There are even papers with more than two corresponding authors ([3](http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja4051873) and probably more)
Probably the most typical case is when you have **two (or more) teams collaborating**. If you have an experimental and a theoretical team, you can imagine that questions/discussion concerning each aspect of their joint paper might be better directed at the respective team’s expert. Same thing if you have a paper including very different techniques/methods, or multidisciplinary paper with teams from different fields.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Having two (or more) corresponding authors is also common, if the paper is submitted by a student (or post-doc) who is expected to leave the research group soon and may not be able to attend to correspondence, reviewer queries etc, particularly in case the review gets delayed. In these cases, it is customary for the adviser to add his/her name as the corresponding author
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It is possible, as far as **the journal allows it.** In the journal I copy edit, only one corresponding author is allowed. Full stop, no discussion.
Different journals have different policies, some, for instance, do not have the notion of a corresponding author at all, and only mention that "at least one e-mail address shall be provided".
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/24 | 512 | 2,277 | <issue_start>username_0: Patents are not normally considered as publications in scholarly journals, as they are not subject to peer-review. They are actually new ideas, but patenting does not guarantee the impact and importance (whether good or bad idea). However, academics tend to patent inventions and discoveries for the sake of possible commercial benefits.
I wonder if they have any considerable impact on academic career? e.g., promotion, getting academic jobs, and in a different context, impact on proposals for getting grants and research funds.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer will clearly vary by institution, and in particular by field (Your average English prof wouldn't be expected to hold any patents but a materials scientist might) but yes, it certainly can. Patents and publications are measures of productivity and it would be silly not to note them. It should be pointed out, however, that [patents correlate to jobs closer to industry](http://archive.cspo.org/rvm/publications/pubs_docs/Dietz_Research_Policy.pdf), so a particularly high rate might be indicative of someone *not* in academia.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: FWIW my university's promotion and tenure guidelines were revised recently (April 2013) to explicitly include consideration of patents and commercialization activities:
>
> "Promotion and tenure require excellent performance and the promise of continued excellence in 1) teaching, 2) service, and 3) research, creative work, and scholarship. The University values an inclusive view of scholarship in the recognition that knowledge is acquired and advanced through discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Given this perspective, promotion and tenure reviews, as detailed in the criteria of individual departments and colleges, will recognize original research contributions in peer-reviewed publications as well as integrative and applied forms of scholarship that involve **cross-cutting collaborations with business and community partners, including translational research, commercialization activities, and patents**."
>
>
>
I think we may see more of this sort of thing as the funding landscape changes and the share of state funding for universities decreases further.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/24 | 448 | 2,081 | <issue_start>username_0: Most of the research I have done so far is in Computational Chemistry, where the major emphasis is on publishing in journals. But I also research aspects of Computer Science,and I have read here that in Computer Science the standard for publishing is different. I have recently created a data structure, and will be presenting my findings at a regional Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) conference later this year. Is this considered a publication in Computer Science? While I do not mind presenting my findings--I've done similarly with posters in my Chemistry research--I would prefer to have my research published in a printed journal. Does the conference lead to a journal publication?<issue_comment>username_1: There are two types of publications in Computer Science:
1. Publications in peer-reviewed conferences **with published proceedings**
2. Publications in journals
If you present your results at a conference or workshop but don't publish them in the conference proceedings — it's not a publication.
In general, publications in top tier conferences are much more important than journal publications for computer science researchers. Usually you can first publish your paper in conference proceedings and then submit it to a journal but not the other way around (though, of course, that depends on conference and journal policies).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to concise and to the point answer by username_1:
* there are also books, and if you publish a chapter in an edited book, it normally does not influence your publication record much (a paper in the proceedings or an article in a journal would value much more).
* however, if you publish a book all alone or with couple of co-authors (monograph, handbook or textbook) then it is valued even more than a journal article or a proceedings paper
* if you publish an edited book (a collection of chapters collected by a group of people - editors, and possibly peer reviewed) it is also valued, but normally less than a monograph
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/25 | 1,988 | 8,410 | <issue_start>username_0: When teaching 250 students in the same subject, knowing each student can be quite difficult. In smaller classes, it may be possible to learn enough through classroom interaction that when assessing the assignments it may be easy to tell if it is their work or not. For example, if a student can never form a coherent argument when asked in class, but that same student submits extremely high quality work, the teacher might want to dig a little deeper to see if the student is just better at writing or if they are hiring a ghost writer to produce their reports for them. However, in large classes, there is too little interaction with each student to form a strong opinion of everyone. Those who can 'hide' in class are the least likely to be 'caught.'
I see one option as incorporating an oral exam into the overall mark and using that mark as a basis from which to judge the student's future work. It's not perfect but it's something. One problem is that with 250 students, oral exams end up consuming so much class time that little time remains for lectures.
Running through something like TurnInIt will only catch if they are taking from an existing work but it will clearly not catch ghost writing.
What are the most effective ways of verifying authenticity of student assignments?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to give you an answer you may not want to hear: **it isn't worth it** for a class that big.
The pedagogue in me doesn't like my own answer, but as they say, you have to choose your battles, and I believe there are more important issues when teaching a class that large than to worry about catching the homework cheaters. Mitigation can include reducing the impact that homework has on the overall grade (but this leads to other issues, such as students wondering why homework is necessary if it isn't worth much in the final grade).
Another (probably less successful) method is to instill the fear of [insert deity of choice] into your students when it comes to cheating. If you do catch a cheater, make an example of that person that the other students won't forget -- I threaten to fail any cheater instantly if I can prove they cheated in any way, and I say it as matter-of-factly as I can on the first day of class: "Look, if I catch you cheating, I'll fail you, end of story."
If you have a balanced set of assignments that includes in-class exams, then poor performance on exams should produce final grades that indicate that the student hasn't learned the material.
If you can work out the oral exam, that might help balance out any poor knowledge, but beware that some students are absolutely terrified of oral exams, and they might know the knowledge as well as anyone else on paper but not be able to perform out loud.
I suggest not losing sleep over a few cheaters in a class that big, and to ensure that you're giving good assignments that are challenging and provide a good means for learning the material.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1's answer and want to add some additional thoughts and strategies to it.
**Make cheating irrelevant**
>
> 1) Homework becomes a collaborative venture.
>
>
>
Students can work individually or in groups on all out-of-class assignments. Every student needs to turn in their own copy of the assignment. Every student has to list whom they worked with on the assignment. Homework is a tool for me to give the students to help the students learn the material. Why should I care if they do it in groups or individually? If you encourage students to go to each other for help, then only the most diehard cheaters (whom you cannot stop) will keep going to the faceless masses on the internet. All involved learn more through the interaction. Most "real-world" work is done collaboratively anyway. When I give these kinds of assignments I work very hard to come up with questions and prompts that are not internet searchable - because they must use specific resources, the questions are opinion-based, or the questions focus on specific narrow local events, etc.
* Which of the two figures on the accompanying handout best explains the observation that carbon-carbon single bonds in strain cyclic molecules are weaker than those in unstrained cyclic molecules? Provide a brief rationale.
* Use the data in Table 8.1 on page 115 to determine which of the the following is growing faster: China's population, China's per capita GDP, or China's per capita energy consumption. Do a similar analysis for the US 100 years ago (use the data on the handout). Comment on any similarities.
* What are the three key points of the speech given last week by the Dean of the College? With the information I've given you about the budget of the College, which of the Dean's action priorities for this year are financially feasible? Which action priority are you most interested in seeing completed?
The third one on my list would be very challenging for someone to get outside the institution help on.
If the out-of-class projects are significant, then you can encourage the students to keep each other honest. On big collaborative projects, I have the students rate (not grade) each other on the following questions. Trends appear when someone has not pulled his/her own weight:
* This person contributions to the project were (less than, the same as, greater than) mine.
* This person deserves a grade on the project that is (less than, the same as, greater than) mine.
* This person's greatest contribution to the project was ***\_*\_\_*\_*\_\_*\_***.
* The hardest thing about working with this person was ***\_*\_\_*\_*\_\_*\_***.
>
> 2) As username_1 said - make exams worth much more than homework.
>
>
>
For example:
* Homework 20%
* Midterm Exam 1 20%
* Midterm Exam 2 20%
* Midterm Exam 3 20%
* Final Exam 20%
In this scenario, exams count for 80% of the grade (and so cheating on homework will not have a huge impact), but homework still counts for something. If you phrase your grading descriptions as "homework counts as much as an exam", then you get students to take it seriously. One instructor I know even goes the extra step to rename his homework assignments as "Take-home Exam Part 1, 2, 3, etc." (and then treat them like the collaborative homework I described above. If a student has been cheating on the assignments, then he/she will not do well on the tests, and course grades will follow.
Both of these strategies focus on the purpose of the homework (to guide student learning and studying) which is different from the the purpose of tests (to assess student knowledge, skills, etc.). If homework is a guiding assignment and exams are an assessment assignment, then worry about cheating on exams (easier to spot and control) and ignore cheating on homework. Some students will not be guided the way you want them to be. Just as you cannot make an individual student learn, you also cannot make an individual student learn in the fashion you choose.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I've never seen it done before, but in theory, it could work...
The day you collect the assignment in class, hand out a surprise quiz that is identical to the assignment the students completed at home (or maybe just a couple questions from the assignment to make it faster/easier to compare). Have the students complete the quiz during the class period.
If a student completed the assignment legitimately, they will likely have very similar answers on the quiz. If the student did not complete the original assignment legitimately, they will likely struggle with the quiz and their answers will not even remotely match the answers they "provided" on the assignment.
The key is to look for quizzes whose answers are significantly worse than those provided on the assignment.
Two problems with this method
1. It is kind of insulting to students that didn't cheat. FIX: Don't tell the students until afterwards, but don't count the quiz for normal credit. Instead, just give students who didn't cheat a few extra credit points.
2. It does nothing to catch cheaters that don't show up to class. FIX: Make a big deal out of requiring students to hand the assignment in in-person on the day of the quiz to make sure whoever hands in an assignment takes the quiz.
I admit, this is a pretty wacky idea, but it seems feasible, although a bit elaborate.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/25 | 1,785 | 8,004 | <issue_start>username_0: When applying for a faculty position (from assistant to full professor), the search committee asks for 3 - 5 recommendation letters by people who know the applicant professionally (and probably in person).
The first factor for choosing a reference is his/her relationship with the applicant, but another important factor is the (academic) position of the writer. Possible references can be:
* **Past PhD student/post-doctoral fellow who is now an assistant professor**: probably he is the best person to describe the
applicant's attitude towards students and education (something that
is critical for the search committee).
* **A faculty colleague**: closely witnessed the applicant works, but not directly involved.
* **Department chair**: supervised the applicant, but probably his view is just the standpoint of a boss.
* **Dean**: had less connection with the applicant, but can provide a top view about the applicant.
* **Provost/Vice Presidents**: very little direct connection, but can show the applicant's relationship with senior people.
***The point is that how to balance the level of relationship and the reference's position?*** Normally, recommendation letters by people with higher positions are more reliable, and can be trusted search committee, as a colleague may bias the letter for a colleague, but a provost will not do this for an employee.
Is the position of a reference more important than his/her direct connection with the applicant (considering the fact that a senior person has no reason to write a recommendation letter for someone he does not know personally)?
**UPDATE:** Some commented that references should be not-related peers, not people who know the applicant. It seems I'm a little bit confused.
1. Do you list references who do not know you at the end of CV/resume? References named in the applicant CV can be contacted for a job application.
2. Some job ads ask the applicant to arrange submission of three letters of recommendation to the search committee (for example, see a job ad at [UC Berkeley](https://www.econ.berkeley.edu/recruitment/faculty-openings)). Do you ask people who do not know you to submit a recommendation letter about you?
3. Nowadays, most job applications are via online systems. When the online system requests a recommendation letter just send an email to the named reference to submit his/her recommendation for Mr./Mrs. X (but will not attach his/her resume or works). How one who does not know the applicant can then submit a recommendation letter.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with the commenters above: none of these would be a good reference. If I was on a committee that received a reference letter by a dean, president or former student, I think it would probably be immediately dropped from the pile as someone who plainly has no idea what they are doing (I say think, because in hundreds of applications, I don't think I've ever seen anyone do this). I can imagine having a letter from the department chair, but that would still be pretty weird, unless it was specifically to address the candidates teaching. A letter from a colleague of comparable or greater seniority is reasonable in some circumstances, but unless you're a postdoc and they're your supervisor still probably not the best choice.
In general, you seem to have a lot of weird ideas about how search committees work. I think you should try to find a senior colleague in your field who can advise you about applications; asking deans for letters is not going to help you get jobs or make you a popular person with deans.
**EDIT**: To address the new questions you've added: first, I think it is even more clear from this that you need have a personal discussion with an older colleague/person in your field who knows your situation well and can give you advice, as you are clearly incredibly confused about how academic job applications work.
Recommendation letters should come (typically) from people in your field senior enough to have tenure; your former supervisors, either in a graduate or postdoctoral capacity, are good people ask, as are any more senior collaborators or more senior scholars who have shown an interest in your work. Typically, you do want to ask people you personally know, but there are exceptions; that could be because you worked in the same department, but that's not a factor I would weight highly.
1. It's fine to list references on your CV, but this is not a substitute for getting letters. The committee does not have time to contact that many people. They will just ignore your application if your letters aren't there.
2. You want to get people who are familiar with your work. So, it's unlikely you'll know someone is familiar with your work if you never met or corresponded with them, but it is conceivable. I would only go ask people with whom you've had no contact if you have no good options amongst people you've personally discussed your work with. (Note, the important thing here is not your personal acquaintance with them, but how that allows you to judge how they feel about your work).
3. Basic politeness dictates that you contact your letter writers long before you are ready to submit your application to ask if they are willing to write a letter and to share your materials like your CV with them. It is not a good strategy to sent a request from an online system to them cold, whether you know them or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your letters should come from experts in your field who are familiar with your work. They should be written by professors who are substantially more senior than you are, and who will be known to the people reading your applications.
A typical situation for someone applying for a first job out of graduate school would be one letter from your advisor, one letter from someone else in your dept. who is also an expert in your field, and one letter from an expert at a different school who saw you speak in a seminar or at a conference and who has read your papers. It is not necessary, at the new-graduate level, to have had more substantial interactions with outside letter writers than their having seen you talk and read your papers. If you can get two good outside letter writers, then do that instead, but in my experience it's common to have only one outside letter writer at this stage. At least two of these people should be at the associate or full professor level, and all should have excellent tenure-track jobs. For someone a few years out of Ph.D. one would expect, in addition to the Ph.D. advisor and postdoc advisor, letters from well-known experts in the field who have interacted more substantially with the applicant.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: For assistant level positions your PhD supervisor and any postdoc supervisors should be included as reference writers. Even if they are not willing to write you a stellar letter, I believe it is better than the questions that are raised by not having them. If you cannot include them (e.g., they are deceased), I would address this in the cover letter and ask one of the other letter writers to explain why in his/her letter. For more senior positions (e.g., associate and full professor) you may replace some of your former supervisors with people more familiar with your recent accomplishments.
Additional letters can be sought from thesis committee members (especially for first jobs), more senior research collaborators, a teaching mentor (either someone you TA'd for for someone who has observed your teaching), or colleagues at your current and past jobs. A letter from a past department chair can be useful in saying that the department was really sad to lose you and that you are a great colleague. A letter from your current department chair is a little trickier in that the letter may be read as a means of pawning a bad apple off one someone else. Then again it can explain why you are trying to leave your current position.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/25 | 897 | 3,646 | <issue_start>username_0: I sometimes find papers that aim to solve the same problem that I am working on, but these papers are of *terrible* quality. Some of these papers:
1. introduce wrong solutions,
2. re-introduce a solution that is already published, or
3. are just very hard to understand because of the low quality of writing.
**Should I cite these papers in my "related work" section when writing a paper?**
Would it be offensive to tackle these papers and prove that they are wrong (especially as the most of these papers are published in not very good conferences)?
Or is it perhaps a waste of time to pay any attention to these papers?<issue_comment>username_1: I would:
* Not cite them in your related works section as you clearly do not build on top of that work because of the bad quality.
* If these papers do not have a lot of citations or attention, I would not waste my energy on writing responses to these as they will remain obscure. I would recommend putting your energy into writing papers yourself and reading quality material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general I cite a paper in two cases:
1) I use something introduced there (from the problem statement to some theorem) in my work.
2) I think it would be a good idea if the reader takes a look at that paper when reading mine for some reason (historical, mathematical, whatever).
I don't think I am either able or obliged to put even *everything good* related to my current work into the literature list: I don't know the whole history myself and nobody will be able to navigate through the whole history anyway. Beyond certain length, the
"additional literature" part of the list becomes equivalent to the empty one: if I am suggested to read 3 papers, I'll look at all 3; if 10, I'll look at 1-2, and if 50, I'll look at none, and I suspect that most other people have similar attitudes.
The only case in which I would put any reference to a terrible (in your sense) paper into my work is if I choose to write the sentence "There is a lot of junk written on this subject as well, see, e.g., [][][]" in the main body, but I usually prefer to make enemies in more sophisticated ways :-).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Speaking from the perspective of a no-longer-quite-so-young mathematician, this is a serious question. I think one *should* acknowledge "prior art", even if one disagrees with many aspects of it. That is, to pretend that something doesn't exist when one is aware of it is dishonest. (I do not think that one's bibliography must only include things one has *used*... that can be subverted to argue, as I have heard a distinguished mathematician say, that one need not cite anyone else's work \_if\_one\_is\_careful\_not\_to\_look\_at\_it\_.)
Yes, there is the awkward issue of giving an opinion on "prior art" that one finds deficient. As @Shion comments to the question, one probably should hesitate before being too sure. The universal non-commital (therefore slightly dismissive, which is the right amount) comment is something like (at the end of introduction) "Compare [A], [B], [C]." Not saying that they're crap, or failures, or anything else. Just admitting one is aware of them, and pointedly not *endorsing* them... if that's one's intent.
That is, *I* think that published papers should not just be update-reports, but have sufficient scholarly context-setting to orient a genuinely interested reader not already completely expert, for example. I realize that the literal function of many "published papers" is merely "making a living", but it is not profoundly difficult to do somewhat better.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/25 | 1,344 | 5,767 | <issue_start>username_0: I am applying for doctoral programs in biostatistics and have read multiple places to attempt to set up contact with a potential advisor before applying.
What if the department website specifically says to *not* contact potential advisors? There is a research lab I am very interested in joining (my top pick), but I still should *not* contact this professor, right?
Here's the exact wording of the website:
>
> *"Should I contact faculty about RA opportunities?
>
> No. All applications are reviewed by our admission committee and students do not need to (nor can they) try to find their own mentors prior to admissions. Having an interested faculty member in no way influences the admission process, which is based on an evaluation of your application only."*
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: If thats what the department says, then don't do it.
I was very interested in a couple of research groups in my university but I never contacted them before admission. After I was admitted, I had an opportunity to speak to all these faculty and then made the best choice for myself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Admissions are tough, and if you break the rules you make the committee's life easier (one less applicant to judge). So: don't break the rules, especially when you not in a position of power.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are multiple practical reasons for not asking you not to contact advisors prior to admission:
* Advisors may not know how many RA positions they will have available until later in the year, and departments do not want that to discourage people from applying.
* They may have an established procedure for allocating students to research groups; "jumping the gun" would therefore be discouraged.
* They don't want undue influence from various faculty members lobbying the admissions committee in support of "their" candidates.
Note that this is also because at many schools—particularly in Europe—individual faculty members are responsible for advertising their open positions. This is not the normal procedure in the US, thereby leading many schools to explicitly state that students should not directly petition individual faculty members.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This position may be a little stern, but once you are on the other side of the admissions table, you get bombarded with "Dear Professor, I am highly interested in working with you, do you have any positions available?" emails every week. A lot of these emails suffer from poor grammar, and most in fact miss the point of what I do, researchwise. As [F'x said](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/12975/739), if you decide to take the liberty of sending such an email, it (a) may be lost among dozens such emails, (b) may get you blacklisted by the department. (This is a very good school, and they will have no shortage of highly qualified applicants, and you hardly will be in a position of power in negotiating with them.)
Ideally, you would've established a contact with a faculty much earlier with something like "I believe there is a typo in the Appendix of your recent Biometrika paper" or "What R package did you use? I can't get lmer to work on a similar problem" or "I thought that M=5 imputations is always enough" or some other question relevant to both your studies/interest and their expertise. I've established a couple of the most long-lasting and satisfying professional relations by asking these curiosity-driven questions, even though I never worked with these specific researchers, in the end. Don't try to make this up, though, and make sure to produce something that will really pique enough of the professor's interest to reply.
As a faculty, I have been receiving meaningful emails, too, saying "You've published on this and that; I am working on the intersection of this-that right now as an analyst in Iranian government, but I realized that I don't know enough, and want to learn more..." -- to which I would have to say that the contacts between Iran and US are kept low profile. The fraction of such emails is low double digits, most are obvious academic spam.
Finally, the department may have similar language in the faculty bylaws discouraging faculty member from discussing financial matters and/or open positions with potential applicants. Basically, this would be done to avoid a mutually unpleasant situation in which a professor may promise an applicant the RA support, but either the applicant would not make it based, say, on their GRE scores, or the professor would not get that grant that they were expecting. The department cannot commit acceptance based on such side negotiations, so they want to minimize the risk of that happening. Likewise, a professor may not be able to promise to take you as an advisee if they expect to have five more students, currently in their second year, joining their lab to support the work on a new multi-million R01 grant. You will be taking the fundamental required courses for a year or two, and talking right now about what is going to happen three years down the road is basically waving a big question mark in the air.
So my bottom line is, if you want to talk about research, there is little to stop you; if you are told not to discuss the admissions process and the existing positions with anybody outside the admissions committee, don't.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As other have said you should follow their instructions. I just wanted to point out that you will have opportunities *after* admission but *before* deciding where to go to get answers to your questions. In my experience in math, this post-admission pre-decision time is the appropriate window to talk to potential advisors.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/26 | 1,242 | 5,486 | <issue_start>username_0: I will graduate in 1 semester and I have realized towards the end of my B.S. in mathematical sciences that I would like to develop software. I know there's no degree requirement to do this.
I have taken 20 math classes, bu have only taken 4 official computer science classes (2 in Java, 1 in C++, 1 in discrete math) and will have the opportunity to take up to 2 more before I graduate such as "data structures and algorithms" (a java class). I have also taken graph theory through the math department.
I have brainstormed. I could apply to masters degree programs in computer science (or PhD programs, then leave with a masters) or I could try to self teach myself the programming languages and gaps in my knowledge. Or I could take the additional couple of years to finish a double undergraduate major in computer science at my school. I could also try for an internship for Summer 2014, regardless.
So I could:
1. Self study and try for an entry level position. No explicit or implicit cost if I succeed. But if I fail to get a job, there's the time wasted that I could have been in school.
2. Finish a double major in CS (would take an additional 2 years). This would have an opportunity cost as well as an explicit cost.
3. Apply to graduate school in CS. This would have an opportunity cost and most likely an explicit cost.<issue_comment>username_1: What do understand by 'software developer'?
If you want to write the source code for casual games on smart phones, you don't need any knowledge from university at all. I am pretty sure that many software developers do not care at all about your university degree if you can provide practical prove of ability.
The more complex and "professional" the project gets, the more a university degree (in sciences or engineering) is expected or even required. But then your desired level operation is more "bird view" than anything you could learn in university classes. Whether you are an excellent computer scientist, mathematician or physicist does not matter, as long as you are excellent. In particular, mathematical skills are all but mandatory and essential for large-scale and high-performance computation.
*So, what kind of mathematician are you?* It makes a difference whether you are an algebraic topologist, or into combinatorial or numerical algorithms. Furthermore, there are universities where CS programs are extremely mathematical, or, conversely, math programs contain a lot of theoretical computer science.
At least if you are a computational mathematician, it does not matter at all whether your master is CS, math or physics. These theory stuff on software engineering (development models) is more humanities rather than science. Spend some bucks for SE books if you feel like missing these topics.
PS:
"2 in Java, 1 in C++" - nobody gives a ... cares what languages you encountered in these classes. University won't help you to become a Java or C++ pro, you will have to do that by yourself, as will you have to do with a lot of other languages in professional software development. What have these classes really been about?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: My answer is coming from the experience of graduating with a B.S. in Mathematics (with a Physics minor) and then work as a programmer.
I had comparable programming experience before graduating and had actually planned on taking a second major in CS before dropping in in favor of Physics. I quickly realized that I would only find work in a programming position. It was quite a shock to work on a enterprise class application with hundreds of classes and a complicated architecture. I was incredibly lucky to find a position that was willing to train me up to speed.
I have found that sometimes I will use my math background to come up with an algorithm easily that other programmers will be stunned by. Other times I will feel critically behind the curve, especially when asked to design/architecture a new project.
I have filled in some of these gaps by supplementing my education through MOOCs, reading tons of books and forums (although I have only now started contributing), and picking my coworkers brains. I have had a goal of improving my skills with software patterns, and adding a new language/technology every year. However, keeping up with my mathematical skills (especially linear algebra and statistics) has opened many doors.
Also, improving "soft skills" like communication, networking, and organization is very important. In a lot of positions the goal in training is for you to generate business for the company.
Getting the lingo right away is critical. Once you know what **can** be done it is simply a matter of finding out how.
After three years as a junior programmer I am starting to look at Masters programs and I feel much more prepared and my job will be partially reimbursing me for classes. In addition I have a much better sense of what programs will benefit my career and how. For the type of work I am interested in I am looking into CS programs but also Systems Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Statistics.
That being said, I was incredibly fortunate to find a position that nurtured my abilities. To be clear, my supervisors were expecting a year before I contributed in a meaningful way, a lot of places will not take that bet on anyone. In order to get where I am I worked **hard**, usually 50 hrs at work and an additional 10 hrs of outside research.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/26 | 954 | 4,226 | <issue_start>username_0: Well, I am interested to know how much data, code, results, etc needs to be shared in a successful collaboration. For example: when engineers collaborate with AI researchers to optimize an engineering problem using specific algorithms, should engineers have access to the whole optimization dataset? Even optimization code should be shared among different parts of a research team?<issue_comment>username_1: All of it. If I don't trust you with my data, why would I collaborate with you?
Note: I'm in favor of sharing all the code and data with the whole world, not just my collaborators. Once you make intellectual property public, it cannot be stolen.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The more you limit the information exchange between the two teams, the more you also limit the best possible outcome of the project: without the information about the other group's work, you won't be able to achieve more than rather blindly applying some optimization algorithm to some kind of problem.
But successful collaborations are not something that pops up at full strength: the different groups have to learn the others' language, get to know each other etc., and the trust that enables sharing the data is something that will grow over time (carefull: destroying the built up trust takes no time at all).
As for the intellectual property: that should be clear already before you start the collaboration.
All in all, I think the normal human behaviour is that the collaboration partners adjust the level of cooperation to each other. I'm usually very open to sharing data and code. But if I find that other people want me to send them my data without even allowing me to read their code, neither will I give them my data. Neither will I help people understanding my code\* who would not give me their code or data (but sometimes I tell them that I run a freelancing side-job, so they can *buy* consulting time - and then we can specify non-disclosure conditions and it's completely their problem if my advise is not optimal *because* I didn't have the details. However, this doesn't work for scientific publications, as I have to take care that *my* name is not pubicly on a bad paper).
\* I have published code that is e.g. GPLed, so there is no question about not sharing the code.
>
> when engineers collaborate with AI researchers to optimize an engineering problem using specific algorithms,
>
>
> should engineers have access to the whole optimization dataset?
>
>
>
Yes: they will be the ones who can check the optimization process with "common engineering sense", which the AI team usually won't have.
>
> Even optimization code should be shared among different parts of a research team?
>
>
>
Yes: and the AI should explain the heuristics of the optimization to the engineers. Not only the AI researchers, but also the engineers need to judge whether these heuristics are appropriate for the application. I guess the AI people are better at checking the "formal" part (e.g. numeric properties), whereas the engineers can say whether a certain strategy makes sense from an engineering point of view.
IMHO the AI team should also have early access/particupate in the setting up of the DoE of the engineering team, as optimization approach must be appropriate for the DoE (and vice versa).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If by withholding data one part of the collaboration has made the other part draw false conclusions, then you have broken the trust in the process, and if you're going to publish based on this collaboration, spoilt that as well.
On the other hand, you don't want to bog them down in stuff which is irrelevant - so some material should be made available (perhaps on request) rather than pushed to them. You wouldn't want to see all their preliminary work, and your code may be meaningless to them.
I assume you have properly defined your optimisation and other datasets, so there's no need to hold anything back for testing.
Some industrial collaborations are affected by issues of commercially sensitive material being kept back, usually this can be sorted out, and if the collaboration is purely academic, this issue doesn't arise.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/26 | 971 | 4,371 | <issue_start>username_0: Assume a search committee is reading my CV and in the publication section they notice some of my papers are only submitted or claimed to appear in a journal (or accepted for publication in a journal). Sometimes the journal which has accepted the paper for publication lists the title of accepted articles before actually publishing them, but in the rest of cases there is no evidence to prove that the referee process of the paper is over and the journal has accepted the paper for publication. Also assume preprints of my papers are available in ArXiv. So, my questions are:
>
> 1. How a search committee interprets and evaluates those papers which are just submitted or are claimed to appear?
> 2. Does a search committee consider these types of publications less valuable than the published ones (assuming the same quality)?
> 3. Does a search committee refer to my preprints in ArXiv to evaluate my submitted or accepted papers?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: First you need to distinguish between publications that have passed the review process (accepted, in press) with those who have not (in prep, in review etc.). The first group are just as published as those that are printed and should/could be listed among the published. The others have not received the accept decision and despite their quality are not yet officially approved by peers and journals. Hence they are equated with manuscripts.
You can divide your manuscripts and papers in as many categories you like in the CV but the bottom line is that those that are not through the peers review will not be counted as highly since no-one yet knows of their deemed quality. But, that said, manuscripts (of all forms) indicates activity so they are not a complete loss in the CV. Unfortunately people have very wide views on what can be included. One person stated that a manuscript existed if it had a title, an abstract, some text and some references. With experiences like that it is perhaps not difficult to imagine that a list of manuscripts in different stages may not count for much other than an indication of activity (no matter the reality).
As for manuscripts in public archives, there will be a middle ground. They obviously exist but have not been peer reviewed. An evaluator should be able to check its quality fairly easily, even if they are not necessarily an expert on the topic. It is also doubtful reviewers search for papers on their own, commonly what they receive to review is what they look at. So the value of such papers is less clear but I would definitely set up a separate category for these sorts of papers in the CV between published peer reviewed and unpublished manuscripts.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It's a tiered system:
1. **Peer-reviewed published articles**. Published means published in any form, so it includes papers in all states published online on the journal's website, including “in print”, “ASAP papers”, “just accepted papers”, etc.
That's top notch: it demonstrates your ability to perform research, write it up and publish it. Those are key requirements for the job.
1b. **Peer-reviewed accepted papers**. All search committees I know will assume good faith, and accepted papers not yet published (thus without proof) are considered as good as published papers. If you want to (and the application format allows for it), you can actually join a copy of the manuscript (not as proof, but for committee members who may want to read your paper to judge its quality).
2. **Submitted papers, non peer-reviewed papers**. This has some value, as an indication of your recent activity. It is especially useful to the committee if you have few papers (junior researcher) or have not published much recently (so that it is clear you are still active). Again, you may want to join manuscript(s) to your application, or give a link to arXiv if you deposited it there.
3. **In preparation**, **in writing**, … There is no clear standard on threshold for what is a paper “in preparation”, so these are usually worthless on a CV. The only exception is if you have very very few (or no) published papers: applying for a PhD position, or early application for post-doc position, with 1 or 2 published papers. Otherwise, my advice is simply not to mention manuscripts you have not finished writing.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/26 | 1,889 | 7,655 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been recently accepted into graduate school for my PhD in Mathematics. I feel very prepared and excited. However, my route is somewhat untraditional as I am "going back." That is, I am walking away from a well paying job. (I should mention that I am unmarried with no children.) I still have a lot of debt from undergrad. And, I am about to accumulate more (although an assistantship will help defray some costs). Obtaining my PhD and teaching at a college is my dream. As such, I am taking the plunge-no matter the cost. Working with the assumption that I will be about $100,000 in debt when I graduate, is it feasible to "live" even if I secure a tenure-track position? For instance, can one "request" to teach intersession and summer sessions for extra income (as a professor)?<issue_comment>username_1: In most math PhD programs in the US, your tuition costs are covered by either the department or your advisor, and you receive a *stipend* on top of that to cover your living expenses. While it may not be enough to cover the lifestyle you are accustomed to as a working professional, it is certainly enough that you should not need to accumulate substantial debt as a doctoral student! Moreover, you should be able to put any subsidized loans you have in deferral during this time, so that they do not accumulate interest during this period.
With respect to income as an assistant professor, what exactly is permitted depends on the regulations of the particular institution at which you are working. At most schools, however, you are entitled to have "consulting contracts" which would supplement your salary as a faculty member; however, such contracts and the workloads associated with them normally have to be declared to the university. In addition, at many schools, you are paid only a nine-month salary; you can "earn" the remaining three months through external grants and other means (perhaps teaching summer courses, and so on).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just my 2 cents here, but in my opinion, going into a math PhD which is not financially covered 100% more or less; meaning tuition and basic living expenses are paid for, sounds like a bad move to me. Even full teaching assistantships are paid very badly.
One can spend a lot of time in a PhD program. You said that after you graduate, you want to be a math teacher. Well, math teachers don't get paid that much.
If you aren't fully covered under your current arrangements, I suggest you try and find an institution that will fully cover you.
Having said that, you don't give a lot of details about what your financial arrangements during grad school will be, or details about your current debt. If you gave more details, people might be able to offer more concrete responses.
I think that asking about such things in a personal finance forum such as [Personal Finance & Money](https://money.stackexchange.com/) would also be a reasonable thing to do, as this is partly a finance question.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Having a lot of undergraduate student loan debt and expressing the amount in dollars makes it sound like you are in the U.S. On the other hand, I haven't heard of a U.S. math grad school admitting anyone in September, so I'm puzzled by where you are. I'll answer assuming it's the U.S., but this answer may not apply in other locations.
As username_1 pointed out, U.S. Ph.D. programs in mathematics fund their students at a level that should let you make it through grad school without new loans. If such a program admits you but won't provide funding, then that shows a serious lack of confidence in you. It amounts to saying that you're welcome to try if you can afford to pay for everything, but they don't think it's a good use of their money.
It seems from your question and comments that you've been admitted now but will not learn about funding until spring. I would strongly recommend applying more broadly this fall, so you can see what your other options are. If the current school does not come through with funding in the spring, then you should view it as just barely being admitted (and you should factor that into your estimate of the likelihood of getting a good job - they might be totally wrong in their judgment of you, but this would indicate that they don't expect you to be one of their more successful students).
I'd recommend taking your favorite among funded offers of admission and treating unfunded offers as tantamount to rejection, but of course it depends on how risk averse you are.
>
> Working with the assumption that I will be about $100,000 in debt when I graduate, is it feasible to "live" even if I secure a tenure-track position?
>
>
>
Try a [student loan calculator](http://www.direct.ed.gov/calc.html). The details will depend on your interest rate, repayment schedule, etc., but for an order of magnitude estimate, you'd need to pay roughly $1,000/month to be debt-free in ten years. Whether this is feasible depends on how frugal you are and [how much you might make](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/facsal). I've linked to American Mathematical Society salary surveys. You should be careful not to get too optimistic: fancy jobs can pay starting salaries in the $80,000 to $90,000 range, but few people get such jobs and in any case typically after a postdoc. A typical starting salary for a tenure-track job at a teaching-oriented college is $55,000, and getting a tenure-track job at all is certainly not guaranteed.
>
> For instance, can one "request" to teach intersession and summer sessions for extra income (as a professor)?
>
>
>
Sometimes. If you find a job at a research university with a low teaching load, then deliberately increasing the teaching load would be a bad way to get tenure. If you end up working somewhere with a high teaching load, then you might not want to increase it, but I'd expect that you could take on summer teaching if you need the money. It may not pay very well, though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Since nobody else has offered a direct answer to the title question...
>
> Should I take on debt in order to get a Ph.D. in mathematics?
>
>
>
Absolutely not.
---------------
If a PhD program isn't willing to waive your tuition and offer you a stipend (in the form of an assistantship or fellowship), they don't really want you. Go somewhere else. If they decide not to give you more funding after a semester or two, you're done. Go somewhere else.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If your dream is to do a PhD in math then go for it by all means, but take into account that you are not putting yourself in the best situation. Could you delay your entry into the PhD program to pay half of the debt with your current good-paying job? You could delay and apply to other programs as well to see if you get more funding. I mean by all means pursue your dreams, but please take into account the financials of it. Also, it might not be your dream after all, once you have spent a few years in the program. The reality might be different than the dream, and for that reason I would suggest working a couple more years, paying off the loan and then entering with a better situation the PhD program.
In any case, you should be able to pay the loan after the PhD straight after graduating, just as if it was part of your mortgage, but you'll have to make some sacrifices, and I assume there is the possibility of you getting married, having more responsibilities but also possibly another source of income. Please take this into account when making your final decision.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/26 | 1,107 | 4,896 | <issue_start>username_0: A bit of background, I am doing research in atmospheric physics and detection systems
Recently, I received a paper submission back with revisions suggested by a couple of reviewers. For the most part, the revisions were definitely constructive, justified and most importantly, helpful.
That is, except on one particular crucial aspect of the paper where both reviewers made suggestions, that they labelled as critical for the paper's success. However, the suggestions were directly opposite. i.e. Both suggestions are mutually exclusive, but equally feasible.
What is an effective means to address this conflict?
*I have spoken to my academic supervisor and he is not sure how to proceed either and we have double checked and both suggested paths are feasible.*<issue_comment>username_1: Often, but not always, reviewers try and be helpful. For example, a reviews that simply says that "crucial aspect of the paper is broken/wrong/needs to be reworked", tends not to be as helpful as "crucial aspect of the paper is broken and would be improved by doing X". Of course when you get a second review saying to do Y and X and Y are incompatible, then you have an issue. I would think about X and Y (and possibly Z) and decide which you want to do. Then respond to the reviewers and acknowledge that you improved crucial aspect with method X (or Y or Z) for the reasons you decided to use it. Hopefully, the reviewer will be happy that you improved crucial aspect and not upset that you didn't use method Y. If after the second round of reviews you still have conflicts, explain the problem to the editor and ask for advice.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In my capacity as editor for a journal, I see this quite frequently. I think it is a pity that you are left on your own to try to resolve the problem. An editor should provide some indication of possible solutions in tricky situations like this. So my first advice is to contact the editor and briefly explain the dilemma and ask for some advise on how to proceed. If you can, you should also provide your opinion on what you think is reasonable. After all, you have made your study and knows its strengths and weaknesses better than most.
In some cases, I have experienced how authors have used conflicting reviews to swing their paper in one or the other direction. This is certainly also possible since the reviews, and this is important, constitute peer's views and opinions, not an absolute and definitive truth to be followed.
Lacking the necessary insight into the details of your work and the issue at hand, I would also add the following. If you think you can bring up the conflicting views in the discussion, you may perhaps add both to your paper and simply arrive at a conclusion that the jury might still be out concerning the burning issue. I realize this may not be applicable in your case, but could be one way to acknowledge the existence of several, seemingly valid views.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **Reviewers' suggestions are just that: suggestions.** So, read both of them, make your own idea on how useful each of the suggestions would be, then depending on available resources, **you may choose to follow one, the other, both, or none**.
* If you can do both, then of course do it, compare the results, and that will vastly improve your paper!
* If you cannot do both, then decide in advance on which seems more likely to you, and follow this course (X). Then, add mention of the other method (Y) in the revised paper, saying something along the lines of *“it would also be interesting to see how doing Y improves the results of Z, though we do not expect it to be as efficient as X because of …”*. And explain in your letter to the editor that you have followed the avenue which seemed best to you, out of the two suggested by the referees. If your case is convincing (yet concise), you should not have a problem with the editor: you're the expert, after all!
* If you think both have value, but (i) you don't have the resources to do it, and (ii) though the suggestions are valid, your current results already bring something new and significant to the field, you may decide not to follow the suggestions. Include them, with some background for each, in the revised manuscript and explain that it may be useful for future work to consider those. In the response to the editor, make your case that though it is interesting, it would be out of the scope of the current study, and your work meets publication standards as it is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: What I would probably do is:
In the appropriate section, acknowledge that two routes had been suggested, and then explain why you chose to take the route you did.
edit: sorry, didn't fully read through the answer above mine before posting (which says much the same thing).
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/09/26 | 600 | 2,460 | <issue_start>username_0: It is understandable if considering the educational record (where s/he has studied and how is his/her transcript) of an applicant applied for junior academic positions such as postdoctoral fellow or assistant professor. BUT, for senior academics, the factors for judging a potential full professor is his/her research, teaching, publications, and other academic achievements.
I read *in a few job ads for full professors in Europe (mainly Scandinavia), one of the application materials is unofficial transcripts.* It seems that the initial review is substantially based on the applicant education achievements two decades ago.
I wonder how much the education of an applicant affects his/her chance to be appointed as a full professor? Does a bad education (having low GPA at PhD level) always affects someone's academic career, even at highest levels?<issue_comment>username_1: Combining the various comments that this question has elicited:
In some countries and at some institutions, the transcript is the official record certifying completion of the degree. When an institution asks for an unofficial transcript, they are really asking for verification that you earned the degree you said you did. Unfortunately, [certain events](http://www.techradar.com/us/news/internet/scott-thompson-quits-as-yahoo-ceo-following-fake-degree-controversy-1080165) make some institutions feel justified in asking for proof. You cannot very well mail your diploma! Unofficial copies of your transcript are easy to come by in the digital age.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From a European perspective: the only time I was ever asked for transcripts was for PhD admission. After that, nobody every asked me for transcripts.
* Administrative people asked me for a proof of my degree (a copy of the degree itself, without grades, is what I gave). They only wanted to check I was eligible for the position's formal requirements (having a PhD to become post-doc or assistant professor).
* Scientists asked me for my publications, my thesis, the list of topics I had taught, etc. They did not care the least about my grades in undergrad or graduate education.
So, I think the ads you saw asking for transcripts, especially for senior positions, are by far a minority. **Once you have a PhD, most people won't care about your earlier educational record**, since it is not a good predictor of how awesome you will be as a researcher.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/26 | 1,468 | 6,166 | <issue_start>username_0: During seminars and talks, some presenters hear a question and compliment it by saying "Good question." Could this possibly offend the asker? Could this be viewed as a tactic to pretend being unfazed by a difficult question?
Or is it really a good psychological ploy to mollify the interrogator so that he/she is more accepting to the answer?<issue_comment>username_1: An amusing issue! This sort of response can be done in a good way, or in a not-so-good way. It is rhetorically constructive to not be combative, and also to deflect potential combativeness, but/and not good to be sycophantic (which will offend some people). It is also not so bad to give oneself time to think while being polite and positive to one's audience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As an economist I can rant for hours about people's ulterior motives... as a speaker I can tell you that this reaction springs in me spontaneously, when the question has good *timing* with what I am presenting, meaning that it is a good opening for the next issue (or next aspect of the current issue) I was about to start speaking on. It makes a presentation rolling *with* the audience, and you cannot ask much more than that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: There are several reason why a presenter (of any kind) will comment "Good question."
1. The question is good and the speaker wants to provide positive reinforcement for other participants to ask questions (feeding each person's need for praise)
2. To give themselves time to think of an answer
3. They don't know why, they just do it.
In the case of (3), it is usually taught for the reason (1). That is, speakers are taught to play to the ego or rather give positive reinforcement to the audience which will in turn lead the audience to think more highly of the speaker ("Wow! That speaker really sees how amazingly clever I am."). There is a very real psychological issue going on here and one which is properly used all the time (in and out of the classroom). It is not to patronize, it is to give credit where credit is due. Those who do not know why they do it, can end up patronizing but that is just from a lack of understanding and experience.
The reason is psychological but only partially to make the person asking more receptive to the answer. It is also to encourage others to ask more questions.
Point (2) does happen and it perfectly acceptable. It is not the comment that is the concern. The concern is whether the speaker *should* know the answer and does not. When I am asked questions for which I need to think for a moment, I will openly say so: "Hmmm, I've never heard that question before, let me think for a moment." If the needed thinking time is too long I will refer the asker to follow up 'offline' so it does not interrupt the overall flow.
In any case, if a presenter is dancing around an issue to avoid showing ignorance shows a lack of confidence which is usually also shown other ways leading to a weaker overall presentation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I actually tend to do this more with a younger, less experienced audience. I remember being terrified to ask questions during talks, and how much it helped to have a speaker with this attitude. So, in part, when I say it, it means: 'It's good that you asked a question'. Of course I only do it if the question is reasonable. I was recently at a summer school for PhD students and postdocs where the speaker started his response with: 'That's a very basic question, of course'. I think it was a language issue and that he actually meant it's fundamental, but nobody wanted to ask any questions afterwards.
In contrast, in an audience of peers, I usually take 'good question' to mean that it's something that the speaker has found intriguing at some point, because that's usually when I would say it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I would usually respond 'Good question' to
* A question asking something that I have thought about before, but which is not obvious. This could be something I forgot to include in my talk, something I am about to get to, or something which I decided to skip over.
* A question asking something that I haven't thought about before, but immediately see that maybe I should have.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I doubt it's a tactic or a ploy, except maybe to reassure the ones who asked the question that they have not asked a stupid question. How many questions never get asked because members of the audience are afraid they will look like fools if they raise their hands and ask a "silly" question?
Your question almost makes it sound like the speaker is trying to cover up a weakness. Ironically, I think it conveys a strength, because, by saying "good question," the lecturer may be inviting *more* questions.
Others have listed several spontenous reasons why a question might be considered good – its timeliness, its relevance, its insight. I'll add one more:
* When the question reminds me to cover something I had been intending to cover, but almost forgot.
I'd call that a "good question" – perhaps aloud, even.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The problem with saying good question is that when you have said it once, you have to say it every time - otherwise it implies that you're saying that the next question is not a good question. So I don't say it unless the person looked nervous or appeared to need encouragement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: After the first question, a speaker once explained that there are three types of question: great questions, good questions, and interesting questions.
* Great questions are answered on the very next slide!
* Good questions are answered in an upcoming slide
* Interesting questions need some research before they can be answered
Made sense to me, and no-one need be offended by the category assigned to their question :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I think it also depends on the culture of the speaker. I spent some time in the US and France, and I keep hearing "[great|good|excellent|etc.] questions" in the former while it was quite rare in the latter.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/27 | 1,621 | 7,175 | <issue_start>username_0: In scientific conferences, there are usually many headhunters who come to offer newly graduated scholars jobs in the industry sector. As a matter of fact, the recruitment in industry mostly works with the headhunting system.
However, academic recruitment is mainly application-based, and they are stuck with *Equal Employment Opportunity*, in which even when planning to appoint a Vice President to a vacant President position, they need to follow public call for application.
**Why doesn't a department chair offer faculty position to exceptional scholars to attract extraordinary people?**
In an application-based system, only those who are looking for new jobs will apply, but in a headhunting system, headhunters tempts satisfied employees with attractive offers.
In general, when someone is averagely satisfied by his/her job will not check current job ads.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Why doesn't a department chair offer faculty positions to exceptional scholars to attract extraordinary people?
>
>
>
Ah, but they do. For high profile academics, there are many behind-the-scenes discussions between department chairs, deans, and other faculty members. If a department really wants a particular academic for a particular chair, they'll have discussions about it with the candidate. I imagine that certain faculty get calls rather frequently asking if they want to move universities. Some professors can pretty much move at will; see, for instance, [Cornell West's move between Harvard and Princeton](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West) -- West got in a tiff with Harvard President <NAME>, and then he up and moved to Princeton, where they were happy to have him.
The networking system within academia is broad enough and the number of open positions small enough that hiring headhunters is not really necessary, although for really high profile positions -- presidents of universities and the like -- a headhunting firm may be hired to make sure certain protocols are met.
For run-of-the-mill assistant professor and associate professor positions, and for other candidate-search positions such as department chairs, the application process works well. But don't think that there still isn't any wrangling between various faculty members and possible candidates -- if you're an excellent researcher that has been making a name for yourself as a graduate student or as a junior faculty member, you may be asked directly to apply for positions that are open.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> However, academic recruitment is mainly application-based, and they are stuck to Equal Employment Opportunity, in which even when planning to appoint a Vice President to a vacant President position, they need to follow public call for application.
>
>
> **Why a department chair does not offer faculty position to exceptional scholars to attract extraordinary people?**
>
>
>
At least for public universities in the US, you've answered your own question. Public universities cannot directly offer jobs to anyone; they must follow Equal Employment Opportunity laws, which require open applications. Even with an open search, department chairs often don't have unilateral power to offer a job to anyone. At my university, all faculty appointments must be approved by the dean of the department's college, who among other things, is supposed to verify that all EEO procedures have been followed.
But as Chris writes, less direct headhunting does still happen. For senior positions, especially endowed chairs and department heads, most applications submitted in response to the public ad are hopeless; the only strong applications come from candidates that faculty identify, contact directly, and convince to apply. (That's the explicit reason my department has a faculty *recruiting* committee, and not just a faculty *search* committee.) But even for assistant professor positions, faculty do contact promising PhD students—by email, by phone, or in person at conferences—and strongly encourage them to apply.
For even higher-level positions like deans and university presidents, universities often work with professional search firms to identify and contact promising candidates, but my impression (having worked with such a firm in one search) is that those firms are mostly good at identifying people who aren't interested. Strong candidates for those positions—the ones that are actually invited for public interviews—are almost always people that the university faculty and administration has been courting for months.
Departments do sometimes identify people they'd like to hire even before they've advertised a position. In that case, the university may *create* a position specifically for that person, with a very narrowly tailored job description. But then sometimes the department gets an even stronger application in response to their narrowly tailored ad, so they don't end up hiring their original target after all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In order to answer this question it is important to understand what a head hunting firm does. For a substantial fee (potentially in excess of 25% of the annual salary) head hunters use their networks to identify (and convince) people to apply for a job. They talk to the contacts they have, plus individuals identified by the hiring department, and try and get names of not only potential applicants, but also people who might know potential applicants. They may also use web resources, but in general I believe they like to use named introductions instead of cold calls.
In industry where HR firms often do not have networks in the area of expertise of the job, outside consultation is necessary. Industry jobs tend to also be less worried about costs. Additionally, it is harder for potential applicants to find out about job openings at smaller companies and figure out if they are interested in working for the company.
For academic position networks in the required area of expertise already exist. Search committees and most faculty in the department will email their colleagues when a search opens and try and attract candidates to apply. Additionally, even small colleges would qualify as a large company and are much better advertised and described. This means departments don't really need head hunters to reach potential applicants.
The second issue with head hunters is that the candidates they identify didn't respond to the open call and are therefore either less interested or feel the are less qualified. In general academic searches do not have a problem with attracting qualified candidates to apply.
Which brings us to the final issue. It is often difficult to make an attractive enough offer to candidates to get them to accept. Adding 25% of the annual salary onto the search costs means less money for recruiting and start up package. This makes it less likely to get the candidate of choice.
Head hunters do have a role in academic job searches. Sometimes a department is trying to expand in an area they do not have expertise/networks or are looking to make an unusual interdisciplinary appointment.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/27 | 531 | 2,216 | <issue_start>username_0: When addressing the past positions in a resume, although titles somewhat describes the role, they cannot clarify the importance of positions.
For example, listing a past position of `department chair` indicates administrative duties at department level, but it depends on the department. Definitely, chairing a small department with a few faculty members and annual enrollment of 30 undergraduate students is different from a well-funded department with tens of senior faculty members and several PhD programs. However, if a reader does not know that specific department, the term `department chair` is the same.
This is even more serious when it comes to differences in terminology. In a university, a faculty can be equal to a department, and somewhere else a faculty can be in the size of a university hosting several large departments. Even terms of mid-level administrative positions in academia do not always have the same meaning: e.g., dean, director, chair, head.
**How do you fairly clarify the importance of the job you had?**
It is possible to add a description, but as it is not very common, it may cause an impression of overestimation.<issue_comment>username_1: You can put a short (maybe four or five word) explanation in the CV item itself (or more if you think it's really important). You can also give more details in your cover letter about exactly what responsibilities you had. Another option is to ask one of your letter writers to explain; this is a common approach for things like personal reasons for wanting to leave a job, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If a title or position is unclear, or an institution is possibly not well known, just explain it in a few words:
>
> * Director of Supersonic Operations department (15 researchers) at Small U.
> * Time-management officer, Funny Inc. (in charge of scheduling company-wide meetings)
> * Information officer, U. of North Virginia (CTO-like position, managing computing resources for 10,000+ students and staff)
>
>
>
Be as concise as possible, but give the reader some idea of the scope of your activities. And if the position is clear or well-known, just don't add any details.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/09/27 | 2,590 | 10,009 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently having a hard time understanding if authors are using the word `methodology` correctly, or if their papers should be classified as BS. Hence, I set out to get a better feeling for the correct use of the word, but now I'm even more confused than before:
First I had a look at [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology) which states:
>
> Methodology is the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied to a field of study, or the theoretical analysis of the body of methods and principles associated with a branch of knowledge.
>
>
>
This sentence is followed by a second sentence with reference to a paper from <NAME>, which as far as I could see, states something very contracting:
>
> Methodology is generally a guideline for solving a problem, with
> specific components such as phases, tasks, methods, techniques and
> tools [two sources are given]
>
>
>
Even though I think the wikipedia description is identical with my understanding of the term, the reference is confusion. I then asked [Merriam & Webster](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/methodology) for help. Here it says:
>
> 1: a body of methods, rules, and postulates employed by a discipline : a particular procedure or set of procedures
> 2: the analysis of the principles or procedures of inquiry in a particular field
>
>
>
Oxford says a discipline is branch of knowledge, which I would interpret as things like math, sociology, computer science and psychology, but not things like UML modeling, crossword solving, methods for solving a problem, or even sticking together methods to solve a problem. This does not match the `discipline : a particular procedure or a set of procedures` part of the definition.
And then again they give a weird example:
>
> «for solving crossword puzzles my usual methodology is to begin by
> filling in all of the answers I'm reasonably sure of»
>
>
>
Maybe the `«` and `»` brackets indicate that they chose a poor example, or they consider crosswords a discipline (case 1). It obviously doesn't qualify for case 2, as the example does not analyse methods used in the crossword domain.
Sadly, Oxford defines the term as:
>
> a system of methods used in a particular area of study or activity: a
> methodology for investigating the concept of focal points
>
>
>
Which again is used as a method/solution for a problem and not the theorecial study of methods in that field. Only the "Methodology as a buzzword" section on wikipedia seems to back up my understanding of the term:
>
> Many recent uses of the word methodology mistakenly treat it a synonym
> for method or body of methods. Doing this shifts it away from its true
> epistemological meaning and reduces it to being the procedure itself,
> the set of tools or the instruments that should have been its outcome.
> A methodology is the design process for carrying out research or the
> development of a procedure and is not in itself an instrument for
> doing those things. Using it as a synonym for method or set of
> methods, leads to misinterpretation and undermines the proper analysis
> that should go into designing research.
>
>
>
**Question 1:** Is my understanding that a methodology is, as the name suggests it, a logic behind methods, and consequently must not deal with the topic per se, but address some meta level of the used methods, wrong?
**Question 2:** For my particular academic problem in CS: Is the combination of general priciples and rules as part of a standard for creating a particular type of operating system a methodology (e.g. as used in AUTOSAR)? Such principles and rules govern and describe communication mechanisms, memory access methods, scheduling and the like. I would call this a body of methods, hence this must be a buzzword?
**Additional fact**: My Sixth edition Oxford from 1976 says:
>
> Science of method; body of methods used in a particular branch of
> activity;
>
>
>
So in the current version they dumped the actual meaning and only used that weird body of method definition.
I'm happy about any source bringing some clarity into this mess. Don't worry if you can't answer the CS specific question, a general purpose answer may well be just as good.<issue_comment>username_1: Words don't have a fixed meaning, and dictionaries only follow usage here. That is what is happening here.
The **“classical” meaning of *methodology*** is (my own words): **a branch of epistemology that studies scientific methods, i.e. the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied in science.** (*[Epistemology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology)*, in turn, is a branch of philosophy dealing with knowledge).
This classical meaning is what the [eponym Wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology) discusses (WP being an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, it doesn't have to list all meanings of a given word). It's also what one of the Merriam-Webster definitions says:
>
> the analysis of the principles or procedures of inquiry in a particular field
>
>
>
---
Now, language evolves, and in addition to this “classical” meaning of *methodology* (which is, in that sense, a [mass noun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun)), a second meaning is developing. This new meaning is **“a collection of methods used in conjunction”**, as you noted.
Now, as with every language evolution, [some people complain about it](http://organizationsandmarkets.com/2007/04/07/method-versus-methodology/) (and the [Wikipedia article on Methodology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology) is clearly written from this point of view; see [“Methodology as a buzzword”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology#Methodology_as_a_buzzword) section). The [Wiktionary article](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/methodology) goes on to say:
>
> Etymologically, *methodology* refers to the study of methods. Thus the use of *methodology* as a synonym for *methods* (or other simple terms such as *means*, *technique*, or *procedure*) is **proscribed as both inaccurate and pretentious**.
>
>
>
Well, sod them to Hades! It is clear that **this newer meaning is abundantly used in the academic literature these days**, and can thus be considered acceptable.
---
*(If you've never seen it, this [wonderful tirade by <NAME>](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY) should cure you of [prescriptivism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescription). It is delightful to hear… “They're no more guardians of language than the Kennel Club is the guardian of dogkind.”)*
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Since there exists also the word "method", then one could argue that we should use "methodology" in its full epistemological meaning (definition 2 in Merriam & Webster), which is the discourse *about* science and its methods. In practice, a lot of people use the two words almost interchangeably.
There is a reason for that: "method" has a rather narrow *applied* and descriptive flavor, while "methodology" invokes the knowledge of the fundamental principles of logic, science or whatever else is pertinent to the case, from which specific methods descend. So when we write "the methodology that was followed in this paper is...", we do mean to refer to the fact that we are aware of the philosophical, epistemological foundations (and weaknesses) of our methods. Even if we are not aware of that, in a sense, it makes us *accountable*: we cannot afterwards claim that "we just employed a widely used method" -by using the word "methodology" we accept responsibility of having a clear opinion of what we are doing and why we are doing it this way (even if we really don't).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: One meaning of "methodology" is a synonym for method. That is how it is used, both in technical literature and in common use.
Another of its meanings is the study of methods.
And yet another is the body of methods in a particular field.
You will find writers who are celebrated for being experts in that craft who use the word with any and all of those meanings; so this is not a question of technical usage versus casual usage.
**Etymology is not destiny.** As username_1 writes, language is defined by usage, and evolves constantly.
Nevertheless, as writers we not only have the expectations of our readers in mind, but also (and primarily) the expectations of our commissioning editor - the gatekeeper to publication. If they are a descriptivist, you may have to work with that in order to get published. If they have a style guide to work to, then you must work to it too. Your goal is to get your paper published: fighting to change the publisher's style guide is a different and separate battle, so don't mix them up.
So, to find out whether you should be using "methodology", "method" or "paradigm", read some comparable papers in your target journal, and see what's most commonly used, in contexts that are most analagous to yours. If that doesn't clear it up, ask your contact editor at the journal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Maybe it's my strictness for definitions. Maybe it's that I have some friends who speak Greek. But I've always understood "log" as part, and the "-y" as just a declension. So methodology would be in regards to the parts of methods. Given that when discussing methodologys, writers go into great detail, this definition seems to fit.
Part of why I treat "log" as a synonym for part has to do with how it's used, independently, in English. Consider logs from a tree, the tree has been sliced, with each slice being a part or log. A timelog or datalog is essentially just a bunch of separate entries in a single document.
You can find a lot of similar use here: <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Log>
Some thoughts: I think a lot of the more recent use of "methodology" stems from it being a "bigger word" and therefore sounding more sophisticated or intellectual.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/27 | 742 | 2,445 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing a paper where you are citing from another paper which uses a different citation style, how should one cite portions of text that contain in-text citations? For example
>
>
> >
> > “Malnutrition has often been referred to as “the skeleton in the hospital closet”, as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated [69,70].Despite this, the negative consequences of malnutrition have been widely reported..." (Barker, Grout & Crowe, 2011).
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
An alternative format would be
>
>
> >
> > "Malnutrition has often been referred to as "the skeleton in the hospital closet" , as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated (McKee, 2011; Busby, 2008; in Barker, Grout, & Crowe, 2011). Despite this...."( Barker, Grout, & Crowe, 2011).
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
This seems an awkward and redundant solution. Would this be considered correct for APA style? What about other citation styles; MLA,etc.?<issue_comment>username_1: Why not rephrase it, and quote each source properly? Like this:
>
> McKee (2011), Busby (2008) and in Barker, Grout, & Crowe (2011) wrote that “Malnutrition has often been referred to as 'the skeleton in the hospital closet', as it is often overlooked, under-diagnosed, and untreated". To this, in Barker, Grout & Crowe added that "Despite this, the negative consequences of malnutrition have been widely reported...".
>
>
>
In a way, you are quoting McKee at al., so it is only proper to cite them properly, and thus have them in your references.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Echoing the other good comments and answer, I'd encourage you to think in terms of "forthrightness", rather than compliance to semi-random formal criteria. Think of the *function* of your citations, and thinking of the idealized version of scholarship and such. The goal is not conformity to style guides, but useful contributions to human knowledge, blah-blah-blah, ;) But, yes, that should be the way to think about such questions.
To my taste, citations in-line should be sufficient so that the reader does not have to "flip to the end" to see what "[46]" is. The space spent on fuller references is a good investment!!!
That is, yet again, if one thinks that the *function* of one's writing is to *help* the reader, all in-line references would be optimally helpful, as opposed to "proper-and-possibly-unhelpful".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/09/28 | 958 | 4,101 | <issue_start>username_0: Many questions on this website ask how university rankings affect the future career in research and graduate admissions. But it is not clear for me what is actually meant by ranking. There are various rankings of universities and many of them are contradictory.
Thus, in the context of graduate admissions what ranking does the admission committee have in their mind? How does the committee decide which is a high-ranked school and which is a low-ranked school?<issue_comment>username_1: In the context of graduate admissions, the “ranking” of universities by members of the committee is a purely subjective one, and depends heavily from place to place, from department to department, and from committee member to committee member. That's why you're not getting a simple silver-bullet answer to your question.
Now, most admission committee members will rather rely on their own past experience with students coming from various schools, and would probably go further and would not “rank” the same the different undergrad programs from a given university. They would typically consider things like:
* how ready were past students from program X for our graduate courses? e.g., did they know and master well enough all the prerequisites for our courses
* how well did these students do during courses? e.g. what sort of grades do they get (knowing that a top student from school X usually doesn't make it to the first half of your program, for example, is interesting to know for future candidates from this school)
* how well did they perform in terms of research? e.g. school Y has students with excellent grades and educational record, but are they prepared for a wide-ranging professional experience that is a PhD?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: (I speak for a mathematics grad program and admissions...) In any case, it's not literal "ranking" that is generated by some for-profit group, but, rather, not-so-young-anymore faculty peoples' knowledge of the relative rigor and standards of a program, and the appreciation (or lack thereof) of that faculty's conception and awareness of what graduate programs demand of students. Of course, yes, some faculty have arrived at modest places by choice or by chance after times spent at "high-status/tier" places, so have an idea about the larger world, so their appraisals of the potential success of their students carries more weight. Yes, obviously, some faculty at lower-tier places have less idea of the rigors of "fancier" places, so give dubious opinions about future success of their students. It is more plausible to imagine that faculty at higher-tier places are aware of how their own graduate program works, at least, and can imagine the success-or-not of their undergrad proteges in comparable programs.
In summary, it's not really about "status/ranking" per se, but about "demands of the program", and expectations for PhD projects and coursework background.
In particular, it is *not* the case that while looking at grad applications, I automatically think applicants from higher-tier schools are better... What does tend to be the case is that there's less *volatility* in the letters-of-recommendation from such places, since the faculty have more substantial track records (regardless of whether they're big-shots), and can speak more convincingly about probable success of their students in our program.
For applicants from small colleges, etc, it is indeed a bit harder to gauge potential, because they may not yet have been challenged, by coursework or projects. (Many or most "REU"s are of interest, but don't at all reliably "stress" participants, and this is by design, presumably...) Not a moral failing, for sure, but not so useful in gauging potential for future success in a less jolly, more stressful, environment. But, duh, admissions committees realize that not all mathematically talented people happen to go to colleges/universities where the faculty are able, or inclined, or allowed (!) to stress them. And maybe the available courses are limited, for various reasons.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/09/29 | 742 | 3,604 | <issue_start>username_0: Let's consider a paper that uses many different techniques to solve a **practical** problem. *The techniques that the paper uses have all already been published by others*. This paper only **modifies or customizes these techniques a bit to fit the particular question** that the paper is solving.
The techniques used are from different disciplines. So the paper is more or less similar to **an integration of these techniques**. These different techniques were proposed or published for a general purpose with no specified applications before. Now this paper integrates them together and solves a rather specific and practical problem.
I understand that this kind of very-specific-problem-solver application paper will get cited less often than those algorithm papers that may be applicable to many applications. However, let us leave the impact factor issue aside first.
Is this integration and application valued by the peers? Is this paper valuable enough to get published? (not considering its impact first)<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, yes.
You paper will prove that those techniques are useful and usable by using them to solve a practical problem. I consider it a contribution to human kind, thus valuable to get published.
Whether or not it will be accepted by journal/conference is another issue. You should try. Please send it to be peer-reviewed.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Regarding the way you described your work, it certainly worth writing it up and submitting it as an article to a journal. However, there are several factors that can add more value to your work as follows:
1. If the problem you have solved is an important problem and has been addressed by well known experts in the literature and if you write a very nice introduction to your paper and explaining the importance of the problem.
2. If the way you use these techniques explores more applications and benefits of them. In this way, it is like you have invented a brand new technique.
3. If the way you use these techniques from different disciplines shows interconnections of these disciplines and suggest more interrelationship for further investigations.
I am sure that if you explain carefully all the above points in your paper and highlight the advantages of your approach to the problem, it won't be difficult to publish your result.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I wouldn't have any doubts about this. It is the essence of *applied science*, where theoretical techniques get to be tested through their application on practical problems. And as you write, it is usually found that some modification and customization is required, or even, that some techniques actually don't work with some sub-class of problems, or that some techniques are better suited to some sub-class compared to others. Further, a paper that *compares* the application of different techniques on the same problem, is even more valuable.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Definitely!
Such publication will not only be helpful to the community whose focus is on the particular problem under investigation in your paper, but, will also be instrumental in spreading the knowledge of the techniques you employed from other fields.
In order to improve the technical quality of your manuscript, I would even suggest that you elaborate on the techniques used. Often analysis techniques originate from complex mathematical treatises. Applied research employing such techniques help in making the techniques popular and useful for practical applications.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/29 | 2,049 | 9,134 | <issue_start>username_0: I have had a few professors who announced to the class the mean and median scores for each exam, but I haven't seen anyone go further than this (e.g., announce this information for homework too, give a histogram of all the scores, etc.). Also, this information has always been kept semi-private, in the sense that it is announced verbally in class, without an explicit instruction **not** to share it, but still making it unlikely that the information would spread beyond the class.
I'm wondering what to take into consideration when deciding what sort of information to provide, and how. Would it be acceptable to put the mean and median scores for each exam on my (publicly available) website, for example? Or is that violating the privacy of my students in some way? Might they be ashamed, as a group, if they've all done extraordinarily badly? But as their teacher, I would have to also be ashamed if that were the case - so perhaps deciding to publicize how my students are doing ought to be considered as a sign of confidence that my teaching will make them do well.
I'm sure there are other issues I'm not thinking of regarding this. Your experiences (either as a student or as a teacher) with classes that gave this sort of information, and any other thoughts, would be welcome.
**Edit:** I'd be teaching an undergraduate math class. But regardless of my personal situation, I'd like to hear whether you think the field of study, or the level of the course, affect the answer to the question.<issue_comment>username_1: Revealing information about grades is normally directed by some combination of university policy and government regulations (if one is teaching at a public institution of higher learning).
Where I teach, for instance, *all* grades for written exams are officially published, but semi-anonymized by replacing the students' names with their student ID numbers. In addition, the aggregate statistics are also published, along with the rubric for converting "raw" scores into final grades.
My general belief, however, is that grades are an "internal" matter, that should not generally be publicized beyond the extent required by regulations. There is no need for everyone in the world to see the grade distribution.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Look at regulations that apply to you, whether local or national. There has been a recent shift to more privacy on this issue, so in most institutions today grades of a specific students are not public (no one knows except the student himself, and probably the NSA). In my institution (in France), full listings of grades are regularly posted, but they are anonymous (associated with student numerical ID, not with name). Back when I was a student, though, full listings of names and grades were not uncommon!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This answer is based on my experience teaching undergraduate math in the US.
Students are used to having at least the mean or median, so as to give them some context for their score. If you don't announce it, you can expect to be asked about it.
I've never bothered to post exam statistics on a web site. I wouldn't see it as a privacy issue, though it does feel a tiny bit like over-sharing. Mostly it's that students want this info at the moment they receive their graded exams; they won't want to read it later, or remember it from earlier. So even if you post it, you'll probably have to announce it also.
Legally, I understand that FERPA generally forbids releasing *identifiable* student information. There should be no legal objection to statistics, or even an anonymized list of scores. (Note, though, that university ID numbers may not be considered sufficiently anonymous.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I can share some experience as simultaneously student, TA and developer of software evaluating user data gathered by learning management systems (including test results).
* Do not share any personal information without consent ever. This goes as far as that you should not show any statistics based on gender, age or any other identifier as this often leads to single students being identifiable (everyone seems to be craving for gender statistics nowadays but this is almost impossible doing anonymously in technical fields where there are few woman).
* You can of course ask all students if it is ok to create some more extensive statistics. Beware that any consent may be caused by peer pressure though. Go for an opt-in rather than opt-out approach if you want to be fair (or the other way around if you want their consent). I think this really depends on trust and the relationship between you and your students.
* Many people feel uncomfortable if too much of their personal data is stored online. They will feel spied upon. For most students the advantages (seeing own success, areas for improvements) are outweighed by the disadvantages (people can see where they failed, make prediction about their chance to graduate, ...). They won't trust any system their data is stored on (and rightfully so, many universities store large amount of personal data for years, freely accessible by any system administrators).
* Ask yourself, are you ok with other teachers seeing your students average results? How about your supervisors? It could affect your career if they knew you let too many students fail or give good grades too easily (management most likely knows this already anyways though).
* If there were public average results of tests of each teacher username_5ilable, as a student, of course I would use this as a measurable factor in my decision for choosing a teacher for my upcoming course. Sure, the word probably gets around anyway if you grade students better/worse compared to other teachers but extensive statistics on this subject are gold for the lazy student.
* If you want to share individual test result online, don't rely on student IDs for anonymous results. Fellow students know each others IDs. Sometimes IDs contain information that can be used to identify students as well. The only reliable approach I've seen, is to let each student write a secret keyword on their test, which you later list online next to their grade. The whole page shouldn't be public for everyone.
Still, don't let this discourage you to share information with your students. If you gather any statistic that could help a particular student to improve, it would be best to discuss this in case they come see you during office hours. Even if it's just to praise a student or offer help when his grades are declining.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Teaching College Students requires being mindful of their mental health and avoiding embarrassing the student.
It can be very degrading to anyone to get a low score and have it announced to the class if they received a low score. So we should probably rule out announcing the lowest score. If a student received a high score, they most likely would want everyone to know, so you could probably announce the highest three scores.
Using the high-score method, as I discussed above, in addition to sharing the whole class average, is a good way to let the class know how they did overall in comparison to their individual grades without embarrassing themselves if they got a low grade, and recognizing the three students who received the highest grades, in order to hopefully praise them into wanting to get better scores in the future as well.
Another method, which is becoming more and more common as of late, is just anonymizing names using one platform (I forget the name of the site) to share everyone's grades in comparison. That way, everyone knows who they are, but they are anonymous to all others. This avoids all the common dangers of announcing grades to the whole class while gently letting students know what they did wrong (or right!)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: As everyone else says, certainly do not use any personally identifying data. I am not clear as to whether using student ID numbers is legal, but it is a bad idea; these are effectively not private. If you really want each student to have a secret PIN, assign them one specifically for the class. That said, I think giving a list of scores with any sort of identifier is asking for trouble.
What I do is give a coarse bucketing of the grade distribution, either stated as "x between 90-100, y students between 80-90, etcetera", or else as "10-th percentile of class got grade x, 20-th percentile got grade y, etcetera." I make sure that the top bin is wide enough to include at least 10% of the class and the bottom is wide enough to include at least 20%. I don't think there is any real need for the tails to know their rankings more accurately; they probably aren't meaningful anyway.
Oh, I just recalled a stunt I did once. I collected data on which students showed up to class for two weeks before the exam and then, the day after the exam, showed a scatter plot of exam grade versus class attendance. Correlation isn't causation, but the correlation was certainly clear!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/09/29 | 1,559 | 6,509 | <issue_start>username_0: When I receive galley proofs of a paper, I look at possible errors introduced by the copy-editing team. But while I proofread the article, there are sometimes small mistakes I'd like to fix, which were not introduced by them (i.e. they were already present in the accepted version of the manuscript).
Usually, the proofs are accompanied by instructions saying that **extensive changes should not be introduced at that time, and any such changes would have to be approved by the editor** (hence, I suppose, delaying publication). However, the limit is not very clear to me. **What is considered extensive changes?** In particular, what do you think of the following items (from my experience):
* Slight changes in wording, to improve clarity
* Updating a citation, because an “in press” or “ASAP” article now has page numbers
* Adding an important (but not crucial) citation one had missed, in the introduction
* Adding a citation to a paper that has been published since the manuscript was submitted; possibly adding a short sentence to the text
---
What I have done so far is change everything that I think should be changed to improve the paper (including all the above items), and let the typesetter decide whether he wanted to send it back to the editor. I never received any complaint or comment on my changes, which could indicate that it was the correct course of action.<issue_comment>username_1: A galley proof should primarily be proofed for typos or mistakes made in the type-setting process. It is not the time to change phrasing, exchange figures, add or remove blocks of text or anything else substantial.
Adding references might seem like a useful addition but the problem is that it would then be possible to add references without the knowledge of the editors and of course the reviewers and hence possibly make changes that could have affected reviews etc. The case of adding anew paper is a similar problem since it may change the paper in ways that the editor and reviewers have not seen and therefore ok'd. If such changes are wanted (they are probably seldom needed), it would be best to at least check with the editor if that would be appropriate. In short, no changes should be made that alters the content of the paper. All such details should have been checked and if necessary corrected before submitting the final revised manuscript for copy-editing and proof production. Any corrections called for by the copy-editor and editors after submitting the final version is of course to be made.
Updating of references are usually also acceptable, to, for example, add the publication year (from e.g. "in press") or adding doi, page numbers etc. if these were not known at the time the final version was submitted.
The proofing stage is not a stage where many changes should be made. The manuscript that is submitted for proofing should be considered the last chance to make any substantial changes. What many do not realize is that all changes done after a type-set proof has been produced may cost the journal money, apart from the extra time and trouble it causes. So, as an editor, I often have the feeling authors just send in their final manuscript without checking figures and text properly and then waiting for the proof to make final changes but is, in fact, an abuse of the system.
Regarding your last paragraph, the type-setter is usually not a scientist and has no idea of what changes might mean so to think that the type-setter would act as some form of intermediate editor is not right. In cases where type-setting is done in-house it might be a professional doing the type-setting but I would still say this is not the way to handle the type-setting/proofing stage.
So, anyone, make sure the final submitted manuscript is checked, complete and correct.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: All the cases you mention (minor wording changes, updating/adding references) seem entirely fine to me. It's best to do this only when it's important, but in my experience it's standard and acceptable. username_1's answer suggests what's acceptable might vary between fields or journals, however. (His point about making changes after reviewing is valid, but I'm not so worried if the changes are relatively minor.) All I can talk about is my experience in mathematics as an author and editor.
The book [Mathematics Into Type](http://books.google.com/books?id=5YKiwrpJntoC) (first published by the American Mathematical Society in 1971, and last updated in 1999) says the following on pages 53-54:
>
> If an author makes changes in first proof amounting to more than 10% of the original cost of composition, these changes are usually considered excessive. Many publishers ask authors to bear the costs in excess of 10%. These excessive correction charges may be the result of large sections of text being deleted or of changes in wording or notation.
>
>
>
This agrees with my memory of the traditional standard for excessive changes. It's not clear what, if anything, this 10% figure means nowadays, or how widely it's used (although web searches lead to [some](http://www.journalofsurgicalresearch.com/authorinfo) [mentions](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-environmental-economics-and-management/0095-0696/guide-for-authors) of it in guides for authors). I wouldn't take it too seriously, but it does give an indication of what was considered acceptable in the past. Note that it didn't mean you could rewrite 5% of the article, since those changes would require resetting a lot of the surrounding text as well, but it meant you had some flexibility for making a few small changes.
Going back further, [in 1943](http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1943-49-03/S0002-9904-1943-07884-6/S0002-9904-1943-07884-6.pdf) the AMS said this:
>
> It is important that galley proofs be carefully read and corrected by the author, since it is only the author who can detect errors which are due to an imperfect manuscript.
>
>
>
So at least back then the official AMS position was that authors should correct their own mistakes when reading proofs, and not just new mistakes introduced by the typesetter. (I don't know of more recent references that discuss this explicitly.)
Of course I agree with username_1 that articles should be carefully checked at the time the final version is submitted, with changes to the proofs being considered a last resort rather than an opportunity to delay the checking.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/09/30 | 2,084 | 6,981 | <issue_start>username_0: In the terminology for a peer-reviewed publication to be submitted to a reputable scientific journal, what are the differences and characteristic properties of the following?
* *draft*
* *manuscript*
* *preprint*
* *paper*
* *article*
My own take on it would be that my text is a draft until I submit it to a journal, at which point it becomes a manuscript. When the manuscript is accepted it becomes a preprint, and when it gets published it becomes a paper, which is synonymous to article.
Would that be an accurate summary? Would anyone have corrections or additions?<issue_comment>username_1: * **paper = article**: In the academic meaning of the words, papers and articles refer to the same thing: a published piece of writing. The term is used for *journal papers* or *journal articles*, which means they have been published by a journal, but also for less traditional publications, including self-publication (*“Dr. Who just published a great paper on the intricacies of time travel on his webpage”*) and e-print repositories such as arXiv (*“check out the latest paper by Galileo on arXiv, that guy has mad ideas!”*).
Some journals have different categories of “articles”, and differentiate between letters, communications, reports, reviews, and full papers (sometimes abbreviated as just “papers”). In usage I have seen, *paper* (or *article*) used as a generic term covers all of those: you would say, for example, that *“letters and full papers are two types of articles”*.
* A **preprint** (more commonly used without the hyphen) refers to the **distribution, in advance of formal publication, of something that will be published in print**. The preprint may differ from the final publication.
*Preprint* status does not always indicate that the work has been formally accepted for publication. It just means the authors intend to publish it in a more formal venue (journal, book, etc.) but wanted to distribute by other means beforehand (preprints used to be distributed to colleagues as photocopies, but are now mostly circulated by email or repositories).
* A **manuscript** is, in the *New Oxford American Dictionary*'s words, “an author's text that has **not yet been published**”. Any piece of writing that you have not published in any way (but intend to) is a manuscript.
* A **draft** is the same as a manuscript, except that it insists on the **unfinished state** of the manuscript.
---
Summarizing, I could say:
>
> Here's the ***draft*** I've been working on, please amend it with your corrections. Once we have done this final round of revision, I will upload the ***manuscript*** to the editor's website, and we can start circulating it as a ***preprint*** to colleagues whom you think may be interested. Once it is accepted and published, we'll just send them the published version of the ***paper*** for their records.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that a piece of writing during the pre-submission stage is a draft and during the post-acceptance, but pre-publication, stage is a preprint. I think that this agrees with your terminology.
Many journals publish original research findings under a number of categories including articles, letters, and reports and in some fields books are the predominant mode of publishing research. Therefore, I would say that a preprint does not necessarily become a paper/article when published and instead becomes whatever it is.
Defining a manuscript is the hardest for me. I have often seen acknowledgements which thank someone for reading a previous version of the manuscript. This happens frequently enough in my field that I believe that a piece of writing becomes a manuscript prior to submission to a publisher. I am not sure when a piece of writing becomes a manuscript. I think a piece of writing becomes a manuscript when the first complete draft is completed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: An "article" typically specifically means a paper in a journal, while "paper" is a more general term that also includes conferences, technical memos, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In French, paper is definitely informal, while article is the term to be used in a written document.
However, in English I feel that we tend to use
* "journal article" more often that "journal paper",
* "conference article" less than "conference paper",
* "workshop article" far less often than "workshop paper".
So paper might tend to designate a piece of work of lesser importance than article, or as username_3 said have a more general use. It still sounds slightly more informal to me, probably because I am a French native speaker, but I'm pretty sure many French colleagues of mine have the same feeling even if they work in some English-speaking country.
My field computer science > machine learning, in case the terminology changes from field to field, and my location is the US.
---
Some statistics (obviously biased by the corpus):
[Journal paper vs. journal article](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Journal+paper%2C+journal+article&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CJournal%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bjournal%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJournal%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJournal%20Paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJOURNAL%20PAPER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Cjournal%20article%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bjournal%20article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJournal%20article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJournal%20Article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BJOURNAL%20ARTICLE%3B%2Cc0):
[Conference paper vs. conference article](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Conference+paper%2CConference+article&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2014&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2CConference%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bconference%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BConference%20Paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BConference%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BCONFERENCE%20PAPER%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2CConference%20article%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BConference%20Article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BCONFERENCE%20Article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BConference%20article%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BCONFERENCE%20ARTICLE%3B%2Cc0%3B%3Bconference%20article%3B%2Cc0):
[Workshop paper vs. workshop article](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=workshop+paper%2Cworkshop+article&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2014&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cworkshop%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3BWorkshop%20Paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3Bworkshop%20paper%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BWorkshop%20paper%3B%2Cc0):
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I would consider a preprint is the read-proof document that some Journals allow the author to distribute under some rules. So it is in post-acceptance but pre-publication stage. I don´t think the draft-manuscript-paper distinctions are relevant.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/09/30 | 1,021 | 4,302 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a recent bachelor of technology graduate from India and want to become a research assistant just after b.tech at any abroad university (USA,CANADA,UK, etc). If it is possible then what kind of qualifications, GPA, academics are required? Also for becoming an RA at these universities is the GRE exam necessary?<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes.**
First be admitted to graduate school.
Then convince a professor to hire you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my field is it quite common to hire recent graduates for a year or two as a research assistant. Typical duties of an RA include scheduling participants, collecting data, and doing preliminary data analysis. Depending on previous expertise and experience gained on the job RAs can also design and implement/program experiments. There is also a fair amount of house keeping work (e.g., sending equipment off to be calibrated and making sure the supply cupboard is stocked).
Most people hiring for these types of positions look at GPA and classes taken as well as practical skills. I have never heard of anyone requiring or looking at the GRE. As far as qualifications are concerned you will need to have whatever paperwork is required to allow you to work in that country. I don't know anyone who would go out of the way to get a work permit type visa for an RA.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **Yes it is possible to become a research assistant just after completing B-Tech.**
Qualifications needed for it could be categorized as:-
* Good Academics
* Research Papers published in International Conference that are indexed IEEE (required)
* GPA of 3.6/4
**Also for becoming an RA at these universities is the GRE exam necessary?**
The answer to this is **Yes** for some universities and **NO** for other universities. This is mainly because **Not all the universities require GRE EXAM.** It all depends upon university requirements. You need to check out their website for the details. **Even they have Cut-off score for GRE and TOEFL Exam.**
**Advantages of becoming RA**
* Tuition Fee waiver
* Increases chances for off-campus placement.
* Exposure to Subject in depth.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Unfortunately there's some ambiguity in language here that I think is causing a wide variety of different answers.
"Research Assistant" means many different things to many different people. Most commonly in the U.S., this invokes the idea of a funding mechanism for a graduate student that doesn't involve teaching. If this is what you mean, then the answers about getting into graduate school apply. And then yes, in that case, it is possible to get admitted to graduate school straight out of undergrad, and work for a professor doing research - the requirements of that will vary depending on the type of school, department, etc. you're looking at.
If you just mean "Someone who works on research projects", then I'm going to suggest another title - in the "wet lab" sciences I'd say "Lab Tech", and unfortunately most of the computational researchers I know come from a biological heritage, so use "Lab Tech" even when referring to programmers and the like.
If this is what you mean, then you're talking about being a research employee of the university, paid for likely by grant money and working for a particular professor. It's certainly possible to do this - a former group I worked for regularly hired people out of undergrad to work on programming projects that made like easier for other people in the department, and we've got a researcher now who came straight out of undergrad. As for what's required? Likely not a GRE, but your academics should be fairly strong, and you should have some evidence of the quality of your work. That can be publications and independent research, or it could be a portfolio of things you've done for other people - after all, the job is "Can you do things well for other people".
It's likely a particular professor you'll have to contact, and be warned - if you're looking to come in from another country, you have to be worth more than the visa and immigration hassle, and it's going to be an uphill climb when there's likely undergraduates at their own university who probably wouldn't mind a job after graduation either.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/10/01 | 920 | 4,117 | <issue_start>username_0: The deadline for uploading conference papers (extended abstracts) for presentations at the AICHE conference (<http://www.aiche.org/conferences/aiche-annual-meeting/2013>) is tonight. I have already been accepted to present on the basis of my abstracts submitted a while ago. (I wasn't invited to this conference; it requires registration and submission of material).
I emailed the event organizer and received the reply: "We strongly encourage a paper (synonymous with extended abstract) submission. However, it is not a requirement to present."
I *can* submit something today, but I would prefer not to. For one thing, some of the material needs a little more polish. And for another, I'd rather not reveal research results before the presentation date in November. I meant to ask my advisor his opinion earlier when I met with him today, but it slipped my mind. I've just started year two of grad school and this will be my first conference presentation.
Is there a good reason to go ahead and submit anyway? Having no conference experience, I am not even sure what/who these papers/extended abstracts are for. Am I skipping something that I really should be doing?
Thanks
**EDIT**: Checking the online presentations, it appears that *most* people have not uploaded an extended abstract. Not sure if that makes a difference...<issue_comment>username_1: The main thing you get by submitting something is a publication on your CV. The value of a conference publication varies heavily by field; except in computer science, they are usually of much less value than a journal publication. But since you are a student, presumably even this is a substantial addition to your CV.
Unfortunately, conference papers are usually published in a book that is later impossible to get a copy of. Usually a conference publication is a limited, preliminary version of work that will later be published in a journal. It can also be a good place to publish work that is interesting but that you can't/won't pursue far enough to make it worth a journal publication.
Speaking as a professor, **you should not submit anything to a conference without first having your advisor review it**. So I think at this point you're better off not submitting anything, but I recommend planning in advance to submit something to the next conference.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **As a chemical engineer,** I would recommend *against* submitting an extended abstract. The primary reason for this is that, unlike proceedings of the [Materials Research Society](http://www.mrs.org), the extended abstracts of the AIChE annual meeting are **not** peer-reviewed. Therefore, any such publication will automatically be of lower weight than something that has been published in a venue that provides peer review.
In addition, because the work has effectively been "published," you will find it harder to secure publication for fuller versions of this work later on, as many journals could view the extended abstract as a "prior publication" and reject a paper on those grounds.
Moreover, as username_1 suggests in his answer, the dissemination of your research will be greatly hampered by the relatively low circulation of the extended abstracts.
So, for this conference in particular, and more generally for *any* conference whose proceedings are not peer-reviewed, I would avoid submitting extended abstracts and conference proceedings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me chime in advising against submitting an extended abstract submission.
In my field (analytical chemistry/biospectroscopy) we joke that such proceedings (including the mandatory ones e.g. with SPIE conferences) are quite good if you need a publication, but at the same time want to make sure that noone will ever read it.
Most of our conferences do not have their "own" proceedings any more, but instead papers can be submitted to a themed issue of a proper journal, undergoing the usual peer-reviewing process for a paper.
Maybe you can ask the organizer whether any such issue is planned, and for what journal?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/10/01 | 1,459 | 5,622 | <issue_start>username_0: I often brainstorm research ideas on my whiteboard. I then run out of space and want to store and print the contents of the whiteboard. In general I [have a system of taking a photo of the whiteboard](http://jeromyanglim.tumblr.com/post/48596358182/whiteboard-workflow) with my phone, which is synchronised to dropbox, which then creates a copy on my computer. Now I can print the image, on my computer, but it is not optimised for printing.
It is possible to open it up in photoshop and manually make it black and white, and try to optimise the contrast and so on.
However, I'd ideally like it to be a one click process for printing a whiteboard image. The whole point is that the process shouldn't disrupt the brainstorming process.
**How can I efficiently print digital photos of a whiteboard that are optimised for printing?**
Naturally, the procedure might vary under different computing or phone operating systems. An ideal solution would be (a) extremely efficient, (b) minimise printing toner usage, (c) maximise readability. Useful automated steps would include: (a) optional conversion to black and white; (b) arrangement of image into a size and layout designed for printed paper, (c) optimising contrast so that the whiteboard is white and only markings print. Some form of auto-cropping might also be useful.
**UPDATE:** A few options I've discovered since posting:
* [Ricoh has a couple of Apps for iphone and Android](http://rii.ricoh.com/apps) that will email you a modified whiteboard photo. I wasn't entirely happy with the quality of the results, but with good initial lighting and black and white image, it seem to work okay. They also have [a web app that is quite easy to use](http://whiteboard.rii.ricoh.com/whiteboard_cleanup/) for uploading single files and then printing cleaned versions.
* This [gimp tutorial](http://matthew.mceachen.us/blog/how-to-clean-up-photos-of-whiteboards-with-gimp-403.html) and [gimp script](http://registry.gimp.org/node/19822) for processing whiteboard images. The manual process if fairly straightforward, but not a single click.
* [Various suggestions on Photo StackExchange for getting more professional results](https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/18717/) particularly one involving shooting both the original image and and an empty white board and digitally subtracting images. It all sounds a bit complex for simple brainstorming needs.
* These suggestions on [SuperUser](https://superuser.com/questions/107313/software-to-clean-up-photos-of-whiteboards-and-documents). In particular, there's an email service where you email the original whiteboard photo file and get a cleaned version back <http://snapclean.me/> . It took a few minutes when I tried it.
*Given that using whiteboards is fundamental to teaching and research, I hope people don't mind that I have used this site for asking the question.*<issue_comment>username_1: Optimizing a photo of a whiteboard is similar to optimizing a scan of a page. On Linux, I use [scantailor](http://scantailor.sourceforge.net/) -- it usually does a great job for what I want. It's not automatic, but it's way faster than trying to tweak curves in Photoshop.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: How much money are you willing to spend? If the answer is around $400 $900\*, you can get a whiteboard capture system like this:
[MimioCapture System](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AQ4Zk6Pqr0)
You would have to change your workflow to make sure your computer was up and capturing, but you use regular whiteboard markers (albeit inside the electronic case).
\*educational pricing, I think, although you may have to buy additional software; I couldn't tell from the product's website
\*It looks like the pricing is much more steep for a standalone system. I am not 100% positive, but it looks like the $400 system does need other expensive components. Darn. This one seems to be completely standalond:[eBeam Edge](http://gigaom.com/2011/09/30/capture-what-you-draw-in-real-time-with-ebeam-edge-whiteboard/)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: For this I use [TurboScan](https://itunes.apple.com/sa/app/turboscan-quickly-scan-multipage/id342548956?mt=8) on my iPhone. It's designed for scanning and there are many similar apps.
It takes 3 photos and combines them to get one with good contrast and resolution. It optimizes for readability. It automatically detects the edge of the whiteboard and crops there; you can easily adjust the crop to be smaller if desired. You can easily adjust contrast.
Here is a photo of what's on my whiteboard right now. This was taken in extremely poor lighting conditions (dim, with lots of glare). Also, TurboScan outputs a PDF, so you can zoom nicely without it becoming pixelated, but SE would only allow me to upload a JPEG, so what's below is lower quality. Right-click and open in a new window to see it better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It would not be too difficult to set up for an "almost" one-click operation. With a little bit of Unix shell scripting you could set up a process on the print server which could do the job. E.g. you could email a photo from your phone to a special email address on the print server (to make things simple on the phone side). On the server the process could look like this:
saving attached photo upon receiving email -> processing it with e.g. ImageMagick to optimize for printing -> send to printer
P.S.
It seems the scantailor can also be used for batch processing, haven't tried it myself, though.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/10/01 | 738 | 3,135 | <issue_start>username_0: When applying for jobs after my PhD, should my CV include an incomplete degree I read towards years ago? It's a field completely unrelated to what I'm doing now. However, before my final year when I started getting sups and failures by the dozen (my reason for quitting) things actually went swimmingly. I worked with a renowned professor as an undergrad research assistant for a spell and even published a paper (on my own) during that phase of my academic journey. I didn't get a certificate out of it, but I nevertheless feel I honed some valuabe skills then (and of course I have a transcript listing the passes and failures).
I have since moved onto a completely unrelated humanities field. Should I mention the incomplete degree on my CV? If I ignore it, prospective employers might wonder what I did for three years of my life, surely? Should I list my science publication on my CV when it is irrelevant to what I'm doing now? Does quitting and switching tracks make me look flighty?<issue_comment>username_1: Changing fields in and of itself does not make you look flighty—many faculty members have changed research fields and even academic departments during the course of their careers, and it doesn't make them look flighty!
What would be a problem is not having a valid reason for making the career switch. Struggling with a major in a science field is not a big deal; however, the fact that you managed to publish a scientific paper in that area actually represents a significant degree of accomplishment (*particularly* if you were an undergraduate at the time).
Moreover, ignoring the degree on your CV could come back to haunt you if it is discovered later on, as "fudging" the CV is often grounds for termination for a position, even years afterwards. So I would not try to "hide" this. Instead, I would make sure that I have a logical and convincing explanation for that period of your life: why did you choose to start in that field at that time, what led you to leave it, and what lessons did you take from the experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Don't omit it**. Changing your mind at some point during your education or your career is nothing to be ashamed of. Just make sure to put it in a way that does not imply that you actually got the degree.
Not listing it would be an error in three ways at least:
* experience even in unrelated fields is always valuable;
* if you omit that stint, there will be a hole on your CV, and you will have to explain it (so you'd better mention it upfront);
* you got a publication from it, so it was actually a successful experience, even if you didn't complete your degree
---
In fact, my advice would be to always list what you've done on your CV, even if it is not an academic activity. **Even if you spent two years traveling and selling onion rings on Australian beach grill house, put it in your CV.** The pros outweigh the cons (and if that experience leads a potential recruiter to turn you away, ask yourself: would you have wanted to work with someöne who has such as narrow view of life?)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/10/01 | 1,168 | 5,029 | <issue_start>username_0: I published a conference abstract with a undergraduate student of mine as a co-author. The work was presented as a poster and the conference doesn't publish proceedings/papers. I am now planning on publishing an extended version and want to drop her as a co-author. Can I do this?
Prior to the student starting the project we discussed authorship and agreed that it was unlikely that she would contribute enough to warrant authorship on anything that came out of the study since the experiment was conceived and implemented by me and I designed the statistical analysis. At the time of the conference, the student had collected approximately 1/4 of the data on the poster and did a fair amount of the statistical analysis, but her contribution was essentially just turning the crank. Given the effort she put in, I did not think it was out of place to have her as a co-author on the poster, but nor did I think it was required. I wrote the abstract and poster and asked her if she wanted to be an author and if so for any input on the abstract and poster.
Since then, I have collected a second independent data set and come up with a completely new analysis. I now feel her contribution (1/8 of the total data set and helping with a partial preliminary analysis) does not warrant authorship and I think it would be better to acknowledge her work in the acknowledgements then to add her as an author. I would discuss this with her, but she is out of the field and I cannot contact her easily. Can I drop her for the list of authors?<issue_comment>username_1: Most authorship questions are a gray area: she did contribute to the paper, but was it a *significant intellectual contribution* (which is one usual criterion), with emphasis of both *significant* and *intellectual* (or *scientific*)? That's for you and her to decide, taking into account the customs of your field.
From her point of view, I can see two reasons why she might be consider a rightful co-author of the paper:
* If the data collection was itself part of the scientific research, i.e. if it could not have been done by an unskilled worker following instructions. If so, then her data collection was significant (and it doesn't really ).
* If the conclusions drawn from the preliminary analysis were useful in tuning your final analysis, i.e. if her work helped design a better analysis method.
Though by your description it seems like she may not pass the threshold, it is true that having her as a co-author on an earlier publication (conference abstract) gives her a stronger case than otherwise. If her contribution was deemed important enough for authorship at first, and you now publish work that includes this contribution, why shouldn't she be an author? I don't think that authorship “dilutes” because other larger contributions were added…
---
In conclusion: you maybe have good reasons not to make her a co-author, but if she feels like fighting it, she does have valid enough arguments that it could get messy. I'd advise discussing it openly with her, but being ready to have her as co-author if she feels strongly about it.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The [Hardy-Littlewood rules of collaboration](http://www.math.ufl.edu/misc/hlrules.html), while formulated for a mathematical collaboration between peers, are a useful guide to a harmonious collaboration here. Specifically, the fourth axiom:
>
> ...it was quite indifferent if one of them had not contributed the
> least bit to the contents of a paper under their common name . . .
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I generally agree with the answer by username_1, but there is an additional point: You wrote in your question that
>
> she is out of the field and I cannot contact her easily
>
>
>
I think that you **shouldn't put her on the list of authors without her approval**, for which you obviously need to contact her. Many journals that I know have the explicit policy that all authors need to approve the final manuscript.
If you don't have any affordable means to reach her, one way out could be to cite the conference abstract / poster where she is a coauthor, even if it is not a formal research publication. Thus, you make clear that her contribution was only to the results presented earlier. In addition, you could explain the particular contribution in the acknowledgments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The rule-to-go is the question **"has she contributed to the new paper?"** Next issue is to **ask the actual contributee**, if she wants to be on the authors' list – this was all mentioned in the answers above.
Bu-uuuut. I see a bad flag raised here. It is a **follow-up work** on something you worked together with her. How much of *that* work transitioned into the current one? Has she contributed to those parts?
I would say, if you answer the above questions positively, she *should* be mentioned in the authors' list. But, please, do as the first paragraph states.
Upvotes: 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.