date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2014/04/01 | 1,188 | 5,116 | <issue_start>username_0: I tend to learn and understand a subject to a much deeper extent if I am able to play around/experiment/mess with something that demonstrates the principles.
I'm starting a Neuroscience PhD program in the fall and would like to know how I could maximize the opportunities to experiment with various equipment at the university. I'm interested in working with things like fMRI, MEG, EEG, electron-microscopes, and supercomputers.
How easy is it to informally play with these types of equipment when they might be sitting idle?
Note: I'm looking to do this safely without any intent to damage the equipment. Primarily, I'm looking to replicate the findings of classic experiments and discover aspects that didn't make it into the published papers.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends to a large degree on who owns them.
If it's your lab group, and your supervisor's happy enough, you can probably use them whenever you like.
If they're owned by the department/division/etc then there's likely to be a formal booking system. Once you've booked a slot, though, I'd imagine you can do whatever work you like on them.
Provisos in this are cost and safety.
Cost, because some of the stuff you're talking about is pretty pricey. An fMRI session can be charged at [over $400 dollars per hour](http://mrrc.yale.edu/users/charges.aspx).
Safety applies to you and the equipment. You may well intend to be safe and not damage the equipment, but that can be easier said than done. As such, you're never going to be allowed to use certain items without having gone through the necessary training - so you'll have to convince your supervisor that doing such training is a good use of your time/funding.
So in your lab, play around time will I suspect be limited, save on equipment you use daily. But if you must get your hands on a piece of kit, fear not, for there are workshops and courses you can attend! These often occur in conjunction with a conference/meeting/etc of some kind, where a sponsoring vendor will kindly 'donate' a piece of equipment (in the hope you'll buy the same brand later down the road) and as a group you get the opportunity to spend a while using it under the company representative's watchful eye. Keep an eye out for these, and try to arrange to publish a paper in the conference, or give a talk in the meeting, and I'm sure you'll be given the funding to go.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Pat's right about the more expensive and controlled equipment like fMRI and MEG machines, but I wanted to add more about the other equipment. I previously worked in an engineering lab that took on a lot of cognition research, and we had close ties with a neuroscientist and professor on campus, as well as a physics lab.
* You didn't mention it explicitly, but do you know if you'll be working with a lab yet? Some grad students are funded as TAs instead of RAs (or not at all!), which doesn't put you in front of the equipment until it's research time (if even then, depending on your thesis.) Make sure your advisor knows about your desire to get hands-on; it's a good trait, and they'll know more about the opportunities.
* EEG equipment can be expensive, but pretty simple. Same with GSR (Galvanic Skin Response.) Clinical EEG data often requires gel or saline to make contact with the scalp, and can have 16, 32, 64, or even 128 electrodes in a "cap." It's possible to have a setup that requires two people to properly configure, which limits availability. But other than that, it's only permission and careful handling keeping you from using it while idle, assuming there's a dedicated set of research EEG equipment.
* An electron microscope station would likely have a small library of prepared samples to peruse. Preparation is not a trivial task for many things, so you aren't likely to get more than this without actively working with one for research.
* Supercomputing abilities don't necessarily require a supercomputer. Computing clusters are very common, and many institutes have them. Some big schools have huge dedicated clusters, but many have small department-funded clusters. You may have to search or talk with IT (who may not manage them, but need to know about them,) but it's still possible to get an account. Department-sized clusters aren't large enough to handle college-wide access, but aren't often used at 100% capacity by their owners. There may also be an associated Computer Science class that will give you access and teach you how to use one effectively, though it may not count towards your degree.
The experimental labs are your best bet for finding equipment you can use, since medical facilities are pretty tightly controlled and clinical equipment is protected. This may mean going cross-discipline depending on your institution, but that is often encouraged. Ask around, but remember to be respectful of the equipment and the group's time and resources. Having a plan ahead of time is part of this; if you have a concrete goal (think lab exercises rather than pure research) they will be more willing to share.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/01 | 948 | 4,099 | <issue_start>username_0: If I do a non-thesis MS program in statistics, will I be eligible for an admission in to a PhD program in Statistics later in my life? The MS program I am looking into is a non-thesis program but I still have to complete a research project requirement (which involves oral presentation as well as some form of a written report) towards the end of the program...I am still not sure if it can lead to a PhD program though.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the university. Some Ph.D. programs have extra requirements for students who did not complete a thesis (or they will not accept these students). Others are fine with a 'capstone/directed project' which has elements of a thesis. Others may simply ask that students who did not complete a thesis take the GRE for admission into the Ph.D. program while not requiring this for students who did complete a thesis (I attend an [R1 university in the US](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_I_university) and this is the case here).
So the answer is yes, but it depends on the university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends, in the US for example I do not think they acknowledge Masters from other countries, a couple of friends had master degrees themselves before doing their PhDs and both had to get an additional masters (more like it just happened somewhere in the middle)
Now, in Japan, you cannot get into a PhD if you do not have a Masters degree and a title to show for it. That is for all the Universities, not some of them. The only case when this is not the norm is in natural sciences. But in Japan, is like in the UK, PhD programs are 3 years long (usually) you have no classes (well, few, like 4), and you are expected to do research most of the time.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Applying for a PhD program depends on your curriculum vitae and the research work you have done during the years before your PhD. One may have completed a MSc with research and thesis but his research topic is not that much current and that is not so much alluring for the professor who is seeking for a PhD research student. On the other hand, someone (probably like you) may have attended a MSc program which did not include any thesis or research work, but, the student was that much active and interested in doing research that his resume is full of scientific publications, research assistantships and voluntary academic work that the professor prefers to supervise him.
So, if you are aiming a PhD in future, it may be better to do as much as research work and publication as you can. Then you need to meet the minimum requirements for a PhD student who wants to apply for a PhD program. Go and search the websites of the universities you want to apply and prepare the qualifications and requirements they have mentioned.
It may be a good idea to seek the research interests of the professors of the university you are interested in attending too. If you want to work with a professor, try to review his publications and if you want to do some researches; make some researches in the areas of their interest. For example, a professor the research interest of whom is numerical methods in engineering is not probable to accept and work with a person who's resume is full of laboratory activities.
Another thing is that you choose some courses (as your electives) that are of value for the research in PhD. I mean, choose some courses that prove that you are capable of understanding PhD courses. By this way, you prove that you are so interested in studying PhD courses, you are capable of understanding and analyzing PhD courses and you have chosen your elective courses by an insight to your research activity.
Not to forget that some universities and education systems have specific education regulations and it may be important for them that a student have completed a MSc by research.
By the way, I have seen some students who did not completed a thesis or research during their MSc, applied for PhD after graduation and started their PhD successfully.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/01 | 1,070 | 4,619 | <issue_start>username_0: Last term, I collected some important projects from about 200 students. When I returned all of the work the next week, one student claimed that they had submitted their work, but never received it back. A misplaced project was highly unlikely, as they were individually bound in a uniform, bright cover and carried in sealed bags, so I assigned the student a 0. Still, I would like to have proof of “no submit”, especially as my supervisor occasionally wants an explanation for failing grades. But not having something is not proof of never submitting. What method can I use in the future to prove that a student did not submit their work?<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt this will work with 200 students, but the first thing I do when I collect assignments is check to see whose assignment is missing, and send the relevant students a message via the class messaging system. This does two things:
* if there was a slipup at either end, this catches it quickly. Most often, the student says that they're turning it in late (I have an automatic submit-late-and-get-deductions policy).
* By using the class messaging system, I'm on record as having asked the student about the missing assignment. If they complain a week later that they did turn it in, I can point to the message and ask why they didn't respond to it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's easy to given students the ability to prove that they submitted (some form of receipt only you could have authored). The other direction, however, is harder.
1. **Hightech**
Have them submit electronically with a system that you don't control and that stores timestamps with submissions. It does not show up there on time, you did not submit in time.
2. **Lowtech**
Have them sign when handing in (make sure to announce that submissions are only valid if signed off). You receive their submission, they sign some form for you (and you sign their receipt). Have witnesses.
In the end, there is no way you can make sure it's their fault; they can beat any system ("I lost the receipt!", "That's not my signature, somebody must have forged it!", "You never told me to sign!", ...). As far as I know, German courts typically rule in favor of students (if there is any doubt), even in ridiculous circumstances. That may be different in other countries, but you may want to check back with your university's legal department to be safe.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A few thoughts in addition to the above:
* Is there a departmental office or library that can help with accepting submissions and giving receipts?
* Can the department hire a temp for a day to handle the submissions?
* Strongly suggest to the students that they copy and/or photograph their work, in case of disaster. Provide a means for them to upload their photo albums to the department.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: For a large class, without or with receipts, set up 4 (or more boxes) split alphabetically. Students drop off the work and possibly sign a sheet. Either give them a quiz immediately while you double-check that you have all work, or check it later that day and query for any missing work.
If you're using a sign-in sheet, and a student wants to turn in someone else's, he or she discusses it with you directly. That way you don't get, "But I had Lisa turn in my work for me!"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I require my students to run a particular program to send their homework in. Positive identification of the students is already done when they log into the server. If your students don't use UNIX, the technique easily extends to a web or phone app with some other form of authentication.
The result is neatly timestamped student files all in one place. If you like, add some form of receipt. I take the opportunity to automatically update a web page showing who's turned in what.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: If you use coversheets:
* acknowledgement of all policies and adherence thereto, is checked and signed by the student,
* a QR or barcode, containing their student number and name, course number and assignment number, and a timestamp is generated,
* the QR or barcode forms part of the coversheet, and is scanned *in* when they submit, then *out* when it is returned or collected,
* an email gets sent to the student confirming their submission for that assignment.
While it takes some thought to set up, the implementation is as simple as taking a picture on a smartphone, and scales extremely well (increasing returns on effort expended per assignment/course/student/year added).
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/01 | 1,083 | 4,622 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper, which in the application used a function from a programming language (in this case, it is OpenCV function canny edge detection). When is or is not appropriate to explain the algorithm in mathematics/words and when or how should a function be referenced.
In this case, OpenCV explains the algorithm <http://docs.opencv.org/doc/tutorials/imgproc/imgtrans/canny_detector/canny_detector.html>
Should I just provide a link to this, as I did not modify the algorithm but it is an important part of the implementation decision.
Is there a standard way of deciding to reference the language, function, or original algorithm?<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt this will work with 200 students, but the first thing I do when I collect assignments is check to see whose assignment is missing, and send the relevant students a message via the class messaging system. This does two things:
* if there was a slipup at either end, this catches it quickly. Most often, the student says that they're turning it in late (I have an automatic submit-late-and-get-deductions policy).
* By using the class messaging system, I'm on record as having asked the student about the missing assignment. If they complain a week later that they did turn it in, I can point to the message and ask why they didn't respond to it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's easy to given students the ability to prove that they submitted (some form of receipt only you could have authored). The other direction, however, is harder.
1. **Hightech**
Have them submit electronically with a system that you don't control and that stores timestamps with submissions. It does not show up there on time, you did not submit in time.
2. **Lowtech**
Have them sign when handing in (make sure to announce that submissions are only valid if signed off). You receive their submission, they sign some form for you (and you sign their receipt). Have witnesses.
In the end, there is no way you can make sure it's their fault; they can beat any system ("I lost the receipt!", "That's not my signature, somebody must have forged it!", "You never told me to sign!", ...). As far as I know, German courts typically rule in favor of students (if there is any doubt), even in ridiculous circumstances. That may be different in other countries, but you may want to check back with your university's legal department to be safe.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A few thoughts in addition to the above:
* Is there a departmental office or library that can help with accepting submissions and giving receipts?
* Can the department hire a temp for a day to handle the submissions?
* Strongly suggest to the students that they copy and/or photograph their work, in case of disaster. Provide a means for them to upload their photo albums to the department.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: For a large class, without or with receipts, set up 4 (or more boxes) split alphabetically. Students drop off the work and possibly sign a sheet. Either give them a quiz immediately while you double-check that you have all work, or check it later that day and query for any missing work.
If you're using a sign-in sheet, and a student wants to turn in someone else's, he or she discusses it with you directly. That way you don't get, "But I had Lisa turn in my work for me!"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I require my students to run a particular program to send their homework in. Positive identification of the students is already done when they log into the server. If your students don't use UNIX, the technique easily extends to a web or phone app with some other form of authentication.
The result is neatly timestamped student files all in one place. If you like, add some form of receipt. I take the opportunity to automatically update a web page showing who's turned in what.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: If you use coversheets:
* acknowledgement of all policies and adherence thereto, is checked and signed by the student,
* a QR or barcode, containing their student number and name, course number and assignment number, and a timestamp is generated,
* the QR or barcode forms part of the coversheet, and is scanned *in* when they submit, then *out* when it is returned or collected,
* an email gets sent to the student confirming their submission for that assignment.
While it takes some thought to set up, the implementation is as simple as taking a picture on a smartphone, and scales extremely well (increasing returns on effort expended per assignment/course/student/year added).
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/01 | 694 | 2,882 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a non-native speaker and writing my cv. In my subject (mathematics), there are small exercise groups where you have to grade the students' homework and discuss it with them; some are hold by students; some by PhD students or postdocs.
What are the correct terms if you have done the following things:
1. You are a (PhD) student student holding the exercise group, grading homework, but nothing more.
2. You are the one who is in charge of organization, i.e., you design questions for homework and the exam, you make announcements, moderate the meeting of those people having an exercise group (see 1), but you don't have an own exercise group.
3. Same as 2, but you have an own exercise group.
4. The course is so small that there is only one exercise group. You are holding this group and are in charge of the organization.
Thank you very much!<issue_comment>username_1: First to answer your titular question:
>
> What is a TA called when he/she is in charge of organization?
>
>
>
Such a position does (in theory) not exist, as a TA as by definition supposed to "assist" somebody else and not run the show on her/his own (I am aware that this is not how it sometimes works in practice).
Generally, you need to keep in mind that title and scope of academic positions, especially regarding teaching, are quite different between US and Germany, so you will likely not be able to do an accurate 1-to-1 mapping. I would write "Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter" in the CV and explain what you actually did. Translating it to english is prone to confusion.
If you write **TA**, people will underestimate your responsibility in the course, if you write something like **lecturer**, people may infer that you already had a faculty position and will be confused by the perceived mismatch with the rest of your CV.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my program, such a person might be called 'head TA'.
Personally, in versions of my CV where I've wanted to highlight teaching experience, I write **Teaching Assistant** followed by the responsibilities in italics. I have also done this for classes that I've taught (listed my particular responsibilities while teaching), since the amount of responsibility one has while teaching can vary widely - I've also listed class sizes, since that might be pertinent information for whoever is reading it. (My more research-focused CVs just contain lists of courses I've been a TA/instructor for, with no greater detail than that.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think any of the duties you mention are consistent with being a teaching assistant.
Regardless, your CV should list your official job title as it appears on your contract. But it's a good idea to add another line or two explaining your duties in more detail. You could also list the classes you taught.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/01 | 1,059 | 3,708 | <issue_start>username_0: Some degree titles have many components, e.g.:
```
Master of Arts in Psychology: Behavioral Health
|_A__|_B_____|_C___________|_D________________|
```
Another e.g.:
```
Master of Education in Curriculum and Instruction: Special Education
|_A__|_B__________|_C___________________________|_D________________|
```
What are these components called?<issue_comment>username_1: To take one of your examples:
```
Master of Arts in Psychology: Behavioral Health
|_A__|_B_____|_C___________|_D________________|
```
"Master" is the degree. Etymologically, "degree" comes from "degré": the step of a stair (or rung of a ladder). "Degree" can be synonymous with "level" or "extent" - it is a measure. You could say "the level of a degree", but that would be a tautology. It's not incorrect, but "level" is redundant there - "degree" already says everything that you'd be trying to get from "level". Degree is a very flexible word, and can be used to refer to just part A, parts A+B, parts A+B+C, and parts A+B+C+D.
Then either:
"Psychology" is the subject and "Behavioral Health" is the speciality, or "Psychology: Behavioral Health" is the subject. You might also hear "field" used instead of "subject".
"of Arts" doesn't really have a well-recognised name. You could call it type, kind, field, sort, school or faculty, but in the end, if you want to ask what sort of Master's someone has, you'll probably end up saying something like: "What kind of Master's? Master of Science, Arts, MBA, something else?"
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would think "Master of Arts" is the degree, this is because in medieval universities the arts faculty was the first faculty one had to graduate from before being admitted to higher study. So the master of arts looks like it should be thought of as the name of a degree awarded by the arts faculty.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not aware of either (a) a consistent way of referring to the parts of the degree title or, more fundamentally, (b) a consistent way of deciding even what goes into the degree titles! None of my degrees have a colon or any listed specialty or sub-field. For that matter, what I translate from Latin as a masters degree is actually a Scientiæ Magister (which should properly be abbreviated SM, not MS).
According to academic tradition, all PhD are degrees in philosophy. As a result, a PhD in biology is a doctoral degree in philosophy (in the sense of thinking and research) with an specialty in biology. On the other hand, a DSci would be a doctoral degree in science in the field of biology. It's not clear to me that we would want to refer to the fields or specialties in that case the same way in any sort of rigorous way.
[EnergyNumbers' answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18811/5962) seems like a good attempt to parse out the answer. That said, I agree with [Shane's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18813/5962) that "Master of Arts" is the name of the degree. So, in:
```
Master of Arts in Psychology: Behavioral Health
|_A__|_B_____|_C___________|_D________________|
```
I would say that A+B is the degree. A is not the degree because an MBA is simply not the same degree as an MS, MFA, MPH, MPhil, etc.
C is the field, subject, area, or specialty. D is the sub-field, sub-area, or sub-specialty. I think adding a "sub-" makes this relationship clear.
I would call "A" the type, or maybe the level, of the degree. I like level because if I were to ask someone what their highest level of degree was, I would expect to hear something like doctorate, masters, bachelors, or associates and would not expect to hear that it was a bachelors of science.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/01 | 980 | 3,774 | <issue_start>username_0: In order to get feedback more quickly, I've seen some teachers run a quick (certainly no more than 5 minutes), entirely optional, anonymous survey for students at the end of each of each class, meeting, or session. The idea is to get feedback on what is working and what isn't on a per-week basis before mid-term or end-of-term evaluations. What are good questions or prompts to use on a survey like this?
For example, I am currently planning to ask something like:
>
> Any feedback on the **BLANK**? (e.g., was it rewarding, challenging, about the right about, etc.)"
>
>
>
Where **BLANK** will be the readings, lecture, and discussion for the class session. I will also ask a general question like:
>
> "Any other feedback or things you think I should know?"
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: The K12 definition of this is an "exit ticket," though it can be used effectively at any educational level.
Skim this article from Brown's [Sheridan Teaching and Learning Center](http://brown.edu/about/administration/sheridan-center/teaching-learning/effective-classroom-practices/entrance-exit-tickets/sample) for ideas?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've always used the following in ALL of the classes I teach:
1. What did you like most about quantitative basket weaving? [free text]
2. What would you most like to see changed for quantitative basket weaving? [free text]
3. How valuable do you feel your time has been in quantitative basket weaving? [1-10]
4. Do you have any other comments about the module?
To these I will often add 3-5 other questions which I'm curious about. Sometimes it is to test the waters on new things I'm planning on trying with them or future classes.
The key is to keep it short. ~5 minutes is way too long. If you take more than 1-2 minutes of students' time, you are very unlikely to get many responses.
I usually ask these questions at mid-point and after the final class. However, if you want more frequent feedback, I'd suggest the "one minute paper" where you ask two simple questions (paper, electronically, whatever fits):
1. What do you think is the most important thing you learned today (or this week)?
2. What did you find the most difficult point to understand?
One minute papers are useful for constant course corrections while the earlier questions are more to find out how to change the design of the module next time (or next half).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: * 3 things you liked the most in X.
* 3 things you liked the least in X.
* Other comments.
See my answer on [How to improve myself as a lecturer?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5236/how-to-improve-myself-as-a-lecturer/5249#5249).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: My class sessions each had a lecture and a period of time devoted to discussion. As a result, I ended up using a Google form with the the following four questions each followed by a text box:
* **Any feedback on the readings?** (e.g., was it rewarding, challenging, about right, etc.)
* **Any feedback about the case and/or the other class discussion?**
* **Any feedback on the lecture?** (e.g., about the right length, too dense, etc)
* **Any other comments, ideas, questions, concerns, or reflections?**
I sent a link to the survey every week after class and kept it online so that students could fill it whenever they liked. All answers were anonymous.
About half the class filled it out the first week and there was decreasing numbers who did so in subsequent weeks. Since I used feedback to make adjustments to the class over the quarter, this worked out just fine. I felt that the survey was successful enough that I plan to ask it again, in exactly this form, in my class this quarter.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/02 | 3,631 | 14,932 | <issue_start>username_0: My advisor is a brilliant new professor and my efforts don't seem to impress him.
When I show him something in person, we always have a very careful intensive discussion for hours. But he does make comments which seem to indicate that he doesn't think much of my abilities. Or he says that I am being very slow and that this stuff shouldn't have been taking months.
I think I work as hard as I can.
What can I do about this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like you are interpreting your advisor's comments about how your work is going as an indication that your advisor doesn't think you're smart or capable.
However, that's not necessarily what it means *at all*. It's only human for an advisor to express some occasional disappointment about how the work is going. (Every advisor thinks the work should be going faster!!! It's practically in the advisor rulebook.)
And some people (unfortunately) express criticism more often than they express praise. This could just be your advisor's style.
It's not necessarily an indication of what your advisor thinks about *you* as a student and researcher.
So in answer to your question of "How to deal with this?":
**Instead of inferring what your advisor thinks of your abilities from his comments about your work, ask him directly what he thinks of your abilities!**
Ask your advisor: "How am I doing, in general? What areas do I need to improve in? What strengths do I have that I can play up?"
This is your chance to find out what your advisor sees in you, get some constructive criticism about your research skills in general (not about your current project). It's also a chance for you to tell your advisor how *you* think you're doing, and correct any misperceptions he may have about how hard you are working or how long the work should take.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You said:
>
> brilliant **new** prof
>
>
>
A new professor is under pressure to produce results **quickly**. It's entirely possible that some of what you're sensing is a consequence of this.
But you also say:
>
> he does make comments which seem to indicate that he doesn't think much of my abilities.
>
>
>
Without more specifics, it's hard to know whether (as @username_1 says) you're interpreting criticism of work as criticism of you.
And finally, you say:
>
> he says that I am being very slow and that this stuff shouldn't have been taking months
>
>
>
Should it ? We have no idea what kind of work you're doing, and how long it should take. Maybe your advisor is right. Maybe he's completely wrong because he doesn't understand how much effort it actually takes.
At any rate, your first step has to be to **talk to your advisor** to understand what he wants from you. It sounds like he's willing to spend time talking to you, so make use of it.
Any advisor-advisee relationship has an adjustment period where both individuals get used to the other's habits, rhythms and style of operation, and a level of trust starts to build. It sounds like you're in that phase, so keep lines of communication open and try not to interpret comments as personal criticism without clarification.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: First I would try and push more communication. If you're not telling him what you're actually doing everyday then maybe he's just underestimating you. If you are communicating exactly what you're doing: (experiment X got messed up because of this, or I can't figure out why experiment B is showing this result, it took me 3 months to clarify this so that I could move forward...etc) then it's both really hard for you and your professor to gauge whether you're actually spending too much time on these topics.
Some Suggestions:
* Maybe he can follow you in the lab for a day and see what you're doing?
He could potentially offer advice on how to speed up your work day.
* Provide weekly updates of what you've achieved that week. This can be helpful not only for him, but also for you. It helps to keep a kind of diary.
However, if more communication does not help to strengthen your relationship with your PI and you've been there for less than a year, I'd consider jumping boat. Try looking for another professor that you connect better with. This can be a very tricky situation.
Lastly, since you sound kind of new and like you may not have a lot of other graduate friends, I'd consider suggesting buying a book on getting your PhD and the process of getting it. There are some good [books](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0307589447) out there on the topic...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm going to suggest something harder than anyone else has suggested, but which will pay off bigger dividends for the rest of your life. Start working now on disconnecting your opinion of yourself from (your perception of) others' opinions of you.
Right now, you have someone you really respect, who, you think, doesn't have a great deal of respect for you. The best reaction you could have, which is in no way easy, is to completely objectify that observation. Pretend you are someone else, observing the two of you. The prof might be a brilliant jerk. You might actually not be nearly as smart as the prof. People are different, after all. This could just be a fact. But when you are looking at it emotionally it brings up fear of inadequacy, etc, etc, etc. If you objectify it, however--pretend you are a Vulcan for a minute--you can see practical paths forward.
What are the practical things you can do? It sounds like you are already working as hard as you know how to. There might be ways you can work smarter. If you were someone else looking in, you might suggest to yourself that you ask your prof "I interpreted this comment you made--'when this takes you so long, why would you even think of that'--to mean that you don't think I'm making rapid enough progress. Is that interpretation correct? I think I'm working as hard as I can. Do you think there might be strategies I could use that would improve my productivity?" Just one example. The idea is to extract yourself from the emotional tangle and just say "well, if this is the case, how can I use the prof as a resource to improve the situation?".
Your life is going to be full of people who you will perceive to either respect or not respect you. Spending effort on figuring out who does or doesn't respect you, and trying to do things specifically to make people respect you, is a huge, frustrating, waste of time. I know, I know, I know, that it is very hard to stop doing. But when you find yourself in this situation, maybe you can think "this is an opportunity to work on caring less about peoples' impression of me, and just focusing on doing the best work I can."
The payoff for this is immense. Personal relationships will improve. You interactions with other people will be more genuine. Ironically, in the end, people will respect you a lot more.
The body of work you do while working under this advisor is going to be *your work*. If you're doing good work, there will be someone at some point that recognizes that and you will get the practical results out of that which you need to further your career, even if your advisor *never* thinks you were that good. Therefore, the more you are able to focus on making *your work* the best it can be, the better it will be for your career.
Try as hard as you can to not care about his opinion of you, and focus on making your work the best that it can be. In the end, after all, that's the best way to make his opinion improve--but that is not guaranteed. Your prof, as I suggested earlier, may be a brilliant jerk. You may possibly just not be as smart as him, period. He might never even be impressed that you worked hard even though you were not as naturally talented [btw--this is a *very viable* path to tremendous success. Hard work with a little talent will very, very often beat little work with a lot of talent.].
There is some sense in which his opinion of you is completely out of your control. Try to get yourself in the mindset that it *is* completely out of your control, and that you need to focus on doing your work the best you possibly can.
When you are sure you are doing that, your prof will make his decision--maybe a fair one, maybe not--about whether to respect you or not. **But the important thing is that *you* will respect yourself.** **And if you have learned to work as hard as you can and not worry about what other people think of you, you will have learned something of inestimable value.** It's a hard thing to learn, but you've got a great opportunity to do so, right in front of you. So get to work :).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: We need more context, but perhaps your adviser actually thinks highly of your abilities.
>
> he says that I am being very slow and that this stuff shouldn't have
> been taking months.
>
>
>
If I think your IQ is 150, and you are showing 130 level on a given problem, I would show disappointment in your performance: "Are you trying hard enough? This is taking too long". However, if I thought your IQ level was 100, I would be praising you: "You are doing great!".
The above might not be the case of course, but I it is something to keep in mind.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: With so little information there is no way to know what does (s)he mean and what is the problem or solution, e.g. maybe the point is that you could use some help to work faster, maybe from an undergrad student.
You have to divide the task that is taking months into smaller tasks to clearly see:
* where your supervisor and you don't agree on the times that it takes.
* where you could use some help or the task could be divided into different tasks, with more specialized people.
* where you could use a different approach.
* what is the cause of the disagreement in the time that is required for that thing.
You may be even working on something that you should not, investing too much time in something that is not important enough to invest that time. Maybe that time should be invested in a different set of activities if it is going to take so long. You want to produce results and impact, and your supervisor probably wants that as well, it should be easy to agree.
Without more details about the kind of work that you are doing I don't think a better answer is possible.
I'd suggest something different to what everybody is suggesting. Try to be as fast and efficient as you can, try to get feedback from your supervisor about how to achieve that and what is exactly the problem, that will probably be the best for your career.
If your supervisor cannot be specific on the problems that (s)he vaguely points out and cannot advise on how to overcome them, then your supervisor is not competent at supervising/advising and you will have a good reason to try to switch to a different supervisor or finish asap or whatever is your best chance to get rid of your (incompetent) supervisor.
Remember, don't assume your supervisor doesn't like you and don't assume any incompetence on either side. Try to find the cause of the problem and discrepancy in time estimations and try to find a solution. I can't think of a more constructive approach.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I once apologized to my advisor. He replied, "Don't apologize to me - I don't care whether you do what you say you will do. Apologize to yourself. It's your own goals you aren't achieving, not mine. I am only here to help you achieve them."
I start with this because I don't believe you should be trying to impress your advisor. You should be trying to impress yourself. Find a problem you want to solve, something that is difficult, but you are wildly interested in, and prove to yourself that you are one of the best in the world in your field. Strive for truth. Seek the hidden solution. Uncover mysteries. And in doing so, build up the skills relevant to your field.
It is an old wisdom that someone will start to respect you on the day when you have proven to yourself that you no longer require their respect. Your advisor can be a great asset, but they are not a crutch for you to feel good about yourself... true self-worth comes from within, not externally.
At the same time, I agree that it certainly brightens our day to be told a "great job" every now and then by the certain people in your life. I found a new level of scrutiny at MIT, where best is normal, excellence is mediocre, and good is frowned upon. A compliment can be hard to come by. "Oh, you've just invented a new algorithm to solve an unsolved problem in Massive Open Online Courses? Nice. But did you hear about so-and-so right down the hall who just invented a robotic microchip that resides in your blood stream and is the next big thing in curing cancer?"
When you hear stuff like this, or when you feel like you aren't smart enough, or you feel like your advisor doesn't believe in you... you know what? Who cares!? You do you, but don't cheat yourself. If you know you can do better, be better. If you know you the problem is deeper, think harder.
Learn to heed your advisor's advice. Glean everything you can from him/her. Watch how they work, and how they manipulate their environment to their advantage. Emulate them, iteratively improve on their methods, and then create a better version for yourself.
If however, your advisor is actively affecting your career, by giving bad recommendations or not supporting you in collaborations or future jobs, you need to have a discussion with them. Your advisor should help promote your future, and if your relationship is parasitism or commensalism, you are both losing.
Hopefully, that's not the case and assuming it is not, full steam ahead regardless of what your advisor thinks. Remind yourself that you chose to do this; and although you have to meet some criteria for achievement, grad school is very much for you. So use this time for yourself. Become the researcher you've dreamed of becoming. Don't lose the big picture of the leader you want to become. And above all, "earn the right to be proud of yourself, first for yourself, then the world will follow" - a quote from my advisor, <NAME>.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Your advisor is probably smarter than 95% of grad students in your department, so it's normal for him to think you are stupid. He's probably comparing your performance to how he would perform on similar tasks, so if he could do something in a week, he expects you to be able to do it in a week. Eventually he will supervise more students and lower his expectations, but since he is new it is natural for him to have higher standards.
If you're already working as hard as you can, the best you can do is keep doing what you're doing, and be glad that you've found a professor who's so smart.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/02 | 706 | 2,885 | <issue_start>username_0: I will be graduating my first Ph.D. student this summer. My student is quite strong and has done good work, and I am quite proud of him!
I do face one conundrum. He has expressed the hope that I would be there for his Ph.D. hooding and graduation ceremony. It seems like an utterly natural, totally reasonable thing to ask for. I was tenatively planning on being out of the country at the time, so I need to decide whether to cancel my plans to attend his graduation.
On the one hand, missing my student's graduation seems like the equivalent of missing your best friend's wedding. Or perhaps worse, missing your child's wedding, or your own. On the other, this seems to be very common. My own Ph.D. advisor was out of town for my graduation and I asked another professor on my committee to escort me in his place.
Is there any kind of consensus?<issue_comment>username_1: Obligation? Unless through your institution's academic responsibilities there is a requirement to attend, then none.
However, if you equate it to being on par with missing your own child's wedding, then I think you've answered your own question.
You only get one 'first Ph.D. student'.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations on your first PhD student!
I don't think there's any hard-and-fast rule about attending your student's graduation. It comes down to how much you want to be there, how strongly your student feels about you being there, and how compelling your other plans are.
There are certainly some people who don't care much about this kind of thing. (I am one of those people; I gave my father wholehearted permission to skip both my high school and college graduation. Neither of us has regretted his absence from those ceremonies in the slightest.)
Then there are some people who really care about graduations, and want the people who were instrumental in their success to be there. And you're right that it's a reasonable thing to ask for, if it's very important to the student.
So, see if you can find out what category your student falls in. From your description (he "hopes you will be there") it could really be either one. If it turns out he feels really strongly about it, you can look into canceling your trip; if not, I don't think it's a big deal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a phd student myself, and to be honest I couldn't care less if my advisor was at my graduation. The graduation ceremony is not something you should cancel any plans over. If you missed my thesis defense however ...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Being hooded by my advisor was a really big deal for me. Without him, I wouldn't have gotten the degree. If your student as explicitly asked you to attend, I would do it- if you have a good personal and professional relationship with this student, your absence would be significant.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/02 | 1,017 | 4,278 | <issue_start>username_0: So I'm not sure what to do. I've been listed as a co-author on my first publication in X journal, with a decent impact factor. Now I just realized that my middle initial wasn't included on the first publication.
Can I start using my middle initial in future publications? I know it's only my first, but that paper could get plenty of citations in the near future. (just hypothetically)
What do you think?
Is there a way to link the 2 names? Could I link them if I publish again in that same journal, specifically an ACS journal?<issue_comment>username_1: You will probably [not be able to change your name on an already-published article](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10700/how-to-edit-name-on-existing-publications-after-a-name-change). (Is it already fully published? You can of course change things at the proof stage.)
So the question is whether it makes sense to use your middle initial going forward. I think that yes. There are millions of "<NAME>" out there, so it would be much better to be "<NAME>" so people can identify your papers among the many by other Smiths.
The drawback, as you mention, is that people may not be able to link your very first article to you. Yes, that is not nice. But believe me, in ten years you will be much happier if people correctly identify your papers than if this one single article is linked to you (along with possibly a lot of other papers someone with the same name as you wrote, if you decide to leave out your middle initial in the future).
Plus: literature databases are getting more and more sophisticated. I assume that things like missing middle initials should not be a problem for long in linking papers to authors. After all, later publications of yours will not only connect in terms of your name as an author, but also in terms of subject matter, collaborators, affiliations... All things that any decent machine learning algorithm can easily take into account.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the modern day of vastly intelligent computer software and important internet presence, it is highly unlikely that a missing middle initial will be the cause of "nonrecognition" of your name. As Stephan wrote, a bigger problem is name confusion; it is definitely a good idea for you to start including your middle initial(s) in future publications. I'll answer here focused more on how to make sure the names are "linked".
[My Google Scholar profile](http://scholar.google.ch/citations?user=k_bKV6gAAAAJ&hl=en), which is compiled entirely by a computer (my only contribution there was identification of duplicate entries and removing them), even picked up some of my undergraduate term-reports which I put on my website many years ago (and which are now no longer available). Of my published papers, I've listed at various times my name as
* username_2
* <NAME>
* <NAME>
* <NAME>
and I don't seem to have had much trouble\*.
If you want better control over the articles associated to your name, you can always register for [Web of Science researcher ID](http://wokinfo.com/researcherid/) and/or an [ORCID](http://orcid.org/) which are both designed to help alleviate the problem of name collision and name changes throughout the career of a research scientist.
For fields which encourages the use of arXiv, the [author identifier](http://arxiv.org/help/author_identifiers) also helps group all of your pre-prints, and allows you neat things like [a Javascript widget for your own website](http://arxiv.org/help/myarticles) showing your recent pre-prints.
For mathematics, the AMS maintains [author profiles](http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/help/getauth.html) (they recently upgraded this!) to which you can also submit corrections to include omitted paper or to exclude misattributed papers by other authors. (The AMS author profiles are only accessible through a MathSciNet subscription.)
I am not that familiar with other fields, but you should look around to see if your scholarly society provides a similar service to help maintain a comprehensive publication record for authors.
\*With Google, at least. Microsoft Academic Search has some trouble coming up with my complete list of publications.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/02 | 2,096 | 9,025 | <issue_start>username_0: Take, for example, that a student is nearing the end of their thesis project.
The supervisor has an idea for a new method that can help to verify the results of part of the project. He does not think much of the significance of the idea at the time, [writes up a document outlining the procedure] and passes it to the student to implement.
A week later, a problem arises. The supervisor questions whether the idea was in fact more significant than he originally thought - i.e. could form a paper on its own, and has realised that answering the students questions on the specifics of how to implement the said method would take up more time/effort then just doing it themselves.
So, how would the supervisor go about retracting the new project from the student? From the student's point of view, they would have a strong motivation to try and implement the idea that has been brought to their attention since it is directly relevant to their thesis work. Yet the supervisor does not want to be hassled by the student on learning the specifics (that would form the content of the paper), and does not want the student to claim partial ownership of the idea. The student has not yet produced any results using the method that has been passed to them.
The issues that I see are as follows:
* If the supervisor tells the student to relax and think about something else instead, they probably would not listen
* If the supervisor works independently from the student to produce the paper (figures, text, observing trends), then the student could still claim that they were involved (?) since they would have probably started working on it too<issue_comment>username_1: It is hard not to sense some kind of "foul play" by the phrase *He does not want the student to claim partial ownership of the idea* and the phrase "*just doing it themselves*". Who are they? The senior professor, the PostDoc or a graduate student? If the idea was not good, the poor student should bang his head to make it worthwhile. If the idea is good then you somehow want the student out of it.
The main question is why? If you write a seminal paper based on the idea, one more co-author would not hurt you. Why don't you want the student involved? He will provide help and you can explain to him that he is not going to be the first author and immediately all your problems are solved.
Once the idea gets out of your head and into somebody's mind (and possibly his PC) it cannot be contained anymore. What will stop the student to implement it on his own? If he is fast enough, he may even do it faster than the busiest, more senior team members.
I know I do not answer the actual OP's question but this is deliberate. I consider highly unethical the fact OP thinks he can freely change your mind, make people work on his ideas and when those ideas seem promising (which is partially due to the student's work - although he clearly denies this fact) he claims full ownership and decides who else should work on his idea. The only reason I see legit for this kind of behaviour is if there is a highly ranked conference approaching and the OP (by doing the work himself) might make it on time, something that will be impossible for the student to do. If it is so, then the OP may explain it to the student and implement the idea himself. All other possible reasons are either questionable or possibly unethical.
If you treasure raw research ideas that much (and most of us do), I would suggest next time be careful who you share it with. When most people get an excellent research idea they only share it with the ones who will work on it. Once they share it, they should stick with these people, unless something unpredictable (work-related arguments, work relocation) happens. But even then, plan changes should be fully explained. And since from your previous questions I believe that you are possibly a graduate student, please do not start your academic career by questionable practises.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: With the way this question is framed, "retracting" the idea sounds both difficult and unethical. Based on the information given here, my advice, and the only ethical path, is for the supervisor to collaborate closely with the student on the work. If the idea is good, the pair should work toward a co-authored publication. This question states that, "since [the student] has more free time on their hands [they] could potentially have some results first." In this case, it sounds like collaboration with the student is very likely to help.
Working with students means teaching and mentorship. It means that supervisors are, "hassled by the student on learning the specifics" and it often means, "answering the students questions on the specifics of how to implement the said method [in ways that] take up more time/effort then just doing it themselves." *This is part of the job of an academic supervisor*.
Moreover, I completely fail to see why co-authorship and shared ownership of an idea *between a supervisor and student* is a problem.
That said, one of the most important jobs a supervisor has is trying to decide when and what to delegate. It was the supervisors job to be more thoughtful and they need to deal with the consequences — whatever they are.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Too late, you should have thought that more carefully beforehand. You cannot undo.
Like it or not, this student is now your collaborator for this idea, so I'd suggest to get the best out of the collaboration that you can get. This means no races, etc. Try to give him chunks of work that won't require too many questions and interaction (if that's a problem) and try to publish asap, because you are collaborating with this person, but probably you are "competing" with other people in other places, who may be able to produce results faster than you.
Next time, think about it twice before you share your next idea, specially if you are going to be so possessive about them. Now it's shared.
If the problem is being hassled, you can postpone investing time specifically on that until the deadline for publication is met. Priorities are priorities. The student may not care after that or may have no questions. By your wording the problem doesn't seem to be that, though.
We can only hope there are micro-contributions in the future so that we can trace exactly how much did each person contribute to something and have the provenance of everything with a personal granularity. Either good or bad, it's not happening anytime soon. I'd think this would be good, specially if it helps to collaborate smoothly, there are many open problems that need to be solved, the more we can collaborate (if done correctly), the more problems we will be able to solve in less time, in theory.
“We are masters of the unsaid words, but slaves of those we let slip out.” ― <NAME>.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The stated scenario sounds awful, and the clarification makes it sound even worse. When you start a collaboration with a student you're advising (I'm using "you" colloquially), you don't get to "keep the good bits". That's grossly unfair to the student who is after all attempting to learn from you.
Yes, research is uncertain, and you can't always predict what ideas will become interesting.
**Which is why rules for collaboration are set up first, and are not contingent on the quality of the (potential) results.**
I understand that in this case, there's a worry about the student "slowing things down". But that's about convenience, not about doing the right thing.
And I should say that because this is a **student** and not a collaborator, all rules should be adjusted to give the student the benefit.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: The only time I can imagine retracting a project from a student, is if continuing with it would be detrimental to them or to the university.
Retracting in other circumstances is unethical. It's a breach of trust. And it's a fundamental failure at the task in hand, of being a supervisor of research students.
**It is my job, as a supervisor of research students, to enable them to become better researchers than me.**
++
The first time I was told that, by a very wise colleague, I was shocked. I felt threatened. My students would go on to take my research, my grants, my future jobs away from me.
Then I took a deep breath, had a think about what my role was, and realised he was completely right. And I accepted it, and now I revel in it.
If it ever got to the point where I didn't want to do what I practicably can to make them better researchers than me, then it would be time for me to step down from that role.
++(yes yes, I know, it's my job to enable them to be the best researchers they can be, insofar as it does not ask for impracticable demands from me. The phrasing above isn't perfectly accurate. But it does have impact, and it does punch home an important message)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/03 | 845 | 3,478 | <issue_start>username_0: I've discovered that every time my supervisor has cited any of the papers or technical documents I've written she/he would:
* spell my name incorrectly or forget to add my name
* spell the article/technical document title incorrectly
These are citation made in articles already published (!!) or at final stage (where she/he denied to make any effort to try to correct them). Althought this means she/he also loses citations of these articles she/he is doing mistakes only on my papers/technical documents, not with others.
I am obliged to add her/him in every paper as co-author, although she/he never engages in any discussion concerning any of the papers or phd. This is not someone that has a flock of PhD and MSc students under her/his wings, the number of students are really reduced.
How should I react to this? What should I do about it?<issue_comment>username_1: In accordance with the comments, I think you have two choices, get out or stick with it. Since you are determined to finish (no-one but you can weigh the choices) just try to do so and swallow the problems you describe. I am sure it is extremely irritating but focus on finishing and do not let your energy go to issues you cannot change. The sooner you finish the better. So, if you can, focus only on the work leading to your thesis.
That advisors put their names on papers, is a separate discussion and one which has been dealt with here on academia.sx for many cases. Search on, for example, the [authorship](/questions/tagged/authorship "show questions tagged 'authorship'") tag combined perhaps with [advisor](/questions/tagged/advisor "show questions tagged 'advisor'").
In the end, you need to assess what you do and how you best should spend your time to reach your goal, the PhD. If you feel you are drawn into things that are not productive for this goal, use the goal as a reason not to involve: "I really must focus on my PhD, I fear I may not be able to finish in time otherwise". Also, it sounds as if you have numerous publications already, so try to probe what is enough, if that is not already clear. Simply try to find the path of least resistance to get to the goal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Mis-citing articles (and worse, removing authors) is one of those crimes that academics take very seriously (and no one else really understands). If you were a collaborator, then repeated behavior of this kind would get your advisor in trouble not just with you, but with editors at the journals, reviewers, and so on.
So you really should bring it up.
How do you go about doing it ? Because it's your advisor, you have to be a little more gentle: some options:
* **keeping it specific to each mis-cite**: "I noticed you cited my work, but you omitted my name: can you please fix it". It sounds like you've been doing this already though.
* **the technical solution**: "Here's a BibTeX file containing all my papers: you can use that for citing" - this works only if your advisor uses some kind of citation manager to cite papers.
* **the direct solution**: "I noticed that in this, this and this paper, you omitted my name from the citation. I'd really appreciate it if you could contact the editors and submit a correction: I'd like to get credit for my work".
In other words, keep the discussion focused on outcomes and actions, rather than intent (because a) it's hard to argue intent, and b) you're in a position of weakness)
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/04/03 | 1,038 | 4,659 | <issue_start>username_0: A couple of months back, I reviewed a manuscript and recommended a Major Revision. Ten days ago, I received the revision for review, with a note from the editor asking me to expedite, since the review process had already taken a while (not due to me).
However, from both the initial decision letter by the editor and the authors' response, I see that my initial review did not reach the authors (I checked: my review is in the system). The other review, which *did* reach them, mostly raised points orthogonal to mine, so if I were to review the revision again, I would likely reiterate my original points.
I immediately notified the editor and expressed that I would be happy to re-review, but would appreciate a confirmation that this review would then actually reach the authors. No response. A week later, I wrote again. No response. That was three days ago.
To be honest, I am a little miffed. Not so much that my initial review, which I did spend a considerable amount of time on, was not forwarded - stuff happens. More that I am not getting a response to what to me appears a straightforward question. After having been asked specifically to move quickly on this.
At the moment, I am vacillating between either doing the review ASAP or waiting for *any* kind of response from the editor first, but this second option seems passive-aggressive to me. Additional info: I know the editor, we meet regularly at conferences. I know that since he has been appointed dean, he is drowning in work.
Questions:
* Has this happened to anyone else? How did you react?
* Am I overreacting? Should I just review and stop whining?<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot say whether the situation is due to sloppiness or due to some technical issue but it seems odd and something that should not happen. I gather that you were in an electronic review system of some sort and then the review should automatically be forwarded. In a journal not working with an electronic system, something like this is more likely to occur but should be a one off mistake in any case. Problems like these, if they recur regularly, will likely sink the journal reputation in the end. you probably have some sense of the standings of the journal.
The lack of response may not mean much and I would not over-interpret it. It is of course not a positive reflection of the journal.
Anyway, I would recommend you to basically re-use your earlier review. Look through it after reading the paper and authors comments to see if anything can be removed. If you catch anything new that needs corrections, of course, add it. You have done the work once and unless the paper is completely rewritten with significant changes to discussion and conclusions, your comments still stand. You can only reiterate your verdict of Major Revisions, which should lead to a third round. I think, under the circumstances that would b fair, unless the authors fully comply with your suggestions, in which case the editors can use his/her discretion (depending on a second reviewers response of course).
So bottom line: your initial review needs to reach the authors but with corrections for whatever has been changed. Unless you receive some explanation for what has happened from the editor, you have to draw your own conclusions about the quality of the journal and particularly the editorship. Try to form a well-founded opinion, whether you think the journal is worth your attention in the future. One mistake is reason for caution, but not reason for judging.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I had this happen as a reviewer at a journal with a 3+ month review cycle. The journal BCCs the reviewers on the decision letter so I knew my review was sent. I also knew my review was sent as a PDF attachment and the other review and the AE comments were sent as plain text. The authors wrote a point by point rebuttal letter to the AE and reviewer, but didn't acknowledge my review, so I expected they missed my review.
I emailed the AE within a few days of accepting the rereview that the authors seemed to have either missed my review or ignored it (including both typos and major concerns). The AE responded immediately (with 48 hours) saying to just review what I had. So I sent a review back that said "The authors are either unable or unwilling to address my major concerns and therefore I recommend rejection". After that review cycle, I received a 3rd version, with a rebuttal letter that apologised for missing my earlier review.
I would not whine, but nor would I spend any time rereviewing. Just say that your concerns are not addressed.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/03 | 1,134 | 4,525 | <issue_start>username_0: Extensively using Google Scholar, I've realized that most of the articles belonging to publishers that limit access to material (i.e. ACM, IEEE, Elsevier) also have PDF versions available for free, and these files usually are hosted by universities or other aggregators like ResearchGate.
Is it legal for the university/organization to host a copy of an article, if this has been published on a conference or journal with paid access? Does it matter if the authors of the article belong to that university/organization?<issue_comment>username_1: To answer the question in the title: free access to an article depends largely on the version. It's almost always fine to post versions on your institutional page. Some journals do have embargo periods, during which you must refrain from doing so.
Depending on the field and journal, authors may post one of the following on their institutional website:
* *published version*: article as it appears in the journal
* *accepted version*: manuscript after peer review but prior to journal editting/typesetting; typically allowed after the article is published (ex: *Nature*, *Science*, *The Lancet*)
* *preprint*: manuscript before peer review (this is *almost* always allowed)
Many journals encourage disseminating accepted versions, including posting them to repositories like PubMedCentral.
Additionally, some fields make heavy use of preprint servers like arXiv to get work out to the public as soon as possible. This is particularly relevant for fields with long review times (maths, physics, ...).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the ([original version](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/18866/1) of the) question in the title:
>
> Are scientific articles of public domain?
>
>
>
the answer is **absolutely not, unless the relevant copyright holders declared it so or that its copyright has expired**. Note that public domain is emphatically different from open access.
To answer the question in the body:
>
> Is it legal for the university/organization to host a copy of an article, if this has been published on a conference or journal with paid access? Does it matter if the authors of the article belong to that university/organization?
>
>
>
the answer is **it depends**.
What does it depend on? Very simply, the **publication agreement** or the **copyright transfer agreement** or the **licensing agreement** signed by the author when the article has been accepted for publishing. For example:
* Here's [the version for *Science*](http://www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/contribinfo/prep/license.xhtml)
* Here's [the one for IEEE](http://www.ieee.org/documents/ieeecopyrightform.pdf)
* [Elsevier compiled a handy table](http://www.elsevier.com/journal-authors/author-rights-and-responsibilities#author-posting) for their journals.
As username_3 points out below, a great resource for checking the self-archiving and open access policies of is [Sherpa/Romeo](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Many universities now have institutional open access policies. Most of those policies assert a non-exclusive license to distribute research authored by university employees.
Does the university's pre-existing non-exclusive license remain in effect when a restrictive copyright transfer agreement is later signed?
This has been considered in great detail by <NAME> in a study published in the [Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, Vol. 10, p. 377, 2012](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1890467). This seems to be the most authoritative work available on the matter. His conclusion is that the non-exclusive license granted by Harvard-style open access policies will remain in effect in such cases, at least under US law. This is based on a careful analysis of [section 205(e) of the US Copyright Act](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/205), which reads:
>
> (e) Priority Between Conflicting Transfer of Ownership and Nonexclusive License.— A nonexclusive license, whether recorded or not, prevails over a conflicting transfer of copyright ownership if the license is evidenced by a written instrument signed by the owner of the rights licensed or such owner’s duly authorized agent, and if—
>
>
> (1) the license was taken before execution of the transfer; or
>
>
> (2) the license was taken in good faith before recordation of the transfer and without notice of it.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/03 | 1,326 | 5,404 | <issue_start>username_0: I have two offers for graduate study within the UK and I am trying to make a balanced decision.
My offers are:
* Four year doctoral training centre at University of Oxford (approx. £14k/year)
* Four year PhD at the Cancer Research London Research Institute (LRI) (approx. £21k/year)
I suspect that the Cancer Research institute does not have a comparable international reputation when compared to Oxford. On the other hand, I've met the research group at the LRI and they seem nice. At Oxford I wouldn't be choosing my research group until after the first year. I already have significant ties to London and have been living here for four years.
What other factors should I be considering in order to make this a rational decision?<issue_comment>username_1: I am answering this on the basis that I was making this same decision myself a year ago.
Firstly, the LRI will be joining the Francis Crick Institute next year as it opens, which may end up being esteemed in it's own right if all goes according to their plans. It depends what you want to do after the PhD, if you want to stay in academia and cancer research, then it is the supervisor's esteem that is more likely to help you in the long run, as well as the impact of your papers. The label on the institute makes less difference as you go on (within reason of course).
Have a look at the recent publications of the group, maybe see how many have PhD students on good author positions in good journals; that's what will get you a post-doc ultimately.
The two being 4 year funded, the London one may be better financially overall. Integrated PhD programs (where you have 3 small projects in the first year, getting an MRes, then pick the final PhD project for 3 years, I presume this is the case for Oxford) in my experience tend to be more trouble than they're wort, unless you're not sure on picking a definite research project yet or don't have a Masters.
The issues can come from firstly, not getting the project you were hoping for after the first year, after the MRes, but now you're tied down to Oxford (may not happen, but does all too ofter) and also you now have 3 years to do your PhD, not 4. Why waste time on multiple smaller sub-projects at the start if you have a clear idea on what you want to do for your final project? Of course, the corollary here, if you don't have a clear idea exactly what you want your PhD to be on, then integrated programs can be a godsend.
My best advice on the rational decision front is don't. Relationship with group and particularly the supervisor is the main factor in a PhD, with a bad supervisor able to kill your career dead in the water, intentionally or not.
If you have a passion for the research, and get on well with the group and supervisor then I would definitely go for that PhD. Lack of these both for 4 years will likely mean you either drop out, or have a horrible 4 years and then hate your research.
I went for the lower paid, lower ranked Uni offer, and have no regrets. In fact, the higher paid one was industry funded, and they've since gone under, so I dodged a bullet there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Oxford is a small city with an atmosphere absolutely steeped in scholarship – some thrive in it; some find the pressure it induces extremely stressful. I would visit Oxford if you can and try to establish whether that atmosphere is for you. If you’re prepared to relocate, you’ll have almost no commuting time and may be able to live in college accommodation. It would be possible in such circumstances to concentrate very intensively on your work. You would be surrounded almost entirely by others doing the same. For some this is heaven, for others it is hell....
In London it would be much easier to collaborate across institutions, and therefore to meet a wide range of researchers formally and informally, all of which will help enormously in coming up with good ideas for post-doc projects, if you want to think that far ahead. Living in London, it will be very convenient to attend meetings and seminars at the London colleges as well as to meet with policy makers etc, if that is important in your area. It also means that you can rely on the friendship network that you already have in place, something to bear in mind as you may go through a bad patch during your studies and it’s good to have an established support network. The first year in the new Francis Crick Institute is likely to be slightly disrupted as everybody settles in (think usual teething problems like no hot water for months, no telephones etc.) but possibly a tremendously exciting time.
But agreeing completely with [Reuben](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13766/reuben-john-pengelly), I would recommend taking some time to get to know your potential new supervisors and groups. Talk to former PhD students from the lab, try to go for a beer/coffee with some of the present students. The relationship with the supervisor(s) is absolutely vital. Try to work out what previous students go on to do – do they complete vaguely on time? Do they get good post-doc jobs afterwards? One advantage of going to Oxford is that it will give you one year to work this out, especially as you don’t mention wishing to work on a specific topic. But accommodation in Oxford is quite expensive, so £14k/yr may leave finances quite tight.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/03 | 811 | 3,767 | <issue_start>username_0: My methodology is online ethnography. This methodology has certain limitations such as identity play, falsification, and artificiality of data.
However, its proponents have suggested some strategies for coping with these limitations and my study is based on them.
I am confused because I think the limitations section is concerned with limitations of a study that were not solved or accounted for, and that are to be avoided in future research.
So, should I discuss these limitations, that have alternative approaches or proposed solutions, in the limitations section?
Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: With the caveat that this is discipline specific, you could discuss your questions in several places in your article.
First, you can begin to nod at this briefly in the methods section of your article. Every methodology has some drawback or limitation and my advisers always told me to acknowledge this in the beginning. For instance, while doing semi-structured interviews, I admitted that my sampling was convenience and snowball based and restricted to 30 participants. However, I followed this up by citing 2 papers which talk about appropriateness of sample size in grounded theory approaches and theoretical saturation and why this is not hamstringing my paper completely.
Second, one of the ways of validating qualitative studies from a methodological perspective is to look at issues of credibility, transferability etc. One of their solutions is to do member checks (especially for interview based studies) In one of my current projects, I did do member checks and talk about this approach as mitigating some of my methodological drawbacks in the **Discussion** section of my article.
Third, you can definitely talk about this in the limitations section of your paper. There is no panacea to solving a human-centered research problem (and indeed various nuanced facets of every research project, however thoroughly investigated they might be are almost always incomplete) In the limitations section of my papers, I put down both theoretical as well as methodological limitations of my work and discuss potential ways to approach them in future work or follow up studies.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While I do not directly address your question, the following might help you to find a point of view that allows you to structure your work. Also note that I am from an entirely different discipline.
>
> I am confused because I think the limitations section is concerned with limitations of a study that were not solved or accounted for, and that are to be avoided in future research.
>
>
>
With exception to the rare case that you can fully reduce the effects of a limitation of your methodology to a neglible magnitude, it remains a limitation and thus further work can improve on this aspect.
Moreover, a limitation of a methodology that is neither addressed by countermeasures nor argument (i.e., you can argue that the limitation’s effects are limited) is not only a limitation but a flaw – with some exceptions such as if that limitation only became apparent in hindsight or your main work is to explore the methodology rather than just to apply it. Any claims resulting from a methodology that has errors of fully unknown magnitude are worthless.
Finally, unless your advisor or some other relevant person has dogmatic views on how your thesis is to be structured, your structure should be determined by your content and not vice versa. In particular, it may be wise to address certain aspects only once and thouroughly – and not in multiple places and in parts. For example, you may consider titling a section along the lines of *Limitations and how to circumvent them.*
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/03 | 1,252 | 5,498 | <issue_start>username_0: When I graduated from college in 2012, I was quite excited about my job (although it is a small hi-tech company.) My goal has always been to either start my own business or get back to school for PhD. Ultimately, be able to live a life filled with research, and learning.
I have been working for almost two years now. And before going back to school, I really want to publish a paper and make myself a better PhD candidate. And ideally this would help me better discover my field, gain confidence, and maybe discover assistantship opportunities.
I think I've found a quite interesting topic for a paper that also leverages my work experience in transportation technologies. The paper is about accident prevention and I am targeting a public health professor. I contacted the professor and I was not able get any response back yet. (It has been 2 days.) I am not sure about the right strategy to follow to communicate such idea and gain her interest. I wrote an email with 3 paragraphs and 350 words. And briefly tried to explain the possible research context and my intention in starting a PhD. But maybe I was just supposed to ask for an appointment? It is a wise way to sent a follow-up email stating how valuable I think this paper would be? and ask for an appointment?<issue_comment>username_1: Many professors take a while to respond to emails. I would give it at least a week before you follow up with her.
When you do send a reminder, keep it brief and polite, and send it as a forward of your previous email, so she won't have to go searching for your other message. Reminding her of why you think the paper is valuable could be a good strategy--if you do it in a way that's not heavy-handed and that you think is *true* (i.e., it's actually of value to her career aside from another line on her CV).
It's always nice to give her multiple options for responding--you might include a line to the effect of, "If you'd prefer to chat about this over the phone, I'm happy to schedule a brief call at your convenience." Saves her time from having to compose a reply email.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your question doesn't specify how well-adapted the proposed research is to the particular public-health professor you've contacted. I think this is a key issue. Let me explain:
Most academics have broad training, *some* expertise across a wide range of areas, and then are true masters (in some cases, the top ones in the world) in a much smaller range of topics. I considered at this point giving examples from my own experience to indicate what sort of things which are "up my alley" that would get me to respond quickly rather than to be interested in principle but respond only much later or never, but this ran into the following issues: (i) the examples would be meaningful only to mathematicians with some experience in number theory, which I think the OP is not, (ii) unfortunately every time I came up with what I thought was a description of "my alley", I could then think of someone who sent me work or questions in that area to which my response was inadequate or even non-existent! But I think there is a lesson here: when you send a paper (or a question or an idea) to anyone, it is always a bit of a crapshoot: you may well get absolutely no response, and the reasons for this may have absolutely nothing to with you or your work. In fact history is filled with examples of much more famous mathematicians rejecting -- or worse, ignoring -- much more important work.
The moral of the above paragraph is this: you should cast a wider net. If there is one faculty member that you feel is the perfect person to get involved with, then you may as well contact them first, and the job of your message ought to be to convey to them why they are a perfect match for the project at hand (and that the project at hand may be worthy of their time). Even so, your perfect match may not see it that way or may simply be too busy to give you the attention you deserve. (Again, apologies to all the people who sent me good work or asked me good questions over the years to which I did not respond. I definitely respond to some of the correspondence I receive; I do not always have time to respond to all of it; and I sometimes make what looks in retrospect to be bad choices about what to respond to. In particular, something promising that I don't have the time to think about at the moment tends to get put on the "answer later" shelf, but my algorithm for addressing correspondence does not have a step which ensures that the answer will actually come later.) It is okay to write twice to someone when you think it is important, and the repetition can be distressingly effective: as I wrote elsewhere on this site, unfortunately for some types of correspondence I implicitly assume that if I only hear about it once then it cannot be so important. This gets me in trouble from time to time, but not as often as it should.
More likely though there will be several people who could help you with your idea. The classiest move is to contact each of them individually and explain why their expertise is well-tailored to your idea. The chance that you hear back from any one person increases dramatically this way. And then you can get started with the person who you hear back from. In some cases this may result in getting emails later on from people who were interested but didn't have time to reply. Those, as they say, are the breaks.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/03 | 1,277 | 5,218 | <issue_start>username_0: A prior student of mine is applying for a prestigious certificate in her field. She is asked to list relevant accomplishments. I was asked by the student to sign a *verification form* since I am in a position to do just that: verify the accomplishments. Upon reading the accomplishments, I noticed a misspelled word. It's one of those words that is commonly misspelled, and I suspect this will limit her chances of being accepted.
Should I mention this to the student prior to signing my name? I am torn between wanting this student to succeed and having the student be self-reliant.
This student is only a "student" in that she was in a professional development course that I had a hand in teaching. She is actually a practicing K-12 teacher.
There was some discussion about the nature of the misspelling. The two words confused were **colleague and college.**
I suppose the term *self-reliant* was a poor choice by me in my original question. My question is more accurately stated as *Should I point out the typos when the student was not directly asking for such feedback.* It is not my intention to teach the student a lesson, as my question seems to have come across.<issue_comment>username_1: I would point out the error, especially if you have a reason to believe it will be taken into account in some nontrivial way.
I don't really understand why doing this goes against the student's "self-reliance". I point out errors of this kind in papers that I am refereeing, for instance, and when people read my own papers or course notes or whatever, they sometimes point out my own typos including spelling errors.\* I don't think that either I or these other adult academic professionals are failing to show self-reliance.
\*: I do all my writing on a version of LaTeX with disabled spell-checking, so I have to spell my words correctly "the old-fashioned way". Mistakes do sometimes creep in. I could be setting things up better, but anyway the New York Times occasionally has spelling mistakes.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that level of "self-reliance" is a false goal. How far are you going to take it? If you saw her drop her wallet in the street, would you leave it there so that she learns self-reliance? ;-)
If the student handed you something riddled with errors, expecting you to proof-read it before signing, then maybe there would be a problem and maybe you could teach a lesson by saying, "there are 12 spelling errors in this document, but because you should know better than to leave it to me to proof-read, I'm not going to tell you what they are". Assuming you believe that cruelty can be a kindness.
A simple error doesn't say to me, "this person unreasonably battens on others" or even "this person should be left to succeed or fail alone". The rest of the application is OK, right? Self-reliant people still make mistakes. So I don't think there's a question about her self-reliance, it's about her spelling. Having one's occasional mistakes pointed out doesn't harm self-reliance.
Suppose you *could* teach her a lesson by leaving the error in (perhaps wait until she's rejected and then casually mention to her that in your view it could have been because of the error). Would you *really* prefer her to be a better speller without a certificate, rather than a worse speller with one? If not you're almost morally obliged to help her. You may draw conclusions about my politics, but I question absolute self-reliance anyway:
>
> Any man's death diminishes me,
>
> Because I am involved in mankind,
>
> And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
>
> It tolls for thee.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You should point it out to her seeing as she is a former student - on another note I'd like to point out that in your query, you wrote 'I was asked by the student to sign a this verification form ' - errors can happens to anyone :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A misspelled word doesn't jump off the paper and bite the offending student. Because of this, learning may not take place as easily as it would in touching a hot stove.
The embarrassment caused to the student by your telling the student about the misspelled word and how it could very easily be counterproductive to the student's goal might qualify as a very good learning experience that could lend itself to teaching self reliance regardless of the age of the student.
It's in the tact of your approach. For example, I've seen some people offering help on the math and physics sites in ways that really approach berating levels. They may be very smart, but they have no clue how to interact with other people. And when I say "no clue", I mean they literally have no idea how arrogant they are.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, by all means tactfully point out the spelling error. As you would do for any friend or colleague. Be helpful, especially when it requires so little of you, for avoidance of potentially large disadvantage to the other.
Also, "being self-reliant" can easily become a bad goal... thinking that no one will help you? And feeling no responsibility to help others?
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/03 | 727 | 3,165 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my master's thesis, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it will not be very good. This is partly because I have been unable to test the system I propose in the thesis properly, because testing it involves test cases that has to be manually performed, and I simply haven't got the time/resources/mental sanity to do more than a handful of them.
The problem is that having little testing could be viewed as a large, weak point in my thesis, and is easily attackable when I shall defend it.
My thesis is about detecting malware that requires human interaction (hence the testing difficulty), and by looking at some indicators I can determine what is malware and what is not. But my fear is that these results won't be very generalizable because of the small sample size. So my question is then: **can a master thesis still be good if the presented results only cover a laughably small sample size?**<issue_comment>username_1: Good enough to publish your results: Most likely no. Unless low sample sizes are typical of the research papers in the same field trying to collect similar data, you can't expect lack of results to be publishable.
Good enough to still pass with your masters degree: maybe... It's up to your committee to decide. You need to discuss this with your advisor and committee members ahead of time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> can a master thesis still be good if the presented results only cover a laughably small sample size?
>
>
>
It might be, if you can show a significant improvement over existing methods for said samples. If you can't do anything special with your "labour intensive" technique, it seems to have little merit.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: My Masters project (synthetic chemistry) didn't actually generate results other than failure and black goop (so nothing novel!) until the last two weeks of time I had in the lab, and even then, there was insufficient purity and quantity of my compound to do a complete 'standard' panel of analysis. It was the 4th year of an integrated BSc/Msci course, was graded including a viva and I achieved a mid 2.1.
The main purpose of a research Masters, at least in chemistry, is to accustom you to 'proper' research methods, while allowing you to pursue something novel and to demonstrate your ability to conduct research to a sufficient standard. In my cohort there was typically a tradeoff between novelty of project and quality of results, where one forgave the lack of the other.
As long as your thesis is written with an awareness of its deficits (aims far loftier/broader than the time/resources available sounds like a good start!) and you write good further work and conclusion sections where you tie this awareness in, making sensible conclusions and observations on the few cases you have achieved, I think it is definitely possible to write a good one! As username_1 indicated above, you should discuss these concerns with your supervisor and possibly head of class (or equivalent). I am sure they will have dealt with someone with your concerns and circumstances before.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/03 | 367 | 1,530 | <issue_start>username_0: I am making a statement in my dissertation based on a comment written in the Linux kernel source code. I would like to be able to reference this comment. At least I would like to be able to name the file to which I'm referring.
Is this (citing files in large pieces of source code) recommended?
What is the best way to go about doing this?<issue_comment>username_1: It's not uncommon in certain areas of CS to cite specific files. In your specific case, I would suggest that you include the git commit hash of the kernel.org sources in the citation, so that people can find the *precise* version your referring to.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: According to the [MIT handbook](http://integrity.mit.edu/writing-code) in relation to writing code you should use the following when citing code.
* Generally, the URL and the date of retrieval are sufficient. Add more details if it will help the reader get a clearer understanding of the source.
* If you adapted the code, you should indicate “Adapted from:” or “Based on” so it is understood that you modified the code.
The page link above also includes the following in relation to open-source material
>
> When you use code from an open source project, you need both to attribute the source and follow the terms of any open source license that applies to the code you are using.
>
>
>
Finally, as always with citing, you should check with your Department to see if they have guidance or a citation style-sheet.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/04 | 1,703 | 7,061 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a continuation of my previous question, [I believe my advisor doesn't think I am smart. How should I deal with this?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18819/how-to-deal-with-advisor-not-thinking-i-am-smart)
It just so happens that when I asked my prof for feedback, he decided to just drop me. Obviously I had asked for feedback when I saw some signs recently which indicated that he wasn't very happy.
Now what do I do?
I really liked talking to this prof. I was enjoying the discussions. I thought things were well. But he seems to think that I get stuck with simple things! He probably also thinks that I am overambitious (in the few instances that I have tried discussing some other topics with him).
I wrote to my prof asking him to reconsider his decision and reflecting on what could be the issues of his disappointment and what I could do to improve. Obviously he didn't reply.
I met the grad coordinator.
He has schedule another between with all three of us.
I wonder whether I should be optimistic about that meeting!<issue_comment>username_1: It's possible that you really *aren't* capable of doing the work, and that your advisor thought about this for a long time and decided that the kindest thing to do would be to drop you now, before you waste more time.
It's also possible that you weren't really applying your advisor's criticism - for example, you weren't taking him seriously when he told you not to get distracted by new ideas, but to focus on making progress on your original research. Your advisor felt that he was wasting his time because you weren't listening to his advice.
You should really talk to this professor's other students, and find out how they experience him as an advisor. If the other students get along just fine with him, and only you have this problem, then it's possible he just can't work with you.
However, in that case, he should really have spoken to you about the possibility of dropping you **before** he did it. (Not just making comments about your work, but explicitly telling you, "I can't keep working with you if this continues; this is what you need to do to show me you are making enough progress to continue.")
---
In any event, I'm going to answer this question as if you *are* a capable student, and your advisor is just unwilling to let you learn and work at a reasonable pace. (Obviously, I don't know you, so I don't know if this is true.)
In that case,
**If your advisor isn't prepared to deal with a student who is capable, and clearly eager to learn and improve, then you should really reconsider *wanting* to work with him.**
There is a professor like this in my department - brilliant, great to talk to, and there is a lot one can learn from him. But he is under a lot of pressure to produce results (he's new, like your advisor). He is constantly making "threats" to get his students to produce work (e.g., telling them their funding the next semester depends on whether their next conference paper is accepted - although he doesn't follow through on these threats). He isn't willing to let students grow and develop as researchers - he expects them to work up to his standards, immediately.
This professor's students are leaving him in droves. They are either leaving school with an M.S. (instead of sticking it out for the PhD), or switching to another advisor. As a result, he's only published one paper in the last two years (which is far, far below standard in his field).
So, you should think about whether you really want to work with this professor, and consider asking the grad coordinator for another advisor. If this advisor is not a capable advisor, you will not be successful with him, no matter how brilliant he is.
---
**If you decide you *really* want to work with this professor,** do *not* approach this meeting as a student who is begging an advisor to keep them on.
Rather, come as a student who is *willing* to stay with this advisor, but understands that **both of you need to change for this to work.** He will have to give you a reasonable chance to learn from, and apply, his constructive criticism. In return, you will agree to take his advice seriously, work hard, and do your best to improve and succeed.
Talk about how highly you value this professor's experience, and how much you want to learn from him. Explain that you take his concerns (about getting stuck with simple things and getting distracted with new ideas) seriously, and want to work on fixing those things - but that growth takes some time.
And of course, if you *are* able to work things out, and you continue with this advisor, make sure to talk to him often about what he expects from you, and how you are living up to his expectations. Work hard to apply his advice and improve your research skills, and *make him aware of these efforts* so that he doesn't think you are ignoring his advice.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Do not under any circumstances in any sense *force* someone to be your advisor that doesn't want to be. Your advisor has incredible influence over your success not only while doing your work, but afterwords, as he or she would be the most obvious person letters of recommendation should come from.
Some advisors are of the "throw them in the pool and see if they swim in my field" type, others are more of the "this is a sort of apprenticeship where I will guide you into my field" type, and there are many other possibilities. Choose one that doesn't want to get rid of you.
The last thing you need is to have the person who has the most influence over both your academic life and great influence over your post academic life to have grudging feelings about the whole affair.
I end with an old joke, but one that maybe sums up my recommendation.
"A good lawyer knows the law. A great lawyer knows the judge."
I don't really believe in that as a principle for lawyers or for myself, but I do think that trying to make the opposition situation work, where antagonistic feelings have developed, is going to be disastrous.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Consider how the rest of the grad students in your group are faring and this professor's history with past students. If there are recurring problems with students, then you don't want to work for this professor. If there are no such recurring problems, then he is probably correct about your aptitude for this work *at this time in your life*. You are going to need to take a step back an re-evaluate yourself and what you should be doing right now.
Hearing from the comments that you are his first student, my inclination would be to drop him if I was less than 1/3 of the way through my research. Being a brilliant contributor to his field does not mean he is a brilliant advisor. In fact, he is the most inexperienced as advisors can come, having never graduated a student. He has no context in which to judge you other than what he remembers what his graduate student colleagues were like at a different school.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/04 | 433 | 1,792 | <issue_start>username_0: I am interviewing at several research institutions in the U.S. for a tenure-track faculty position all around the same time. I booked a multi-city flight to avoid having to fly back to my current hometown between each interview because that would be lame. **I plan on asking the institutions for guidance on how to get reimbursed, but figured I would ask here about what I should expect or what is commonly done for this situation.** As an example, say for three interviews, ideally each institution would pay a third of the cost, but each institution has its own rules and they are not bound to do what other institutions would in any case.
So, how do U.S. research institutions typically reimburse a faculty candidate's airfare costs for multi-city trips?
Related: [How to buy plane tickets for job interviews?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7484/how-to-buy-plane-tickets-for-job-interviews)<issue_comment>username_1: When looking for a postdoc and visiting multiple labs, I was asked to split the reimbursement for travel costs between the institutions. The exact details of how to split were left to me.
Most institutions expect to fund the entire trip for faculty candidates, so I don't foresee any problems with you asking them to pay less than what they expected.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I once visited an institution where they asked me to get an itemized receipt from the airline that broke down the fare by leg. (This information wasn't on my original ticket so I had to ask the ticket agent at the airport.) They then reimbursed me for only the legs going to and from their institution.
Of course, when multiple institutions are involved, you will still have to split intermediate legs somehow.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/04 | 3,532 | 15,525 | <issue_start>username_0: The dominant narrative on how research "should be" done is to begin with a literature survey and then make your own contribution.
But I get the impression that it often happens the other way around - at least in fields such as CS where the cost of knocking some lines of code together is low (compared to, say, a 3 year medical testing programme). Creativity knows no rules.
* The obvious risk of this approach is that the research is subsequently found to be old hat, or better versions of the same thing exist already, or it commits an error already widely known in the field.
* The reward, on the other hand, is that such creation might never have happened if the requirement of surveying the literature first was always met. (Indeed some grad students have been known to quit before finishing the lit review their supervisor asked for - maybe they'd have done better if allowed to exercise their creative nature first?).
So I would conclude that it's an acceptable strategy when the individual is happy with that risk/reward balance (provided they already know enough about what they're doing to have some inspiration in the first place, that is).
Are there other arguments/perspectives I've missed here?
**UPDATE**
There are a lot of very good answers here and there is no one right answer. I'm not quite sure how to handle that. In my experience this is the kind of thing that tends to lead to questions being closed as "not constructive" on SE sites. I'm glad nobody has done so yet because I think the full range of opinions expressed below is a very worthwhile thing to read through. Thanks all for your contributions.<issue_comment>username_1: I would argue that it only becomes "research" when reading up on existing literature is involved. Basically, if inspiration hits you and you just fire up your IDE to test it, you are not aware if what you are doing is in any way novel. That's not really the nature of research.
**Edit:** (I should add that even if something is not novel in a scientific sense, it can still be extremely interesting and cool to do - however, it will likely never lead to a paper)
That is not to say that a researcher is never allowed to just follow her/his inspiration. It has certainly happened to me more than a few times that I had a crazy idea and just ran with it. Oftentimes, the quickly led nowhere and I just forgot about it. Sometimes, initial results proved interesting and **then I went ahead and did proper research before going further**.
**Edit 2:** I have just noticed that I did not actually answer your question:
>
> Research before surveying the literature - is it ever a good idea?
>
>
>
No, not really. If you are doing "research" (in the sense that you are hoping to publish it, and not doing it out of personal interest, or as a training exercise, etc.), the only senseful way is to start with a literature review. One needs to keep in mind that in most fields, most of the "low-hanging fruits" (i.e., obvious ideas) are long solved. So just going ahead and doing something in the hopes that it may be novel has a significant error rate.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with your conclusion that it is an acceptable strategy when the individual is happy with the risk/reward balance. My supervisor used to always encourage his students not to do a literature survey but instead work on a concrete problem. Some students liked this approach, others did not like it and left to somewhere else within few months and still did very well in their research. I personally was undecided.
An obvious reward of this approach is that you may be able to publish something interesting within a year from the start of your PhD study. On the other hand you may end up with a negative result that can not be published and thus you may decide to change topic.
Spending a year or so on a literature survey may seem like a waste of time, however it can really help in the process of building an overall understanding of the field and boost your confidence and ability to discuss with more experienced people.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A few thoughts. This is clearly a delicate balancing act by the individual and also an area of convention passed down from teacher to student in different fields. One of the main roles of an advisor is to keep the student on track and make sure they are not going off in "unproductive" directions. "Unproductive" involves extremes. The young researcher may be spending a lot of time experimenting without looking at the literature, or too much time looking at literature and not experimenting.
A young researcher who spends a lot of time on an idea and then the advisor quickly shoots it down as previously explored may find his/her balance is slightly off and need to "recalibrate". But also realize this is a common scenario that has happened to all fledgling scientists, and even senior ones. Research and experimentation are a feedback loop which of course go "hand in hand". One must be continually/flexibly "jumping between both worlds" at all stages of development.
Yes, each scientific field probably has slightly different conventions. Some fields are more empirical than others. Some are "younger", and yes there is some case to be made that computer science is a younger field than others, which means that the balance may be different in this field. Also, there is some case to be made that empirical research in CS is underexplored at this moment in the larger scheme.
However, computer science is a somewhat unique field in that, yes, the individual may be able to do scientific experiments without expensive laboratory equipment independent of his research laboratory, on "his/her" own time, and gain significant understanding/insight toward their research thesis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: To a certain extent this creates a false dichotomy. My mind is always turning with new ideas, and I may jot them down on paper and give then a bit of thought before I go and see if it is old hat with prior literature. The bit of thought may be a few hours of deliberation, or some simple experimentation or writing a few pages of a paper.
You need a general knowledge of the field to be able to understand how to make a contribution. You then have an idea, read on that specific prior literature, and this will often refine your idea. The more specific your idea becomes the easier it is to find prior literature and see if/how it is different. It is not a one before the other - they are constant and reciprocating.
The consumption of the pertinent scientific literature though is forever and endless.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Knowing the state of the art is necessary, as well as having a clear definition of the problem that has to be solved.
Otherwise the student can:
* make old know mistakes, as you pointed
* solve old problems that have already been solved
* worse than that, solve problems nobody cares about and where the solution is completely useless (specially in middleware that will not be used by any top layer or lower layer).
In short, it can be a complete waste of an arbitrarily long time.
Whether this is done by the supervisor pointing at a few selected papers or the students reading in a uninformed way trying to understand what they got into is a different matter.
IMHO, the supervisor should guide the student in the first years. A few minutes to make a reading list can save months of reading not-so-interesting things, being lost in the broadness and vagueness of a not properly defined state of the art/problem/area, and a lot of frustration and misunderstanding.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't entirely agree with the answer "No". This may be because my field is mathematics, though. Sure, not looking at literature beforehand means you are at risk of re-doing something that was already known and it's never nice to discover after spending lots of time working on something that it was already out there.
On the other hand, when you come across what seems to be a good question, I don't think it's such a bad idea to start by asking yourself "Can I answer this myself?" and not rush immediately to see what other people have already done in relation to this question. I see a possibility of positive outcome to not being aware of previous results for a significant time (of course not to the point of being on the verge of publishing and discovering the day before submission a very similar paper...).
As ff524 pointed out in a comment, "if you are a researcher, [...] you already have some idea what's been done before". If you find an interesting question and don't know about an answer, it may be because it does not exist, but it may also happen that it does and has been overlooked before. Maybe it came out at a time when it didn't meet the interests of the community, or it came from another community, or the communication on the result was not so good, or *it didn't look interesting because the strategy was inappropriate*. If you find this result early on, you will likely drop the question, not advertise it and the result (although of interest to the community) will remain unknown. If you start searching the answer without knowing about the previous result, it's likely that you will not follow the exact same path and that can be good.
* Maybe your way is more "natural" and makes the result fit nicely in a developing theory that didn't include it before. It's not such a bad idea to provide a new way of looking at something, even if the result *per se* is not new.
* Maybe your way is more fruitful, in the sense that during your quest for the answer to the original question you will come up with new interesting questions which did not stem clearly from the way the result was previously established.
It's still risky, but in research you constantly invest your time in stuff you don't know the outcome of.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: While doing my Master's thesis my advisor said that (up to the wording):
>
> It is better to spend the same time solving a problem than searching for its solution.
>
>
>
You learn more (compare: solving a problem in class vs googling for its solution) and more fun.
However, the question is:
* What is the time overhead (i.e. how much longer does it take to solve it)?
* Do you get the big picture?
If solving takes too much time, you may end up learning a lot but not doing new research. Also, without feedback (literature review or *even better* asking experts if the problem is novel and worth pursuing) you may end up with:
* solving already solved problems (perhaps with much more general methods)
* or solving problems no one cares about.
In any case, any sensible research strategy involves both.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Research before surveying the literature - is it ever a good idea?
>
>
>
If I reword that as:
>
> Independent problem-solving before surveying the literature - is it ever a good idea?
>
>
>
**Yes**. I think in most cases it is a good idea to make an "initial effort" (the definition of "initial effort" depends on the scenario) to independently solve a problem before checking the literature. If you have not sat down and thought about the problem yourself, then:
1. you may not readily understand the solutions (if any) proposed in the literature unless you've worked through them yourself
2. you may not know the extent to which solutions are appropriate if you have not tried to apply your own ideas or thought of alternatives
3. you may not know what to search for ... the core problem may not be as it initially seems but may reduce to something more well-known
4. your own ideas on the problem may be influenced into the narrower-scope of what has already done (it might stifle creative problem-solving in the broader sense)
Of course, it is important to avoid working on a problem for months without referring to the literature at any point.
**But certainly for a student, I would encourage them to think about and frame solutions for a problem strictly before they do a literature survey!** Once they show understanding of the problem and of some approaches then I think they're ready to read papers ... doing it in this order, they're much better equipped to recognise relevant papers and interesting approaches when they see them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: * One point I don't see so far is that a quick experiment (in lab or in silico) can result in showing that the idea wasn't that great after all. And in that case, it is rather unlikely that literature says anything about it at all.
* Another point (rather in line with @username_4 and @username_8's answers) is that spending some effort of your own on the problem may be needed in order to find the relevant literature.
(I've had problems that I eventually solved myself, and where only the solution I obtained allowed me afterwards to find some relevant literature in a different field - simply because only the solution yielded successful search keywords)
* Of course, students solving old and known problems is often called "education" and considered necessary, not a waste of time...
* Last but not least, a few hours in the library often still make months in the lab necessary...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_10: I had a discussion like this with a seasoned professor. I think the best and also simplest thing to do when tackling a new problem is to first figure out multiple ways you think you could solve it WITHOUT doing a literature review. That shouldn't take too long, and doesn't involve actually doing any research, just some thinking and maybe some basic reading (but not a literature review). Then, review the literature, at which point you'll see if your ideas have been tried before and \ or have merit, based on your improved understanding.
What happens a lot in science is that people acquire a lot of knowledge in a field, and then often creativity is stifled, as every solution to a problem is seen in the light of the existing knowledge. It's hard to think originally about a problem when you've seen lots of other attempts to solve it. I call this the 'burden of knowledge'. So I would encourage contemplating a problem yourself before seeing what other people have done. This may lead to an original line of inquiry. But preferably before you spend a lot of time doing real research, do a thorough literature review. You'll also find that contemplating how to solve the problem yourself will help you understand the efforts of others better.
One more thing. In the field of mathematics at least, it has been commonly noted in history that some of the greatest mathematicians solved some big problems in their youth, before realizing that others had already solved that problem. I specifically recall reading this about <NAME>, but he wasn't alone in this. Sometimes this may lead to alternate proofs that are more elegant or reveal other mathematics. For instance, <NAME> solved Fermat's last theorem using tools that didn't exist in Fermat's day. So assuming Fermat did in fact solve his famous last theorem, then there is likely a much simpler solution which may reveal new mathematics. So sometimes solving an existing problem in a new way can be very valuable in its own light. That may be true even if your solution is not more elegant or more effective, if it's shows new lines of inquiry.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/04 | 3,670 | 15,455 | <issue_start>username_0: I have seen question on here regarding a citation error in a paper here:
[What should I do if I found a citation error in a published paper?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12195/finding-a-mistake-in-a-published-paper), but the nature of this problem is very different.
Basically, I came across an error in a paper (call this error 2).
I have previously contacted the author before regarding a different problem (call this error 1, say) in this paper, and I got no response. (That was what I still believe to be an unproven proposition, and is actually also related to this problem.)
The reason I decided to ask here this time is the following:
1. I am highly confident about error 2.
2. Its correctness has a direct impact on my current research.
3. The mistake cannot be easily fixed. (At least it appears to me, for the time being). I have spent months on a related problem before revisiting this paper and realised that I have tried this same technique in problem, which did not work in my problem, which led me to check why it worked in his paper - and it turned out, it did not.
4. The result was probably the first/the only result of its kind in the literature and the paper is fairly important with 150+ citations.
What should I do here? I have previously contacted the author and I have no reason to believe he would respond this time. I want it to be correct/easily patched because of reason 2. This paper was published in 1997 so it has been a while....
EDIT: Precisely for reason 2, I would much prefer some way of getting the author to respond.
EDIT: I had a discussion with my supervisor. He immediately agreed with me it was a mistake. The thing is when we tried to use a similar technique for a different problem, we fell down the same trap about 10 times. At the moment, we have no fix and the mistake is serious enough that it takes away a lot of credit from the paper.<issue_comment>username_1: *Ask someone else* - your age listed in your profile suggests that you're a grad student. Have you talked to your supervisor about this? Even better, do you know someone in your own department that has collaborated with the paper's author?
Put yourself in the author's shoes. He's probably bombarded with emails all the time from grad students he's never heard of, so unless you've collaborated before then he may not even read your email. An email from your supervisor or one of the author's collaborators is much more likely to get serious attention.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with username_1 entirely. The first step is to get independent confirmation that there is an error.
The second is to judge its severity and how it impacts on the conclusions of the paper.
The third is to contact the authors directly and perhaps ask them to list or fix the errata on their homepage and on any pre-prints.
Mainly my answer is to introduce the fourth option. Many journals allow for publishing reviews, comments or corrections on papers that have already been published. [Here's an example of this in a reputable computer science journal (TKDE).](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=5551138) Particularly if the paper is highly cited and the error underlines grave concerns about its contributions, this option is recommendable.
If the journal does not allow corrections, you may consider writing your own independent "correction" paper instead (as others have suggested), but this way, you may be expected to present new results, not just pointing out errors.
---
But again, like username_1, I would highly recommend that you get the advice of a more experienced researcher, in particular before engaging in the fourth or fifth option.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would do the following:
1. **Write up a rigorous white paper demonstrating the issue.** This should be your first step, as putting the idea to paper will help you think of aspects you may not have thought of yet. If you can successfully convince *yourself* in a written paper that this issue is valid, then...
2. **Present the white paper to your advisor.** This has numerous benefits:
* Your advisor will critique your writing, which is always a good thing; you will become a better scientific writer.
* Your advisor can provide specific feedback on specific aspects of your argument by simply referencing what you wrote and providing counterexamples. This will make the process of convincing him that there is a problem much easier.If you can sucessfully convince your *advisor* that the problem exists, then it's time for..
3. **Work with your advisor to reach out to the author.** Working with your advisor will significantly increase your chances of success. You may also be able to progress to
4. **Write up your findings in a letter or article of your own,** depending on the nature of the issue.
Do note that you state that this paper has been reviewed and cited many times. While it is possible that you have found something everyone else has missed, your ideas will need to be iron-clad before anyone will even listen to you. I would spend the most time right now making sure you haven't made a mistake before reaching out to the author.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: The main answer to your question is easy: **talk to your advisor**.
I find it a little curious that you have not done this already. As a graduate student, you read a very famous paper (in mathematics, more than 150 citations is a *very* large number) that was written a while ago, and at the first sign of trouble you contacted the author of the paper. That is already a little strange: although both are possible, the probability that you, a relatively young graduate student, have misunderstood something in the paper (or are applying standards that are different from those of the field you will be working in, or some other similar issue related to the fact that you probably do not yet have expert level knowledge and experience in this field) is higher than that the author has made a serious mistake. Writing to someone that you don't know at all and who is much more senior than yourself and pointing out a mistake is not without risk: the risk is that you will be wrong and they will dismiss you in the future as a less than serious person.
Your advisor is there exactly for such things: she is the person who is helping you transition from a neophyte to a journeyman to an expert, and she needs to see your mistakes and flawed reasoning in order to do this properly. Some outside expert really does not: they can wait to see the finished product that you become. Moreover, you are presumably reading the paper because your advisor wants you to, perhaps even because she directly told you to read it. Therefore a mistake in the paper is your advisor's problem as well as yours. Why are you holding that information back from her? You shouldn't.
Having said that, I feel like the OP is getting a fair amount of advice that would be more appropriate in other fields than mathematics. Especially:
>
> In mathematics it is very difficult to write a paper whose sole or even primary purpose is to point out a mistake (even if it includes a correction) in someone else's work.
>
>
>
This is a cultural reality of the field; it is certainly not entirely positive. In many other academic fields, one can "score points" by pointing out others' mistakes, and in some fields this is one of the best ways to score points. Mathematics is not like this: if you can get such a paper published it will "take points away" from the author and give you a certain amount of notoriety, but if this is for instance your first published paper then many people will look at you strangely, almost as if they expect you to make further trouble. (Again, I'm not endorsing this cultural practice; I'm just describing it.)
Similarly, I would say that contacting the editor of the journal in question is maybe step 10 of a procedure that is mostly designed to terminate after one of the first 9 steps. You should do this only after you have exhausted every other possible avenue.
>
> In mathematics -- very much unlike in some other fields -- it is prohibitively unlikely that an editor will publish any "commentary/correction/erratum" by you unless she believes that you are mathematically correct in the point you're making, and convincing someone with standing in the field like a journal editor that you are mathematically correct is largely what you're trying to do anyway.
>
>
>
Finally, while I barely know what a [white paper](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_paper) is and to the extent that I do I'm not sure it's the appropriate terminology here -- in content I do agree with @username_3's suggestion: it will certainly help your advisor if along with communicating the surprising news that Famous Paper X is wrong, you can supply a written version of your arguments. This can be hard to do: explaining why a difficult argument is subtly wrong is one of the sternest expository challenges in mathematics that I can think of. It takes a lot to go from "I don't understand the argument and find it rather unclear" to "I am convinced that it is wrong." By the way, in writing to an author it is a good strategy to err on the side of the former quotation.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: The answer may be field-dependent, but in theoretical physics it is: **write your paper**. If the error is non-trivial, showing why something not works (or an counterexample) may be valuable. The same thing if the error is relatively simple, but most people are not aware of it.
Sometimes a critical flaw in one paper gives raise to a new field - see [How the No-Cloning Theorem Got its Name
by <NAME>](http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0205076) (or for a longer story, [How the Hippies Saved Physics by <NAME>](http://www.hippiessavedphysics.com/)).
An [erroneous paper](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00729622) (with an error being non-trivial at this time) resulted in the [non-cloning theorem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-cloning_theorem), and later - quantum cryptography, quantum information etc. The error (assumption that a machine could copy any quantum state) could be addressed by a few lines of an elementary proof there no such machine could exist.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: If you can give all the relevant details in a reasonably concise way, then it may be appropriate to ask a question on mathoverflow.net. I would strongly recommend that:
* You prepare your question very carefully, and review and revise it several times before posting to ensure that it is as clear and complete as possible and correct in all details.
* You phrase your question as "I do not see how this can be correct, please explain what I am missing" (even if you feel very sure that you are not missing anything).
If your problem is in an area that is well covered by mathoverflow, then this should be effective. Either someone will explain what you are missing, or the relevant experts will become aware that you have uncovered a genuine problem.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Let me share my personal experience in a vaguely similar situation: Back in 2007 and within a couple of months of publication I spotted a huge mistake in a paper published in a journal that used to be A class but is more like B class these days. I wrote a proof of the error, showed how to correct it, and sent it to the journal. It took over one year of back and forth between the editor and I to get him to admit he had published a profoundly incorrect paper and to publish my "Comment": but I'll say that I probably got lucky that he admitted his error, got lucky that he cared to correct it, got lucky that he read my correspondence, etc.. If my experience is any indication, it will be very difficult to get across to the editor(s). At some point, about 6 months into the exchange, when it was clear that the editor was assuming I was in the wrong (he never read the math bits), I wrote to another editor and asked him if he thought I could damage my reputation by insisting so much, and he told me not to worry and go ahead on the quest for truth (but there was nothing he could do to help). The bottom line is you will hurt several people's pride and could make some enemies. I personally couldn't care less, but I'm atypical. And if you looked at my career, you'd probably think twice about upsetting the editors of an influential journal. Whatever you do, all the best!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: My advice is pretty much the same as everyone else's: talk to your advisor, go over the suspected problem point with him; if there is no resolution, reach out to others in the department (your advisor should do this).
Having said this, I'd like to relate a few incidents from my own experience. As a graduate student, I independently discovered a result in number theory that did not appear in the literature. I was unaware of the significance of the result, but it came up in discussion with my advisor. He informed me that Professor X had found this result, but had never published it, and that I should not publish it, thereby "scooping" the (world-famous) expert.
While working with my second advisor, in a different area, I read a paper by a major player in that area who had developed a widely used technique. I mantioned to my advisor that there was a point in the proof of that technique that I didn't understand and he told me that no one understood the proof, but all assumed it worked.
Many years later, I now work in a different area. But while I was getting started in it I ran across a theorem in a book by a well-known expert in the field. What it said contradicted other things I had read. Not fully trusting myself, I reached out to the author who acknowledged that what he had written was not correct. He was very grateful for the correction and saved it against the advent of a second edition of his book.
Finally, I wrote a paper which contained an error, an error I should not have made because I was familiar with a counterexample to the statement I made. No referee caught the mistake, and only one person ever wrote to me about it, and I am very grateful to that person. Everyone reacts to these things differently, but I did not take offense at the correction. Granted this situation is a bit different than yours, because the correction came from a well-known source, and not from a graduate student. I would like to think I would have been equally accepting if the correction came from a student. I was embarrassed to be corrected by an expert, whereas I might have been peeved to be corrected by a student. However, were it you who wrote to me, you would never have known my reaction. I would have thanked you for pointing out the error, and perhaps have apologized for making it. But that's just me, and I'm far from well-known in the field. So, I have no idea of what my more famous colleagues have to deal with on a daily basis. The paper in question has never been corrected to my knowledge.
As I said, everyone reacts differently in these cases. Work with your advisor. The most important thing for you is to determine if there is indeed an error in the paper, and, if not, to understand why the paper is correct so that you can move forward with a correct grasp of what the paper established.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/04 | 546 | 2,335 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm in the process of writing figure legends but realized I don't actually know what to include or what to exclude. I wrote them based on intuition and tried to copy what I've already seen but I was wondering if anyone had good suggestions or references for making figure legends for papers and reports in the biological sciences.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, the figure should contain a title which concisely captures what it's showing: 'Effect of manipulation A on measure B', or 'Level of A influences property of B', or 'B vanishes when A is larger than X', or some such.
After that you would go on describe what the figure shows, as precisely as possible - go panel by panel and say what's on the axes (and in which units), what denotes statistical significance in the image (e.g. gray shaded areas), what the colors mean, that sort of thing. You can also write what the main statistical finding is, using just words (i.e. no p-values or similar).
Those are the basics. However, take into account that some journals allow unsubscribed readers to see the title, abstract and figures of their papers. If this is the case, try to imagine what it's like to be able to read just the abstract and see the figure with legends, and build from there. See if an experienced reader can infer what your specific contribution is from this information only (in fact, many people will anyway just skim over the figures before deciding whether to read the paper). This often means that the figure legend should also include a mini-recap of the experimental setup or specific manipulations next to the finding it depicts, but the exact contents will vary depending on what you're showing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The chosen answer suggests going through panel by panel and stating what's on each axis and its units or what the colors mean. You shouldn't need to do this: axes labels tell you what is on the axes and that's where the units should go (not in the caption). As for what the colors mean, that's ideally the purpose of a legend.
I have a [post about this](https://brushingupscience.wordpress.com/2015/12/18/your-figure-caption-need-not-be-half-a-page/) that goes into more detail about avoiding long-winded, procedural, and uninteresting figure captions.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/04 | 1,652 | 7,124 | <issue_start>username_0: A prospective graduate student is coming to visit a program and does not have a place to stay. As is sometimes the case, the program is not funding a hotel for the student and it seems likely that it would be an economic hardship for the student to host themselves. Let's say that the student is accepted to the program so this is more in the context of trying to impress the student and get her to join the program (although I'd be interested to hear if a similar situation with a non-accepted student would be different).
Is it appropriate for a faculty member to try to arrange for a host stay with a current student in the department?
Would it be appropriate for a faculty member interested in working with the student to offer to host the student in a guest room in their home?
Are there other or better options?<issue_comment>username_1: Always follow your school policy on the matter, if there is one.
>
> Is it appropriate for a faculty member to try to arrange for a host stay with a current student in the department?
>
>
>
It's appropriate for a faculty member to ask current students if they can help, then tell the visitor, "Here is the email address of a current student in the department who can help you arrange a host stay, if you're interested."
Then let the visitor make contact with the student. Don't be pushy.
>
> Would it be appropriate for a faculty member interested in working with the student to offer to host the student in a guest room in their home?
>
>
>
I vote "no" unless there's really no alternative - especially if the faculty member makes the offer directly to the visitor.
I have seen something similar (students living in the guest room of a researcher in industry who they are working with for the summer). Those students apparently were OK with it.
However, I have been *offered* this (visiting a professor in another country for the summer, he offers me a guest room in his home). I did not want to live in this professor's home, and it was mildly uncomfortable and awkward to turn down the offer. There is a power imbalance here that can be a problem.
If you decide to offer a guest room in a faculty member's home, definitely do it through a third party (e.g., have a student contact the visitor and say "Here are some possible hosts, including a guest room in this professor's home"). This way the visitor can turn it down without having to worry about offending the faculty member.
>
> Are there other or better options?
>
>
>
If your school has a dorm with spare rooms (or if a nearby school has a dorm), this is a good option.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yeah, I'm afraid that's been the case at my alma mater more often lately due to budgetary issues...Kind of a pity we can't even afford to host prospective, accepted recruits when they come from out of state/country.
What I've seen done is for the department staff to coordinate with the department's student representatives in organizing the whole recruitment visitation event, which has included making hosting arrangements for visiting recruits. Usually it has involved sending emails around to current grad students asking if anyone can host a recruit. Responses and outcomes have been pretty good from what I've seen. I think that's something of a small miracle, considering most grad students live rather modestly. I don't think I was ever in a position to host anyone, but it seems enough other students have managed to make it work that the department can get away with not supporting visitors' lodging needs financially.
I'd expect faculty to have somewhat better accommodations available, judging from the few whose houses I've visited – much more spacious than any grad student's I've ever known. I'd also expect faculty to have a more vested interest in cajoling good recruits into enrolling, and also more interest in getting to know these students ahead of time. Faculty might have longer histories in the area as well, and therefore make better hosts and offer better introductions to the city outside the university. Some faculty are very busy, but some are tenured (insert joke about sea cucumbers here, but the implication that tenured professors aren't busy isn't to be taken too seriously), and no grad student has this luxury – they're all busy, or at least should be. For these reasons, I'm inclined to argue that faculty would actually make better hosts than grad students overall, if they could just be convinced to take that extra responsibility.
However, I'm not sure a faculty member should host his/her own recruit. Personalities can clash in unpredictable ways when people share their personal spaces with one another, and a long-term advisor-student relationship is not one with which to take such risks lightly. People sometimes depend on a sort of professional distance in relationships with authority differences (i.e., superior-subordinate relationships, to whatever extent that fits the advisor-student scenario), and learn to regret lowering their personal boundaries through particularly bad experiences. These are easier to put behind oneself if one doesn't have to work with the other person continuously over several years thereafter.
Furthermore, one wouldn't want to create an implicit expectation in a department that faculty should host their own recruits. Many people choose not to live in tidy, spacious, or peaceful places that a visitor of unknown sensitivities might need just to be able to relax and sleep. This is why it's important to request volunteers for informal hosting if it can't be done through a professional hosting service such as a hotel (or even a hostel). Some people are reluctant to host others for very good reasons, and shouldn't suffer others' judgment for failing to fulfill their expectations when they would be unreasonable. It's all too easy to produce a culture of implicit obligation inadvertently like this, so this justifies preventative precautions.
@username_1's points are well-made on this matter too, and the dorm suggestion isn't a bad idea either, but from a recruit's perspective, I would prefer to be offered a room in a grad student's house / apartment / foxhole. Dorms tend to be dominated by undergrad culture, which at some universities won't make the best impression on recruits. There's enrollment-incentivizing value in being welcomed into a tight-knit, professional environment that gives a realistic impression of what life is like for other grad students, who presumably don't live in dorms (unless they're RAs). Staying with other grad students is a chance to talk about the university or the city over breakfast or dinner, whereas undergrads might make somewhat less useful company.
I'm not sure whether I'm giving undergrads too much credit or too little in saying no more or less than this...Some dorms and undergrads could make very nice environments I'm sure, but others could be downright awful. It seems to me that there's much more risk involved in the dorm proposition than in having other grad students host recruits.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/05 | 1,328 | 5,758 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm 2 years out of undergrad and thinking about applying to some math graduate schools, specifically operations research and maybe financial engineering. I was a math major, with middling grades, and now I work in IT.
My question is this: it seems that even for not top-tier schools, a high GPA is crucial, as are great letters of recommendation, wonderful GRE scores etc. Why? If I'm willing to shell out 50k for grad school, and I've met the prerequisites, and I show an interest in the subject, why wouldn't a school want to have me? Is it purely so that they can claim they have a low acceptance rate?
In other words, if a grad school (again, not top 10 let's say) has a surplus of people who want to take that program, in a field like math, why not just hire as many professors as it would take to teach them?
I guess I don't get all this pressure to be perfect.
Thanks!
EDIT: I am referring to masters programs in particular, where stipends are not as common.
EDIT: Ok, Pete and Paul's answers make sense, given the current set up of grad school. I can imagine a different set up, however, that would make it less competitive for students, more profitable for professors and more about learning than prestige.<issue_comment>username_1: You should not pay tuition to attend grad school, excepting possibly certain "professional" schools like medicine, business, law.
That is, grad programs admit a number of students for which they have funding, and have faculty/mentoring support.
Programs do not get tuition money back directly (as counter-intuitive as this might seem), but have to calibrate grad admissions to match the faculty they have ... the numbers of which are determined by essentially unrelated issues. But, approximately, programs will not admit you if they are not confident that you can succeed in their program. So you should not begrugde that judgement. And, srsly, such judgements are made with much experience.
Yes, there is the issue of prediction of success, which is an element that did not enter in undergrad studies. That is, programs do not "admit everyone" and then allow people to fail. Nor is it just a matter of "trying hard". Beyond a certain point, there is an issue of natural ability. It is true that this is highly non-trivial to understand/detect/encourage.
Yes, there is a considerable amount of disingenuousness in how we describe graduate programs...
Perhaps reaction-comments from the OP could help refine useful answers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Some points:
1) The line that jumped out at me and probably most other mathematicians reading your message was "If I'm willing to shell out 50k for grad school". Stop right there. Most people who go to math graduate school get paid stipends; almost no one pays the full tuition themselves. It is a little unclear why you are so willing to do this: it certainly does not seem like a wise career move.
2) Graduate programs have limited resources. If they admitted more PhD students then it might in the long run lead to more faculty, but this is an indirect and uncertain process. Moreover every graduate student is a huge outlay of time and effort on the part of the faculty, and while programs are not being ranked according to their acceptance rates (I don't know that these statistics are even reported), they are certainly being ranked according to their *completion rates*. Math graduate school is a challenging proposition, and a lot of people who enroll realize it is not for them.
3) The requirements for getting into a decent math graduate program are not "perfection". (In fact, a "perfect" academic record may in practice mean that the student did not suitably challenge herself.) They are looking for an academic record that gives them confidence that the student will actually succeed in the program. If you admit a student who is merely interested and willing to pay but turns out not to have the skills and the drive to complete the program, everyone's time has been wasted, and lots of the student's money has been wasted. This is not a desirable outcome.
**Added**: Yes, the above remarks apply primarily to PhD programs. (In fact I didn't understand the meaning of MFE, and I thought that OR stood for "Oregon" rather than -- my next guess -- "Operations Research". It's best to err on the side of spelling out abbreviations on a site like this.) Master's programs generally do have lower entry requirements compared to PhD programs at the same institution, and yes, paying your own way is somewhat more common, although I would still not recommend it to any but the wealthiest students. There are in fact some good master's programs in mathematics that one could get into by making clear in advance that no financial support was being requested.
To say more than this really depends on the department. Some places have extra resources for master's programs, but many do not: the master's program takes place alongside the more populous PhD program and is administrated and taught by the same faculty members with limited time and energy that they are trying to apply in the best possible way. Master's students who are not strong enough to receive funding may in fact be the ones who require significant extra effort to get them to finish the program. They may also require faculty to meet and discuss tough questions like whether or not they should be allowed to continue in the program. Speaking from my own experience: a few years ago I was largely open to the idea that anyone who has the appropriate undergraduate degree and coursework and is willing to pay their own way should be given a shot in our master's program. I do not feel that way any longer.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/05 | 3,680 | 14,656 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently received an offer from a group which pursues topics I find very motivating and whose equipment is above average for my field.
The salary offered is 50% of the German TV-L E13 salary, which I think is acceptable by academic standards. However, all other offers which I have received are 65% of TV-L E13, though all of these other groups pursue topics which to me are slightly less interesting. To give you a bit of background, 50% has been the standard for a long time, but since a couple of years ago most groups in my field are deciding to award their PhD employees 65%.
I am very motivated by my particular interests, and had the salary been equal for all offers I would have taken this one without question. Sadly, the situation being as it is, I am quite split. Additionally, the professor made it quite clear that I would also have to get involved in teaching (not all other groups were as forward about this) - which I do not mind in the slightest, but which I think would give cause for extra consideration when calculating a salary. Regarding the professor's interest, he seemed very keen to have me on board, but also very confident I would take his offer.
I would like to ask whether he could accommodate for 65%. But, since I am yet to decide, I would not like to lose the offer or put great strain on our future relationship if he refused.
The way I see it, academic culture treats monetary interest with a certain disdain, and I would like to ask you how I could best formulate my request.
**FEEDBACK: I have followed the advice offered here, and stated in an email to my prospective PI that I had received better paid offers, and that I would ask him if he could increase the pay, though I am aware of how difficult this could be for him. He took some time to reply (which initially gave me cause to worry), but apparently now he managed to arrange for 65%. I would encourage any of you to follow the advice presented here; and *do* try to negotiate as long as you do it *very* respectfully!**<issue_comment>username_1: One of the mods here is a professor in a german university, I think he is able to add a better answer or at least confirm or discard mine.
Some considerations:
* As far as I know, many german PhD students, at least in CS, are actually employed full-time, which I assume means 100% TVL-E. In that sense, both 50% and 65% seem somewhat on the low side to me. At the very least, negotiating for 65% does not seem so unreasonable that it should offend anybody.
* However, don't be too disappointed if your negotiations go nowhere. I have heard from multiple people that academic salaries are oftentimes entirely unnegotiable in Germany (though not always)
* German PhD student salaries are internationally quite on the high side (also if you take costs of living into account), so even if you cannot negotiate, 50% might still be ok compared internationally. That being said, the question is always if the salary is enough for **your standard of living / circumstances**. If you have a partner and two kids, maybe 50% simply does not allow you to live. If you are alone and live in a dorm, maybe 50% is plenty.
* In germany, some amount of teaching is usually part of the job. That the one professor told you this before is a good thing. However, there is teaching and there is teaching. I have certainly seen groups where teaching load could add up to about 75% of a PhD student's work time. This is obviously terrible (independent of money issues). The hard part is figuring out whether this is the case in your specific group. The best way is to ask one of the current PhD students.
* Don't be too afraid that you may annoy your future professor. In my experience, the entire "academics frown upon money issues" is a bit of a show. The same professors who says such things at the same time have no quarrels at all negotiating their own contracts or department budgets. If your future professors gets annoyed by you mentioning that you have a number of better offers, you should likely go somewhere else anyway.
Now, for the actual negotiation, I would follow **moriary's** remark from the comment - simply mention (friendly and non-threatingly) that you are torn on accepting the offer, as you have counter-offers at 65%. As said, nobody should get annoyed by that. We are all adults, right?
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are two fundamentally opposing issues here. One is that
>
> You will not get a higher salary unless you negotiate.
>
>
>
while at the same time
>
> The only way to avoid the messiness of failed negotiations is not to negotiate.
>
>
>
You have to be prepared for the possibility that negotiations will not go the way that you want. So, really, the question is if the extra pay is so important to you that you are willing to walk away from the position if things don't work out the way you want.
Funding for research groups in Germany can resemble a zero-sum game: faculty members get a fixed budget from the university, as well as a mostly set budget from funding agencies: they get a certain allotment of positions to fill, and get paid based on the salary needed to fund those positions. But what this means is that to give you the extra 15 percent of the position, they need to come up with the funding from somewhere. This may or may not have been budgeted for in the original proposal; if not, finding the money to do so can be quite difficult, particularly in non-science fields (where there may not be a large amount of third-party and industrial funding available).
Even if the funding comes from the so-called *Planstelle* (or university funding), the issue is fundamentally the same: giving you an extra 0.15 position means that there's that much less for somebody else. So 2.0 *Planstelle* positions could be used to hire four graduate students at 50 percent, or three graduate students at 65 percent.
Furthermore, some faculties may have guidelines on what faculty members can offer potential PhD students; it may be worthwhile to contact the person responsible for doctoral students at the department in question to see if this is the case here.
However, unless the group is rather large, I'm rather pessimistic of the ability of the advisor to increase the offer. (If he could have, he probably would have done so, already knowing the state of competition in the field.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My 2 ct:
* Who is funding the position? (I.e.: is the offer for a concrete project, funded by some funding agency)? If so, look up the funding agencies policies for PhD student funding (e.g. DFG recently changed the recommendation to 65%).
* Anyways, I don't think it will hurt to ask whether 65% are possible. After all, that is now the DFG recommendation. So you are not asking for an outrageous amount of money.
And, if they are not willing to increase the offer, they can easily tell you that this is not possible at the moment due to how positions are tied to projects or even that they don't do this in order not to have one highly paid student at the cost of some other student. (I've been in an institute where positions were more or less rotated among the PhD students in order to have roughly equal pay to everyone in the long run).
* Are you asking for better wage without more work or are you asking for more money, possibly for more work, e.g. because you need to feed your family. Particularly the latter reason may be a good point to tell during the negotiation (depending on where the position is - noone will believe that you'd be able to survive at 65% wage in Munich if you cannot do with 50% in Leipzig).
* There may be other ways to get more money, e.g. it may be possible to get paid the additional 15% if you are borrowed out to do teaching at some other institute for the respective amount of time. I've also been doing work contracts for university though my experience with (one) German university was that they took extremely long to pay (close to 6 months - seems rather usual: I've since heard that other universities have similarly bad reputation). However, this is IMHO only an option if you anyways think about running a free-lancing side-business - otherwise the burocracy will not be worth the hassle.
* Consider also asking whether and when you can expect an increase to 65%.
Update ("soft" advise triggered by the OP's comments)
-----------------------------------------------------
* The comments look to me as if the moment for wage negotiation is already in the past:
Prof: "[blabla] at the usual pay."
Chimera: "... which I take to mean 65% TVL-13"
Is the moment I'd have considered the point to open wage negotiations.
* IMHO a vague offer like "usual pay" needs to be clarified into some hard number - so pinning that to something more concrete is not necessarily blurting out. After all, "usual pay" could be anywhere from 50 to 100% TVL-13 (and formerly even from 50% WHK upwards - but I don't know whether that is still done)
* Maybe the most important point that comes to my mind now: **Wage negotiation does not safe you from making up your mind about what you want.** Quite the contrary: you need to know those *beforehand*, otherwise you'll have no footing for the negotiation.
* In any case, having messed up these negotiations (assuming you *could* have gotten the interesting project *and* the higher wage which we don't know) is an experience for life. It may be good to settle your emotions by writing it off as "Lehrgeld". Yes, 10 000 € net difference over the 3 a hurts (that pain will make the lessons learned last...). On the other hand you're probably going to make more expensive decisions (and even mistakes) during your lifetime (e.g. buying once during our lifetime new car instead of a used one will easily cost you more).
At some point the most expensive mistake will be to keep fretting about this possible mistake instead of looking forward and trying to have a better next negotiation.
* I think there is a deep wisdom in the advise to practice job interviews and negotiations several times with jobs you are not really interested in getting before applying where you seriously want to go. Includes clarifying for yourself the lessons-learned (also by asking questions like this here).
* 10 000 € hurt, but as others have menioned, larger important points aren't negotiable (e.g. how much time you'll spend for teaching)
* or can be negotiated independently of the 50% vs. 65% question (e.g. your prof may be able to throw in helping you to get an international research stay etc.).
---
The remaining thoughts are my very personal point of view.
* The unknown confounding factors ("Munich" vs. "Leipzig", family or not) are too large here to give much advise. Obviously, with a job offer in Munich and a family to feed I'd negotiate more (possibly to the point of trying to reopen negotiations) than as a single applying in Leipzig.
* Personally, I'd say that the 15% are in general not sufficient "pain compensation" for me for taking an uninteresting position. Of course that wouldn't stop me from negotiating.
But in order to weight this point you need to know that
* My personal experience (Germany, Canada, Italy) underlines rather strongly that the wage : costs of basic living are *extremely* favorable in Germany compared to other countries. To the point where I think that with few exceptions, even for students money problems are usually (exceptions being feeding a family in Munich - you get the idea) rather on the side of expenses than on the side of generating income.
But take that as a very personal thing - your priorities may vary: I'm aware that I happen to
+ have inexpensive hobbies (not very interested in cinema and pub tours and instead hiking, wild camping, biking and having the beer & wine at our own camp fire/BBQ - and I don't need the alps that urgently if I have the Sächsische Schweiz or the Thüringer Wald just a few km away; also not feeling an urgent need to get to the Andes or the Himalaya as there are large parts of Europe still unknown to me).
+ be quite good at repairing/renovating stuff
+ enjoy cooking our own meals with friends which also happens to be much cheaper than the pizza service and still cheaper than the mensa.
+ have studied in Dresden where rents were cheap, and now live in Jena which has crazy expensive rents compared to, say, Leipzig, which are however still low compared to about everywhere in former West-Germany. And to Italy (Trieste).Anyways these points gave me the independence even as a student to be rather free in the decision what job offer to take and to follow my interests.
To put it the other way round: my advise is to make up your mind also how much this kind of independence (which can tremendously help your negotiation position) is worth to you. If you make up your mind now, you'll be settled when the more important negotiations come after the PhD. If you find out that you are not the person who is willig or able to go that way, that is perfectly OK as well. But it will safe you a lot of pain to know and act accordingly.
(You asked for *safe* negotiations, not e.g. for successful negotiation or how to avoid basic mistakes during wage negotiation.)
(And, just to let you know @TheChimera, of course I've also messed up job interviews. I believe everyone does at least once in a while.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with username_2 that negotiation is probably not going to work. He seems to know about universities; I work at a research centre from the Helmholtz group. At our research centre, some professors are already trying to get 65% for PhD researchers. But it is a matter which the board of directors decides once for the whole organisation, not something a single professor can decide for his/her chair. So, until the professors get the board to agree, it will be 50% for everybody.
You can still talk to the professor, the ones I know are reasonable and open in salary matters and I haven't experienced a hostile atmosphere in talks involving money/responsibility/tasks negotiations. But there is a very high chance that he has no say in the matter. Besides, it is rare for a professor to have to fill a position quickly; if you don't accept the position, they can just wait for the next good candidate (and there are enough of them). So, I am afraid you probably don't have many levers, even if the professor sympathizes with you and wants to work with you.
My advice is to try it (there isn't anything to lose), but don't get your hopes too high.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/05 | 766 | 3,106 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student and going to assess my instructor in a month, with whom I was not very much satisfied. I had been writing the teachers' evaluation in past but didn't see a scintilla of improvement even after years in any attribute of instructor or course-material. Maybe other students were quite satisfied and I was just a statistical outlier. Apart from my disbelieve, what is the most effective way to communicate with your instructor via evaluation-sheet?
Thanks for any suggestions.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> **What is the most effective way to communicate with your instructor via evaluation-sheet?**
>
>
>
In a word, *constructively*.
If you are overly negative, there's a good chance you will be viewed as a malcontent with an axe to grind. If you'd like to maximize the chance for real improvement, avoid blanket negative statements. For example, instead of:
>
> *This instructor was never available for consultation*.
>
>
>
try:
>
> *This class would be better if the instructor was more available to students*.
>
>
>
(You send the same message, but with a more constructive – and therefore more credible – slant.)
---
Also, you should be realistic in what kinds of improvements you may expect to see. In my experience, some faculty take student evaluations very seriously, some don't. Some probably don't even read them; the forms are only completed because department policy demands it.
There's another important factor, too: the inmates shouldn't run the asylum. Some faculty regard student evaluations with disdain, and there may be legitimate reasons why. Sometimes professors who are easy graders get better evaluations from students, while more demanding professors get poor evaluations from students who are either lazy or else come to class with a sense of entitlement.
Truth is, there are a lot of dynamics that go into this. Just from reading your question, there's no way to tell if you're a good student who unfortunately had a bad professor, or if you're a bad student who got their feathers ruffled by a very good (yet challenging) professor.
A single evaluation won't have a huge effect either way, but, as I said at the beginning of this answer, I think your best chances for a positive impact comes by writing an evaluation with a more positive and constructive slant. In other words, try using the form to suggest improvements, rather than to harshly criticize. Such forms will be harder to dismiss outright.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To [J.R.'s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18974/643) focussing on constructive comments, I would add that the comments are often more useful if they are *specific*, rather than general. A specific comment gives the lecturer something precise to focus on when making improvements.
For example, stating that *the description of endoplasmic reticulm was unclear* or *the first part of lecture 2 went too fast* is better than saying that *lectures were unclear*.
(Of course, these should be stated more constructively.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/05 | 3,125 | 12,397 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently interviewing for tenure-track faculty positions at a number of top departments in my field. Despite getting some very positive feedback about my interviews, I have not yet received any offers. So far I have tried to avoid any "game playing," being very explicit with each department about where and when I am interviewing. Likewise, in follow-up discussions with hosts, I have been careful not to state any strong preferences for one school or another, mentioning that I still have additional places to visit (seems only fair!). I am starting to wonder, however, whether this approach was a mistake, especially given that others in my field are already receiving offers.
The question is, how should I proceed from here? Part of the issue is that I do not fully understand how and when offers are made, which leads to several questions:
**Question 1:** *How often are offers made before the end of the interview period (i.e., before all candidates have been interviewed)?*
I know it happens, of course, but how frequently? (E.g., as a percentage of all offers made by the department over a 10-year period.) A related question is
**Question 2:** *If a candidate expresses that a school is her top choice, does it make any difference to the hiring committee?*
In fact, can expressing this kind of preference actually *hurt* a candidate's chances? E.g., perhaps it makes this candidate look like a "sure thing," which frees the department to first make an offer to another, "higher-risk" candidate. In general, when is a good time to express such a preference? Finally,
**Question 3:** *To what extent do different departments talk to each-other?*
For instance, is there any mechanism in place to prevent candidates from "falling through the cracks?" E.g., one can easily imagine a situation in which lower-ranked schools don't make a candidate an offer because they expect she will get an offer from a higher-ranked school; subsequently, the higher-ranked schools make her no offer and she is left without a job. Likewise, if I express a preference for school X before visiting school Y, do I risk pissing off my hosts at Y?
**Question 4:** *Do I just need to relax?*
I am almost tempted to write an email CC'ing all the department chairs, providing a complete ordering of my preferences... they can duke it out from there. (Or simply tell me that ***none*** of them want to hire me!) In general, the whole game-theoretic aspect of this thing makes me a bit queasy. Wish some brilliant economist would design a mechanism that is fair for both departments and candidates alike. Right now, it definitely feels like a buyer's market.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> **Question 1**: How often are offers made before the end of the interview period (i.e., before all candidates have been interviewed)?
>
>
>
I would say "early offers" only occur in exceptional circumstances. Universities have hiring policies and those policies require dotting i's and crossing t's -- paperwork and process -- particularly for tenured or tenure-track positions.
>
> **Question 2**: If a candidate expresses that a school is her top choice, does it make any difference to the hiring committee?
>
>
>
Let me put it this way: you do **not** want to express that the school is not your top choice. The hiring committee are looking for a monogamous relationship. Talking about all the other schools you're going on first dates with isn't a great idea.
>
> In fact, can expressing this kind of preference actually hurt a candidate's chances? E.g., perhaps it makes this candidate look like a "sure thing," which frees the department to first make an offer to another, "higher-risk" candidate. In general, when is a good time to express such a preference?
>
>
>
This makes absolutely no sense.
>
> **Question 3**: To what extent do different departments talk to each-other?
>
>
>
I guess you refer to the US? If so, I don't know but I would imagine there's very little communication on an inter-department level (though people in different departments may informally communicate).
>
> For instance, is there any mechanism in place to prevent candidates from "falling through the cracks?" E.g., one can easily imagine a situation in which lower-ranked schools don't make a candidate an offer because they expect she will get an offer from a higher-ranked school; subsequently, the higher-ranked schools make her no offer and she is left without a job. Likewise, if I express a preference for school X before visiting school Y, do I risk pissing off my hosts at Y?
>
>
>
This again makes no sense. A university is unlikely to avoid offering you a position because you might be "too good for them" or that you might get other offers (in the worst case, it only costs a university a couple of weeks to make an offer for a position that will last many years).
A university may avoid offering you a position if you seem disinterested or if it seemed likely that you were using this position as a short-term stepping-stone to elsewhere.
Different departments are not going to compare notes. They are competing with each other.
>
> **Question 4**: Do I just need to relax?
>
>
>
Yep. Maybe ease up on the coffee and take up croquet or smoking or something else instead.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations for getting as far as you have!
I think [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18973/5962) is very reasonable. I had two follow ups and elaborations.
>
> **Question 2:** If a candidate expresses that a school is her top choice, does it make any difference to the hiring committee?
>
>
>
It seems inappropriate, and slightly weird, to tell any school you are interviewing with where in your ranked list of preferences they currently fall. That's true for your top choice, your final backup, and everybody in between. Even if you are sure of your ranking, your preferences might change as you learn more about the programs and the particular offers.
That said, if you are legitimately excited about the possibility of joining a school's faculty, you should express that interest. If you feel like the faculty at the department would be great potential colleagues, say it! If you think they have great resources, say it! If you love the graduate students or the city, say it!
The comparison to dating with the goal of a monogamous relationship is a good one. Cultivating an air of disinterest seems unlikely to help and it's possible to show legitimate interest without being dishonest or leading people on. Everybody understands that you can be excited about one potential match, also excited about other potential matches, and that eventually you will have to make a decision.
>
> **Question 4:** Do I just need to relax?
>
>
>
Sounds like it. It also sounds like at this point, you've done most of what you can and the next steps are basically out of your control.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've served several years on the faculty recruiting committee for my (US, top 10) computer science department, including three years as the chair. Protocols vary significantly between different departments, different searches, and *especially* different fields, so take my experience as a sample, not as a definitive answer.
Faculty hiring is best thought of as a complex multi-player game of three-dimensional chess, using invisible pieces that occasionally explode, where nobody knows who the other players are or what rules they play by, and nobody wants to reveal too much information.
>
> Question 1: How often are offers made before the end of the interview period (i.e., before all candidates have been interviewed)?
>
>
>
It happens, but normally only when one of the early candidates emerges as an overwhelming favorite, and that candidate has another offer with an inflexible (or already extended) deadline. But nobody wants to be forced into this situation. It's *really* bad form to interview someone for a position that doesn't exist.
Some universities allow limited gambling with slots. A department might offer a position to candidate A, and then later make a second offer to candidate B for the same slot, under the assumption that at least one of them is likely to say no. If A and B both say yes, then both A and B get jobs. (I've seen this strategy go very "badly", with four low-probability offers made on the same slot, all of which were accepted. Gambling was outlawed for the next *n* years.)
>
> Question 2: If a candidate expresses that a school is her top choice, does it make any difference to the hiring committee?
>
>
>
Especially at universities that (a) forbid gambling and (b) do not let departments roll unused slots from one year to the next, departments do balance the desirability of various candidates against the estimated probability that they will accept an offer, to minimize the risk of not hiring anyone at all. (This scenario also tends to generate offers with very short and inflexible fuses, sometimes while interviews are still ongoing.)
But just telling us that we are your first choice probably won't help much. We *want* to believe you, and we appreciate your effort in making that overture, but we don't *really* believe you, because lots of candidates have said that and then left us at the altar. And even if it's true, you really don't want the rumor that that you prefer us to reach someone else. Best to keep mum until you have actual offers.
On the other hand, *evidence* that we are your first choice is taken very seriously. For example, if you receive an offer from somewhere else, especially from another top department, telling us in time to make a good-faith counter-offer is certainly better than not telling us until it's too late.
>
> In fact, can expressing this kind of preference actually hurt a candidate's chances?
>
>
>
No.
>
> Question 3: To what extent do different departments talk to each-other?
>
>
>
**Not at all.** Different departments are competitors; sharing information is counterproductive.
We do, however, gather as much back-channel information as we can, for example by scouring our competitors' web pages to see who they are interviewing and when. Sometimes I do hear rumors of the form "So-and-so is about to get an offer from X", but those rumors *almost* always trace back to the candidates themselves.
>
> one can easily imagine a situation in which lower-ranked schools don't make a candidate an offer because they expect she will get an offer from a higher-ranked school
>
>
>
Unfortunately, yes, this *does* happen, although I suspect more often at the interview stage than the offer stage. See "minimize the risk of not hiring anyone at all". Nothing you can do about it. Let it go.
>
> Question 4: Do I just need to relax?
>
>
>
Yes, always. I recommend building up an immunity to iocaine powder.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: There's a saying in writing: "show, don't tell." I think it's a bad idea to make any comparative statements between schools (exception: if you have an offer from one school, immediately contact the others to withdraw your application or say you would prefer an offer from them). It's much better to *show* how excited you are about a school, by praising them and showing them in the interview that you've done your research.
If the interview's over, then I think it's good to say generic things in your communications with search committees and chairs, like "I'm really excited about the possibility of joining your department," but I wouldn't get more specific than that. Always be honest, but often it's better to not say too much until things work themselves out.
Incidentally, some [brilliant](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd_Shapley) [mathematicians](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gale) (with follow-up by [economists](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_E._Roth)) did design such a mechanism that is fair for both departments and candidates alike, and won a Nobel Prize for it (or at least the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, whose status as a true Nobel is somewhat debatable). If you would like to know why it will never be implemented in this context, [read this comment thread](http://sbseminar.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/more-on-matches/).
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/06 | 939 | 3,317 | <issue_start>username_0: I usually try to get citation from publishers website and import it into a reference manager like endnote. I have doubt about the correct form of conferences/proceedings/transactions name in citation. As an example, the provided citation for [this paper](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6253489) in IEEE format is this:
>
> <NAME> and <NAME>, "Efficient Map/Reduce-Based DBSCAN Algorithm
> with Optimized Data Partition," in **Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2012 IEEE
> 5th International Conference on, 2012**, pp. 59-66.
>
>
>
It seems to be misplaced but as you could see in the "**published in**" section of IEEE webpage of the paper, the conference name is the same as this citation.
The same holds for proceedings and transactions.
Is this way of citation correct?<issue_comment>username_1: Venue names are often inconsistent in such a manner. Even if you take your citations from a single source (e.g., [DBLP](http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/)), you will sometimes find different names for the same venue across different years.
When citing, the aims should be:
1. Give enough information for a reader to unambiguously find a paper
2. Give enough information for citation engines to unambiguously know which paper is cited
3. Present the citations in the format required by the publisher
4. Keep citations neat and consistent in style
With regards to this citation:
>
> <NAME> and <NAME>, "Efficient Map/Reduce-Based DBSCAN Algorithm with Optimized Data Partition," in Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2012 IEEE 5th International Conference on, 2012, pp. 59-66.
>
>
>
This seems to meet 1–3.
With regards 4, I would say it is not very neat. I would do:
>
> <NAME> and <NAME>, "Efficient Map/Reduce-Based DBSCAN Algorithm with Optimized Data Partition," in IEEE 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), 2012, pp. 59–66.
>
>
>
This reads more naturally, avoids repeating the year and uses an [en-dash](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash) for the pages (okay, the later is being super-pedantic).
More correctly, you should probably have "in Proceedings of IEEE ..." but I always found that a waste of space.
If you're fighting a page limit, it is common practice to just write the abbreviation for *well known* conferences within the community (e.g., "CLOUD").
However you choose to format the venue, for the other conference/workshop citations, you should then include a similar style. In this case, all venues should include the edition (5th), the full title (International ...) and the abbreviation (CLOUD).
(And on a side note, I highly recommend switching to LaTeX/BiBTeX and pulling your citations from DBLP if you have medium-to-long term plans for researching in an area of Computer Science.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that the reason citations are done this way (and now we're verging on [english.se](http://english.stackexchange.com) territory) is to allow for meaningful alphabetical ordering/indexing.
In this case, the "IEEE transactions on" is the generic part of the name, and should not be used for alphabetical ordering/indexing. This is analogous to how in indices you'll often see things like
>
> Korea, Republic of
>
>
>
rather than
>
> Republic of Korea.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/06 | 2,254 | 8,747 | <issue_start>username_0: It happens that some students offer sex for grade.
Just considering the fact that popularity of this strategy can strongly weaken the quality of education, administrators should take some actions to avoid this.
What should a department head do to control this problem in his department?
1. How to punish?
2. Who to be punished? Student or professor? Or both ?
I am not asking about legal actions or university policies or discipline matters. I just wish to know What should a head/dean do in this regard to preserve the education quality.<issue_comment>username_1: About hose situations, I have came to be witness of two situations (taking away the part that there is a consensus between the two parts to get involved in some sort of romantic/sex situation; so I am supposing before hand that there is no harassment involved).
1. The lecturer or the student proposes intimate relations for a grade change
2. The teacher and student were involved in a romantic situation, also in this kind of scenario I believe is the same as case 1. Just because I believe there would be a bias for the lecturer or favoritism for her/his romantic partner
In any case, about your questions:
* How to punish?
This is not an easy one. I have seen one case in a Faculty in which the Dean decided to keep the lecturer involved in a romantic situation, just because he was very good in the topic he was teaching. The Dean only talked with him, and after some advices it was like nothing happened. For me it was a big mistake, they should have at least suspend him for at least one or two terms. I said that because after this guy was dumped by the girl, he still continue getting involved with other girls in the Faculty, but being more careful about his behavior for not getting caught.
In any case, I believe that people involved in these situations should be, at least, punished with a suspension. It cannot be left unattended.
* Who to punish?
Here the situation needs to be taken with enough care, mostly for the part of the student. I mean if you make a public suspension to the student, and make public the reasons behind that decision; the student will mostly be facing harassment from their own classroom mates.
In this case, I believe to have a long talk with the student involved is enough, but the lecturer is the one who should be punished just because he is allowing that situation to happens and also if the is starting it, he is taking advantage of its position as a lecturer.
Hope this could help you in taking a decision.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Initially, like xLeitix, my response to this question was "Say what?"
Then I did some reading. For those who are interested, here are some articles on the subject:
* [Sex, grades and power in higher education in Ghana and Tanzania](http://www.esrc.ac.uk/my-esrc/grants/RES-167-25-0078/outputs/Download/b6c430da-1eb8-4e2f-b519-8f10bf2dad13)
* [Kenyan tutor on 'sex for grades'](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6612681.stm)
* [Teachers Demanding Sex for Grades](http://peacecorpsclancy.blogspot.com/2011/02/teachers-demanding-sex-for-grades.html)
* [Liberian women battle against 'sex for grades' at universities](http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/mar/04/liberian-women-battle-sex-grades-universities)
* [Sex for grades in Africa's academy](http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/410068.article)
Given this context: if sex-for-grades is sufficiently "popular" in your department that it can "strongly weaken the quality of education," then you have a bigger problem then how and whom to punish the next time it happens.
>
> What should a head/dean do in this regard to preserve the education quality?
>
>
>
In a department where sex-for-grades is common, you can't stop it by punishing it in an ad-hoc manner. You have to create a comprehensive policy; educate students, faculty, and administration about this policy; and then enforce it.
If you don't have a university policy (or your university policy is not sufficient), you can create a school-wide or departmental policy, depending on the scope of your position.
Your sexual harassment policy should **clearly** describe:
* Exactly what constitutes sexual harassment,
* What the consequences will be for those involved,
* and (the most important of all), How to safely report harassment.
In addition, you should then take steps to educate
* Faculty, on how to protect themselves against sexual advances from students (steps such as: keep a strictly professional tone in emails and other communication with students, have meetings with students with office door open, etc.)
* Administration, on how to respond to allegations against students/faculty with sensitivity and discretion
* Students, on how they can report harassment without fear of retaliation
>
> Who to be punished? Student or professor? Or both ?
>
>
>
As for **who to punish**: any faculty or administrative staff member who
* solicits sex from a student in return for grades, or threatens to fail a student who won't have sex with them, or
* responds to an offer of sex for grades with anything other than a firm "NO"
should be punished. Of course, it **must say so in your policy** and you must make sure to **educate faculty** about this policy.
Students are usually the disadvantaged group in this scenario, and punishing students could deter them from reporting sexual harassment. Therefore, I would advise against punishing students in most cases. I can think of a few exceptions, where it is appropriate to punish students: e.g., students who make repeated sexual advances, despite being warned more than once in an official capacity not to do so.
>
> How to punish?
>
>
>
depends entirely on what kind of punishment you can enforce, as a department head/dean. I have no idea what kind of power you have as a department head/dean in your educational system.
Typically in the U.S. it would be handled at a higher level, as <NAME> pointed out, because department heads in the U.S. don't usually handle disciplinary matters.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In my university there is a rule which means markers are not allowed to have a 'conflict of interest' so if a professor is sexually involved with a student that is not against the rules however the professor would not be allowed to mark the student's work because it would be seen as a conflict of interest.
I think it's fair for professors and students to get involved with one another as long as they are consenting adults but I do agree that if that happens it would be unfair on the other students for that professor to mark the student's work (as I am sure most people would) and this is why I think a rule against that would prevent unfair advantage (or disadvantage - relationships can go terribly wrong!) so a rule against marker conflict of interest is a good way to prevent that happening.
If your institution does not have a rule about it, then I would say you need to accept what is done is done and learn from it because it is the responsibility of the institution to have rules about these things. You cannot really make it up as you go along because when you think about it, that is not fair either.
One final point: A student making unwanted advances and a professor has made it clear to the student that he/she is uncomfortable with those advances this is a different issue altogether because that falls under the 'sexual harrassment' banner and is unlawful in many countries and most likely against the rules too. The best way to deal with that is sort of carry on is to support the lecturer if the lecturer was unable to resolve the situation after step one e.g of steps:
**Step 1.** professor speaks to student and tells them they feel uncomfortable about the advances
If the problem persists
**Step 2.** verbal warning from the students personal tutor
If the problem persists
**Step 3.** written warning from the school/institution
If the problem persists
**Step 4.** final written warning
If the problem persists
**Step 5.** Expel student
If the problem persists
**Step 6.** Inform Police.
If the problem persists then the police would probably sort out a restraining order so just liaise with them and see what they can do according to the laws in your country.
Obviously, if the lecturer is trying to get sex and offering better grades then the same logic would apply. That is sexual harrassment and if a student complained about that I would go through the steps but step one would be to not allow the professor to mark work of the student (and probably not any other student either) until the matter had been resolved completely.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/07 | 844 | 3,434 | <issue_start>username_0: It recently occurred to me that probably more often than it should happen, while reading someones paper, they see a reference to a different paper, and just use the reference without looking. In my area, a common example is in referencing data, such as average human height, etc.
I came across this as I was looking for data on human dimensions from a somewhat smaller country that does not use English. I found 9 papers that all referenced the same data sheet. I then contacted the author of that data sheet and was informed that there is no online version (never has been), and the only print copy exists in that country. The author herself does not have this book. I'm guessing the only reason the other authors referenced the data was because the author of the referenced data wrote a paper that referenced her own data.
I am not interested in how to format these citations. I would like to know if it is appropriate to cite this information at all, or cite that someone else cited it. I am curious as I am not sure about the accuracy of the information. If I do cite someone else's citation (which i am 99% confident they never saw the data), it seems like I can just make something up myself. Is there a way to express that maybe this data is accurate, but that I'm not sure, since it is the only available source about that data? Or should I ignore it all together and pretend as if there is no data?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is there a way to express this (not as a citation format), that maybe this data is accurate, but not sure, since it is the only available source about that data.
>
>
>
How about something like: "X, measured by Jones in 1950, is commonly given as the value for Y (as cited in Smith, 1989 and Cutler, 1995). However, the original manuscript by Jones describing this result is not generally available."
>
> Or should I ignore it all together and pretend as if there is no data.
>
>
>
Don't do this. If X is cited often in the field, then by pretending as if there is no data, you give the appearance of *not knowing* your field.
Whether or not you should *use* X (knowing that it is unreliable) depends on your purposes.
If your work hinges on having an accurate value for X, then you definitely should not use X if you cannot track down a reliable source for it. (Nor should you make something up.)
If you are using X just as a "sane" value for something, and it isn't central to your work, on the other hand:
If you think you have a better value than X, and can justify why you are using a different value than everyone else in your field, go ahead.
Otherwise, if you need a value, you should just use X (unreliable as it is). A bit of unreliable data that is accepted in your field is still better than a bit of unreliable data that you just made up with no justification.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Actually, "there is no online version (never has been), and the only print copy exists in that country" shouldn't be an obstacle - that's what inter-library agreements are for; univeristy libraries generally are able to get [a copy of] that book for you even it's not online and the physical copies are all located abroad.
It's not conventient and does take time for it to arrive, but if it's widely cited but suspect, then taking a look at the original (and publishing what you find out) would be a Good Thing.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/07 | 826 | 3,496 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in stem cell, regenerative medicine, developmental biology, and genetics for reverse ageing. Since these topics are dealt with in one or both of medical school and school of science and professors have one or both of MD and PhD, I'm confused about my grad school prep. Also, I'm really not interested in clinical medicine, but I want to be a researcher throughout my life.
So, I think I need only PhD, but I'm wondering why some professors in these areas have MD?
Is it just because they decided to become researchers although they initially intended to work as a clinical doctor?<issue_comment>username_1: There are two main tracks of medicine: clinical (the "standard" medical practice), and research. Typically, doctors who work in the latter tend to pursue combined MD-PhD programs, and consequently have degrees in both a traditional scientific research discipline as well as medicine.
It probably was easier in the past to make such a switch with "just" a medical degree; however, the increased specialization in the field makes it harder for a medical doctor to switch over to a research track without the increased training (unless he or she is working on the "clinical" side of therapeutic treatments designed in research programs).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've worked with a fair number of either researcher MDs or MD/PhDs, and myself have only a PhD, so I'll try to give my perspective:
**Do You Need One**: Probably not, if you're only interested in the scientific questions about what you are doing, and are not particularly concerned with it's direct application to patient care or the clinical setting. Basically, if there is a department *outside* a medical school that can house your research, you're likely fine.
**Why Would Someone Pick One Up?**: There are many reasons for a researcher to have a MD or an MD/PhD - they're interested in the clinical aspects of the research science they do, have seen their interests evolve over time toward more research and less patient care, or are in research areas that necessitate having the expertise that comes along with having an MD. There are some medical school programs that are more oriented towards producing new researchers than practicing doctors, and medical schools are *massive* sources of clinical research in the U.S. It's really not surprising there's a number of professors out there with MDs - my doctoral advisor was one of them.
There's also some...field-specific traditions. For example, there are *tons* of MDs working in infectious disease research and epidemiology, because it spawns fairly naturally from "Treat this weird infection" to "Why does this weird infection infected X people?" to "How do we stop this weird infection from spreading".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Regarding why one would be interested in doing an MD/PhD combo:
In my region, and I believe this generalises to the rest of Sweden, clinicians are required to do get some research experience. So for most of those MD-to-be, that's the regular entry to academia.
Furthermore, if you are a clinician with a PhD on a field related to your clinical work, your chances of promotion towards higher positions in the hospital is significantly higher, apparently.
Sadly, I do not have any references on the internet for the last statement, other than the word of my colleagues in the hospital (as well as friends who did medicine at the uni).
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/07 | 832 | 3,478 | <issue_start>username_0: I plan to re-apply for a PhD in the US next year, but meanwhile, I decided to enroll in a PhD in my home country
I read the similar post: [Is it a good idea to stay an extra year at my masters institution while re-applying to PhD programs elsewhere?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18081/applying-for-phd-while-enrolled-elsewhere)
However, I am wondering whether you should admit/declare (in your application), that you are currently enrolled in a PhD program or it is better to hide this information from the US universities?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: **No, you should not hide it.**
Consider the alternative scenarios:
* Unbeknownst to you, the supervisors know each other and find out that you are re-applying without informing either. This may leave you known as dishonest and cause lasting damage to your reputation.
* The supervisors do not know each other, and you do get the new position. Your old supervisor will naturally find out that you leave, and likely be annoyed (he/she will hopefully have invested time in you). As for your new supervisor... are you going to keep it a secret forever? Is the previous place so bad you would rather have a gap in your CV? I hardly think so. Eventually, your new supervisor will find out — which may again be detrimental to your reputation, because if you suddenly leave place A for place B, who knows if you may leave place B for yet another place, again unannounced? If I were a supervisor, I would be reluctant to invest resources (time, effort, money) in someone I'm not sure would live up to commitments.
The only exception one might think of is if your old place is so bad that the association would actively damage your chances. But as a PhD student, I think that's very unlikely. In fact, if you were at a bad place but realised it soon enough to change, that could be interpreted positively and the bad reputation of a former supervisor need not reflect badly upon you.
So, no, in my opinion you should not hide that you are already enrolled elsewhere, ever.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I answered a similar question [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/14983/1010): **No, you absolutely must not hide it.**
The application will request your complete educational history, with official grades and records from each institution. At the end, you will be asked to sign a statement that everything is true and complete.
Submitting an application that is false or has significant omissions is considered **completely unethical**. It's very likely that the institution where you're applying will eventually find out, and there can be extremely serious consequences.
If they find out while reviewing your application, they'll reject it immediately, even if you would otherwise have been accepted.
If they accept you into the program and then find out while you're enrolled, they may kick you out of the program, even if you're doing well. With a record of dishonesty, you will probably not get into another one.
If you enroll in the program and finish your PhD, and they find out about the false application years later, they can revoke your degree. You will almost certainly be fired from whatever job you have at that time, and you will not work in academia again.
So you really do need to include your current institution in your application. You'll probably also need a letter of recommendation from someone at your current institution.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/04/07 | 1,654 | 6,925 | <issue_start>username_0: This happened with a friend of mine and I am asking this question on his behalf.
My friend was recruited for a sponsored research project in the university and offered a part-time PhD along with that. He is currently completing his coursework (2nd semester) which is pretty exhaustive. He has been working pretty rigorously and one of his poster presentation was accepted in a reputed conference within 6 months of work.
Since the coursework in this semester was tough, he wasn't able to give any tangible output in terms of publications or concrete results. Now, suddenly he has been asked by his advisor to resign. This has come to him as a surprise since he was expecting some scolding as his guide is known for being arrogant (and he is very reputed researcher in the field).
He is unsure whether to leave PhD or how to proceed and convince his advisor.
I believe he is pretty new (1 year of coursework) to the domain and since the project is pure research, he does deserve a chance. But I am unsure of how one should proceed in such cases.
**EDIT** (based on queries in comment)
Part Time PhD: He was recruited as an employee for the project by the university. And also offered a PhD. The stipend comes from the project cost(funding agency) and not from university funds (as is the case for direct PhD recruits in my university).
Advisor being Arrogant: He is very knowledgeable and reputed but known for scolding students frequently.(Some faculty members also agree to this including my own advisor)<issue_comment>username_1: This is a difficult situation. Regardless of the facts of the matter, there appears to be have been a breakdown of trust/communication: either the advisor has been sending signals for a while that the person didn't pick up on, or the advisor is indeed pulling this out of the blue, which also signifies a breakdown of communication.
Probably the best first thing to do is for the student to set up a meeting with the advisor to understand the advisor's reasons. It's possible that a face-to-face meeting might allow the advisor to express their underlying concerns in a more productive way that could lead to a concrete plan for activities.
If that fails, or the advisor refuses to meet, the next person to involve is usually the chair of graduate studies at the department (or the equivalent). There is usually someone whose job is to oversee the graduate program and manage conflicts like this. They might be able to mediate a rapproachment between the advisor and student (or even find another advisor for the student). I've had to do this in the past when I served in this capacity.
Bottom line: **if the facts are as you outlined**, then I think the student deserves a more reasonable explanation from the advisor as to why they're being terminated. Sadly though, in my experience I've often found that students ignore signals being sent to them, and that advisors are unwilling/unable to give direct and clear feedback.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Situation: FUBAR. I'm quite sorry for your friend. Good thing is: things can't get much worse.
Now he is a student and the professor is reputed, if he resigns then they are both just human beings. These are two different contexts and your friend is, more or least, with one foot on each of them. With the insight of the second context and a potential imminent resign, I'd ask, from a person to another, "why?".
If it's for the lack of results/publications, your friend should check why did that happen and whether that is going to continue in the future. It's not only a matter of doing and finishing a PhD, but also a matter of how worthy a PhD with few publications is in the end, considering the opportunity cost and all the effort and time that it is going to need. It may be a "Pyrrhic victory" and that is something very few people warn about (actually I haven't seen anyone).
Your friend deserves an explanation. Please keep us posted.
On the other hand. This is a failure in communication, as @username_1 pointed. We only have one side of the story, your friend's, through a third person (you), so it's hard to know. But the description you make of the advisor is:
* he is arrogant
* he makes things suddenly with no prior notice
* he doesn't provide arguments or explanations
The best thing to do in such a situation (if possible, usually not easy) is to switch to a different supervisor, because that guy may be reputed and good at research, but he does not seem good (from your description) at dealing with people, managing them and advising in general.
But again, remember, it's hard not to be biased when all the information that we have comes from a friend of one of the parts...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I generally agree with username_1 and username_2 advice. The relationship between your friend and his advisor is broken. That is a problem that your friend cannot avoid.
On the other hand, it is not only your friend's problem. It is his advisor's too and since he is the senior party, he is the one that needs to do more than your friend to fix it. I also do not get this "resign" thing. Your friend has a contract with the university, not with the advisor. It has also probably been assigned a committee for your friend's PHD that includes other professors except his advisor. If your friend is incapable for a PHD, again this decision is not entirely up to the advisor. It is the advisor that needs to prove your friend failed to meet the requirements of the project / PHD and your friend should not just "roll over dead" just because the advisor is not happy with him. So resigning is out of the question. If he has already a poster publication, did well in the required courses then I think the advisor will have a hard time proving your friend is incapable.
So, your friend should ask his advisor what he can do better to make things work. He should follow his advice, be extra nice and work extra hard. But there is absolutely no reason for him to resign. If the advisor is right (and as powerful as he believes he is), he can always fire your friend. But he will still have to justify to his fellow professors why he took a promising student such as your friend (otherwise your friend would not be selected for a PHD) and failed to "advice" him. It is your friend advisor's failure as well and both parties should suffer the consequences.
All this advice is based on your "word" that your friend did actually 90-100% the best he could. In any other case, where the advisor repeatedly warned your friend about potential improvements and your friend deliberately ignored him then he should just suck it up, take it like a man / woman and suffer the consequences. But if the advisor failed to effectively advice your friend, then this failure should be fixed by both parties and not simply by your friend resigning.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/07 | 584 | 2,090 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a bit confused about the proper abbreviation of `Doctor of Philosophy`. I sometimes read that this person obtained his D.Phil from X University, while someone else obtained his PhD from Y University. According to [Wikipidia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy#Admission_7):
>
> The University of Oxford also abbreviates their Doctor of Philosophy degree as DPhil but in other respects is equivalent to a PhD.
>
>
>
Is it up to me to decide what abbreviation to use?<issue_comment>username_1: No - it depends on the degree you were awarded.
Most universities offer PhD degrees, with a smaller subset (usually UK [red-brick](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_brick_university) universities & Oxford) that offer DPhils. Some of the 'new' universities of the late 60s-early 70s used to offer DPhils. I was awarded a DPhil at Ulster, but subsequent to this, they switched to awarding PhDs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The awarding institution determines the abbreviation\*; someone made a Doctor of Philosophy at Oxford is a DPhil, someone made a Doctor of Philosophy at Cambridge is a PhD, and someone made a Doctor of Philosophy at a university in Austria is a Dr.phil. (before the name, not after).
\*At the time awarded, as pointed out in another answer.
Addendum: As username_3 points out, the abbreviation is of the Latin *doctor philosophiae*, which is why appears both ways around (Latin is more flexible in its word order than English). Many other degree abbreviations make their Latin origin more obvious (e.g. the MLitt for 'master of letters', *magister litterarum*; the LLB for 'batchelor of laws', *legium baccalaureatus*, with conventional doubling of the 'L' to indicate the plural).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Neither <NAME>. nor Ph. D. are abbreviations for 'Doctor of Philosophy', but for 'Doctor Philosophiae' or 'Philosophiae Doctor' respectively. Sorry to be pedantic, but when this is realised it becomes easier to understand why the Ph. D. abbreviation exists at all.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/07 | 1,182 | 5,218 | <issue_start>username_0: I was unable to find any information online about this. I asked a colleague who told me that there are no restrictions on who may review an article, although he thought it was very unlikely that an un-published person may be asked to review. I would like a general answer to this question; nevertheless, the specific context is in the following paragraph.
I am submitting an engineering research paper in the near future and the submission process *requires* that I suggest at least three reviewers. One of the reviewers I would like to suggest has not yet completed their PhD, although they have three publications that are closely related to mine. I know that it will be up to the editor to decide whether to contact this person, but it made me wonder if there are any specific criteria that reviewers have to meet.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Who can peer-review articles?
>
>
>
**Anyone competent enough to be asked in the first place.**
For conferences (e.g., in engineering or computer science), peer-review is conducted by a Programme Committee. To be invited to be part of a Programme Committee (typically done by Chairs or Senior Programme Committee in larger conferences), you need to have a reasonable track record of research and a solid reputation in the area in question. I have seen PCs of reputable conferences in CS with many senior PhDs (I was in PCs myself as a PhD student).
For journals, you are invited to review by a member of the Editorial Board. They would weigh your experience and track-record accordingly. Again, you may get asked to review journal papers as a PhD student (I was also asked to review various journal papers as a PhD student).
Last but not least, you may be delegated a peer-review by someone who was asked to do a review (where that person was asked by the EB of a journal or as part of a PC for a conference). In that case, however, the responsibility for the quality of the review lies squarely with the delegator. In this case, a junior PhD student might be given a peer-review but with the idea that the delegator will check over it and discuss before submitting. (This is a good way to learn the process of peer-reviewing.)
>
> I was unable to find any information online about this. I asked a colleague who told me that there are no restrictions on who may review an article, although he thought it was very unlikely that an un-published person may be asked to review.
>
>
>
I agree with your colleague. The delegation of peer-review is left to the judgement of the EB/PC/Chairs. They will take into account seniority and research track record in their judgement. Formal restrictions would only serve to rule out qualified reviewers from an often already too narrow field.
>
> I am submitting an engineering research paper in the near future and the submission process requires that I suggest at least three reviewers. One of the reviewers I would like to suggest has not yet completed their PhD, although they have three publications that are closely related to mine. I know that it will be up to the editor to decide whether to contact this person, but it made me wonder if there are any specific criteria that reviewers have to meet.
>
>
>
I suggest submitting the name of the supervisor of the PhD student you think would be a good reviewer. The supervisor offers the editor a more senior name, should be knowledgeable in the area and if not, can solicit the advice of the PhD student in question or delegate the review entirely if appropriate.
---
As per my comment (and as a side note since it is not directly asked about) I find the practice of suggesting reviewers for your own paper a little strange (though I have seen it before on occasion). First there's the obvious possibility of selecting one's friends or of prior deal-making (assuming the suggestions were taken into account ... otherwise why would they ask?). Aside from that, if I'm submitting to a journal in my area, I expect the editorial board to have some members that would be sufficiently knowledgeable about my topic to get the paper in good hands. Having to suggest reviewers calls into question (slightly) the competence of the EB and/or the relevance of the journal. In any case, if the journal is otherwise reputable, this should not hold you back from submitting.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To add one small thing to @username_1's answer, there are two very common ways to get asked to be a reviewer for a journal or conference:
1. know the editor or someone on the program committee
2. submit an article yourself for review
I've gotten more requests to review from my PhD supervisor who edited a journal and from journals and conferences I've submitted to. Journals are particularly prone to this in my experience--I've had review requests come in within a few days of my submission of my own article. Conferences tend to be delayed by a year such that submissions to the prior year's conference can generate invitations to review in the current year. This seems to be especially true if you've had a paper accepted.
So, that being said, eligible reviewers tend to be eligible submitters.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/07 | 462 | 1,767 | <issue_start>username_0: Is there any way/resource for finding the list of universities offering a specific degree?
I want to find which universities have a specific program (both undergraduate and graduate).
My target is the US and UK universities, but other countries are also useful (though, I think it is difficult to search because of different terminologies in different languages for a discipline).<issue_comment>username_1: First you should decide what is your major. For universities in USA you can use websites like [US News](http://www.usnews.com/education) or like [BigFuture](https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-search). You can google for finding university offering specific courses and degrees about UK. I believe for US universities US News is the best website.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The UK graduate schools are officially ranked through [Research Assessment Exercise](http://www.rae.ac.uk/) (being currently phased out to be replaced by [Research Excellence Framework](http://www.ref.ac.uk/)), so you can get a full list of programs that are of any worth [here](http://www.rae.ac.uk/results/selectUOA.aspx).
In the US, rankings are produced from time to time by the National Research Council. [The most recent set](http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/Resdoc/PGA_044749) is from 2009. The methodology and reporting format are beyond weird, but at least the list of programs is useful (albeit difficult to navigate in the Excel file format; I found my area, statistics, under "Physical sciences", for instance, which is a very distant shot). The [1995 rankings](http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/nrc1.html) were done with involvement of real statisticians, so I trust them better.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/07 | 1,417 | 6,170 | <issue_start>username_0: One of the crucial skills of a scientist is to identify research gaps. Unfortunately, students rarely receive much formal training in this skill during their studies. How can one get better at identifying research gaps?
---
Some problems that I have seen which make identifying research gaps difficult:
* The best problems are already identified or solved by other people.
* Authors of publications sometimes avoid being overly critical of their own work, and try to phrase their publication so as to make it seem definitive, and avoid admitting that they failed to explain a phenomenon.
* Some scientists are wary of being scooped, and avoid mentioning what they see as future projects in the discussion section.
* Due to publish or perish culture, there is pressure to split research efforts into minimal chunks - such chunks may seem like they are steps along the way to a solution, but in reality, trying to work on the apparent next step is risky because the author is likely to scoop you.
* High-profile journals such as *Nature*, *Science* or *PNAS* probably prefer papers which answer many questions, rather than presenting many uninvestigated open ends.
* Lesser journals may have publications that have only solved part of a problem, but those may be buried under a sea of uninteresting publications. (also the lesser journals are much more numerous and harder to get abreast of)
* It is easy to confirm that an idea has already been done, but it is difficult to confirm that an idea is truly novel.<issue_comment>username_1: Finding good research "gaps" is indeed a challenging and important task. It has different components that all require slightly different skills.
Above all, a useful research gap is **interesting**, **feasible**, and **unexplored**:
* **interesting**: I think this part goes without saying. But how do you determine 'interestingness' ? This is a complex mix of structural aspects of the field and community opinions, so it varies a lot from area to area. But probably the best way to understand what's interesting is by talking to people, asking them what *they* think is interesting, and **why**, and also understanding how even the basic questions in your field came to be deemed interesting (an advisor/senior researcher can often help with the latter).
* **feasible**: It's not hard to list the "top 10 open questions" in your field. And for some researchers, [that constitutes their entire research program](http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~dahlin/bookshelf/hamming.html). But that's not realistic for most people, and especially for students. Feasibility is about determining whether the tools exist to even make a dent on the problem. This requires a lot of experience in using different methods and understanding what they can and cannot do for you. It also involves thinking somewhat "sideways" about tools and problems, because it's likely that the obvious approach to an interesting problem has been tried. You will have to read papers very closely to find little gaps, or missing reasoning steps, that might suggest that a technique could get used. And you have to learn how to "fail quickly" when trying a new idea.
* **unexplored**: While it might be educational to work on a new direction that has been explored before, you don't want that to be the fate of all your research explorations ! Here again, being plugged into your community and understanding what people have tried (or not) is also helpful. There are often "folklore" statements of the form "Oh this doesn't work because...". Sometimes it's true. and sometimes it's not. But it's best to understand what people have seen and what they're trying. Related to this is the idea of **knowing your strengths**: you'll accumulate a set of tools over time that you're an expert at. Make sure that you can use them: that gives you a competitive advantage.
We get a lot of questions here about whether anyone can do research (even if they're not in a formal academic environment). The answer of course is yes. But where amateurs (in the sense of people not being paid to do research) can often slip up is in identifying gaps that are feasible and unexplored (finding interesting gaps is usually not that difficult to do on your own) because they're not plugged into a larger commmunity.
**Update**: In response to the edit, [here's an interview with <NAME>](http://intelligence.org/2014/02/21/john-baez-on-research-tactics/) that directly addresses the first point (of all the good problems being taken). <NAME>'s other suggestions are very good as well, and form a nice 'counter' to the Hamming article linked above.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The only way I know is to read, read, and then read some more. The more you know and truly understand about your field and other fields, the better you'll be at identifying gaps. There is no shortcut to this. It takes a lot of hard work and experience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Gaps could be a hindrance when creating a change in practice because there is no research to support the change or the use of an intervention. A thorough review of literature should be performed to identify validity and reliability before considering implementing a change in practice. A critical part of reviewing literature is identifying gaps, and when they are found an outline should show those areas of research that is incomplete. Sometimes gaps are a help if further research information can be found on the topic. So, there is a potential for further study or independent research. Also, a researcher can produce their own interpretation and suggest how future studies may carry on or what actions could be taken to fill those gaps to improve the topic outlook.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: I find that when lots of the other authors working on my topic area note what "future research" should address, it's a good indicator that there's some headway there. It's not a very good answer, but I am finding that the more I read and the better acquainted I get with the field and trends, the better I develop a sense of where there are "gaps".
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/07 | 1,498 | 5,915 | <issue_start>username_0: Assuming I'm writing a review article and I'd like to use figures
after [1]" or similar? How am I expected to deal with copyright? Obviously a review article is going to use existing figures, more or less--that's the point. It seems from sites like IEEE that the expected practice is to pay, per figure, for each graphic used. Is that really how things work? Or is there some "fair use" clause that can be invoked?<issue_comment>username_1: The rules vary widely by publisher here. It also depends on whose work you're "copying." If it's your own graphic, then there's usually no issue associated with it. However, if it belongs to someone else, then you should either request the permission from the rights holder, or redraw the figure yourself (if it's a schematic, then this would eliminate copyright issues).
Similarly, a journal or publisher may allow you to reuse people's work from within the same publisher's journals without fee. But again, this is something the individual publishers determine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Or is there some "fair use" clause that can be invoked?
>
>
>
Fair use exists in some jurisdictions (e.g., the US) but not others (e.g., the UK). The rules for fair use are somewhat vague, and most publishers would prefer not to rely on it. Talk to the journal that you're writing the article for, and ask them how they like to handle this kind of thing.
If there is a practice in some fields of paying royalties for this kind of thing, then I'm not aware of it. Authors want their work cited in review papers.
If the figures you want to use are from an open-access journal, then you should read the license of that journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Usually you have to obtain a permission (there are exceptions, for example if you "redraw"¹ content). Your publisher may request permissions for you! Here is a how to for the most common way, if you have to do it on your own:
* Search for the title of the paper containing the figure you would like to reuse on Google (*for example: An RNA-Sequencing Transcriptome and Splicing Database of Glia, Neurons, and Vascular Cells of the Cerebral Cortex*)
* Identify the website of the journal and click on it (sometimes the first result refers you to a reference aggregation site, researchgate or personal webpage) (*in my example this would be <http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/36/11929>* )
* Look for a button or link saying "Rights and permissions", "Request Permissions" or similar. Every journal has it at a different spot and sometimes it is hidden behind some floating "Info box" (Tip: Search for the words *right* or *permission* in your browser) (*see screenshot for the location in my example*)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tO2vo.png)
* Following this link you are usually taken to the Copyright Clearance Center on copyright.com which can automatically proceed most of your requests
* Follow the steps indicated at the Copyright Clearance Center, indicating how you want to use the content (in your case this would be "Republish in a journal/magazine) (*in my example I have to identify the correct publication first, then enter the year of publication, and afterwards choose how I want to use it*)
* You will eventually get to a page where you have to select which rights you would like to procure (e.g. publishing worldwide, doing translations, modifying the figure and son on). Important here is also do select your role in this process too (on whose behalf are you requesting copyright) (*see screenshot for the categories to be filled in in my example*)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/J0uka.png)
* Afterwards a price should be quoted for you, which may be 0 if you are allowed to reuse without paying.
* Accept the conditions and terms on that page
* Print a .pdf copy of the confirmation for your documents. Usually they'll also send you an email. You will likely be asked by your new publisher to send them this permission statement.
* Make sure to acknowledge the publisher in the figure caption. Example: Figure 1: description of figure. From Crowell et al. 2014 (reference), with permission from StackExchange (publisher).
If you cannot find a Rights or Permission link on the webpage of the article try the following:
* Identify the publisher of the journal in question
* Search on Google for the name of the publisher together with "Reusing figures", "Permission and Rights" or "Permission request" or similar. Major publishers usually have instructions on how to do this somewhere on their web page.
If you cannot find that information either or if you have a specific question write to the publisher's permission department (most of the times you can find that email address on their website). From experience I can say that they are slow to answer and that they usually send you a generic "please do it the usual way" email first. Just write them again in that case. Consider that this takes time (they give 30 business days (~ 1.5 month) as expected answer time), so don't do it last minute.
As [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53/username_1) mentioned there are good chances that you can reuse your own, previously published content and content published in the same publication you plan to publish your paper in, without to much hassle (write to the publisher's permissions department).
¹meaning: substantially change so that it can be considered a new work, see also [Figure reproduction, adaptation and redrawing by Wiley.com](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/(ISSN)1521-4117/asset/homepages/2056-Copyright-permissions-for-Author-Guidelines.pdf;jsessionid=F465557C301501B450DB6F833C822173.f01t02?v=1&s=93f7916a0334309fb4837076b0a591dd51698fef&isAguDoi=false)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/07 | 1,507 | 5,977 | <issue_start>username_0: In the US and UK higher education system, who is responsible for a program curriculum?
For example, if planning to modify the curriculum by adding an uncommon course, who should approve this modification?
Consider that the change is truly uncommon. Can the department head decide about it? or needs the approval of higher officials (such as dean or VP for Academics) or there are boards and committees to decide uncommon changes (for the sake of education quality assurance).<issue_comment>username_1: The rules vary widely by publisher here. It also depends on whose work you're "copying." If it's your own graphic, then there's usually no issue associated with it. However, if it belongs to someone else, then you should either request the permission from the rights holder, or redraw the figure yourself (if it's a schematic, then this would eliminate copyright issues).
Similarly, a journal or publisher may allow you to reuse people's work from within the same publisher's journals without fee. But again, this is something the individual publishers determine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Or is there some "fair use" clause that can be invoked?
>
>
>
Fair use exists in some jurisdictions (e.g., the US) but not others (e.g., the UK). The rules for fair use are somewhat vague, and most publishers would prefer not to rely on it. Talk to the journal that you're writing the article for, and ask them how they like to handle this kind of thing.
If there is a practice in some fields of paying royalties for this kind of thing, then I'm not aware of it. Authors want their work cited in review papers.
If the figures you want to use are from an open-access journal, then you should read the license of that journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Usually you have to obtain a permission (there are exceptions, for example if you "redraw"¹ content). Your publisher may request permissions for you! Here is a how to for the most common way, if you have to do it on your own:
* Search for the title of the paper containing the figure you would like to reuse on Google (*for example: An RNA-Sequencing Transcriptome and Splicing Database of Glia, Neurons, and Vascular Cells of the Cerebral Cortex*)
* Identify the website of the journal and click on it (sometimes the first result refers you to a reference aggregation site, researchgate or personal webpage) (*in my example this would be <http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/36/11929>* )
* Look for a button or link saying "Rights and permissions", "Request Permissions" or similar. Every journal has it at a different spot and sometimes it is hidden behind some floating "Info box" (Tip: Search for the words *right* or *permission* in your browser) (*see screenshot for the location in my example*)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/tO2vo.png)
* Following this link you are usually taken to the Copyright Clearance Center on copyright.com which can automatically proceed most of your requests
* Follow the steps indicated at the Copyright Clearance Center, indicating how you want to use the content (in your case this would be "Republish in a journal/magazine) (*in my example I have to identify the correct publication first, then enter the year of publication, and afterwards choose how I want to use it*)
* You will eventually get to a page where you have to select which rights you would like to procure (e.g. publishing worldwide, doing translations, modifying the figure and son on). Important here is also do select your role in this process too (on whose behalf are you requesting copyright) (*see screenshot for the categories to be filled in in my example*)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/J0uka.png)
* Afterwards a price should be quoted for you, which may be 0 if you are allowed to reuse without paying.
* Accept the conditions and terms on that page
* Print a .pdf copy of the confirmation for your documents. Usually they'll also send you an email. You will likely be asked by your new publisher to send them this permission statement.
* Make sure to acknowledge the publisher in the figure caption. Example: Figure 1: description of figure. From Crowell et al. 2014 (reference), with permission from StackExchange (publisher).
If you cannot find a Rights or Permission link on the webpage of the article try the following:
* Identify the publisher of the journal in question
* Search on Google for the name of the publisher together with "Reusing figures", "Permission and Rights" or "Permission request" or similar. Major publishers usually have instructions on how to do this somewhere on their web page.
If you cannot find that information either or if you have a specific question write to the publisher's permission department (most of the times you can find that email address on their website). From experience I can say that they are slow to answer and that they usually send you a generic "please do it the usual way" email first. Just write them again in that case. Consider that this takes time (they give 30 business days (~ 1.5 month) as expected answer time), so don't do it last minute.
As [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53/username_1) mentioned there are good chances that you can reuse your own, previously published content and content published in the same publication you plan to publish your paper in, without to much hassle (write to the publisher's permissions department).
¹meaning: substantially change so that it can be considered a new work, see also [Figure reproduction, adaptation and redrawing by Wiley.com](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/(ISSN)1521-4117/asset/homepages/2056-Copyright-permissions-for-Author-Guidelines.pdf;jsessionid=F465557C301501B450DB6F833C822173.f01t02?v=1&s=93f7916a0334309fb4837076b0a591dd51698fef&isAguDoi=false)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/07 | 302 | 1,268 | <issue_start>username_0: As an organization, a university has various types of regulations (academics, disciplinary, etc), which are separately documented.
Do (at least) large universities prepare a comprehensive book containing the code of laws of the university in different sections. I mean a reference book addressing all regulations of the university.
For example, when there is an official conflict between two parties, using that reference to justify their actions, instead of dealing with section documents.
If yes, could you please reference them for review.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. It will be called a "Policy and Procedures Handbook" or something like that at most universities in the US. The reason to have such a handbook is to ensure that employees follow proper protocols about a range of different issues. This protects both the employees and the universities legally.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Some don't, or rather - some have these in multiple documents, with some of the documents not easily accessible to students or junior / adjucnt faculty. That's what it was like in my Alma Mater anyway - and it's a 90 year old university with ~10k undergrads, 2.5k M.Sc. candidates and 700 Ph.D. candidates.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/07 | 1,534 | 6,354 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, I have being planning to design an automatic pornographic movie detector with the machine learning knowledge that I just acquired.
I am now in the stage of planning how to perform the system evaluation. The intuition is to just test the algorithms with some pornographic movies and some non-pornographic movies and compute the false negative/positive rates. I simply feel that for any evaluation method, I would have to obtain real pornographic movies to test the system!
Here comes the dilemma. As you know (or may not know!), basically all the pornographic movies are not free. I do *not* regard it as ethical to just download illegal pirated movies, as after all they are for a scientific research, which values copyright a lot. On the other hand, it is a bit awkward for me to request funding from my PI to buy the porn videos! Paying them myself is definitely not a feasible solution, either.
How may I handle this case properly?<issue_comment>username_1: I really don't get this. This is a little like the [Movies Classification Board](http://www.classification.gov.au/Pages/Home.aspx) or the [Classification & Ratings Administration](http://www.filmratings.com/) feeling awkward about asking to view the movies they are going to rate.
If you are developing an algorithm for detecting pornography, why would it be awkward to request funding to acquire test resources? This is an entirely **legitimate application, that has huge potential, both economically and socially** (note: use of bold inspired by OP). There are many researchers all over the world working in similar fields. Clearly, at some point you will need to discuss your work with your PI, and presumably, they are already aware of the work you have been doing in the previous 6/9/18 months, and perhaps already requires justification against existing research funding.
Whatever the case, your work will need to be approved by, and comply rigidly with, your institution's ethics committee.
There are also a number of steps you could consider before committing to viewing full-length extreme hardcore films. In making some suggestions, I'm going to make a few assumptions:
1. 1 Your definition of a pornographic movie is one classified as
"mainly concerned with sex", and involves extreme nudity and acts of
sexual behaviour.
2. Your algorithm looks at exposed and interacting body content in some way, and does not work on quality of script and acting (otherwise daytime soapies will bring up many false positives)
3. Your algorithm looks at small fragments of movie clips, and not the entire 60/70/90 minutes worth, or however username_1 these movies go for.
4. Your PI knows what you've been spending your previous doing, which is most likely already associated with existing research funding.
So, some suggestions
* Acquire a number of movie trailers; these are usually freely available for all types of movies, and typically run for about a minute. Contact the various movie studios directly if you need to.
* Speak to your national Film and Television archive body. They are likely to have a number of suitable media to preliminary early test procedures on. [Various](http://www.nfsa.gov.au/) [bodies](http://www.cinema.ucla.edu/) [exist](http://www.bfi.org.uk/).
* Speak to other researchers in this field. There might be a good standard set of images/movies that can be used to determine baseline effectiveness.
* Go to your local friendly adult shop and check out the "specials" bin.
* Finally, and not the best approach to take, look at the internet. I'm guessing if you typed in the right combination of words, you'd get unlimited supply of short, copyright-free videos, to use both as a test group and control group. But I stress, this needs to be done in strict accordance with your institutions policies for network and computing use, and therefore should be approved by your PI and ethics committee.
However, whatever approach you take, the summary is: **talk to your PI**.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If your supervisor knows that she is funding *you* to do research about pornography, I don't think she should be particularly shocked by the the request. If your supervisor does not know, *that* will be the more awkward conversation and it sounds like its time to have it.
Additionally, good options might be:
* Look for freely licensed pornography. Creative Commons [provides a way to search for freely licensed material](http://search.creativecommons.org/) including a way to do Google searches for permissively licensed video.
* Try to rely on a [fair use](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use) justification and go ahead and use copyrighted works you can find for free online (e.g., from free porn video websites).
* You could ask commercial pornography distributors to donate material for science.
Of course, there are risks with going with the fair use argument and it's always best to get your institution's general counsel's opinion first.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> As you know (or may not know!), basically all the pornographic movies are not free.
>
>
>
I find this not quite realistic: A fair chunk of the total internet bandwidth goes to porn. There are a lot of "free" websites. And a lot of "studios" offer samples which would suit your research, in my opinion.
You don't need a two-hour porn movie to test your algorithms.
Furthermore, what is the state of the art in this field? Is anybody else working in that domain? What are they doing, i.e. how are they getting films to test?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I believe you're facing a no-problem kind of problem.
Many of the largest porn streaming sites do actually pay content creators so they allow them to serve the videos for free. What you describe is a [fair use](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use) case, so, in theory, you shouldn't face any issues. Most studio-provided content on these sites are actually legally served for free.
When using one of those sites, make sure you search the studio pages rather than the whole site. Searching the whole site can indeed return pirated results.
(I'm posting as a community wiki because I think this is neither an academic answer nor an Academia.SE-worthy answer. It's better as a comment, but it doesn't fit as a comment)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/07 | 1,150 | 4,805 | <issue_start>username_0: When a department head needs a faculty member, how is the process of hiring one started and conducted (at least in US and UK universities)?
Of particular interest is the following;
1. Finance: Department head should ask the Dean for financing the salary? Who is the final decision maker?
2. Selection: Is the department head responsible for forming the search committee? and is he responsible for approving the qualifications? Can higher officials (e.g. Dean) interfere in the selection?
3. After the selection, how are the official matters handled? Who signs the contract? and who can terminate it (if not tenured)?
4. What is the role of human resources in this process?<issue_comment>username_1: ***(US-specific; public university)***
You'll find a huge variation in procedures across universities. There really isn't one standard method. Having said that, I can at least suggest what happens in (one) American public universities (private universities have different financing structure)
* **Financing**: In our universities, "slots" are line items that are approved by the legislature and are created ultimately by approval of the president of the university in conjunction with the dean of the college. There's a lot of negotiating that goes on to acquire one of these slots, and it's typically based on some "soft" arguments: "look how much research money we're generating, and how many students we're bringing in" and hard arguments: "We can only get this gigantic grant if you promise to give us a faculty slot" and so on.
* **Selection**: departments are usually quite protective of the search process, and control most aspects of it. Again, the degree of shielding depends on politics: it's not unheard of for deans to get actively involved, especially if the department is weak. Within the department, the chair might take charge of selection, or assign a committee to do it, and so on.
* **Official stuff**: a contract is ultimately signed by the university, and all official paperwork must go through them. Negotiations also happen with the dean via the chair.
* **HR**: They're usually involved initially, to make sure job ads are posted correctly, and in compliance with university, state and federal employment laws. They're also involved after the offer is made, especially if there are legal requirements, international issues and so on.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: EDIT: Added dates to give a sense of the timeline.
Here's how the process works at my university (US).
1. The department votes (March or April 2014) to request a new hire or not. Usually at this point they will also specify--is this a hire in some particular field, or do we just want to try to get the best person in the field, regardless of speciality. This request is passed to the provost and dean.
2. If the request is approved (May or June), the department forms a search committee which writes and circulates the job ad (Sept or Oct).
3. Once all the applications for the job are in (Nov), the search committee reads the applications and selects between 15-25 people to interview at our big disciplinary meeting (January 2015). This is a first round interview that will usually discuss scholarship and maybe a little bit about teaching.
4. Of that field of 15-25, the committee will select three finalists to bring to a second, on campus interview. (February) The on campus interview is much more strenuous, usually lasting a day or two. At our institution it always includes a public job talk, which presents some facet of the candidates current research before the full faculty and graduate students. Some places it also includes a teaching demo. Invariably there is also a dinner after the talk at which the candidate still needs to be pleasant, conversational, and collegial.
5. After all the on-campus interviews have been conducted, the department meets and discusses who they want to pick. (Late Feb, Early March) Usually this involves a vote. At some places the faculty's vote is binding, at some places the faculty vote is simply advisory and the committee makes the official recommendation. But, at every school I've heard of it is the Dean or Provost who actually makes the final decision.
6. So, let's say the department has recommended candidate X to the Dean and the dean has no objection. Now the dean will call candidate X and offer him or her the job.
7. Usually some rounds of negotiation will follow. If the candidate has other offers, then usually the dean will have to improve the offer. Once a verbal agreement is made, the dean sends a contract to the candidate to sign and return.
8. Once the dean signs the returned contract, then, presto the candidate is officially a tenure track faculty member. (April or May 2015)
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/04/08 | 2,516 | 10,596 | <issue_start>username_0: **The situation**
I'm a PhD student and serve as an assistant to several courses. Now, the students were complaining that some rules of our course are not good for them - there are some restriction what has to be achieved in order to participate in the final exam, e.g.
1. they need a certain amount of credits in their homework,
2. everybody who has failed that course in the years before, have the get the credits for their homework again.
You have freedom in chosing the threshold, but the rules are written in the examination regulations (I'm also a member of the that examination committee) that is not the problem.
There are some professors in my department who don't follow that rules; or (even) worse come up with some funny new rules contradicting the rules (like (you don't have to read this to answer the question) *If you have 50% of the credits until the third to last week of the semester, you are able to participate in the final exam. If you pass, you pass. If you fail, you are only allowed to participate in the repetition of the final exam if you have 50% of your credits in the last week of the semester*).
**The problem**
Apart from them violating the rules, the problem is now that students come to my course and say: "Hey, professor XX did not have the rules last year. Why do you have them? That is so unfair! And you can have it, too! Because, nobody complained last year! Cmon, we will not tell anyone!".
As soon as I hear something like that, I complain. The problem is then: No student would tell someone things like that (exept in the mentioned case when they try to convince me to do it that way, too); the professors are sometimes not informed, but also sometimes aware of that und don't write anything on their course homepage. So nobody can find out. If you find out (probably at the end of the semester), it is too late and if you want to declare that course as not following the rules, you are only damaging the students of that course.
I was talking to the responsible persons in my department; they see the problem, but they don't want to have fights within the department and they don't to establish automatic announcements from the professors what the rules for their course are.
**The question**
What can I do against it? The atmosphere in my course was very bad because of that. I could go to the head of the faculty or the university who will end all that, but then I fair to be an abandoned person in my department. Also, I want not to damage students and declare their passed exams as illegal.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a standard problem in places where a mentality of *unwritten rules* has become standard (you know, the places that have "rules" and actual rules). If this becomes ingrained in the university culture (both in the student body and the faculty), nobody can really tell anymore what is a an actual rule and what isn't (and, really, the answer will be different for each teacher). For this reason I prefer a relatively strict *no exceptions* policy in my courses. I understand the downsides of this model (see for instance also here: [How do I appropriately penalize late projects?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3664/how-do-i-appropriately-penalize-late-projects)), but at least everybody knows where he stands in such a model.
I understand that you are not in a position to change university culture, so you need to play the hand you are dealt. I see two main ways to go forward:
* Become more lenient yourself. If a number of senior professors deems it fit to not enforce the official rules or implement weaker rules, then maybe the official rules are in fact perceived too strict. In that case, maybe the answer is just to run with the herd and allow for more exceptions etc. yourself. Of course the preferred solution in that case would be to change to official rules, but it is well conceivable that this is not feasible for one reason or another.
* Announce **very, very clearly** at the beginning of the semester that in your case the rules will be the rules, no matter how things were in previous years or with other teachers. Follow through on your claim, and build up a reputation as being a *strict guy*. Note that being strict is not the same as being an unpopular / bad teacher. I have continuously followed this strategy in my teaching, and still receive good to excellent teaching evaluations.
Of course, if you follow the second strategy, some complaining, accusing and guilt-tripping will happen. It is your task as a teacher to be able to distinguish between warranted complains (and react to them) and more manipulative ones (that are to be ignored). These examples you give quite clearly fall into the second category. What you need to do is find a number of polite standard answers to these statements, and then forget them. Examples:
>
> Hey, professor XX did not have the rules last year. Why do you have them? That is so unfair!
>
>
>
Answer: sorry, but it is impossible to change anything in a course if I am forced to always do things exactly like the were done in previous years. I am trying to be more strict this year because I have seen that unclear rules are also not beneficial for many students, as nobody really knows anymore what the actual rules are.
>
> Cmon, we will not tell anyone!
>
>
>
Answer: while I appreciate that, I am afraid that I do not *want* to make an exception here. Making an exception for you is unfair towards the other students that did not get this exception.
Some other minor comments:
>
> I could go to the head of the faculty or the university who will end all that
>
>
>
I am unsure if that is even true. In all places that I have been to, it would be *very* unlikely that a head of faculty micro-manages how professors do their teaching.
>
> Also, I want not to damage students and declare their passed exams as illegal.
>
>
>
This is understandable and correct. If you truely think that students were under the impression that a certain rule or exception would apply to them, I would let them pass as part of a transition period. If you think that they were aware that they should actually fail, but simply try to come up with a reason why this is not the case, then be strict and let them fail. Note that this is the reason why announcing your strict rules enforcement as clearly as possible is key. In your situation, being strict is only fair if you give your students advance warning, as the seem to be trained by your university that, by and large, teachers are lenient.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I was about to recommend talking to the responsible person in your department, and then saw you did that. They handled the situation atrociously; as a PhD student, this sort of department conflict shouldn't be put on your shoulders. You don't have the freedom to deviate from policy as easily as a professor (for instance, you're more vulnerable if the school suddenly gets serious about it).
It's not clear to me if you've asked this, but a good question to ask the responsible person is a flat out: "What should I do?" It's not your responsibility to fix the department's mess. It's that person's job to give you an unequivocal answer about what you should do, and then back you up on it: either tell you to follow the rules, and that any student complaints should be directed their way, or tell you to break the rules and agree to cover you if there's fallout.
If I couldn't get a clear "go ahead and break the rules, if anyone's upset you can say I told you to" then I would go ahead and follow the rules, tell students you simply have no power over the issue, and that the person in charge is the responsible department official. If they don't want to deal with fixing the problem, it's certainly their job to field complaints about the result. That's very much my response, though, which includes a preference for following rules and insufficient regard for whether I'm annoying people who aren't following the rules. It may not actually be the best advice for your career.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: "they don't want to have fights within the department" -- there's your answer. The department would prefer to have inconsistency between different courses/years, than enforce consistency.
Don't put it that way to the students, but acknowledge the truth to yourself, which is that there are better things for course assistants to do with their time, than worry about what other professors than "yours" do when they run this or other courses.
Maybe it isn't fair, but it's not exactly the assistant's job to make it fair or to decide whether a particular department or professor is applying the rules properly. You can (and have) raised the issue and got a decision. Since you know that there's a problem with students not knowing the rules, you can choose to make them clear to the students you see regardless of whether professors are required to announce them.
Make sure that when you're assisting one of the "bad" professors, you are clear what rules you should be passing on to the students in that class -- the exam regulations or whatever this professor has invented.
Now, *as well as* being an assistant, you're on the examinations committee. Oh ho ho ho. Well I never. Wellity well. With your other hat on, the shoe is on the other foot. That's where you make your case that a rogue department and/or rogue professors are disrespecting the exam regulations. As a committee you can consider whether the breaches are so serious as to overrule the department's desire not to have fights, and fight them :-)
The committee is also best placed to make a plausible recommendation how its rules should be enforced by policy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> The atmosphere in my course was very bad because of that.
>
>
>
The question is: should you really care about this?
Of course it is nothing nice to deal with, but I think there's something really wrong with your students if they constantly produced bad atmosphere just because you enforced the university rules. They will face uneven or even clearly unfair conditions during the course of their entire live, so at some stage they must accept this. They should recognise your authority in establishing the rules. You won't teach them this if you will finally relax the rules or influence other courses.
I don't say you shouldn't care about the student feelings, but I think it's more important to teach them respect and some kind of immunity.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/08 | 436 | 2,040 | <issue_start>username_0: On some project grant applications, one gets a question on something along the lines of: "If you are unsuccessful in your application for this funding round, how do you plan on funding this project?"
How should I answer this? Seems like some kind of catch-out question.<issue_comment>username_1: Some organizations require applicants to list alternate sources of potential funding in order to determine whether the applicant has sufficiently explored funding options and is expending effort to obtain funding. If other options are less likely to be funded (due to poorer fit) or are unavailable, you can highlight that to emphasize the importance of applying for this particular grant.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say there are two aspects in this question:
* **Do you have a personal contingency plan?** A funder might like to see that you have thought about the possible problems that can arise in your project, including not getting it funded. Showing that you have explored different options shows that you take into account the global context of this project, which is a mindset very useful to be successful in leading a project.
* **How specific is your proposal to the call?** In general, a proposal might not be eligible as is to many funding agencies. For instance, your initial proposal could include only partners from the UK, which makes it ineligible for most EU calls. Answering that you believe the proposed consortium is the best possible one for that particular project, and as such, is not eligible for other agencies, shows that, again, you've thought about the global context of your project.
So the actual answer might depend on your project, whether it is tailored for that specific call or not , whether there are other places it can be eligible or not, whether you would include feedback or not, etc. Answering properly this question demonstrates that you have a vision for your project in a global context, rather than simply answering to the current call.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/08 | 1,045 | 4,180 | <issue_start>username_0: I plan to move to the US, and thus, looking for a less-competitive faculty position to start there. Later, I can find better jobs, but at this stage, I just need to find a position.
For an outsider, all the job ads are similar. How can I find which job is less-competitive.
As an example, is it really less-competitive to apply for a faculty position in Alaska or less-interesting states (due to geographical reasons, I do not know which).
**NOTE:** This is the additional question separated from my previous [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19078/competition-for-faculty-positions-in-the-us-is-on-the-university-or-city), as advised by a moderator.<issue_comment>username_1: Well as you mentioned, depending on the geographical location, reputation of the university, strong graduate (PhD and masters), and the size of the institutions you can make a good guess about the competitiveness of getting hired.
As for your reasons, I've heard from many scholars that it's better to wait longer and get a proper position than starting in a teaching-only university and burning yourself.
Any thoughts ?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Although (see my comments), I cannot recommend this sort of career path, here are two ways for an outsider to determine which positions will be less competitive:
1. Teaching load and pay. If the pay is poor, and the teaching load is high (say, 4/4 or higher), then the position will be less competitive.
2. Look up the average SAT scores ([easy to find via Google](https://www.google.com/search?q=US%20colleges%20average%20SAT%20scores&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t)) of American schools to which you are applying. This is a reasonable (although not perfect) guide for the quality of the undergraduates that these schools enroll. Schools with lower averages will have less competition for faculty positions.
That said, *all* faculty jobs are highly competitive.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The U.S. academic job market (at least in my field, mathematics) is very competitive, regardless of the institution and its perceived quality. Now, competition comes in various flavors. We have a lot of people looking for few jobs. That automatically creates competition. You need something to make yourself stand out from the other candidates.
My school is less-competitive as far as admission of students is concerned. Our student body is not that strong overall, although we get a fair number of really bright kids. We also have a 4/4 teaching load, and faculty salaries are relatively low. Our last job search was conducted almost ten years ago and we received in the neighborhood of 200 applications. At more research oriented schools, you may be competing with more applicants, and applicants who have very strong resumes relative to research. So, you're likely to be competing against a larger and more talented pool. This makes the situation even more competitive.
I thought that I was going to follow your intended career path, start out small, be able to spend some quality time with the family, and produce some great work that would allow me to move up to a better school. Didn't happen. I've been able to do some research, but not nearly enough, or of high enough quality, to allow me to move up. There are a couple of factors to keep in mind working in a less competitive environment, especially with a high teaching load. Your research time will be limited, and you won't have a lot of resources at your disposal (great library, colleagues who are fluent in your area, etc.). So, think carefully about what you want to do. Mine has not been a bad career, but it is not what I imagined starting out. As a general rule, it's easier to move down than up. So, I'd apply to the best places for which you're qualified and hope for the best.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Note that second- and third-tier are often much less willing to sponsor H1B visas compared to R1s. This is not only because they have less money and less expertise with this, but some simply don't see the investment as worthwhile.
This puts a considerable hurdle in your path.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/08 | 7,460 | 30,374 | <issue_start>username_0: For example, suppose you're writing an article about triangles, and you want to include a short proof of Pythagoras' theorem, but you can't quite remember how to derive it, so you pop over to: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#Algebraic_proofs> and check the proof there. It works mathematically, makes sense and is as far as you can tell, correct, so you include it. Now the proof on Wikipedia doesn't have a citation because probably someone has been taught it and copied it over to Wikipedia, but it's still correct. The only thing you could cite for the proof would be Wikipedia, would a citation be ok or should it just be copied down without a citation?
Edit: Ok, there have been many responses. Most with a firm "no", but some giving the reason: "Just get the proof from a book" since it's so common, but suppose then it wasn't a common proof of something. Maybe it's not very well known or something but suppose there is a small Wikipedia page with the correct mathematical proof. How much effort are people going to go to to find a proof in a book when there's a (correct (which we know, becuase it's maths and we can check it)) proof on Wikipedia? Why is it so bad to say: "I found this proof on Wikipedia, and the maths checks out so it doesn't matter who wrote it, it is correct, but that's where I found it." Or if you do find it somewhere else why not say: "Proof taken from Wikipedia and verified by the proof shown in "Triangles and their properties, Nature, 2014, p113 etc..."<issue_comment>username_1: You should *never* use something that isn't your own without a citation. "Copied down without a citation" is not an option.
However, you should also not cite Wikipedia as an authoritative source; you should track down a source that *is* authoritative and use that.
### Why *not* use Wikipedia as a source?
One reason for not using Wikipedia as an authoritative source is that it is simply not reliable enough in many cases. Wikipedia's founder, <NAME>, himself [says](http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation/2305)
>
> that he gets about 10 e-mail messages a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has gotten them into academic hot water. "They say, 'Please help me. I got an F on my paper because I cited Wikipedia'" and the information turned out to be wrong, he says. But he said he has no sympathy for their plight, noting that he thinks to himself: "For God sake, you’re in college; don’t cite the encyclopedia."
>
>
>
Even if you *can* verify that the Wikipedia article is correct, you should not use it as an authoritative source. You asked:
>
> Why is it so bad to say: "I found this proof on Wikipedia, and the maths checks out so it doesn't matter who wrote it, it is correct, but that's where I found it."
>
>
>
Citing Wikipedia as a source for an idea that isn't original to Wikipedia **does not give credit to the original author of the idea**, which is a major reason for citing something in the first place. (The same applies to any [tertiary source](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_source).)
The Wikipedia entry on [Citing Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia#Citing_Wikipedia) itself advises:
>
> It will usually be more acceptable to cite those original sources rather than Wikipedia since it is, by nature, a secondary or tertiary source. At the same time, simple academic ethics require that you should actually read the work that you cite: if you do not actually have your hands on a book, you should not misleadingly cite it as your source.
>
>
>
### When *should* you cite Wikipedia?
It *is* appropriate to cite Wikipedia if you are commenting *on* Wikipedia. For example: "The Wikipedia page on X shows that it is a controversial topic, with a large number of rollbacks indicating disagreement on the correct approach."
Similarly, Wikipedia can sometimes be a primary source on popular culture. In this case, you should use it and cite it accordingly. **Update**: I gave an example of this in [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19154/should-i-treat-specialized-wikis-with-the-same-scrutiny-as-wikipedia-itself/19172#19172).
If you use Wikipedia as a source for finding other sources, then the question, [Is there a problem with citing the original source instead of the source where the information was first found?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18143/is-there-a-problem-with-citing-the-original-source-instead-of-the-source-where-t) applies.
### Further reading
* [Appropriate use of Wikipedia](http://oldsite.english.ucsb.edu/faculty/ayliu/courses/wikipedia-policy.html) (highly recommend reading this one)
* [Should I use or cite Wikipedia? Probably not.](http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php)
* [Why you can't cite Wikipedia in my class](http://www.citeulike.org/user/dartar/article/1688924)
* [A Stand Against Wikipedia](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you got your information from Wiki, or used the Wiki article to find a more authoritative source, it would be honest and proper to cite it. Cite what you use, at the very least! Acknowledge your sources.
I know this is not universally approved, and, as in one comment, many people will react negatively if Wiki appears in the references... and this could have in impact on a referee's reaction to your paper, yes.
And, yes, Wiki's context for technical matters is a roller coaster... Best to see what Wiki says, maybe use Wiki as a pointer to key-words, to external/traditional sources. Then, if you are being honest, cite Wiki *and* the/an-other more conventional/traditional/orthodox (authoritative?) source.
In mathematics, sometimes Wiki comes up with connections or sources or people I'd not been aware of previously, as well as often mentioning historical sources that many standard sources do not. Also, it is ... available!
If you find yourself in the (unfortunate) situation of needing to conform to a retro standard of "what's legal" to cite, not only can you not cite Wiki, but probably shouldn't give URLs in your bibliography, either? Can't cite arXiv, either? Can't cite anything that was not refereed and "published" (in a now-archaic sense) in one of the known journals? Probably...
But, looking forward, it is happier to be in a situation where you can be honest about sources! Obviously!
EDIT: It seems that people react variously to two aspects (at least) of Wiki, namely, issues about authoritativeness, and issues about primariness of sources, which segues into giving credit where credit is due.
The bad scenario is, as in @username_1's quote from <NAME>, that someone uses Wiki *uncritically*, and gets burned because something's wrong. This potential is arguably greater in Wiki than in other sources, but it's only a matter of *degree*. Everything needs corroboration, if it really matters.
Similarly, pretending that Wiki is somehow a primary source probably is never correct, just as no old-timey paper encyclopedia was every primary. But I recall, quite honestly, being exposed to ideas accidentally in encyclopedias that I would not have known to look for at all otherwise, ... and a good encyclopedia, and the better articles in Wiki, *do* give external pointers of various sorts.
For that matter, how many mathematics textbooks manage to come anywhere *close* to citing primary sources? :) It's not easy, I agree! Not a good argument for not trying. I was amazed to observe, some years ago, that <NAME>' "Complex Analsis" has no bibliography whatsoever, although there're many named-after theorems.
The near-universal accessibility of Wiki means that many, many people will turn to it first, rightly or wrongly. Again, I use it often to get clues about aspects of mathematics distant from my prior experience, although I certainly do seek corroboration! To pretend that Wiki wasn't used when it *was* used is a bit dishonest, as well as not giving credit to its utility, if not to its primariness as source.
There can be different reasons for acknowledgements, I think.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: For the title question, it is almost always **No!**
Although you may be able to find a venue in which you could 'get away' with citing Wikipedia for something like that, it is almost never a good idea. If I see Wikipedia cited as a source (for anything except a comment on Wikipedia, as @username_1 mentioned), it will raise a huge red flag. My immediate thought is that this writer is too lazy to search for and find a better source! **Don't do this to yourself.** For something very common like this, you should be able to go to your local physical university library and -- without much effort -- find a book that references the needed theorem.
For your second question in the body, copying without citation, *even from a Wikipedia page*, is plagiarism. Again, don't do this to yourself!
Find a better source if at all possible, and no matter what, **cite your source!**
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Are there instances where citing Wikipedia is allowed?
>
>
>
I'm not going to try to answer the question of "is allowed" or "isn't allowed" but instead I'm going to try and answer if citing Wikipedia is, in general, a *good idea* or not for research papers.
Here's five points I can think of for and five points against.
**Good idea:**
* If Wikipedia is your source, and you learn something from what Wikipedia's editors have provided, then citing Wikipedia is the Nice Thing To Do™.
* Wikipedia is a convenient, well-known, easily and freely accessible source (vs. final-copy published papers that are pay-per-view if not out of your wallet, then indirectly out of your university's).
* Content aims to be written in an accessible manner targeted at a wide audience (vs. arguably the bulk of technical articles published in journals and conferences). Plus there's clickable links for jargon! Sweet!
* Notable or Featured Articles will probably have undergone more scrutiny from experts (w.r.t. bias, technical correctness, sources cited, etc.) than your average peer-reviewed article on a similar topic.
* At least with Wikipedia, readers should know where they stand with such a citation. Compare this with the artifice of citing papers for claims made in poor-quality journals or conferences that can be considered authoritative solely on the basis of being "peer-reviewed".
**Bad idea:**
* A Wikipedia article is subject to frequent editing and the content you cite it for may not be there when the reader goes looking for it (adding a date-accessed only partly addresses the issue since it will be difficult for the reader to start going through versions **edit** but as per the comments below, you can use [a citing service within Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special%3aCite) to cite a specific version of a page).
* Relatedly, the content may have been correct at the time of citing but errors may be edited into the content at a later point, making you look bad by association (**edit**, again, citing a specific version could work around that)
* There is no minimal guarantee of the quality for most Wikipedia articles (which peer-review, at least in theory, should provide, depending perhaps on the venue).
* Wikipedia is not a first-party source: in theory, no new knowledge is "created" in Wikipedia. *Where feasible*, you should try to attribute knowledge to those who create it (and optionally thereafter add a reference to those who report it or better describe it in a book or survey)
* Attribution for the content of a Wikipedia article is difficult: multiple editors may be involved in a certain piece of content, many editors are anonymous, etc. This means that there is no culpability for information (unlike peer-reviewed papers where authors have *something* to lose by publishing crap). This opens up further possibilities, such as authors anonymously adding content to Wikipedia that they can cite to support the claims in their paper.
Okay, back to academic convention and "*isn't alloweds*" and "*is alloweds*" ...
---
>
> Maybe it's not very well known or something but suppose there is a small Wikipedia page with the correct mathematical proof. How much effort are people going to go to to find a proof in a book when there's a (correct (which we know, because it's maths and we can check it)) proof on Wikipedia?
>
>
>
According to Wikipedia policies, it should have a reference to an original source. Cite that.
If it doesn't have a reference, or if you copy how the proof is expressed directly, I would recommend to add a footnote (rather than a formal citation) stating the Wikipedia article you found the proof on and how you verified it (and the CC-BY-SA licence if you copy the expression).
Generally avoid citing web-pages (unless they are normative online standards or something) if only to avoid getting your hand bitten off by a reviewer. Using footnotes is much safer in this regards and serves a similar-ish purpose (though it won't be counted as a formal citation).
In research, if enough reviewers believe something *isn't allowed*, then de facto it isn't allowed.
>
> Or if you do find it somewhere else why not say: "Proof taken from Wikipedia and verified by the proof shown in "Triangles and their properties, Nature, 2014, p113 etc..."
>
>
>
Why not say "*Proof sketched for me by Fred, the guy who sits next to me, who had previously read it in 'Triangles and their properties, Nature, 2014, p113 etc...'*"?
In other words, what's important is the reference, not how you found.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: What is "allowed" and "not allowed"?
But there's almost no reason to ever cite Wikipedia. If Wikipedia states something without citing a source, then you're basically citing "Some random guy on the internet told me that..." If Wikipedia states something and does cite a source, check the source yourself, to make sure it says what Wikipedia says it says; then cite that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In my opinion a lot of the answers are too negative about wikipedia, at least when applied to the part of wikipedia that applies to mathematics (my academic field, and the field the OP asked about).
I am a little surprised to hear people describe wikipedia as "unreliable", including links to university websites which say rather snootily to avoid it. This is how I felt about the mathematics on wikipedia circa 2006. It has gotten so much better in the intervening years, for the obvious reason: a lot of very mathematically experienced people (including at least one Fields Medalist, and also including me, for a period from about 2006 to 2008) put in a lot of time writing and vetting the articles. Where it stands now is that wikipedia is the best single repository of mathematical information in the world. It has been several years since I have seen anything that was wrong on a wikipedia math article. Some of these articles contain content that is difficult to find in other places, and some of the content is new: it is far from unheard of that someone just put in their own proof of a theorem. Many feel in principle that this sort of thing should not be done (I think I do; it's been a while since I've really thought about it), but in practice when someone writes a nice self-contained proof of a mathematical result, why delete it? So there is some really great stuff there: I think that most research mathematicians who are frequent users of the internet have by now learned mathematics from wikipedia.
As others have correctly pointed out, the question of "when to cite" is more complicated. Let me consider several of the alternatives:
>
> 1. Should you refer to wikipedia for standard proofs?
>
>
>
I think I believe that sometimes you should but I have never actually done it in a "serious research paper", in part because of exactly the sort of internet-phobic practices that <NAME> refers to in his answer. Recently I was writing a broad-audience article, and I wanted to say that a certain aspect of a classical construction -- the Galois connection between ideals of a polynomial ring over an algebraically closed field k and subsets of affine n-space over k -- worked verbatim with k replaced by an arbitrary integral domain. I ended up referring to Lang's *Algebra* for this. That is really not (ahem) ideal: this is one of the most "standard texts" in the sense that a large percentage of professional mathematicians have a copy in their office. On the other hand it is not free and even more mathematicians and math students don't have it. But billions of people have internet access, and surely wikipedia (for instance) does a perfectly good job of explaining the point. I wussed out and didn't give an explicit electronic reference, and I rarely do in formal writing. (In fact I have *myself* written many, many pages of mathematical writing -- as has <NAME>, by the way -- and I usually wuss out and do not refer to it in my formal writing either, even though I know exactly where I would like to point and a student would understand my research paper much more easily with that reference included.) At this point, when I say that something is "well known" I assume that students will look for it on the internet, and as a code between me and myself, at least, I try never to say that in papers except in cases where a student who looked for it on the internet would quickly and easily find it (and when that happens I don't worry so much about tracking down a print reference).
In the above case, the big advantage of wikipedia is its ease and convenience: it has almost exactly what any text would have but is much quicker, easier and *freer* to access.
>
> 2. Should you refer to wikipedia for non-standard proofs?
>
>
>
In other words, if a wikipedia article has a proof which is *different* from the one that you would find in any expensive math text, should you refer to that? If you want the reader to read that proof, I think you have to do refer to it *or* try to track down the source of the proof that made it into the wikipedia article. However, the latter brings me to my **biggest complaint** about the math articles on wikipedia: they're great for mathematical content. They can be really bad as references: e.g. they can be taken out of some standard source without referring back to that source. Or an article on the X-Y Theorem will have a statement of the theorem, motivation for the statement, the proof of the theorem, and then talk about further work and generalizations. That would make for a great lecture about the X-Y Theorem, but for an encyclopedia article there's a lot missing: who are X and Y? (Sometimes they don't even try to tell you, even when there are wikipedia articles on X and Y.) Where was the X-Y Theorem first published? (I'm sorry to tell you that many mathematically rock-solid articles don't contain this kind of primary source material.) Is the proof included in the article the original proof of X-Y? If not, where does it come from?
When I was involved with it, the culture of mathematical wikipedians was not good at addressing the above issues: if I asked for this information about an article, someone would usually nicely tell me that I was more than welcome to add it myself. I would mention that unfortunately I didn't know the source material that led to most of what other people included in the article...and there the matter usually got dropped.
So it may very well be the case that wikipedia has a proof of something for which it is not trivial to discern where the proof comes from. As an example, wikipedia has a really nice proof of the [Schwartz-Zippel Lemma](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwartz%E2%80%93Zippel_lemma). It is not the original proof, *I think* -- it's slicker. Where does it come from? I couldn't tell from the article itself. This is not a hypothetical example: [I wrote a brief expository note including this proof](http://alpha.math.uga.edu/%7Epete/dvirnotes.pdf). As you can see, I did refer to the wikipedia article. However, I should say that this is an article in the informal sense of the term: I wrote it up for myself, spoke in a colleague's seminar about it, and kept the document for myself. I have not tried to publish it anywhere, nor would I, since it is "just an exposition" of a proof of Zeev Dvir's resolution of the Finite Field Kakeya Problem. This brings me to my last point:
>
> 3. When should you *include* proofs from wikipedia in your articles?
>
>
>
If you use a wikipedia proof in your article in a critical way, then you should include a reference to it (or where it comes from, if possible). However, if you are using a wikipedia proof in a critical way in your article, is your article a research article or even a "serious expository" article? Why would a journal want to republish something that is available in a standard source?
In the OP's example he mentions including a proof of the Pythagorean Theorem. No math journal I know is going to allow you to include (any one of; I'm sure it gives several) wikipedia's proof of the Pythagorean Theorem, but not because it comes from wikipedia: they're just not going to want you to rehash such old-hat stuff. To be honest, the introductory passage "For example, suppose you're writing an article about triangles..." raises some eyebrows in this regard: are you trying to formally publish an article about triangles? Good luck with that: it's going to be tough. Such articles *are* published, but for every one that is, probably a hundred are rejected.
I also think that in a formal article -- even, perhaps even especially, if it's an expository article -- the burden falls more highly on you to investigate primary source material. If you're teaching a class or something, then it's helpful to say exactly where *you got the material from*. But if you're writing an article, it becomes more important to track down the provenance of the intellectual content itself: that is a much more challenging thing to do. Still though I think there are cases where the answer really will be that the argument appeared for the first time on wikipedia, in which case you should cite it there.
>
> 4. What about the "unreliability" of wikipedia articles?
>
>
>
This is really "weak sauce" for math articles, because unlike most encyclopedia articles, mathematics articles are **self verifying** by any sufficiently qualified reader. So saying "Don't include this proof from wikipedia because wikipedia is full of errors" sounds silly to me: on the one hand lots of published books have a higher density of errors than wikipedia math articles; on the other hand, every proof you read you're supposed to check anyway. So don't worry about whether it's correct: *see* whether it's correct. Most proofs in wikipedia articles are no more than a page or so in length, so they can be checked in a relatively short time. If it's not correct, fix it or tell someone about it!
---
@SteveJessop asked:
>
> Since you mention not being able to work out where a proof comes from: suppose you found a proof spray-painted under a bridge, that was slicker than the best proof you can find published. Are the concerns over such proofs on Wikipedia essentially the same as for that found on a wall? That is, there's no problem with verifying it correct, but if you can't print it or refer to it without giving credit then it's difficult to use?
>
>
>
Wikipedia seems better than "bridge proofs" because any interested party can access wikipedia and see the proof there as well as whatever documentation or lack thereof exists. In the bridge scenario, one can question whether this is really where I found the argument or whether I did my due diligence in trying to track down its provenance.
In practice: in the mathematical community, the scholarly task of giving the correct attribution -- either in the sense of where you found it or, still more so, the primary source -- is not taken all that seriously by many (compared to other branches of academia). We agree that you shouldn't be passing off others' ideas as your own, and that if you know who the "other" is you should cite them, but "I learned this trick from somewhere, and now I can't remember where" is pretty common in mathematics. In fact math papers tend to be written in logical sequence rather than psychological sequence, so that there is a key part of the mathematical writing process in which history is removed or rewritten, so to speak. I can only hope you understand what I mean by that. It's a subtle phenomenon and not an inherently negative one, but we do it in mathematics more than in almost any other field (and I do it more than the average amount for a mathematician: a big part of my research process is to take others' ideas and writing and rewriting it in one way or another). In general I have grown "more scholarly" over the years, but usually with the suspicion that *at best* the referees will not really care one way or the other. I ended one recent paper with a section surveying the history and the literature of a certain problem. That is very rare in a math paper. I got zero comments about this section, and if the journal was better I would have expected them to tell me to shorten or remove the section. In [my most recent paper](http://alpha.math.uga.edu/%7Epete/BCS_10_6_Pete.pdf), see Theorem 2.1 and Remark 2.2. Remark 2.2 explains the history of Theorem 2.1. It is almost as long as the proof of the theorem!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I will not speak to the direct topic of your questions, which is proofs, because, to be blunt, that's not my field. I will say that there are some edge case where it's acceptable, in my mind, to cite Wikipedia - namely, where said Wiki has become the *de facto* repository of information for a given topic. These are rare, and usually pop culture focused, but they do exist.
For example, I have a paper which cites the Wiki for a game (which is even less authoritative as a source than Wikipedia), and it was cited without issue from reviewers, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: One issue the other answers don't mention is the possibility of *circular reporting*: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reporting>
As other answers have said, if there's a citation then you should follow it. If there's not a citation, and you use the result in your published paper, the article may then be edited to use your paper as its citation.
This is dangerous, since referenced results will not be scrutinised as much as novel results. In this situation, it would be prudent to cite Wikipedia explicitly, so that such a circular arguments would become clear by looking at both sets of references.
The examples in the link above are false information about the real-world, which are difficult to verify and hence should be avoided outright. The situation isn't as bad for mathematical proofs, since you can verify them before including them, but you should make sure to present the proof in a way that shows it's novel (and hence needs review), but also cites Wikipedia as the source (or else it's plagiarism). A footnote like those mentioned above would work for this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Are there instances where citing Wikipedia is allowed? Yes, when appropriate.
It is appropriate to cite Wikipedia in a case study or literary scrutiny of Wikipedia.
For scholarly articles, jurored sources are often mandated.
For literary articles, source citation is based upon the origin.
For example, a literary examination of Xenophon's *Cyropaedia* or Wikipedia's page on *Cyrus the Great*, may cite the origin text to draw conclusions regarding (inclusive of, but not limited to) erroneous statistics or accurate accounting.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: There is already so many detailed answers are provided in this thread. I agree and disagree with some part of answers. But being a professor of computer science, reviewer and editor of various journals and conferences I always recommend.
1) DO NOT cite trivial things from Wikipedia which are commonly known to the research community.
2) DO NOT cite an established research work (algorithm, equation, findings etc.) from Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the original work, rather it is a reflection and understanding of 100s of editors. If you learned something from Wikipedia, then refer to the original source and verify the correctness from original work before using it in your research/project work, and always cite the original work.
The reviewers and Editors usually don't like the citation from Wikipedia, because it may change during or after the review process, and we don't have enough time to search the original source to verify the correctness of referred idea/equation/algorithm etc.
So the bottom line is: Wikipedia is a good source of learning, but it is not the original work and subject to change. If you learn something new always refer to the original source to verify the correctness, and always cite the original work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: Any time you cite something, you should consider whether or not the reader will accept it as an authority for the point you're trying to justify. That's just a basic principle of persuasion.
A well-known journal in the field you're writing for probably doesn't need much consideration. But just about everything else is possibly suspect. The New York Times is probably reliable for most facts, but for a fact that can't be sourced to a more authoritative scientific source, a New York Times citation could be questioned. A blog post from a known expert? Maybe the expert isn't as "known" to your audience as you think. And maybe they made a mistake. Wikipedia is just one of many publications in this general category.
If you find it necessary to cite such a source, find a way to concisely make the case that your reader should accept its validity for the point it justifies. There are ways to do that in the text, or in a footnote. If you can't find a way to do it, your paper might be better off without it.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/04/09 | 1,068 | 4,708 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a first year PhD in a large Social Sciences program at an American public institution. My CV is very weak as I am not yet published. I have research assistantship experience and teaching experience as well as a stint on a Fulbright. I'm applying to fellowships for the summer to gain more research experience.
I am working on a fellowship application and would like to stand out amongst the crowd. Other than my attributes above, I have nothing! My CV barely fills two pages. Will I be written off because I don't have much experience? I need fellowships like these in order to grow my tiny resume- but- I'm worried can't compete to get them without more.
Thank you for your help!<issue_comment>username_1: Everyone starts out with no publications. Never mind starting a PhD in that condition: I *finished* my PhD at a top-three program for my field without any publications, and I still got a good postdoctoral position. How did I do this? Because of my advisor's recommendation. (And it was a sound recommendation: eventually I did get some publications...)
For graduate students -- and especially, early career graduate students -- recommendation letters are all-important. Do you have a thesis advisor yet? If so, go directly to her and tell her what fellowships you are thinking of applying for and asking whether that sounds reasonable and whether your application will be competitive. If you do not have a thesis advisor, try out the same conversation with several faculty members in your department that know you through your coursework, research or TAing. Emphasize that because you are young and unpublished, you think you will need strong recommendations from them to get serious consideration for summer research fellowships. Select from among these the ones who sound most enthusiastic.
In general, faculty in your department should be very supportive of your endeavor. On the one hand, such fellowships generally provide funding, and faculty are always very happy when graduate students can find external funding of any kind whatsoever, since internal funding is so limited and hard to come up with in these straitened economic times. On the other hand, if you get the fellowship you will be getting funded for doing *exactly* what you are supposed to be doing in the summer as a graduate student: research. So if you feel like the faculty you've spoken to are not helping you enough with this, it could be worthwhile to discuss this with someone like the graduate coordinator or department head: not in a way which casts any blame on the faculty members, but just to emphasize that you want to do this very desirable thing and you haven't yet found the right person to help you out.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It might be an idea to contact the career or academic advisory department of your university and ask for an appointment with them to discuss improving your CV and get their input on how you can improve it and what you should and should not put in.
As regards gaining experience and kudos could be to consider publishing some of the Undergrad work you feel proud of. There are lots of open source journals which might be a good starting point.
You can also network with researchers using resources like [researchgate][1] for ideas and to get experience peer reviewing articles so you can put your contributions onto your CV and maybe get some feedback on undergrad work you have already done to learn more about the whole process of peer review and network with other academics.
Ultimately getting ahead in academia is likely like everything else: more about who you know not what you know so putting yourself out there by banging on doors and networking is going to be the ticket to filling your CV with stuff. Ironically, it will probably mean you'll not need to show your CV to get the position you want the end, too perhaps.
Such is life.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: @username_1 gives good advice. It's really your letters of rec that will probably stand out to committees awarding fellowships. I want to add one point though that may be helpful generally.
One way to stand out from the crowd in graduate school is to write well. Most academics think of their writing in very functional, utilitarian ways. If you can write winsomely, using vivid examples, and occasionally graceful turn a phrase, you will automatically stand out from the crowd. What you are trying to do as an academic is to gain a readership for your work. You are much more likely to succeed in this if people actually enjoy reading your work.
I recommend <NAME>'s book on Style to every graduate student I meet.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/09 | 582 | 2,470 | <issue_start>username_0: What methods could you recommend for attaining assistance when writing a master's thesis, in the particular case when one feels uncomfortable seeking any more help from the advisor, because of his own anxiety and the advisor's personality and busyness?
Is there an option available to get independent help? How would one go about finding help so that he can get the thesis finished?<issue_comment>username_1: Your advisors are the ones you should seek advice from, on how to write the thesis, and on fundamental research skills such as avoiding plagiarism.
If you feel uncomfortable about approaching your advisors / supervisors, you've got two options.
Either work out how to get comfortable approaching them.
Or get new advisors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: At the end of the day, your advisor is the one who needs to *accept* your thesis. Seeking help from others may be useful for some types of questions, but you'll definitely want his feedback during the process to make sure you're developing the thesis to his standards.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the others that bypassing the advisor is not a helpful strategy.
But, you should also understand that **the point of this exercise (the M.S.) is *not* to just end up with a finished thesis**.
It's to show that the student has developed the mathematical/scientific/technical and professional maturity to produce a piece of M.S.-level independent work, in spite of any personal and interpersonal problems that come up.
If the student has a problem with depression, he should seek help from a mental health professional. If the student has a significant interpersonal problem with his advisor, he can ask for help from the person at the university who is in charge of graduate studies. If the student has a problem with writing, he can ask for help from the writing center.
But ultimately, it's up to the student to get things moving. Having someone "walk him through it step by step so that he can get finished" is probably missing the point.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If there are problems approaching the advisor for help, I would suggest talking to the PhD students and/or postdocs who work in the same group as the advisor. They might be able to help. It would also be helpful talking to other students who are supervised by the same advisor. They might not be able to help, but at least you feel that you are not alone.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/09 | 1,129 | 4,927 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been assigned to mark student reports for an engineering coursework, which mainly involves the use of a software. The main content of each report is around 15 pages. There are 45 reports in total. I am also required to write feedback to each student. I have not been involved in designing the assignment nor teaching the course.
The professor who assigned me this task told me that the marker last year took about 4 full days to complete the markings, and yet I have spent more than two weeks doing this (and not really doing anything else), and I am not yet done. I did need to spend some time familiarising myself with the subject matter and the software in the beginning, because I have never used the software before, but it is not that difficult to use.
Since this is my first marking experience, I am wondering whether it is normal to have spent so much time marking. Is there any strategy I can adopt to complete the task more efficiently, especially in my case where I am not involved in designing the assignment?<issue_comment>username_1: Marking assignment is a very demanding and time-consuming task, especially if you intend to do it thoroughly (and you should). It is also a big responsibility, as you have the students' success in your hands. It might be that your supervisor underestimated the time necessary to take care of it, although it's difficult to say without knowing the exact content of the assignment.
From my experience of grading assignments and exams (topics: acoustics and fluid mechanics), 2 weeks of work for a class of the size you mention doesn't sound like a lot, especially if, as you said, you needed to get accustomed to the specific aspects of the course.
>
> I am wondering whether it is normal to have spent so much time
> marking.
>
>
>
My answer is yes, even though it depends on the type of exam. It might indicate that you take the task seriously, and it's a good thing.
Now as for:
>
> How to mark student reports more efficiently
>
>
>
Here are some of my usual approaches:
* Make sure you clearly identify the 'gold standard' to which you will compare the answers. Is there a ready-made solution (from last year) or do you need to make your own (if it's the later, the 2 weeks time frame is even less surprising). **The prof/instructor should help you with this step**.
* Grade a given section/exercise at a time, for all students and then switch to the next one.
* Do a quick overview of all the assignments to identify the good quality ones, grade them first.
* Take a break between individual exercises, maybe do some of your administrative or research work for a while (this to avoid overdose).
* Don't take cases of very low quality assignments personally (student clearly didn't attend class, tried to get away with an all-nighter, don't care about the grade, etc.). Students have their reasons. It's not you, it's them.
The good news is that you will theoretically be better and quicker at doing this next term.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I was in a *very* similar situation this past term. I was also tasked with grading engineering assignments that involved the use of software and a written component for which there were no solutions (mind you they were a little shorter than the ones you are grading). I am familiar with the software so it ended up taking me 5 days to mark.
Jigg has covered most of the bases, I just wanted to add another tip for efficiency:
In an effort to give them good feedback I wanted to write thorough comments. But after I got going on the marking I found that many students were making the same kinds of mistakes and I was writing the same comments over and over again. Eventually I just created an excel spreadsheet that really helped automate the marking that looked like this example:
The totals for points and points available are summation formulas so I didn't need to do any totalling myself. As I graded each assignment, I just compared it to the solutions I came up with and judged how well each of them met the criteria (nothing new). When I saw something wrong I just copied a detailed comment from the comments list and pasted it in the relevant cell. When I was finished with an assignment I just copied the everything in the thick black border into the online comments section, entered their grade, and moved on to the next one. If there was something new (and incorrect) that a student was doing I created a new comment and copied it into the list. Sometimes I also wrote something like "good work" next to the assignment total, just so that there were some positive comments.
Granted this worked really well when the students were all doing the exact same thing, but if your students are writing about different topics, it might not work as well.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/09 | 372 | 1,578 | <issue_start>username_0: In a [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19047/who-should-approve-changes-in-curriculum/19049?noredirect=1#comment39202_19049), it was quoted that some universities have administrative or academic department head. I sensed this difference before (but do not remember specifically), but I always thought that the latter is the case: one of the faculty members of a department is appointed as the head or hiring a new faculty member to serve as the department head (or vice versa in some sense).
How and why are administrative and academic heads different?<issue_comment>username_1: An administrative head of department heads up the administration of the department, and will typically have little or no involvement in the direction or the content of the research or teaching.
An academic department head leads the academic direction of the department. This often include somes administrative duties. Well, they nominally lead the academic direction of the department. In theory, they guide the direction of the department's researchers and teaching. In practice, that's like herding cats.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with EnergyNumbers. As another way to think about it, the administrative head deals more with the business functions -- e.g., grant management, hiring of staff, issues with the physical environment, communications, technology, etc. The academic head focuses on issues related to teaching, research, and service. Indeed, the functions may overlap, but this the general division of labor.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/09 | 1,347 | 6,031 | <issue_start>username_0: Historically, only full professors could have a specific chair, and assistant and associate professors could only wonder under supervision of a chaired (full) professor.
Now, every assistant professor is an independent academic, only with a lower salary and possibilities. On the other hand, a chaired position gains secured research funding, but no other faculty member is under his supervision (yes or no, this is my question).
I think the classic chair system still exists in Japan (at least to some extent). Do universities in West Europe and North America still have such system to place junior faculty members (assistant/associate professors) under supervision of a senior (chaired professor) faculty member?<issue_comment>username_1: In Germany this depends on the university, and possibly also on the subject. I know of universities that still have a chair system officially.
I also know of a university in which the chair indeed is the superior of assistant and associate professors in the sense that they are in charge of the chairs full budget and also of the budgets for associate and assistant professors. But I also know universities that do not have the chair system (both officially and practical). However, I can't tell which system is more frequent… I tend to think that chairs are more frequent in Bavaria but I may be wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer to your question is **yes** in my experience at major US research universities, assistant and associate professors will, in general, work independently from full professors or individuals with named chairs.
Despite the name, assistant professors are not usually assisting in the research of more senior faculty. There are exceptions including in very large multi-PI labs, in special non-tenured faculty research positions, and in other special circumstances. Of course, nothing keeps junior faculty from collaborating with senior faculty — and many do. If anything though, junior faculty are encouraged to do at work on their own or with their own students to demonstrate their individual intellectual abilities for the purposes of the tenure and promotion processes.
Named chairs usually refers to special permanent funded positions at a university. Usually, these chairs are in a particular area and have been funded to support a particular line of research. As you suggest, named chairs often come with special pots of research funding and are generally more prestigious. Some particularly old or famous named chairs are extremely prestigious.
That said, by no means do all full professors or senior faculties have named chairs. Additionally, it's increasingly common to see junior faculty with named chairs as well including in temporary "Career Development Chairs." Although named chairs are generally more prestigious than non-named positions, they do not usually signal a higher *rank* (i.e., assistant, associate, full) and they certainly do not suggest a supervisory relationship.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I know of no American university in which any tenure track faculty member works under any other tenure track faculty member in any official capacity.
The main difference between assistant professors and full professors is that assistant professors do not have tenure. (Going far enough back in the history of my department, one sees "tenured assistant professors". I don't know what that's about. I am not willing to claim that nowadays *no* American university has tenured assistant professors, but I do not know of any.) "Associate professor" is ambiguous on this point: in *most* cases associate professors have tenure, but at my university the promotion and the tenure are distinct processes with slightly different rules, although they are similar enough and onerous enough that candidates get pressured -- perhaps a little unfairly, in my view -- to carry them out simultaneously. There are a few really good places where "associate professor" is a title awarded to young faculty for which their future tenure is by no means assured -- I'm thinking of you, MIT. But that's rare.
You write that an assistant professor is "with a lower salary and possibilities". I wanted to let you know that this really need not be the case. Academic salaries are most competitive now at the assistant professor level; since annual raises have been meager or nonexistent in many recent years, an associate or even full professor cannot be counted on to have a higher salary than a new-hire assistant professor. In fact the amount of our *first offer* to new-hire assistant professors in my department is very close to my current salary (I am an associate professor not so far away from promotion to full). This means that if the candidate negotiates at all, they will get offered a higher salary than mine. This has certainly happened. (All this is a matter of public record.) I think that there are no full professors in my department making less than new hire assistant professors, but there are some who are not making substantially more.
Also, in my department and at many others, assistant professors do not have fewer "possibilities": with the exception of certain voting rights in faculty meetings, they have identical privileges with all other faculty. They may begin with less "service responsibility" than older faculty; that is probably an advantage.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: The whole point of a tenure track position is to show that someone can independently work and lead a laboratory.
An academic career is extremely slow compared to most other careers. I don't know why anyone would automatically assume that people with ten to fifteen years of research experience, typically in their late thirties or early forties, cannot work independently or cannot supervise five to ten other people. The old system you mention typically degrade most assistant and associate professors to a low level administrator / secretary position.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/09 | 1,696 | 7,289 | <issue_start>username_0: In my experience, there are two types of PhD students
(1) A professor offers a PhD studentship. Then, students apply directly and know their supervisor from the first day.
In this case, how a professor secure the funding for a PhD studentship?
(2) A department offers PhD studentships. After admission, students can choose their supervisors or the department will assign them to available professors.
In this case, how the capacity of each faculty member is determined to accept PhD students from available students of the department?
I know that the system varies from university to university, but I am curious to know the most common systems for each cases in North America and Eastern Europe.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> (2) A department offers PhD studentships. After admission, students
> can choose their supervisors or the department will assign them to
> available professors.
>
>
> In this case, how the capacity of each faculty member is determined to
> accept PhD students from available students of the department?
>
>
>
This is generally the norm in US universities. How the capacity is set depends on various funding-related factors:
* Does the department support all incoming Ph.D students via fellowships ? Then there's a budget associated with this.
* Does the department support all incoming students via fellowship or teaching assistant positions ? Then based on estimated enrollment of students in courses there's a rough formula estimating number of TAs needed each year, and this factors in how many students are leaving.
* Does faculty funding support students (either from Day 1 or eventually) ? Then the department will solicit information from faculty on how many students they expect to support that year, and make calculations accordingly.
All of these are estimates, and can go wrong. So departments usually need some kind of cushion when doing calculations to adjust for that.
While departments might "assign" students to faculty when they enter, this is probably for administrative purposes so students don't slip through the cracks and have someone they can approach early on. Typically students and advisors choose each other once the students arrive.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences departments in the United States, it seems to be a hybrid of the two; the department admissions committee must accept you even if the professor you want to work for has RA funding for you (as opposed to TA funding generated by the school/dept). They evaluate you knowing that you want to work with Professor A. It's almost a given that the student has contacted Professor A prior to the application. The influence of professor A is persuasive (I assume) but not the be all end all, since often times the departments are looking to build a diverse class of not just research interests, but personalities and experiences. This is at least how both my advisors explained the admissions process to me at my current institution. This also seems consistent to how I've been admitted to other places.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> (1) A professor offers a PhD studentship. Then, students apply
> directly and know their supervisor from the first day.
>
>
> In this case, how a professor secure the funding for a PhD
> studentship?
>
>
>
Either through departmental funding allocated to a particular faculty member (perhaps a new professor was given a 'startup package' from the department), or through external grant money (which would usually dictate that the PhD student is to work on a specific project).
Relevant:
* [What sources of funding do faculty in Computer Science dept. in US universities have other than NSF?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8738/what-sources-of-funding-do-faculty-in-computer-science-dept-in-us-universities)
* [How are the personal assistants for professors usually funded?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/248/how-are-the-personal-assistants-for-professors-usually-funded/249#249)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Based on my experience there are actually three different cases:
1. A faculty members (having fund from a project with a company or a national grant or some other source) announces that there are PhD position(s) available. The topic you are going to work on is determined. Those interested, apply to the faculty member directly and s/he decides which one(s) to choose. After admission you become a student of the university of the faculty member, but the department or university don't have any say in the admission process. This method is usually used in Europe. This is similar to your "case 1". (Your answer: As I said it can be from a project with a company, a national research grant or other sources).
2. A university or a department in a university announces that there are some number of PhD positions available. You may correspond with some faculty members and get their approval, but the university or department has the final say. i.e. you may get the approval of a faculty member but don't be admitted by university. In this case you apply to university (or department) and they sort the applicants based on some factors and admit those number of people from top of the list that they announced. For example if they announced 15 PhD positions, then the top 15 applicants will be admitted. In this case it is usually asked from applicants to correspond with faculty members and get their approval before applying. This is similar to your "case 2". This method is usually used in Europe. (your answer: The capacity of each faculty member can be found out by corresponding with them.)
3. There is no official announcement from university/department. The university approves new students each semester. There is no limit on the number of positions. The applicant corresponds with a faculty member, and after getting her/his approval applies to the university(department). Since there is no limit on the number of students (in contrast with case 2), almost all students who get the faculty member's approval, will be accepted by the university/department. This method is usually used in north America.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: US mathematics departments are usually a delayed variation on (2). The department accepts applications. The student *may* in their application mention an interest in working with a particular faculty member, and a faculty member could lobby for a particular student, but in neither case does this actually create a binding advising relationship.
The department don't announce a fixed number of available positions, but they decide how many students to offer admission (and funding) based on current enrollment, funding, and general faculty availability. (Funding primarily comes from the department, not from the faculty.) Some number of those students accept the offer and show up in the fall. They may be assigned a pro forma advisor who helps them decide what classes to take, etc, but this person is not expected to be a research mentor. Then, over the next 2-3 years, the student is expected to make contact with various faculty members and eventually find one who is willing to be their advisor.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/09 | 655 | 2,880 | <issue_start>username_0: What are the things one should consider, as a postdoc, before accepting or rejecting an invitation to contribute a book chapter? The proposed book is a handbook in a developing field of engineering.<issue_comment>username_1: It almost certainly won't earn you any money.
It probably won't be read by many people. It will be cited by even fewer.
The collaboration may lead to future projects together.
It may involve a lot of work.
You might enjoy the process. Or hate it.
It may or may not help your career progression, depending on your field, your career to date, and the posts you apply to. If it's a book that will become a standard for one or more taught courses, your contribution may be crucial for your future teaching career.
In this particular case, when the putative author is a rising young authority in an engineering field, it's a rapidly-developing field that's attracting significant international interest, and many universities are introducing new courses in the area, then, (depending on the publisher, the other authors, and the other chapters) there's potential for the book to have quite a significant audience, so contributing to the book chapter would be attractive.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: When I get an invitation to contribute a book chapter (or conference paper in an invited session), I usually ask myself the following questions:
1. Can I have a reasonable contribution ready for the proposed submission deadline?
2. Is the venue I am invited to a good fit and does it provide the best possible visibility for my contribution?
3. Do I want to invite the person inviting me to similar occasions in the future?
Ideally, you should be able to answer at least questions 1 and 2 with "yes" before accepting the invitation. If your answer to question 2 would be "no", it may still be wise to accept the invitation in view of question 3. For this type of invitations, I would try to find a smaller contribution which fits the visibility of the proposed publication venue. In a book chapter, for example a summarizing synthesis of some of your previous results might be appropriate.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would like to add the following:
* If there are other, more experienced, persons in the specific field, who would likely do a better job than himself, perhaps it is best for him, for the sake of all the potential readers of the book, to decline the invitation and recommend these other people instead.
* An invitation is something that is unexpected, and meeting it would likely require an extra effort in addition to his normal responsibilities. Unless he is able to manage his resources well without encroaching what belongs to his family, for example, then perhaps it would be prudent, despite all the prospects it might offer, to decline the invitation.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/09 | 1,137 | 4,915 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student that just finished my first year in graduate school. The University I am at will only fund me if I work as a TA.
There is a community college in the area which I have a long working relationship with. The full time instructors are paid more than I am. They also get 6 credit hours per semester of paid graduate tuition at the university.
I am considering going back to work at the college after I get my masters degree to have some more control over my life while continuing to work on my PhD.
My question is whether anyone on this site knows someone who has done this or has done this themselves? If so what were the worst and best aspects of the situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Teaching at a community college while in grad school is certainly an option and I know people who have done it.
My major concern would be workload. I'd expect a community college job to be drastically more work, greater responsibility and stress, and less likely to accommodate your coursework and research time. It can be very difficult in grad school to balance your time and energy among your responsibilities, and it's easy for the short-term demands of teaching to push the longer-term demands of research to the back burner, ultimately sabotaging your chances of finishing your degree. I certainly wouldn't suggest a full-time community college appointment; even part-time seems like it would be hard to manage. But it sounds like you've actually taught at this college before, and have also TA'ed, so you'll be in the best position to make that judgment.
At the university, you'll probably get to TA a variety of courses, including more advanced courses in your discipline. This can be a great learning experience for you, and fill in gaps in your education that you didn't know you had. It can also be an asset on the job market. At the community college, I presume you'd teach introductory or remedial courses exclusively; that's a learning experience too, but not in the same way.
At the university, you're more likely to find fellow students and faculty mentors with whom you can discuss aspects of teaching, and being a TA can be a great social / bonding / networking experience. If you stay in academia, you'll be able to get letters from well-known professors attesting to your teaching ability. At the community college, you'll probably be more on your own, and a letter from the department head there may not carry so much weight.
Overall, it might be better to plan on teaching community college during occasional summers (when TA'ing may not be available), or perhaps near the end of your PhD (and especially if your departmental funding runs out). It seems overly ambitious to plan to do it throughout.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I made the decision to go work at the college part time.
The balance between PhD research and teaching part time has been manageable under the following two conditions. 1) I am not teaching a new course which is unfamiliar to me. 2) I am not taking advanced graduate course. When one of these conditions is not met then the amount of outside work is simply too much to balance with research.
Regarding condition (1). Teaching new classes takes me roughly an hour or two per lecture to prepare. This ends up taking all the free time which was presumed available for research. If at all possible it is preferable to co-teach with a colleague who has taught the course before.
Regarding condition (2). As a physics student I dearly wanted to take Quantum Field Theory even though it wasn't strictly necessary for my research. I found that I had no time to finish the homework assignments. In one week I fell behind on grading exams (which were all free response) and I fell badly behind in the course.
There are some advantages to teaching courses of my own design. As the course instructor I decide what gets graded and how it gets graded. If I give my students exams which can be automatically graded by a computer with a few free response components then I can finish grading exams within 30 minutes to an hour. The danger is to get too ambitious and forget how much grading free response exams takes.
I have found that I have to take advantage of every free moment. When I am proctoring it is advantageous to have something on my laptop which needs to be done for my PhD. This generally should be something that needs supervision, but not my exclusive attention (for instance compiling an application or linking libraries). Also, if I am co-teaching with a colleague I should have something to do which is productive on my laptop.
In short the balance is manageable, but the teaching must be strictly controlled so that it does not overflow past your paid working hours. An inexperienced instructor can easily give themselves too much work to do for a single person within the allotted hours.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/10 | 770 | 3,123 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a social science PhD student (with a quantitative bent) at a U.S. research university. If paperwork is not a concern, I would be equivalently interested in working as an academic and in private industries. However, one of my goal is to be able to stay in the U.S., thus to craft my plan I hope to know whether it is indeed easier to obtain H1B / green card as an academic than as a PhD-holding employee? My industry-relevant skill-set is statistical training and programming.
While this question has far-reaching relevance for any typical international PhD students, I would also be willing to give more details regarding my training, my school reputation, etc. if it helps answering the question.
P/S: This is throwaway account for anonymity. I have been an avid user of StackExchange and would love your input.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, IANAL.
The H1B process requires a declaration from the employer that the skill set provided by the candidate cannot be found within the US. This is typically not too hard to satisfy, and is required regardless of whether you're in academia or in private industry.
The Green card process can change dramatically depending on which process you use. Academics will typically go through what is execrably called the 'Outstanding Researcher' process, which awards a green card based on scholarly excellence. But Ph.Ds in private industry also go through this process (I did!). It really depends on the willingness of the employer (because of the legal processing involved).
The alternative is to go through the "regular" advanced degree process, which has different qualification requirements and has a different queue/wait time. Arguably, this could take longer, and I don't think academics ever go through this.
So the bottom line is: it depends on the employer, but there's a technical sense in which being an academic can help slightly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My understanding is that Universities and other academic insitutions (for example, the research hospital in which I work) are not subjected to caps on the H1B that companies are so it should be easier to get one if you follow the academic route.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The Green Card is a different matter, but for an H-1B: It is indeed easier.
There is a cap for the number of H-1Bs awarded every year. The cap for 2013 was 85,000, and 124,000 people applied. When too many applications are eligible, assignment is made by lottery.
However, non-profits are not subject to caps, and universities count as non-profits. See: <http://internationaloffice.berkeley.edu/h-1b_faqs#10>
It is probably not easier in the sense that the employer follows the same procedure and pays the same fees. However, there is no risk of not receiving an H-1B that you are perfectly well qualified for due to the cap. Also, universities are more likely to have access to people who know the process, unlike small companies which may be overwhelmed by the paperwork and byzantine regulations (especially if you are their first international employee).
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/10 | 861 | 3,666 | <issue_start>username_0: Maybe they are helping and I am the one who does not know how things really work and that's why I am seeking help here.
I am about to finish my Master in Computer science (waiting for the oral exam). And this is the time to apply for as many as possible PhD programs. The problem is that many of PhD programs ask for at least two recommendation letters (sometimes three) and they do not accept general recommendation letter. Rather, they send to the referee's email and ask him/her to write. Therefore, for each of them my referees should write a separate evaluation. So far I got them to write for three applications (two got rejected already). However, I feel I am still at the beginning and there are so many programs I need to try. I am totally aware of the program suitability and I should not apply for a program that I'm not 100% sure I have good chance.
Now the problem is that I chase my referees to write one letter and sometimes I miss deadlines because they are busy or not responding. I found only this question is very useful [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13977/how-to-reduce-the-load-of-professors-writing-recommendation-letters-for-graduate?rq=1) but the issue is I follow all steps there to help them to write my recommendation letters, but they mostly do not. I am one of top 5% students of theirs and I published three papers with them.
I feel like I am stuck between the hammer and the rock here. My question is **what is the best tactic I can follow at this stage?** Cut down the number of programs I apply for? Or talk to the supervisor about the issue. What advice do you have for me? I really appreciate your advice.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that you should not worry too much; you mentioned that you have already published three papers with them, and that is the important part. For a PhD what it counts more to the admission committee is to see if you have research skills, and that number of papers it is pretty good.
Maybe you should try to approach one of your past professors directly, I mean to drop a visit and tell them about your problem. Take in consideration that most of them have a heavy duty work and that is why they are forgetting about your recommendation letters. Bottom line, approach to them directly and try not only with one, but with every professor that knows you and that have worked directly with you. I believe that they will be more than happy to help you. So relax and good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know how many letters you're asking people to write for you. However, when there is a separate form that needs to be filled out for each letter, that is asking for a considerable expenditure of time for your advisors. You need to be aware of this, and plan accordingly. You can't ask people to fill out fifty forms for you at once, and then complain when they can't get it done!
So it's not really about applying to "as many PhD programs as possible." Your advisors should be working with you to select the schools and programs you are going to apply to, and you should be working with them to ensure that you are not placing too large a burden on them. This includes giving them a list that clearly states all the schools and programs to which you are applying, as well as the deadlines, **as early as possible**, so that they have time to plan accordingly. Then, if there's no response a few days beforehand, you need to send a polite email.
But to keep sending out request after request for more letters in a season is a good way to annoy your letter writers. Organize and plan in advance.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/10 | 1,293 | 5,285 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose I am making a paper on the impact of popular TV shows on the spread of correct knowledge and facts about current and past events. Shows like South Park, The Simpsons and likely others often feature recent events in their storylines, as well as past events as well. These shows often have specialized wikias, usually in the form of "showname.wikia.com".
These wikias are mainly maintained by a dedicated subgroup of the fanbase for that show, people who usually know a lot about it. This means that the information on there comes from more reliable sources. In addition, since most of the information stems from individual episodes, there usually isn't any information about that episode outside of the wikia or the episode itself.
In cases like this, would it be appropriate to use the wikia as a source?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think wikia are any different to wikipedia: there is no expert quality-control editorial staff like a proper encyclopaedia has: there are only the site owner(s), and the collective wisdom and collective foolishness of the contributors.
If you are writing about, and analysing, the wikia itself, then cite the wikia.
If, however, you are writing about the thing that the wikia itself writes about, then where possible use the wikia as a lead to find sources, but not as a source in itself. For things such as a preçis of a particular episode, then the production company or original broadcaster may have an episode guide. At very worst, you may have to cite the wikia itself: in which case, be sure to cite a specific version of a page, but IMDB may be a better source.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: How do you think Wikipedia is less reliable than a smaller, not widely known topic wiki?
* We all know that Wikipedia is *only about 99% reliable*. [1]
and
* We all *know nothing about the reliability* of the topic wiki.
That does not sound like a good base to conclude the topic wiki is more reliable than Wikipedia, - it's reliability is just much more unknown.
The effect is that every second person on the street can explain to you how Wikipedia "is not reliable", "contains errors" -
while you or your Professor have a hard time ensuring that the topic wiki is even somewhat reliable at all!
For example, it's hard to tell whether a *"dedicated subgroup of the [actual user base]"* is influenced by some important person or subgroup following some non-neutral motivation. What's missing compared to Wikipedia is transparency... or at least we are not sure it's not missing.
Wikipedia has lots of transparency on even the tiniest discussion.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I disagree with the answers that say "There's no difference."
In both cases, you should critically evaluate the content with respect to correctness, reliability, etc. However, there *is* a difference with respect to the *nature* of the content.
Wikipedia (for most topics) serves as a tertiary source. That is, it aggregates primary and secondary sources on a topic, but doesn't add original content or interpretation. (In fact, it is [against Wikipedia policy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3aNo_original_research) to include original content or interpretation.) In these cases, you should find and use the original source, to verify its contents and to give credit to the real authors.
Dedicated wikis on pop culture often *do* contain original content. And quite a few Wikipedia pages on pop culture do as well, even though they aren't supposed to (see e.g., [Mythology of Lost](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology_of_Lost)).
For example, the Lost wiki contains a great deal of interpretation and commentary (e.g.: an analysis of recurring themes in the series) - not just a rehash of the episode plots. This makes it a secondary source, not a tertiary source.
You *can* use this **original content** (having critically assessed its correctness and reliability), and of course if you do, you should cite it.
For example, suppose you are writing a paper on "Use of the flash-forward technique in early 21st century television" and you [read the following on the Lost wiki](http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Flash-forwards) (or on an equivalent page on Wikipedia):
>
> In Lost, the flash-forward technique was introduced in "Through the Looking Glass", although it wasn't made clear that it was a flash-forward until the end of the episode. The first episode to feature a flash-forward that was clearly shown to be one from the start was "The Beginning of the End". "<NAME>" was the first episode to intertwine flashbacks with flash-forwards, although the flashback element was only clearly revealed to be in the past at the end of the episode, making its temporality a plot twist.
>
>
>
Even if you then go on and watch the episodes "Through the Looking Glass," "The Beginning of the End," and "Ji Yeon" yourself, or read the episode scripts (i.e., verify the correctness of the claim by checking the primary source), you still cannot claim in your work that you identified the use of flash-forward in Lost all by yourself! The wiki page in this case is a secondary source with an original analysis and interpretation, and you should cite it as such.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/10 | 1,560 | 6,332 | <issue_start>username_0: As pointed out in another [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19120/is-the-classical-chair-system-in-which-a-senior-professor-supervises-junior-pro), the general tendency today as compared from classical times is to make junior professors (at assistant level) more and more independent. However, I wonder that assistant professors (common in the US university) supervise PhD students.
The philosophy of academic ranking is to prepare academics for academic/scientific tasks.
Although, academics normally have postdoc experience before their appointment as assistant professors, it is not mandatory. Moreover, postdoc experience is not experience conducive for the supervising of students.
**In relation to the above is it wrong that an inexperienced assistant professor (who is not far from his PhD studentship days) can take control of one or several PhD students?**
Does it reduce the quality of the education/research?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Isn't it wrong that an inexperienced assistant professor (who is not far from his PhD studentship days) can take control of one or several PhD students?
>
>
>
It is alright for an assistant professor to guide one or several doctoral students. He is not experienced in probably guiding PhD students, but, he is definitely experienced in conducting research, which will help him translate this to guidance.
>
> Don't it reduce the education/research quality?
>
>
>
Well, maybe. Supervising PhD students is a learning activity like most anything else. As such, it is to be expected that maybe when an assistant professor supervises her/his first student, s/he may do things that should would handle differently later on. But this is not tied to the status of the person, but to her/his experience in advising. So if you don't let assistant professors advise PhD students, they would start doing it later on and be equally bad in it, because when would they have learned how to do it?
An additional concern is that there are only so many full professors to go around. While I concede that working with a more senior professor may have advantages, these advantages would likely disappear if every senior professor has to handle significantly more students (as the entire 'advising force' of assistant professors falls away).
I should also add that, in general, assistant professors are not nearly as inexperienced as you seem to assume. Today, at least in my field (CS), there is hardly any assistant professor that did not have multiple years of postdoc experience, which also includes co-supervising master and PhD students. As such, I am not sure if the problem you seem to consider even exists.
**Edit based on ff524's comment:**
>
> I think the question intends to ask, "Is it appropriate for assistant professors to supervise PhD students alone?" In some places, PhD students working with an inexperienced advisor are also co-advised by another (more experienced) advisor.
>
>
>
Yes, this is actually the case in many well-respected university (dutch universities come to mind right now). I think this is great if the main responsibility/load is still on the junior professor, with the senior person being more an advisor to the advisor than to the student. If the model degenerates into the junior professor basically being a proxy for the senior person, this seems counter-productive.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am an assistant professor supervising two Ph.D. students. Everyone in my department seems to be happy with this.
It helps that there are senior faculty who are happy to give advice to me when needed!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In many fields, Today's assistant professors are older and more experienced than they were in the past. By the time an assistant professor in math has a student start research they're typically 6+ years out from PhD (3-4 years of postdoc plus a couple years to settle before students are likely to ask). I think that means its pretty reasonable for assistant professors to take students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Isn't it wrong that an inexperienced assistant professor (who is not far from his PhD studentship days) can take control of one or several PhD students? Don't it reduce the education/research quality?
>
>
>
For certain institutes I've been in, I would find myself asking the opposite question: **isn't it wrong for senior professors to supervise students when they have little time for them?**
Of course it is not always the case that full professors have no time for their students, but I have seen it happen many times: I've seen cases where students were meeting their official full professor supervisors once a month (or less frequently) and putting names of supervisors on papers that the supervisors had never read. This seems to me to be prevalent in research institutes where the hierarchy tree has a high branching factor to get value out of available funds (few Full Professors, lots of PostDocs / Assistant Professors, even more PhD students and Research Assistants, etc.); in such cases, the priority for senior professors is getting funding for and managing projects. In my case, when I was a PostDoc in such an institute, I was doing the day-to-day supervision of a number of students whose supervisor(s) had no time for them.
Of course it varies from place to place. But my hypothesis is that by the time you reach the Assistant Professor level, either you will have the necessary skills and personality to be a good supervisor, or you will probably never have those skills.
In summary: I don't believe that seniority amongst professors is a good predictor for quality of supervision.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Of course it's appropriate. In many research-intensive academic departments it's the assistant professors (the younger researchers) that are doing the innovative research.
I had several friends who worked with an assistant professor years ago. That professor later won a Nobel Prize for the work being done in his assistant professor days, with the help of those students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I'd rather say: it depends. The question can also be asked as: Is it appropriate for all professors to supervise PhD students?
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/10 | 822 | 3,589 | <issue_start>username_0: A very nervous potential PhD student here!
Long story short, I have been applying to quite a few bioinformatics PhD programs in the US and been rejected from most of them. I did my masters in the UK, and had unfortunately fallen ill during its course and had to take a break so didn't end up doing great. My undergrad GPA is ok (3.12). I did however do good work during my Undergrad and masters, and have a really supporting recommendation letter to show for it.
I had a very promising interview with a professor from a Flagship State University who has agreed to supervise and fund me (Research assistantship). Suffice to say our research interests match a lot and I also think the professor would be a great supervisor. The professor has also been actively following up on my application within the department.
My question here is, what are my chances of getting admitted?
The department doesn't have a "PhD program" per se (i.e. traditional program where students are admitted and then find a supervisor). Students seem to contact supervisor and find funding through that route and then apply. I am not sure how the application processes work in the US.<issue_comment>username_1: Your odds are better than they might be otherwise, but they're not necessarily 100%, either.
Part of the issue is that some schools may not recognize or honor such "claims" or "gentlemen's agreements" to fund people after they are accepted. More importantly, the issue is that US admissions are typically done at the departmental level, not the faculty member level. That means that a professor telling you that you'll be admitted is not necessarily a guarantee, because the admissions committee has to make that call. (On the other hand, if the advisor in question chairs or is a powerful member of the admissions committee, that changes things substantially!)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @username_1 answer; I would say it depends to the university policy/routine in handling applications.
Most likely there are three entities involved in any application:
* School/Faculty of Graduate Studies (GS)
* The department
* The potential supervisor
Your chances depends on how applications are usually processed between these three entities.
* Some schools they just need a commitment from a faculty member to accept you; ( that is, GS decision always align with the supervisor decision).
* Others the final decision is made through GS - after receiving the input from the department.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: *This answer is coming from my experience at one major research school in the US.*
This is department dependent. In some sciences (e.g. those where many professors have their own "lab"), it's essentially a *prerequisite* for you to have a professor who is willing to work with you and let you join their lab. So, in this situation, having this commitment from a professor is not a particularly strong "+" for you, but not having such a commitment would probably rule you out entirely.
In other departments (e.g. my PhD department: Statistics), a vast majority (if not all) PhD students did not have an advisory commitment from any faculty member before applying. However, it did appear that those who ultimately failed the qualifying process (exams, etc.) were those who had not had significant research progress with any faculty. I don't know if this was a causal relationship or just the simple fact that those who were working on research were those that were generally better equipped to pass the exams.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/10 | 775 | 3,237 | <issue_start>username_0: Maybe the answer to this question varies depending on the field of study. I am asking it from an Engineering perspective. I am currently enrolled in a PhD program in Mechanical Engineering (carried out with an industrial partner) and would like to join a research department in the aeronautical/aerospace industry.
For PhD students in a similar situation, what would you consider to be the main advantages (and disadvantages) of doing a Post-Doc ? Should you target a better ranked university than where you did your PhD, same level or lower ? or should you rather join industry straight after finishing the PhD ?
Feel free to share your thoughts and experience. There's probably multiple answers to this question.<issue_comment>username_1: I have a situation somewhat related to yours: I did a PhD in engineering with an industrial partner, and I'm now a post-doc researcher in a reputable university. It sounds, when you say 'doing a postdoc', that you have the impression that it is the logical 'next level' in the sequence: bachelors - masters - PhD - … but it is not.
There are no 'advantages' or 'disadvantages' in being a postdoc researcher for a while. It's just that, with some rare exceptions, you will not get a **faculty** position right after you graduate from your PhD.
The time spent as a postdoc is usually the time where you gain experience, hopefully make your peers aware of your existence, publish (or finish publishing) the chapters of your PhD thesis and maybe that study that you feel will make you stand out, etc. in other words: giving yourself the pedigree that will make you interesting for an **academic** hiring committee.
Since you have no intentions of becoming a professor, there are no real reason to 'do a postdoc', unless there aren't any other options (which I assume is not the case for you, as an engineer with experience in translational research/industry).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You would like to join a research department in the aeronautical/aerospace industry. It seems to me joining industry straight after finishing the PhD is the most logical next step for you.
I can think of only two reasons you want to do postdoc, one is that you really want to stay in Academia and the other is you cannot find a good industry research job after you get PhD.
If you have some unfinished academic research after you have done PhD, doing postdoc may or may not let you finish it depending on what postdoc you can find. But, once you go that route, you may be further from industry. Good job opportunities are sometimes instantaneous. Grab it or lose it.
I am an industry retiree from the sector you are in. I know for fact that they need and they should have more PhDs like you to do more research.
If you want to do postdoc for whatever reasons and your ultimate goal is to join industry, I think the rank of the university you do postdoc does not matter much. The usefulness of the research topic does matter. Industry wants profitability.
Lastly, if you really want to stay in Academia, then don't go to industry after PhD. You could feel unhappy. In that case, postdoc with high rank university is what you want to do.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/10 | 711 | 2,847 | <issue_start>username_0: While giving presentations in conferences or talks in research meetings, is it ok to self-advertise that I'm on the job market (academic or industry)? Is it advisable or does it make more sense to mention that during networking in teams?<issue_comment>username_1: I have seen many people do this and I don't see any problem with it.
Does it help? This is much less clear. But it seems very unlikely to hurt.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is ok, but it may not be ideal. Academia often frowns upon open self-promotion (more than it probably should, in my opinion), and flat out saying that you're on the market in a public presentation seems a little...well, "desperate" is too strong, but the next thing, perhaps.
Some thoughts about how/when/whether to do this:
1. Cultural nuances can vary in very subtle and localized ways. If you are going to a big conference in your profession or field, there must be other people there who are on the job market. Look to them and see how they are behaving: is anyone else advertising their availability in their presentations? If not, maybe don't do it yourself without an especially good reason. If so, look to the audience members and see how they're reacting. A little face-reading will probably tell you whether people are happy to hear this kind of information.
2. Consider trying to disburse this information slightly less directly. For instance, ending a talk with something like "**Please** come talk to me if you're interested in X [or, by implication, me]. I would be very interested to take these things further." Then, when someone talks to you one-on-one or in a small group, you can work the fact that you're on the market organically into the conversation.
3. Whenever you go to a conference and you're on the job market, concentrate on making meaningful academic and social connections with people, especially potential employers. Don't prioritize selling yourself directly. If they meet you and like you and your work, you can follow up later by letting them know you're on the market. And you should.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In circumstances such as this, a little levity can help a lot. Outright saying
>
> I need a job, please hire me!
>
>
>
is going to come across as desperate, melodramatic or tacky. Presenting it a little bit more humorously:
>
> And if you'd be interested in a postdoctoral associate who can tell you about X, I may be able to help you out. . . .
>
>
>
Or something in a similar vein will not. You'll make your point, but it won't come across too negatively. Of course, if a potential advisor isn't amused by such a comment, this could be problematic—but I'd argue that someone who has no sense of humor whatsoever might not be a good advisor to have in the first place.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/10 | 742 | 2,979 | <issue_start>username_0: I applied for a full professor position, and after the interview, I was asked for a copy of my PhD thesis.
I was confused and want to know if it is the common and normal procedure or happened for me based on a specific reason?
Because, my strong works were done after my PhD, and I didn't know that my PhD project would be used for judging me (frankly, I'm not proud of that project).<issue_comment>username_1: One of the general prerequisites in this day and age for a faculty appointment is an earned (as opposed to honorary) PhD from a (typically accredited) degree-granting institution.
Consequently, asking to see either a PhD thesis, a transcript, or the degree certificate is would be ways of ascertaining that you do, in fact, have a valid degree. This by no means implies that only your PhD matters in the hiring process; just that it's part of the process to ensure you're eligible. I wouldn't read too much into this beyond that.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I assume you are applying to a junior faculty line (your use of "full professor" would suggest senior faculty but this is belied by the rest of your post).
---
After they make the short list, we commonly ask junior faculty who do not yet have a research monograph to submit their dissertations. We do this for several reasons:
* If they are ABD, it is an easy way to ascertain whether they will complete. If it is March and they say they are submitting in April and they only have 3 chapters, then we know to be cautious.
* If they are recent PhDs, then often the PhD is the only piece of research writing that they have in their dossier. It remains one of the best gauges of their research competence until they complete more publications.
After responding, I looked at your profile and it seems that you might indeed be applying to senior positions. In that case, I'd be puzzled too -- unless you don't have many publications and/or your dissertation was at a university that is not well known. Or, alternately, the institution you are applying to has not had much experience with senior hires, and is defaulting to the junior practice.
---
Personal Aside: I'm a tenured associate. If I applied for a full position and they asked for my dissertation, I would be puzzled but not be offended **IF** they had also asked for **everything** on my CV. I would assume they are just being extremely meticulous in making my case to the Provost for the senior line. But if they asked for just a few of my publications **and** my dissertation, I might tend to becoming annoyed (by the insinuation that my PhD was suspect).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the field. What they generally want to see is a Terminal Degree, or exceptional achievement in lieu thereof. But in some fields no widely recognized PhD level really exists, and the Masters -- plus professional experience -- is as close to a terminal degree as it gets.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/10 | 817 | 3,356 | <issue_start>username_0: When I give an online test using a Course Management System (aka [Learning Management System](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_management_system), LMS), I like to use the "review answers" capability to go over the test with the class and highlight questions that many of them got incorrect. This can reveal common misunderstandings, poorly worded questions, things I didn't teach adequately, etc.
But given that the recommendation is to scramble the order of the questions and even the answers, how on earth can that work? This is why I DON'T scramble questions and answers.
Does anyone have a way of dealing with this? I have spent hours searching the web and found no reference to this issue. But anyone using a LMS must have encountered it? Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: One of the general prerequisites in this day and age for a faculty appointment is an earned (as opposed to honorary) PhD from a (typically accredited) degree-granting institution.
Consequently, asking to see either a PhD thesis, a transcript, or the degree certificate is would be ways of ascertaining that you do, in fact, have a valid degree. This by no means implies that only your PhD matters in the hiring process; just that it's part of the process to ensure you're eligible. I wouldn't read too much into this beyond that.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I assume you are applying to a junior faculty line (your use of "full professor" would suggest senior faculty but this is belied by the rest of your post).
---
After they make the short list, we commonly ask junior faculty who do not yet have a research monograph to submit their dissertations. We do this for several reasons:
* If they are ABD, it is an easy way to ascertain whether they will complete. If it is March and they say they are submitting in April and they only have 3 chapters, then we know to be cautious.
* If they are recent PhDs, then often the PhD is the only piece of research writing that they have in their dossier. It remains one of the best gauges of their research competence until they complete more publications.
After responding, I looked at your profile and it seems that you might indeed be applying to senior positions. In that case, I'd be puzzled too -- unless you don't have many publications and/or your dissertation was at a university that is not well known. Or, alternately, the institution you are applying to has not had much experience with senior hires, and is defaulting to the junior practice.
---
Personal Aside: I'm a tenured associate. If I applied for a full position and they asked for my dissertation, I would be puzzled but not be offended **IF** they had also asked for **everything** on my CV. I would assume they are just being extremely meticulous in making my case to the Provost for the senior line. But if they asked for just a few of my publications **and** my dissertation, I might tend to becoming annoyed (by the insinuation that my PhD was suspect).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the field. What they generally want to see is a Terminal Degree, or exceptional achievement in lieu thereof. But in some fields no widely recognized PhD level really exists, and the Masters -- plus professional experience -- is as close to a terminal degree as it gets.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/10 | 5,253 | 22,953 | <issue_start>username_0: During my high school career, I had the unique opportunity to take multiple mathematics courses at my local university, and after graduating, I took two graduate level math courses: Measure theory, and a class on topological manifolds. This was a great experience, but it has left me in a shifty situation.
I asked the department head if I could be admitted into the program since I took a full time course load receiving a B+ and A respectively, but it was denied due to the fact that I did not have a bachelors. The only option given to me at this university would be to enroll in the undergraduate program and take graduate courses.
I would be open to that idea, but it has multiple pitfalls. First of all, I am not guaranteed any research opportunities, which view as highly restrictive on my growth as a mathematician. In addition, I am not guaranteed funding opportunities like I would be in the graduate school. This in combination with the fact that I would have to take 50% more credit hours of course work would mean I would end up having to take out more loans than I would like. This is all very disappointing for me.
Instead of enrolling in courses again, this semester I began independent study in algebra and differential topology using Aluffi's and Lee's book respectively on the subjects. In addition, I have been exposing myself to more theoretical physics, such as Yang-Mills theories and Supersymmetry. Because these subjects are capturing my interest as well, it seems natural that I take my studies towards Algebraic Geometry and String Theories. I really want to get involved with a program to help enable me with my studies, but I do not think an undergraduate program would be adequate. For those of you who are still reading, how can I work towards getting into a program which would enable my studies an empower me with supervised research?
---
**EDIT**
I did not think my undergraduate work would to be too relevant, since most of it was not rigorous; that is, calculation based. I took undergraduate courses in ODE's, PDE's, probability theory, analysis, mulitvariable calculus, and linear algebra. Unfortunately, I did not do well in the ODE, calculus, and linear algebra courses because they were during the summer, and I had not yet acclimated to the required amount of work. In this specific program, my course work is nearly equivalent to a bachelors degree, sans single variable calculus and a class in discrete math.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not familiar with math grad programs (your situation would be highly unusual in a CS grad program), but I'd like to question two statements you make about the non-viability of an undergraduate degree:
>
> First of all, I am not guaranteed any research opportunities, which
> view as highly restrictive on my growth as a mathematician.
>
>
>
If you're good enough to take advanced material, grasp it and even approach an actual research question, then you're functionally equivalent to a grad student and many professors would be happy to take you on. The antecedent is important though: the fact that you've taken courses doesn't mean you're ready to do research, but this is precisely what REU programs are for, and faculty often get extra money to support students for UG research.
>
> In
> addition, I am not guaranteed funding opportunities like I would be in
> the graduate school. This in combination with the fact that I would
> have to take 50% more credit hours of course work would mean I would
> end up having to take out more loans than I would like.
>
>
>
You're not wrong here, but there are often scholarship opportunities available, so the situation isn't completely black and white.
A final note: one reason that grad programs might be leery in taking someone without an undergraduate degree is because the UG degree is more than just a credential. It's a proxy for a long sequence of coursework that exposes you broadly to an entire field of study. In almost any discipline, a basic level of breadth is very important for research work: because you need to
* understand what questions are important and why
* understand how different questions fit together
* acquire the ability to see connections among different parts of an area.
Of course you can do an entire undergraduate program via self-study, but then you don't have a "short certificate" proving your command of the material.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you can't get into a good graduate program without a bachelor's (and it seems highly unlikely; I have never heard of such a case, even with child prodigies): Pick an undergraduate university that will offer you a full scholarship (I'm sure that if you have good SAT and grades, you will be able to find some such university), graduate as fast as you want to (could easily be done in 2 years at most public universities, with your background, assuming credits transfer which they should, and you might not even have to take summer classes), and aggressively seek out undergraduate research opportunities from day 1, both during the semester and during the summer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You're not going to get into grad school in Math without going through a Bachelor's first. Just like you won't get into grad school in any of the hard sciences without doing the foundational work first. There's good reason for this: you need the solid background in the fundamentals before you delve into a specialty. The specialties emerged out of the fundamentals, historically, and it makes no sense to try and skip ahead. Also, if you try to do this, you're doing yourself a great disservice, which you would probably realize later on. You'll be approaching your studies without adequate knowledge/experience.
Why would you want to skip undergraduate courses anyway? There's a lot of mathematics to be learned in the undergrad classes, and if you truly love math, then you ought to welcome the chance to learn and explore. You say you didn't do well in calculus and differential equations, but these are foundational for so much mathematics that follows.
So, the main question here is not whether you can go straight into grad school (the answer is no), but what your true goal is: to learn and appreciate math, or simply to get into a field that you think is interesting without truly knowing what's involved.
---
I went to an engineering school that is well known for the hard sciences and engineering, I've had a lot of exposure to academia, have known, studied and worked with a lot of people in these fields, and have never heard of someone going straight from high school to grad school in physics, math, chemistry or engineering fields.
---
now that said, once you are enrolled in an undergraduate degree program, you can definitely take grad level classes, particularly once you get the basic prereqs out of the way, once you start showing your interest and abilities, it's pretty easy to take those grad classes even if you haven't finished your B.S. yet. I've had friends who basically worked on both their B.S. and M.S. or Ph.D. at the same time!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I know of one case in which someone went straight from high school into a graduate program, so it is theoretically possible if you can find a university that agrees. However, it's almost unheard of, and it would be a bad idea for just about everyone (even setting aside the question of whether undergraduate education provides any benefits beyond preparation for graduate school).
What I assume is that you'd like to do important research and are looking for preparation that will help you accomplish this goal. The minimal standards for a Ph.D. are actually pretty low, and you can squeak by without knowing much or doing impressive research, but this sort of dissertation will set you up for career failure. Instead, you need to enter a strong Ph.D. program, ideally one of the top ones, and really excel.
It sounds like you've completed enough courses for a minimal undergraduate degree in mathematics, but probably not enough to be competitive at a top grad program. The applicants at these programs have generally taken a more extensive and rigorous collection of undergraduate courses (e.g., abstract algebra, topology, complex analysis), and it's not uncommon to have taken more than two grad courses, sometimes many more and in a few cases starting in high school. Plus it's common to have undergraduate research experience or other substantial independent work, such as a senior thesis.
Basically, imagine yourself in four years. That's who you're going to be competing against for admission, the other extraordinary high school students who went to college and became even more knowledgeable and impressive.
If you could find a university that would admit you to graduate school now, you'd probably end up going to a second tier school, spending some time catching up on courses, and then writing a good thesis but not living up to your potential. Your career would get off to an inauspicious start, you'd have trouble on the job market, and in the long term you'd likely end up with a less research-oriented job than you might have had otherwise.
Of course I could be wrong about this: you might have exceptional luck or be the next Terry Tao. But diving into graduate school at a young age with minimal preparation is an incredibly risky strategy.
This is something that's really hard to discern from college catalogs. They usually focus on the minimal requirements to complete each degree and move on to the next level, but that's not how people do things in practice. Instead, the vast majority of future mathematicians spend at least three years on their undergraduate studies, and generally four (in the U.S.). The operative question isn't how quickly you can complete the degree requirements, but rather how much you can achieve along the way. Preparing well for grad school is far more demanding than completing an undergraduate degree.
So what I'd recommend is that you pick an undergraduate program in which you'll have really outstanding fellow students, so that you learn from and are pushed by them. Being part of a cohort like this is probably the single biggest factor in success, and your goal should be to find amazing people to hang around with and discuss mathematics. You should then take whatever undergraduate courses are needed to fix up your background (if any) and move on to graduate courses. You should also look for research opportunities during the summer or perhaps the school year, but it's not worth obsessing over this. No program will guarantee anything, but at the very least you'll surely have some success applying to summer REUs, and it's reasonable to hope for even more than that. Perhaps you'll finish in three years, and perhaps you'll decide to stay for four, but either way you'll be far better prepared for graduate school than you are now.
It sounds like you're in a great position to do well, with a remarkably strong mathematics background. However, I'm convinced that the right question is how to get as much as possible from your undergraduate studies, rather than how to skip by them as quickly as you can.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: You need a mentor.
Consider your current experiences and gifts as a large and powerful chainsaw. You may find some immediate gratification at cutting through swaths of wood at a pace you like. However, you can burn yourself out, wreck the chainsaw, reduce your number of functioning limbs, etc.
(I didn't lose any limbs as an undergraduate, but I got sick of school in my second year and left it in my third. If I had paid more attention to the people who were there to help me, my earlier years might have been more satisfying.) If you give yourself the discipline to handle the routine and mundane, and also the time to have fun and work on things at which you excel, you will have something better than an awesome trajectory: you will have a life of enduring and satisfying achievement. And you can still spend time doing graduate work.
The mentor will have to know you well to tell you what is best for you. (A team of mentors might be better.) I can imagine more disasters for you than successes if you try this without at least one. Also, the Internet is no substitute for a mentor: this kind of life decision, while up to you, can benefit from talking face to face with someone who is interested in your personal as well as your academic success. As commented elsewhere, hardly anyone cares how fast you did something as much as how well you did it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Unlike some other respondents, I don't think this is impossible. In fact I have a friend who dropped out of high school for various reasons unrelated to his academic achievement. He spent several years studying math and CS, by himself, to graduate level. He tried in various ways to access a research-based course, culminating in him being offered a place to do a PhD in CS, without having either a Bachelor's or a Master's (which is a usual requirement to start a PhD in Europe).
However, to follow a trajectory like this there are at least four necessary conditions:
* You must be very good. Someone who looks like they are going to do a passable PhD and publish a couple of papers before stagnating or disappearing into industry is not going to get this opportunity. Someone who has already published peer-reviewed work might be a candidate.
* You must have some good reason to not want to do an undergraduate course. You aren't going to be supported with this just because you don't feel like sitting in a lecture hall for several years, listening to things you already know. Most working mathematicians, including prodigies and household names, did exactly that. Usually you will be advised to do the BSc and study harder things / do research in your own time. Good reasons might include some disability or personal circumstances that make it extremely hard for you to get through the undergraduate system, or the fact that you are already spending most of your time doing professional level research. Money issues might or might not be seen as valid, depending on whom you ask.
* You need to show that you are mature enough to be a graduate student. Undergraduate studies involve a certain amount of hand-holding for a reason - many students who have just left high school aren't ready to take full responsibility for their education. Even if you are a genius, a school will be worried about your abilities to perform well in your studies, while taking care of yourself on your own, and not succumbing to mental health issues, addictions, etc. Teaching or TAing undergrads also requires a certain maturity. The exception is if someone is going to take care of you (for example, if you have ASD, and you live with your parents who support you with all the non-mathematical things you need help with).
* You need to put your case to a professor in a school you want to work at, including convincing her of the things above. This is key. There are various obstacles put in place to stop the over-confident, the under-qualified, and the insane from getting onto advanced math courses. If you apply in the usual way you will almost certainly be rejected.
Your best bet is to approach someone in a field you care about, write to them directly and explain why it is that you know you are capable of a PhD. Most people you approach will reject you out of hand. (Think Ramanujan - statistically you are likely to be less talented than Ramanujan.) If you get lucky, you might find someone who is willing to hear you out. Be aware that anything that gives the impression of a scattershot approach (standard letter template, not being able to explain why you chose that professor or that school) will rule you out very quickly. You should be looking for someone whom you have read and understood several papers by (if you aren't reading and understanding journal papers on a regular basis, why not?). You should be able to show them published or publishable work you have done, related to their own interests. This person, if they end up supervising you, will have to fight to get you in to their department, and then deal with an unusually onerous burden of formalities and paperwork to have you as their student. They aren't going to do this unless there is some compelling reason why they would want to work with you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Don't focus on the letters you'll get from your first degree.
It is very likely that you will need to get a bachelor’s degree before going enrolling for an advanced degree, especially since you sound like you would do best in a highly selective program. But for now, what you need is a university and more specifically, a math department, that is willing to be flexible, encouraging of advanced work, and give you the chance to prepare yourself for a really top graduate program. You need this whether you are admitted as a masters student or an undergrad. Assuming you want to continue to a PhD after your first degree, you need to focus more on what you will be doing for the next few years, rather than the degree you’ll have at the end. You are better off finding an excellent school that will support an undergrad doing graduate level work (fairly common) than an OK school that will accept a grad student with uncertain credentials (very unusual).
To start with, I’d strongly recommend contacting professors at well regarded math departments whose research you find interesting, and let them know your situation. This will mean you are looking at schools as though you were going to grad school even though you will probably be an undergrad. Find professors you think you’d like to work with, and arrange to meet them and meet their other grad students. In person is best, but at least talk on the phone. Apply to a few schools where the math department supports and encourages their grad students, not just a place with a good reputation. I've had a number of friends who have dropped out of PhD programs due to department politics or unsupportive advisors. Start yourself out on the right track.
Many schools have scholarships available, and in some cases, a school will offer a full ride including a living stipend to the most exceptional undergraduates. The math departments and professors may be able to help you out here, too, if they especially want you. Just ask. Don’t limit your options because of a preconceived bias.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I think a very good options for you is to apply to very competitive (private) US institutions for undergraduate (i.e. Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, Yale, etc.).
I mention these specifically for a few reasons. They all have very well regarded graduate programs where you will have the flexibility to take very advanced courses. They have extraordinary peers with similar advanced backgrounds (my brother, who was an undergraduate at MIT, took many years of graduate math coursework in high school). Finally they have very good financial aid opportunities. I will say from my own experience (at Yale), that strongly prepared undergraduates are known to jump straight into graduate coursework and research freshman and sophomore year.
The most important thing to do if you are interested in mathematics (or physics) professionally is to interact with great professors and go to a great graduate program. I am extremely skeptical that the top notch of graduate math programs (the past list + Berkeley + University of Michigan + Cambridge + etc.) would take you right now. People apply from undergraduate with graduate coursework, research experience, and letters of recommendation from very well known people in the field. The last point is especially important for these top notch programs (math is a fairly small community). By going through undergraduate, you will make these connections early on, find a subfield, position yourself for the very best program in your interested subfield, and get into an excellent program.
Another thing to note is that assuming your "local university" isn't a large, well-regarded state-school (or international equivalent), these courses are simply not up to the level of those you would take at top-tier university. Generally, in my experience taking courses at my local university in high school, theses course are very computational and those that are proof-based aren't nearly as challenging as those I found at Yale.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: A very prestigious professor at my school told me that another professor here, whom he named, in fact completed his (STEM) undergraduate degree in two weeks:
1. he looked through colleges to find the one that had the lowest requirements to graduation
2. he settled, I believe, on Ohio State, although my memory may be incorrect on the exact college.
3. for two weeks, he took tests to pass out of enough requirements that he was able to graduate.
So he ended up with a legitimate undergraduate degree in two weeks, and then he went to graduate school. I was told he had been sailing around the world for three years prior to getting his undergraduate degree. However, my school is very prestigious. From this story, I am guessing that the professor was also doing something other than sailing that I was not informed of, and certainly he would have to have some kind of academic contact to achieve the necessary recommendations.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: As a rule, you don't get into Graduate Programs without Graduating.
Others have already mentioned ways around that etc.
I will comment on ways you can do undergraduate, and meet your goals.
I am going to assume you are brilliantly clever.
in the top 1% or so of people graduating from high-school at the same time as you
Some universities offer a research undergraduate. For extremely high achieving students, thus the top 1%. This normally involves each year a research component. Either in the from of a unit, or on top of all units. Perhaps with a requirement of maintaining a Distinction or better average. My university calls this a **Bachelor of Philosophy** -- in the same way the a PhD is a Doctorate of Philosophy. It was formerly known as a **Bachelors of Advanced Science**, and a **Bachelors of Advanced Arts**.
I thus recommend that you look into Research based undergraduate degrees in your area.
Even if you are not currently performing well enough to get in, you can often transfer courses after a semester or two of demonstrating your high marks at university -- which are valued to admissions much more than similar marks from high school.
I wouldn't recommend cutting out on the board baseline of experience you would obtain from a undergraduate degree, even if you could. (Exceptions apply, see other answers.)
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/10 | 1,448 | 6,340 | <issue_start>username_0: This is my first time posting here and I apologize if this is not in the relevant forum or site. My question is: is it possible to approach professors to changing their teaching style? and if so, how would it be best to approach this topic?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on what your goal is.
If you have a particular course and a particular professor, and you want to see changes before the course ends, you may need some political power or not. Many professors appreciate feedback, some don't, and you can usually tell by noting which ones ask for it. If they do ask, follow their format for giving feedback, and add a note saying that you have more specific suggestions if they wish to discuss it further. If they don't, you will either have to drop it or try a different tactic.
If the course has teaching assistants, you can usually give some feedback through them, although to promote understanding, you might give them a copy in writing to hand to the professor. If there are none, you may have to submit feedback through the department; there usually are people in that department in charge of the quality of teaching, and they can advise you at least as well as on this forum.
If the issue is more with a person than a situation, then I recommend getting advice from colleagues of that person on how to make such an approach. Through the department is likely the best way, but it highly depends on the situation.
If the issue is more with a class structure than a person, you can make suggestions, but they will likely be referred to the next class.
The applicability of all of the above is subject to class size, level of instruction, and many other factors. Without more specifics, I imagine your best answer in the long run is by using official channels. That way if anything goes wrong, the process can be blamed and not you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest the following:
1. Ask students who have take that course before.
2. Look at ratemyprofessors website for his/her reviews.
3. If there is no past info about him, then ask a "**smart**"/"deep" questions POLITELY in class. If he get angry, then he probably not like your suggestion to change teach style.
4. Ask other students too to see if they have same problems. Then, you will know that its not just you. If only you have problem and most people "get it", then you can take their help instead of prof.
5. If all 1 to 4 are okay, then politely suggest improvements. Show him what you have not understand and how he can explain better. If you need more problem solving in a class, then request for it. Choose words carefully.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I think there is a misunderstanding. Although professors are hired by the university to serve the learning experience of the students (among other things), they are not "hired" by the students. This is a logical misunderstanding in US universities where students pay tuition but this model does not apply to the rest of the world. In this sense, professors, like all regular employees should and are evaluated (in terms of performance) only by their employer (university / state) and not the customer / student. Also, professors stay in many cases, for many years in the same institution where students (undergraduates mostly) stay for a limited amount of time. Therefore although the student might or not pay for the university services he is bound to leave eventually, whereas the professor probably outstays generations of students.
With that being said, one student's opinion is not really relevant. If the university has some sort of professor evaluation by the students, then the student by all means should clearly express his opinion. But going to a professor and just saying "I do not like your teaching style. Change it" is simply rude (and I say that as a student myself). How can I tell someone how to do his work when I have not done it myself? The same goes for all employees from waiters to bouncers (there such comments might get you in trouble), unless the employee has been rude to you and you must defend yourself. In all other cases, you should not tell people how to do their job, you can only tell them how you like to be treated. If you do not like the way they do business you must find someone else that suits your style. In universities where the professor grades you (and not the other way around) I would suggest even extra caution.
You should also not forget that your guess on what is wrong or right is based on only one opinion (yours and your friends) where the professor has based his teaching style on hundreds - thousands of students. His style might or might not suit you. There is not one-size-fits-all. But why he has to change his style for you, when the things you propose might alienate other students? The answer is simple. In 99% of the cases he simply will not. Also consider the fact that probably your comment on his teaching style will not even be an original one (somewhen, somewhere some other student might have expressed a similar discontent to yours).
So, what can you do? Negotiate. Ask him / her for more slides if he has any; Ask him for more personal assignments or for pointing you to extra reading material, basically everything that will help you benefit more from his class. Ask him to repeat what you did not understand. But most of all ask nicely and with respect. That way if he says no, it will be his fault and not yours.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: One thing you might to do is go to office hours and ask thoughtfully prepared questions.
"I looked over my notes on X, and I still don't understand how it's related to the rest of the material. Could you please explain further?
"The theory is interesting, but I'm still confused as to how this applies to examples. Could you suggest where I should learn about these?"
"When you talk about Y, I gather I'm supposed to have mastered that already, but actually I haven't. Where should I learn about this?"
Possible outcomes vary. Maybe you will find that you signed up for a different course than you should have; maybe the professor won't care; but possibly, the professor will take your questions as some evidence that h/she should adjust his/her teaching strategy a little bit. (And will also answer them!)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/11 | 301 | 1,172 | <issue_start>username_0: How should one cite materials taken from a Massively Open Online Course (MOOC)? This may be a specific case of the more general, "How should one cite a university course?"
For a concrete example, consider how I should cite the "Resampling Wheel" algorithm for implementing a particle filter, taken from <NAME>'s [Artificial Intelligence for Robotics](https://www.udacity.com/wiki/cs373/unit_3) course on Udacity?<issue_comment>username_1: In many fields, it is common practice to look up the original publication in which a concept/algorithm was introduced, and to cite that. Many courses will give some literature pointers to help you with the search for it.
The reason is that citations are also meant to distribute credit for novel findings, so in this way, the researchers who came up with the algorithm get the credit.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: <NAME>. “Academic Integrity.” [week 3: Achieving with integrity: using the works of others]. MOOC offered by the University of Auckland. Retrieved on Jul 23, 2017 from <https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/academic-integrity/10/todo/8323>
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/11 | 2,096 | 8,484 | <issue_start>username_0: I start my master studies this fall in quantitative finance/economics in Europe. Since this will just take 3-4 semesters I want to take a look ahead and obviously PhD is one option to do.
So I am wondering if it makes sense to go to the US for PhD, since I will have already a master's degree in two years. I read a lot about the US PhD's which can be started after bachelor and therefore are somehow like a European master & PhD combined.
I saw some PhD programmes from well-known US universities and their curriculum contained almost just courses I will already have in my master. Wouldn't that be a waste of time to repeat them? Specially compared to my country (Switzerland) where a PhD duration is between 3-4 years.
Every input/personal experience will be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I think in the end it will be a personal choice based on what you want in your career on where you may do your PhD. Based on some of the queries you had in the comparison between a US PhD or a European one, hopefully the following will be of help.
This [link](http://www.iisj.net/en/socio-legal-master/doctoral-studies/how-do-phds-different-countries-differ) is a good page that shows the difference between the system in Europe and the US for PhD. The main reasons from it why a US PhD would be longer is;
>
> The main difference between doing a PhD in the US and most other countries is the coursework component. In the US, there is usually a requirement that PhD student complete at least 2 years of coursework before they start their independent research. This means that a PhD in the US will take longer to complete.
>
>
>
So yes there is a chance that you will be repeating coursework that you have done in your masters, but there is also the possibility that you may be able to get a wavier for coursework already completed.
I know (in Ireland at least, my home country) there is now a move in some universities towards a structured PhD that will include some coursework in year 1.
As per Piotr's comment it is typical that a PhD in Europe is pursed after Master's, while in US it contains Master's. In some cases in Europe it may be possible to go straight from a bachelor degree to a PhD. I know in my own case when starting out my advisor wondered if I would like to apply to complete a PhD instead of a Masters (in History). My sister also went straight from her bachelor to her PhD program (in mircobiology). Both these cases were in Ireland where you normally would have to have a first in your bachelor degree to be able to pursue a PhD directly afterward.
The page also details some other differences, such as how the committees are slightly different in both systems.
The [Coimbra Group](http://www.coimbra-group.eu/), an association of long-established European multidisciplinary universities have produced a [Survey on PhD Programme Structures and Administration in Europe and North America](https://web.archive.org/web/20130401083155/http://www.coimbra-group.eu/transdoc/uploads/TRANS-DOC%20Survey%20findings.pdf) that has some insightful information as well.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The difference is that in the US, Bachelor's degrees take longer to obtain (4 years vs. 3 in Switzerland) and it's considered the actual 'college degree', while as you know, in CH1 it makes little sense to stop at the Bachelor's level because is has no value except to give you entry to the Master's (with perhaps the exception of ETH/EPF Bachelors in informatics that can lead to direct employment, and professional schools Bachelors, of course, but they're off-topic).
In the US, in general you go to 'grad school' which describes both Master and PhD studies. Masters are sometimes given to graduate students who wish or have to stop after a few years of grad school for a variety of reasons. As a consequence the Master's degree is less common.
To the point: what you learned as a Master students will not necessarily be redundant with first year graduate courses. And if it is, well good for you, you will just cruise through the exams and enjoy having time to concentrate on research instead of studying. Note that, since recently, most (if not all) Swiss PhD programs have courses requirements as well.
On the other hand, you will most of the time have less (or no) teaching assistant work. And there are incredibly good research groups in the US, some will give you the kind of expertise and exposure that you wouldn't get in a Swiss university. I don't think having to repeat a few courses should be a killing criterion if you are interested in a given research environment.
Also, I don't know much about the economics domain, but for engineering, natural sciences and humanities, the *actual* time to get a PhD in CH tends more towards 4-5 years than 3-4.
1 CH stands for *Confoederatio Helvetica*, the multilingual abbreviation for Switzerland. I hold a Swiss PhD and I'm a postdoc researcher in the US.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To add to username_1's answer: it's true that in the US, most students enter a PhD program immediately after the bachelor's, but by no means all. It's not uncommon for a student to have done a master's elsewhere first. As such, any reasonable PhD program should be used to dealing with incoming students who already have a master's, and be willing to adjust their requirements as warranted.
It would be perfectly reasonable to contact any departments that interest you, and ask them about your situation. It's very likely they will tell you that they are able to waive requirements that would be redundant for you, or to let you satisfy them in an accelerated manner (perhaps you take an exam or something). Alternatively, they might have a compelling explanation for why they won't do that (perhaps their program looks similar to your background but is actually different in some essential way).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Let me first point some differences that may help you making your mind, between the PhD programs in USA and Canada on one hand, and in Europe on the other.
In **US & Canada** you go through a structured PhD program, so it'll be pretty much like your current masters in Switzerland. You'll need to take some classes, then you'll have a semester or two to work on your PhD thesis.
In **Europe** you start right off with your PhD thesis! so you're basically a research assistant, working on your PhD as part of your job as a PhD student, in that case you'll be doing other work as well for your institute. As a scholarship holder you'll be able to work full-time on your PhD.
As for your question: Having the same course names doesn't mean that the content will be same. It could be that more and/or advanced topics will be covered in the PhD programs you came across. If this wasn't the case, you can try to contact the university to see the possibility of equating the courses you already took, this might involve a test by the department to make sure you'll be as qualified in that area as the ones who took their course.
I'd say that a PhD in USA will give you more knowledge through the coursework, you'll get to learn more stuff that you might or might not need. In Europe, since you're jumping directly into your thesis, you'll get more of the academic life and you'll have to learn, on your own, whatever's going to help you with your thesis, which can be difficult at the beginning if you're not self-driven.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This is answered already, but for some reason never straight to the point. If your mind is set to pursue a PhD in the US, just ***go for it right now*** (after your bachelor, and before your masters). Once they accept you, you simply go through the courses you needed to go through anyway at your European Masters, but then there are no additional applications, negotiations, hard decisions to make.
You can on the other hand start a PhD in the US after a Masters in Europe, but you will have to negotiate waiving the courses - and it's not granted they will waive them all. ***Coursework is very comparable, but it will be your responsibility to prove it.***
Summary: pursue a Masters in Europe only if you are not sure you want to commit for the next 4-7 years (the PhD length in the US is not fixed, but typically depends on being able to publish original research). The total PhD length may actually be shorter in the US if you work hard.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/11 | 697 | 2,945 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a student who is currently undergoing therapy for mental health issues and I seem to be making good progress towards normalcy according to my therapist. Recently, I took an exam for a co-ordinated course and I completely panicked on the exam. I made a brave attempt to remain calm and answer the question to the best of my abilities and could only manage to earn 5 points overall.
Based on my predicament, can I approach my professor and department chairperson with a request to re-take the exam? I can of course ask my therapist to provide documentation detailing my case. Do universities make allowances for students who can demonstrate a genuine case for a panic attack?
**EDIT:**
I do realize that I should contact the counselling center beforehand to make arrangements to take the test there but unfortunately, I was doing quite well and my therapist did not see a need to supply me with a note documenting my need. I completely blacked out when I saw the questions as they were quite long and bore no semblance to the practice exams or the homework questions.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Based on my predicament, can I approach my professor and department chairperson with a request to re-take the exam? I can of course ask my therapist to provide documentation detailing my case.
>
>
>
Approach only the professor first. If you are already escalating to the department head in your first mail, the professor may not take it well. That being said, I see no reason why you should *not* contact her/him.
>
> Do universities make allowances for students who can demonstrate a genuine case for a panic attack?
>
>
>
Most universities have a contact person responsible for accessibility and non-discrimination of students with disabilities. I am not sure whether they are in general also responsible for documented cases of mental health issues, but it would not surprise me. In the future, it makes sense to get in touch with the responsible contact person *before* the exam, so as to clarify whether something can be done in advance to make taking the exam easier for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are in the US, your school is required by law (the Americans with Disabilities Act, often abbreviated ADA) to make reasonable academic accommodations for students with disabilities. This includes mental illness.
In the US, schools have a formal ADA policy that describes the procedure for requesting accommodations. This includes a description of *who* to contact to make these arrangements. This person is trained in dealing with these issues.
Your next step should be to contact this person, find out what can be done about this exam, and find out what accommodations they can offer for future exams. (For example, they may help you arrange to take future exams in a separate room with no other students and/or with extended time, which may help you stay calm.)
Upvotes: 6 |
2014/04/11 | 607 | 2,251 | <issue_start>username_0: I didn't immediately find the 4-year death-clock on the K99/R00 grant. I just want to know, is that the only major NIH activity code that restricts eligibility based on time since graduation?
I realize that individual institutes vary a lot in their policies, but I'm trying to get at least a rough idea of which activity codes to filter out before I go through in more detail through the RFAs that remain.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure about the rules on how long since graduating NIH grants begin to be restricted, but there is a general rule that the NIH will only fund postdocs for 5 years total--so if you have already received 5 years funding as a postdoc trainee, you are likely to be excluded from more. I think it depends on the particular grant though.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is one additional example I am aware of, which is institute-dependent: the standard NRSA F32 award is often issued for "3 years minus any time that the fellow has already spent in the sponsor's laboratory at the time of the award." (At least at NIGMS: <https://www.nigms.nih.gov/training/indivpostdoc/Pages/PostdocFellowshipDescription.aspx>)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: The rules seems to be institute and FOA dependent. There are definitely other FOAs that have timelimits. The one I am most familiar with is the [NIDCD Early Career Research (ECR) Award (R21)](https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/funding/types/research-grants-r-series#R21-ECR) which has a 7 year time limit from graduation. The [NIDCD K22](http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-DC-15-002.html#_Section_III._Eligibility) only allows 2 years of research experience (which is not quite a graduation based time limit).
The NIH also gives preference to [Early Stage Investigators](http://grants.nih.gov/policy/new_investigators/index.htm) for some grants which has a 10 year time limit. That page lists a number of early stage grants which may have time limits. You could also look at the [NIH Research and Career Development pages](https://researchtraining.nih.gov/programs/fellowships) for individual FOAs. Finally, the individual institutes that are relevant to your field probably have the most detailed information.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/11 | 454 | 1,922 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student in Computer Science. Long story short: I do not have a good relationship with my advisor. I don't trust his guidance or his ethical integrity. Therefore, I am seeking external advice for my situation.
During my PhD I got one paper accepted in a first tier conference, two papers accepted in a second tier conferences, and other papers published in workshops and minor conferences. I have one journal paper accepted.
However, not all the work is on the same topic but it is scattered among three, mostly unrelated, subjects. Now my PhD is ending.
**Is it negative that my work has been on three unrelated subjects?**
(I cannot find a topic that allows me to merge all my results in my PhD thesis, I have to leave out at least half of my work.)<issue_comment>username_1: To the degree that you do have a PhD thesis *and* some other work (that, more over, has been published), I would say it is a positive thing, not a negative one. It is a good combination of "breadth and depth" as one comment has put it. The general advice I have heard many times for long-term planning, is "the ideal is to try to distinguish yourself in two fields inside a discipline. One -everybody tries that. Three -and your image starts getting blurry". Or something like that (and with the caveat that "fields inside a discipline" may not mean the same thing for different disciplines).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming we are talking about the U.S., at this point you just need to defend your thesis. This should be your main concern. Then publish your results in various journals/conference proceedings, as appropriate, including those results already included in the thesis.
It is irrelevant if you will merge all of your work or not, as chances are, almost nobody is going to read your thesis anyway. You will need a journal/conference publication of the same results.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/11 | 2,704 | 10,965 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a full-time job, and am a part-time PhD student who is experiencing tremendous struggles throughout the first year, compared to my previous schooling which was extremely easy. I want to know if I'm psyching myself out / over-thinking things, or if I'm being rational or not, given all the circumstances.
My academic career began with a degree in Computer Science, but I took as many side courses in Mathematics as I could. I did very well, loved it, and thought to do graduate studies. A couple of my professors thought it was a great idea, considering how well I did in their classes, and suggested going for a Ph.D., part-time as I have a full-time job, in the same school. They wrote me stellar recommendation letters and I got in without any issues, whatsoever (unfunded, but that was not a concern to me).
I am nearing the end of my first year in the program, and it has been an unbelievable struggle. A family/personal emergency caused me to have to withdraw from my classes for the first semester; despite how embarrassed I was, my professors told me it was okay and that things happen, and that they still had complete faith in me. Now it's the second semester, and I am struggling to keep up in my classes. I have always approached math via my intuition, but now I feel I am able to follow my professors in lectures and participate, but when it comes to studying or applying it that's when I struggle. Self-study takes so long and is very arduous and as I'm not used to it; I get extremely distracted.
Compounded with this, is that I want to discuss this with others, but I find it almost impossible to face my professors that recommended me, anymore. I haven't spoken to them since the winter due to shame. They had so much faith and confidence in me (and probably still do), but I feel that as a PhD I should do better, but I'm not. My performance is shocking and appalling to me, considering what I was used to doing. Talking to my adviser is out of the question as well, as when I discussed my last-semester withdrawal situation with him, he made a loose implication that "he wasn't necessarily sure he would've admitted me, in hindsight," and he wondered aloud who was the one that did admit me.
I am still in a position where I feel that I would not be happy unless pursuing graduate study in mathematics, as I want to learn this subject inside and out, be surrounded by a community that I find interesting and exciting, and researching and publishing new ideas. I just have no idea if my struggle is either completely normal, if I'm horribly under-qualified, or if I am just psyching myself out. How can I figure out whether I should stick with my program or not?<issue_comment>username_1: I'll keep this answer fairly general, because what you describe sounds like a fairly general situation.
The transition from undergraduate to Ph.D work is difficult because you're going from a very structured environment (take classes; get grades) to a very unstructured one (take classes, but focus on learning rather than grades; deal with material that's more cutting-edge and therefore open-ended; start getting into research, which is really open-ended).
This is hard, and it's normal to expect a period of transition where things seem out of whack.
Coupled with that is the shame: people going to grad school are usually the ones who do well in undergraduate and have done well all their life in school. You've received praise from your teachers throughout, and have received constant encouragement.
Now you're in grad school. Everyone there is like you, so the competition is more fierce. There are no pseudo-objective measures like grades so there's no way to compare yourself to others (which for high achievers often means that you compare yourself negatively). And above all, all those nice professors who used to encourage you have turned into scowly curmudgeons who expect more and more and more...
It's a wonder everyone isn't depressed. And on top of that you have a full-time job !!
The recommendation that I will give, and that everyone here is giving you, is to ease up on yourself and try separate out your feelings of shame and inadequacy from the reality. You should find a support network of friends, hang out in study groups, do extracurricular stuff. The friends you make in grad school will be friends for life - such is the nature of this crucible. Since you're working full time this is going to be even harder, but maybe you can find others who also work full time and are in a similar position. Also see if you can find senior grad students who are part-time: their experience will be very valuable.
And then in a year you'll be back year asking about [how to avoid discouragement in research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2219/how-should-i-deal-with-discouragement-as-a-graduate-student/2220#2220), and [how to avoid procrastinating](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5786/how-to-avoid-procrastination-during-the-research-phase-of-my-phd), without realizing that this is a sign you've made it through the first year successfully :)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A PhD is an apprenticeship - you need to be on the same page as your advisor always. If he was making comments like that you need to know if it was his poor attempt at motivating, or if you don't get along. If you don't get along you need to find someone whom you can get along with. This is a long process. You should have no "shame" with your former professors either. And you should definitely go back and talk to them, as well as current students, especially the more senior ones.
As username_1 points out, everything is about to change. Classes in a PhD program are more to complete any breadth you are missing at the foundation from your earlier program. Then they are to start filling in a stronger foundation for your specialty. And then they are supposed to give you a taste of the depth in even more specific subfields. Also to help you understand what professors are available, what they study, and how they work, so that you can find an advisor and a committee.
After that you start doing research - and it becomes a much more self-motivated and often self-directed endeavor that builds on these foundations. A PhD is about vetting you as a researcher from start-to-finish. And putting you on an initial research trajectory. No one will ever ask your GPA from graduate school once you have your degree. Although it's expected you get good grades by your program (many require A/B's - C's are often failing in grad school - but you're only taking "in major" classes now so C's weren't really great for "in major" classes in your earlier degree programs). Again though the grade isn't what's important. But how hard you have to work for them is a potential indication of how hare you'll have to push yourself later in the less directed portions of the program. But you'll have much more freedom as to what to research.
I have found your problem is not unique. Many (/Most?/All?) students struggle with what exactly is grad school, and why are they there, and time management. It sounds like time management is something you will have to work on too. Not necessarily because you are bad at it, but because you have a lot of constraints on your time. Holding a job at the same time means you will be a little more removed from your fellow students. You will want to talk to them and get to know them if you can. It will help to know that you aren't in it alone.
In addition to your peers, a good book to help you know that this isn't your own personal hell is: *Getting What You Came For*. Very affordable survey of grad school. Honestly most school "handbooks" should be thrown away and replaced with this. Another good book is *A PhD is Not Enough* it's a shorter version of the first, but also talks about how your goals and "the systems" goals are not 100% in line with each other and you need to be aware of that and how to navigate that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: PhD can be extremely tough, for many reasons. I finished the comprehensive exam prep (1st year), at 6 am in the morning, to start my presentation at 9:00. Needless to say it was less than stellar. So, most, if not all PhD candidates went through what you are going through right now. To put salt on the wound, your first article is a pregnancy that seems to last forever. And I'm not even talking about writing the thesis.
There will be a point, in this journey, where you're not sure of why you started all this in the first place, where you are on the map, and most painfully where the hell this boat is going. Don't worry, that's normal.
There are a few important points from what I see in your narrative. You're feeling bad because you think your performances are suboptimal, and because you don't want to look bad in front of your advisor, you won't bring up the topic with him/them. He's not really helping either. You're then left with little advice as to how to improve. Then you feel worse, and the situation worsens.
Congratulations, you are now in tail spin. How do you get out of it ?
The beast AKA the PhD topic:
It is very much up to you, that's the point of the first year, you can actually decide and then explain why it would benefit from a re-focus. It is the hardest part of the whole stuff. There's no magic recipe, you need to understand, and to accept that what you managed to explore during the first year, is the only material you have to start digging on the right spot. Discussions with your advisor, and with your peers are very important.
The first Year:
It's the toughest one. You have graduate courses AND the comprehensive exam. Basically, the only bright spot are the two weeks vacations coming after that. Keep it in mind.
Health (mental and body)
It's draining. So you have to take care of yourself. Eat well, sleep well, practice sports, and above all you MUST hang out at least once a week. A patient girl/boy friend is a great asset to have.
Kill the father:
A much unexplored aspect of the PhD is the relationship student/advisor. The sooner he doesn't act as a father any more, the better.
Finally, you:
PhD is by nature unstructured. That's what it is, that's what it is for. It's your job to keep the bearings aligned, and to foster great discussions with your peers. If you made it here, it's because your brain functions are what it takes to get through it. So, if you are in trouble at the moment, it's not because you have become dumb overnight.
brain candy, in case you didn't see it : <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FnXgprKgSE> <NAME> journey through Fermat's last theorem. 7 years.
A great advice from a peer at the time. "Always start the day with something you can achieve". So it comes down to your ability to set yourself meaningful targets, which results will accumulate over time.
Good Luck !
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/11 | 1,123 | 4,001 | <issue_start>username_0: I wrote a paper about governance mechanisms at StackExchange in which I got a lot of informations out of questions (especially on meta). I have kept all my references.
My teacher is letting us pick which style we want to use for the paper as long as we apply it thoroughly. In my other courses, we use APA but if I start writing (StackExchange, 2014) everytime I use an info out of a question, my paper is going to be illegible. From what I've read, you're only supposed to cite things that you've paraphrased, ideas, not necessarily information that you've found or researched but I do want to give credit where it belongs and I would also like if my teacher would be able to retrace where I've found things but APA doesn't seem to include such a thing as a bibliography.
I would like to:
* have a bibliography at the end containing the documents I've consulted for my research
* be able to have my citations as footnotes
Which style should I go for in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: One citation style that may be appropriate could be [The Chicago Manual of Style](http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html) which has two documentation systems:
1. notes and bibliography and;
2. author-date
The notes and bibliography system which should suit as per your question is described on the website as such;
>
> The notes and bibliography style is preferred by many in the humanities, including those in literature, history, and the arts. This style presents bibliographic information in notes and, often, a bibliography. It accommodates a variety of sources, including esoteric ones less appropriate to the author-date system.
>
>
>
As a History student this is the style that I am using for my masters thesis.
The style uses the following example for a website as per your question.
>
> **Website**
>
>
> A citation to website content can often be limited to a mention in the text or in a note (“As of July 19, 2008, the McDonald’s Corporation listed on its website . . .”). If a more formal citation is desired, it may be styled as in the examples below. Because such content is subject to change, include an access date or, if available, a date that the site was last modified.
>
>
> 1. “Google Privacy Policy,” last modified March 11, 2009, <http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacypolicy.html>.
> 2. “McDonald’s Happy Meal Toy Safety Facts,” McDonald’s Corporation, accessed July 19, 2008, <http://www.mcdonalds.com/corp/about/factsheets.html>.
> 3. “Google Privacy Policy.”
> 4. “Toy Safety Facts.”
>
>
> Google. “Google Privacy Policy.” Last modified March 11, 2009.
> <http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacypolicy.html>.
> McDonald’s Corporation.
>
>
> “McDonald’s Happy Meal Toy Safety Facts.” Accessed July 19, 2008. <http://www.mcdonalds.com/corp/about/factsheets.html>.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I suggest APA. It does have citation styles and there are many wonderful automatic generators out there that are up to date and will create the bibliography for you by merely data scraping website URLs and by entering the ISBN# of whatever book you may have used.
<https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/> has a great article
<http://www.bibme.org/> is a wonderful generator site I've used numerous times.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Though I'm not a fan of it in general, in your case the IEEE style could work very well. In the body of the paper, references are numbered in square brackets, like this: [1] and [2,3]. In the bibliography, you'd just have one entry per web page, with the URL. If you use LaTex, it's easy to make these all active hyper links, so that your professor can click on the "[1]" to go to the bibliography entry, and then click on the URL to go to the StackExchange web page. It's also possible to make the references hyperlinked in MS Word, but it might take some manual formatting steps to link each reference to each bibliography entry.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/12 | 2,216 | 9,701 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate at a large public research university in the US, finishing my second year. I have done some theorycrafting around my graduation course requirements, and I have realized that it is possible, with some work (and generous CLEP testing), to graduate with a double major, Math BS + Physics BA, by next May. I would be meeting the bare-minimum requirements for both majors (in particular, for math, I will have only taken the 4-semester calculus series, lin. algebra, and the 2-semester abstract algebra series; plus some extraneous ones e.g. game theory).
If I were to stay the extra year, I would comfortably qualify for a double Math BS + Physics BS, and I would have 3-4 more math classes under my belt (perhaps the 2-semester topology series, graph theory, advanced abstract algebra, real analysis, etc). (edit: this option, Physics BS rather than BA, stresses a more thorough physics courseload; 15 hours of upper level physics classes are required for BS over BA)
edit after several answers: Another 4-year option is to get Physics BA + Math BS, leaving my course load open to taking 3-4 math classes per semester. This, hypothetically, could put my post-lin-algebra courses at 2 sem. abstract algebra, 2 sem. topology, 2 sem. intro analysis, graduate level courses of the above, intro complex analysis, intro graph theory, etc
My intent, if I were to graduate next year, is probably to take a year off from academics, and then apply for graduate/PhD programs in math.
Will it be an issue in being considered for these programs, that I have only taken a meager selection of the course offerings in my undergraduate studies? And might it be offset by the fact that I graduated in three years with a double major?<issue_comment>username_1: This would be a great question to discuss with your advisor, or another faculty member at your school whose opinion you respect.
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the "bare-minimum" 3-year program you describe would be woefully inadequate to prepare you for graduate study in mathematics, and I think most admissions committees would agree. The fact that you did it in 3 years with a double major won't mitigate that. A year of analysis is pretty essential, some topology would be very helpful, and taking a significant number of upper-division math electives will be a great way to build what people call "mathematical maturity".
Your 4-year program sounds better, but honestly still a little on the light side. Keep in mind that many applicants to top grad programs will have taken practically every undergraduate course their department offers, and maybe a couple of graduate courses besides, in addition to often having undergraduate research experience. You also want to make sure you get to know (and impress) your mathematics professors well enough that they can write you strong letters
of recommendation, and taking more math courses is the biggest part of that.
The physics degree on your diploma will be nice, especially if you are looking to do a PhD in mathematical physics, but it may not go a long way to making up for weakness on the math side.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: While Nate's answer mostly covers it, let me be a little more concrete: I just went into the files for graduate admissions at my own institution (the University of Virginia), and looked at the double majors we had admitted or wait listed. I can't give details obviously, but I can say they are all way ahead (curricularly) of where you propose being at the end of your 3 year degree, and probably of the 4 year degree you suggest (6 classes beyond linear algebra is actually not very many). I don't think there's any way that the 3 year degree you suggest could get you admitted into a top 50ish school (in USNW or NRC rankings) without some sort of exceptional factor, and if you have 6 post-linear-algebra classes, your background will still be a big disadvantage, unless you are looking specifically at applied math programs where your physics background will actually be taken into account.
To answer your general question: yes, rigor/thoroughness of undergraduate program makes an enormous difference. Graduate programs are under pressure from university administrations to graduate students in a timely manner, and generally don't want to have students with weak backgrounds who will hang around in the program for a long time (or flunk out). Most schools have a set of exams you need to pass before moving on to your thesis, and (just as an example), at UVA, you must pass a topology or analysis exam within 2.5 years of starting the program. Thus, admitting someone with no topology or analysis background would just be setting them up to fail those exams.
While obviously, there's some sort of nebulous notion of talent that schools put a higher premium on (so you also want strong grades, and strong recommendations), background is relatively easy to measure, and is a very important factor in admissions decisions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Your question makes me a little sad. You are obviously a bright and ambitious student, and you have spent almost two years at a US public research university. You are trying to "theorycraft" your future career, which is good. But somehow no one has managed to communicate to you the basic goals of an undergraduate math major and the requirements for graduate study: how did that happen?
To once again answer the title question (the other two answers are completely on point): "Does rigor/thoroughness of undergraduate program matter (for graduate/Phd applications)?" The answer is **yes, of course**. Not only does it matter, but together with indications of your success in these courses -- course grades together with recommendation letters from your instructors -- **it is what matters the most**. Your question first proposed graduating early with a double major in physics and math, with coursework that to any math PhD admissions committee member looks *extremely minimal*. This is a terrible plan for getting into a PhD program in mathematics (not just a top one, but any one that I know).
Let me be clear: I am not scolding you. I am lamenting the total lack of advice you have somehow been subjected to. You are not the first bright, ambitious undergraduate who has asked a question on this site which evinces the misconception that the best students get through undergraduate degrees in as few years as possible. This is quite the opposite of the truth: does anyone know where these misconceptions are coming from?!?
Here is my opinion (as someone who served on the graduate committee of a top 50 PhD program in mathematics for four years): unless you want to work cross-disciplinarily in math and physics, the second undergraduate major in physics is not directly helping you get into a PhD program in mathematics. On the other hand, it seems to be stopping you from taking the deeper and more advanced course offerings that are essential for you to even get consideration at a good (or even decent) PhD program in mathematics. If your postgraduate plans include a career in which knowing a little bit about several different things will be beneficial -- and I can imagine that many careers in business and industry are like this -- then a double major could be desirable. However, for a future PhD student, all else being equal a double major is time taken away from the one thing you're supposed to be devoting much more time and energy to learning.
In your case, you absolutely need the fourth year of your undergraduate program in order to be considered for a top program. Unless you absolutely load yourself up with challenging and graduate-level math courses in that last year (which may not be the best idea for other reasons, e.g. it works against the level of your success in these courses), I would in fact be thinking about what to do *after you graduate in four years* in order to make your grad school application more competitive. You say that you want to take a year off before going back to grad school. If you still want to do that after a four year degree, then thinking about how to get some additional mathematical training in during that year off might be a good idea.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Seconding the other good answers, I would reiterate that, unless you are doing massive amounts of documentable self-study (which is entirely possible modulo the documentability), the senior-level undergrad or beginning grad-level courses you take substantially affect the appearance of your grad school application in at least two ways. First, your documented exposure to something approaching real mathematics. Second, the letters of recommendation from the faculty who taught those courses, testifying to your (presumably...) excellence in beginning-serious mathematics. Letters of recommendation are a very serious component of grad school applications, and if people can only refer to things scarcely beyond linear algebra, it won't help you.
Indeed, as @username_3 observed, you are being dis-served by lack of advising about the goals of your undergrad program, and about preparation for grad school. I realize that there are many ways for young people to disconnect from useful-but-official information, and many ways for institutions to fail to communicate effectively, but, either way, you're missing a bunch of critical info, which a site such as this can only nudge you toward.
One more time: the "minimalist" version of a math undergrad degree will doom your grad school applications. Finishing in three years versus four doesn't matter at all.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/12 | 1,301 | 5,302 | <issue_start>username_0: I teach in the school of sciences and engineering in the university where I work. I have asked professors several times if the final exams have to be comprehensive, and I usually get mixed answers.
So I want to ask, for a course with two midterms and a final:
1. If there is some criteria or organizations that require the final exams to be comprehensive (for instance, does ABET accreditation or legal statute require it?), or does it depend on the school or the professor?
2. What are the pros and cons of having a comprehensive final?
3. Will your answers to the above questions be different if the course components were 2 best out of 3 midterms plus a final, or if the course was a graduate course instead of undergrad?<issue_comment>username_1: At my large public research university (in the US):
In physics, exams are nearly always non-cumulative. The finals are treated essentially as a third midterm, none of which are cumulative.
In math, the it depends on the professor and the course. If it is one of the "common"/high-enrollment courses that students in e.g. biology, chemistry, also have to take, then the final is usually cumulative. In courses designed for upper-level math majors only (e.g. topology, graph theory) it is up to the professor, but usually cumulative (usually the courses are very linear; it would be impossible to pass a test over the final material without knowing the material from the midterms).
In humanities, usually not cumulative. Or if cumulative, trivially so (e.g., one or two basic questions about the early material).
edit: I should clarity, it's always up to the professor, I'm just outlining general departmental tendencies
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To address 1, I've never heard of any such policy on cumulative exams. In my experience, such pedagogical decisions are made solely by the course instructor. They make the decision as to what material appears on the final exam, or even whether to have a final exam at all.
In the case of large multi-section coordinated courses, this decision might be made by the course coordinator (especially if all sections give a common final exam) or by agreement of the various instructors. There might be some expectation that they will respect precedent unless they feel strongly that it should change, in which case they might be expected to discuss it at the department level.
Otherwise, I think any explicit rule about the content or format of exams would be seen as a serious infringement on the instructor's autonomy, which is a central aspect of university teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm responding to #2 and 3, as there are no rules regarding #1 that I'm aware of.
Pedagogically, there is evidence that **repeated testing improves learning**. Most of the literature is via authors Karpicke and Roediger.
Here's a list of resources from a [research project](http://psych.wustl.edu/memory/TELC/) at Washington University, and a rather [overwhelming overview](http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/GSI_2011.htm) of student learning and good teaching by <NAME> at Berkeley.
I don't see why the benefits of a comprehensive final would be lessened by a "two out of three" midterm organization or different for undergrad vs grad level students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: All of my final exams are cumulative, for a couple reasons:
1) I've always felt odd about non-cumulative exams. It seems to send a message I'd rather not send: *“It's okay to forget about what you learned earlier in the course – you won't need that any more.”*
2) Often, what gets taught later in the course builds on earlier concepts. If A lays the foundation for B, and B lays the foundation for C, it can be rather challenging to test on C without testing on A and B also.
That said, I try very hard to test on higher-level concepts rather than on minutia, so a cumulative final fits my teaching style. I expect my students to be able to speak intelligently to the main themes of the course. I've told students many times: “Come to class ready to learn, and be ready to engage with the material via the in-class discussions. That's the best way to prep for the exams.”
My goal is to structure my exams so that students who have paid attention in class and learned the material through other assignments should do quite well on the test – without the need to cram or commit the material to short-term memory. “By the last week of the term, you either know this stuff, or you don't,” I tell them. Many of my exam questions are essay questions that require students to analyze a scenario, and synthesize material from different parts of the course.
That might not always work, depending on the nature of the material; some material doesn't lend itself well to such questions. This approach may not be scalable, either. (It's not uncommon for me to have six or seven pages of essay questions per exam. Most of the time, I have between 15 and 30 students per course, which keeps grading manageable. If I had 50 or 60 students, however, I might have to rethink this approach.)
As a footnote, most of my courses are 400/600-level courses. I don't know if the style I've outlined would be a good fit for freshmen and 100-level material.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/04/12 | 5,384 | 22,267 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it acceptable or ok to report on students cheating? Many times during a test or an exam, I have seen students in front of me either passing notes, or otherwise collaborating whenever the professor isn't looking.
I don't want to get into trouble, and I don't know if it's "alright" to rat on fellow classmates. Part of me thinks they deserve being caught out, by virtue of trying to cheat their way through the course. However, I feel like I would get found out by other students if they were caught cheating.
What is the right course of action here? To be clear, I would never raise an accusation in the middle of an exam; it would only lead to me being ostracized by my peers.<issue_comment>username_1: Fundamentally, this is a question with no easy answer. Ethics would state that you should **definitely** report someone violating the "honor code" (or whatever equivalent of it your university has) by cheating on an exam. However, there are also some problems with this:
* It may be difficult for the exam proctor to prove that cheating has taken place, even if you have observed the communication.
* Reporting it after the exam is not really possible, because again it will be impossible to prove afterward.
* Making an accusation during the examination could lead to disruptions for many students, including yourself.
* If you publicly raise an accusation of cheating during an examination, this could lead to ostracism from your classmates, which may be counterproductive to your educational career (in the present class and in the future).
So I think you need to set those two issues against one another and decide what is the better alternative for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As an instructor, I want to know if there is an environment that allows cheating. Even if the student can't provide proof or only told me afterwards or anonymously, I can take action on future exams by better proctoring, exam versioning, and seating charts.
So telling the teacher afterward would protect individual students but improve the quality of the course overall, which is a win-win.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: **Honor is doing what’s right when no one is looking.** If your institution's Honor Code requires you to report cheating, I'd suggest you report the action to your professor or a higher authority. This is good for multiple reasons:
* You can prevent the cheating student from gaining an unfair advantage over his or her fellow students.
* If they're caught (and punished), they might realize their mistake. If you never report the cheating, this student might sail through the rest of the term repeating the same mistake.
However make sure the suspected cheater doesn't come to know who reported him/her. You can meet the professor after the exam and explain what happened. If you don't wish to reveal the person's name, don't. If you're not comfortable with talking to a professor about your classmates, you can send an unsigned letter, explaining in detail what happened during the exam and if possible, include some ideas on how to stop them next time.
Before you do anything, think of the consequences. What if the other student discovers you're the one who reported the cheating? How would you feel if you confronted the cheater directly? If you can't imagine any of these situations, I suggest you let it slide.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You could send an anonymous e-mail to the professor, informing him that you saw rampant cheating, without naming the students involved.
As an aside, request your professor to NOT mention the anonymous e-mails to anyone. If you have a reputation of being the most virtuous person in the class, then they might target you, even without evidence.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As a professor for over a quarter of a century, I can assure you that your prof would like to know if cheating is going on. When I've been made aware of such nefarious activities, I've been able to catch the culprits on a subsequent exam, by giving the cheaters slightly different versions of the test. Although students engaging in cheating are ultimately cheating themselves, it's still nice when they are caught. This lessens the chance they will make it to Wall Street or Med school, or into government, where their cheating can have serious repercussions for us all.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: Why would people think this is okay?
You talk about honor, but it is clearly an act of egoism.
You feel bad, because you did not get the same advantage, and therefore you hurt the person who received an advantage.
* You should report that *someone* has cheated, but you should not tell the teacher/professor who it was. That way the security will improve, but you will not hurt your fellow classmates.
* If the teacher does not believe you, ignore the fool. To be trustworthy is an important trait, if you report the person who did it, you are breaking his/her trust.
* Why do you think you feel bad about it in the first place? Your mother thought you right.
Going around someones back and reporting them, making them receive a punishment, is in *no case* honorable. Please do not listen to these puny people. Faith in humanity is low these days...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Is it acceptable or ok to report on students cheating?
>
>
>
Yes, but if you're not convinced by the arguments in the other answers, consider this: **is it okay to cheat?**
If not, then if those other students can do something that is not okay, why not you?
---
That being said: the attitude that it's okay to do something wrong if other people are also doing something wrong is not a good one to hold in general. In this case it happens to lead you to the correct course of action though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm a college professor and I have very little tolerance for cheating. Yes, I would like to know if it's going on, and, yes, I expect students who witness it to tell me so I can take preventive action.
I also used to be a competitive golfer. In a tournament every golfer is expected to monitor the actions of the other players in his group to make sure no one bends or breaks the rules. Since tournament officials cannot be everywhere on the course at all times, each individual is responsible for protecting the field by making sure that no one gets an unfair advantage over the field. That is a responsibility that competitive golfers take very seriously.
The student, likewise, needs to assure that there is a level playing field for everyone. Reporting cheaters is one way of doing just that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: I suggest you send an anonymous e-mail to your instructor about who cheated in the exam and how, so that the instructor can take precautions, if he cares at all.
**Who not directly tell during the exam?**
One reason is that if 2 students are exchanging answers, without any proof such as cheat sheet, then it is your word against theirs. In such a case, since there is no proof, their exam will be valid but you will be a rat.
Also, although some people here think that you don't need friends who cheat (as if that is the only consequence), the world is not that fair. You may end up being the rat and completely ignored, and worst case, bullied. Some people are just cruel and may try to blame you instead of themselves for the failure. How they handle such a situation depends on their character, and you should not risk it. No honor code is more important than your happiness and comfort during your years in college. If the honor code is that important, your instructor should do his responsiblities first.
You are a student, not an instructor. Every instructor once was a student and even if they never cheated (very unlikely!), they witnessed other people that cheated. Any instructor should know that given the chance, a student may cheat. It is the instructor's responsiblity to create the environment that does not allow cheating. You shouldn't care more than he cares.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: 1. This is a personal choice; there is no definite answer.
2. What is "ethical" depends on the culture. In Russia reporting someone doing something wrong or mildly illegal is generally considered unacceptable, whereas in the United States it is generally considered acceptable.
3. If you don't want to get into trouble, don't do anything.
4. In most cases the instructor probably knows that there is some cheating going on. This is a part of life.
5. Try to see both sides of the coin. Imagine a single mother with two children working two jobs and taking some classes at night. She doesn't really need this calculus anyway, and it is not even her major. Would the world come to an end if she unfairly gets a B- so she could graduate?
Life is really a complicated thing...
(As a full disclosure, as an instructor I used to be very particular about punishing cheating, even when no hard evidence was present. However, as we get older, we learn that the world is not black and white...)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: It strongly depends on the academic culture in your country. In most Western countries, the answer would be **yes**. The cheating is considered something unethical, and it's something one should be ashamed of. You should, still, do it (the reporting, not the cheating!) as anonymously as possible.
However, in some other countries, the **group solidarity** is more important that the **written rules** and reporting to the officials the **minor** cases (where nobody is hurt) is considered **unethical**.
For example, in Poland, I would strongly discourage anyone from reporting the exam cheaters to the proffesors, because if they get caught (the reporters, not the cheaters), they risk really **serious** social consequences in the student community, which may severe their future opportunities (even for accademic career). Even if the professors are actively against cheating, they may feel uncomfortable with someone reporting it, and they may share that information with collegues, which may end up being public in end effect.
It's the professor's obligation to assure noone is cheating. Nowadays, thanks to Internet, it's quite easy to keep up with the newest techniques. If they don't do that, in some cases, it's even possible they don't mind when students use 'a little help'.
Because of a lot of comments I'd like to express my personal opinion: **cheating is bad**. But the system that fights cheating by encouraging the students to report their collegues is bad too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: >
> On my honor, I have neither given nor received any unauthorized aid on this exam.
>
>
>
I had to write (and sign) this statement on almost all of my exams throughout my university career. My university had a very draconian policy with regard to cheating, as I mentioned in a comment: the default punishment for a first-time offender was expulsion, if the case came before the Honor Council. (Of course, not every case brought before the Council was determined to *be* an offender, in which case there was no punishment at all. On rare occasions, the punishment was something other than expulsion, usually suspension.) As implied by the statement above, it was against the university's policy both to receive (unauthorized) help on an exam *and to give it*: both the person passing the note and the one receiving it would get in trouble with the Honor Council, even if the former individual did all of the exam work himself. (You were not punished if someone cheated by looking over your shoulder, but they would slap you on the wrist and tell you to be more careful in the future.)
The integrity of the university was very important in that micro-culture, and I think that if you asked this question of anyone there -- student or professor -- you'd get the same answer, "yes."
This led many professors comfortable doing things like assigning take-home exams which were closed-book.
All that said, the answer to this question *does* depend on the university's culture (and the culture of the country). For example, when I told an Italian friend of mine that I had a take-home exam and I was not permitted to use my textbook or notes while doing it, he assumed that everyone in the class would be cheating. When I then told him about the quoted statement above that I had to write and sign on the exam, his view of the situation flipped: if I had to write and sign something like *that*, of *course* nobody would cheat! I find the sudden shift in opinion an interesting insight into his own culture.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_12: Maybe German culture is different in this regard but I would never report someone for cheating but instead talk to the cheaters personally. However in areas were people are in danger if the students lack knowledge through cheating (pilots, medicine, ...) I would tell them to report themselves or I would do it myself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: Academically, it is in your best interest to report it. If the class is curved, the cheaters are not only unfairly outshining you, but they are unfairly *lowering your grade*. Even if it's not curved, unless it's an enormous class, the professor's perceptions of who did well may still be influenced by who did how well. If a student that the professor expects to score low (based on their in-class participation) instead cheats and scores high, the professor may decide that the exam was easier than he originally thought, and value your honestly earned mark less.
In the long term, if cheating is rampant in your school, this will soon become known. The value of *your* degree will drop even if you didn't cheat, because how can I know *you* didn't get your degree by being one of the infamous cheaters, and managing to avoid getting caught?
In a class where all exams are multiple choice and grading is completely objective and not curved, cheaters have no effect on you (except for the long term consequences stated above). Only then you could say that pragmatically, neither reporting nor not reporting helps or hurts you appreciably, so you might as well not bother.
But then there is also the ethical aspect. Cheating is bad, you are expected to not cheat and report cheaters by the instructor and school administration, and you probably even signed agreements and made honor pledges to this effect. So, it would be dishonest for you not to report it - not reporting isn't even a valid choice, it would be a dereliction of your contractual and ethical obligations. In practice, you will never "get caught" and be punished for failing to report cheating - but whether you get caught is immaterial to ethics.
So, speaking in terms of your credentials in school and beyond, there is absolutely no reason not to report it, and strong reasons against not reporting (eg. you promised in writing that you would report when you enrolled). It would be extremely unusual for a professor to somehow punish you for reporting.
But that's not the whole story: Like it or not, the people who you reported will hate you for it. They will tell their friends to hate you for it. If they are popular, you will quickly become very unpopular. Not all your classmates may have the same concept of integrity, and some may hate you for "siding with the establishment and betraying your comrades" (as they see it).
Your classmates may one day end up being your colleagues. If you get a reputation as a "rat" who has dubious allegiances, and cannot be relied on to have his friends' back (even though the cheaters are probably not your friends, they are only united with you in their struggle to get good grades) against a perceivedly antagonistic and unfair institution, it may become difficult for you to be seen as trustworthy.
Consider how in history there have been oppressive, unjust regimes which employed "informants" to report on people who try to circumvent or oppose the oppression. Clearly, this is not the same as reporting cheating: For one, academic cheating policies are clearly just, ethical and reasonable (unlike oppressive regimes). But the point is that following a rule is not automatically a just action. It is hard to definitively say what is just and what is unjust, so a lack of skepticism towards even apparently just rules is taken by some as evidence of inability to reject rules even when they are unjust, and generally lack of critical thinking ability.
To answer your question, you must ask yourself: Are you an idealist, or a pragmatist? If an idealist, there is no question that you should report the cheating. But if a pragmatist, unfortunately, it depends. You must further ask, which do you value more: Your reputation among your peers, or your formal academic credentials?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_14: It depends where they are cheating.
If they are cheating on a simple test or exam that is just one of many, don't report them. Such tests do not show the general skill of a student, just what he/she knows at a specific point in time. A good student can fail on a test and a bad one can succeed dependent on way too many factors. It is however a good thing to tell the student afterwards that if he/she wants to succeed, they cannot just base it on luck and cheating.
If they are cheating on an important exam, a final or similar to an extend that is beyond negligible, then do report them. If they are caught at a later point, it is possible that their degree is later revoked, which might not only cause them to loose a complete year, they can even loose a job or worse.
You can cheat during a test, but you cannot cheat when people later depend on your expected skills.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_15: You asked this question on the place, where most of the people are actually professors or want to become one. There is no surprise that mostly you will here one answer "Yes, this is ok, encouraged and should be so". But this is life, and there is no easy answers here.
Also some of the people here compare cheating on the exam as mugging and may be some other crime things, but in my opinion it is not even close. Just to compare, I am really curious how many from professors here have never cheated in any form during their academic life? And how many of them have never stolen anything? I think the number will be different.
It is up to you to decide. What what you can gain, what you can lose and come up with your decision. Yes, I agree, that teachers want to know who cheated/abused them, but students want to have trust in their peers and the same way as teacher can assume that cheaters violate the trust in them, your fellow students can assume that you violated a trust in them. Also more and more students lose their trust in education, because it does not really represent the knowledge and sometimes `A` on the exam only shows that you was able to get `A` on the exam (nothing regarding you knowledge). So why would you memorize `when Napoleon raised to power` if any monkey with Wikipedia can give you this result and half of his biography in one minute.
So think it in this way.
>
> [It is just business, nothing personal](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/29227-it-s-just-business-nothing-personal)
>
>
>
Weigh pros and cons in your situation.
**Pros can be**:
* you will score higher on the exam on average
* teacher will like you more and you can get advantage later
* teacher comes to think that you are not a cheater
* you restore equality
**Cons can be**
* your classmates will hate/not trust you (not only one that cheated). Maybe you will never get help from them neither in your school life or even after it. Being outcast is hard, being outcast who needs help even harder
* teacher might think that you are a cheater too and want to hide yourself this way
So if I would be in a situation when I and 30 people, whom I do not know, fighting for 2 Harvard (or whatever you people value) sits. Then there is no way I would be quite. But if these are people with whom I play basketball taking math/history/language exam, than good luck to you guys, and if you need help I will try to help you.
So life is not back and white. Most of the time it is in grayish. To put this even further: `One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter`.
**You also might have a strong belief that cheating is terrible, or something similar**
* you, fighter for justice in entire world, helped to restore justice. (Some people do believe in the [just world](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis))
* you genuinely think that this is wrong
* you do not like people who do this (or they do not like you)
* you like the teacher and want to help him
* you want to change how cheating is viewed
In such case, think have you ever cheated yourself. I have seen a lot of people who can not stand cheating, but cheat by themselves. With one of them I even had discussion about it, when the person came to me asking for a solutions to programming homework. Funny enough, this person was rising her concern how sharing is bad and had all the discussion with instructor how should he prevent it. So when I asked what changed in her views about the world, to my surprise, she was not looking at it as a cheating. In her eyes it was just minor help for the person in need. No matter how hard I tried to show that this is exactly what she was fighting against, she did not want to hear about this as cheating.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm surprised and chagrined at the number of people posting here who seem to think academic cheating isn't such a big deal. But it is! Fraudulent studies have been published that have resulted in many deaths. In one famous case, the author turned out to be a habitual cheater. His exposure destroyed this researcher's career, and he also faces a number of lawsuits by the relatives of deceased victims of these published lies (clinical studies based on his lies were underway for years before he was caught). Such fraud can destroy the public's trust in the validity of scientific studies. The widespread acceptance of cheating is just plain wrong.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/12 | 1,265 | 4,878 | <issue_start>username_0: I 'm writing a Master thesis. I have some terms that should be defined.
Where should I put this section? In the introduction or literature review chapter?
Thank you
Additional Information
I think there are always exceptions to the general rule of writing theses. That's, some may not have a supervisor, guidelines, etc. This is another story.
Concerning definitions of terms, they can be presented as a glossary or discussed in a separate section. Where this section should be put is my question. I have seen theses having it in the introduction while others in literature review chapter discussing each term in detail.
1. Example of a thesis discussing definitions in the literature review chapter: Contesting the Culture of the Doctoral Degree: Candidates’ Experiences of Three Doctoral Degrees in the School of Education, RMIT University. [Link](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/eserv/rmit:6738/Maxwell.pdf&ei=3lRKU_XRJIqX1AX57YGQBw&usg=AFQjCNH49qA8whbEKYfW7o0ZUc3y14w-gQ&sig2=E43cEtacwZYnamibAbYLBQ).
2. A handbook for writing Master thesis recommends discussing definitions in the introduction: <NAME>. How to write a master's thesis. <NAME>.: Sage, c2009.
You can have access to a summary of the book [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDAQFjAB&url=http://pirate.shu.edu/~baoxuemi/Reading_Notes_from_How_to_write_a_master_thesis.pdf&ei=w1VKU9fAL_PY0QXgsIGoCA&usg=AFQjCNFI14tKPiUSY0tH5-Jq61Y777haDw&sig2=iaSCx84Qcykd1ButF9V7lA).
So, what is the difference between discussing definition of terms in the introduction and doing it in the literature review chapter?
If the literature review chapter is about reviewing previous research on the topic, why should one allocate a whole section for example to defining a term or concept?<issue_comment>username_1: In the guidelines for my Masters thesis we were told to put our glossary after the contents page and before the abstract section, with its own entry in the contents page. Does your course/institution not have any such guidelines?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I've often encountered this type of problem in my own academic writing (and not only in theses). The problem is that it's often difficult to talk about something before you've defined what it is. But at the same time, it's awkward to write so much expository material before being able to talk about your own stuff. It's up to you to work out, for your document in particular, the best way to present these necessary definitions.
Given that you want to say what your work is about as soon as possible, you can't avoid mentioning at least a few of these technical terms before introducing them formally. For one thing, you may well have to put them in the title! Often, you can present *just enough* in the abstract and introduction to allow readers to get an idea of the technicalities, but not overwhelm them with detail. The trick is to make sure your presentation is accurate and useful. If you make it too vague ("the Riemann Hypothesis is a very hard problem") then nobody is helped.
A literature review chapter is often a natural place to put definitions. It's hard to say anything meaningful about the literature if you haven't introduced the terms that the literature talks about. Also, exploring the past contributions to your subject certainly includes identifying who came up with particular definitions, who disagreed, how they adapted the definitions, and so on. This is the case for the dissertation in your first link, which defines "research" in the literature review, in the context of conflicting definitions of what research actually is (p19). The author still talks about research in the preceding pages - but that is the point where she sets the scene for her own work, using that definition in particular.
Material which is more basic or less contested could be introduced earlier, if you like. If it is general background, which readers need to know in order to understand anything you've done, but which the thesis is not particularly "about", then the introduction is a fine place for it.
Equally, definitions could be in their own section - either towards the beginning, or as an appendix. I often see this in documents where the definitions are basic reference material. Some readers will know them already, and skip the chapter; others can read in more detail. Again, this option separates the definitions from the literature review, on the basis that the definitions are simply fundamental to the field.
Ultimately, the choice is yours, unless your institution tells you what to do. I hope these thoughts will be helpful as you consider which option is best for presenting your work.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/14 | 5,686 | 23,964 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm teaching an online lab (to accompany an in-person course) to undergrads in their 3rd or 4th year of an engineering curriculum this semester. The aim of the lab is *not* to teach them any particular technical skills. It's only meant to supplement the *content* of the course by exposing them to some more advanced concepts in a hands-on way. The lab itself is the means, not the goal.
So beyond a single "orientation" lab, they don't get a whole lot of training in debugging things that go wrong in the lab, and I don't expect them to become advanced users of the lab infrastructure. They're encouraged to post questions on a course forum if they have trouble running a lab exercise, and I answer their questions there.
Having said that, some students post questions that would be closed immediately on a Stack Exchange site for lack of detail, and for good reason. Questions like:
>
> I can't log in to the website, please help.
>
>
>
or
>
> When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help me???
>
>
>
or
>
> I can't see the results of the experiment.
>
>
>
with no further details. These are perfectly reasonable things to ask about, but the student hasn't even attempted to give me any details as to what went wrong. In the "real world," people that ask questions like this won't usually get help.
Since I operate the computing infrastructure for the lab, I can actually find out the specifics of what happened by checking the student's username against the server logs. So I can give them an answer even if they ask a really incomplete question (e.g., I can check the server logs and see that their experiment failed because they mistyped a command).
But I'm not sure if I should answer their questions (because I can, and I want to encourage them to ask questions if they have trouble), or if I should try to train them to ask better questions.
* On the one hand: it seems like I am doing them a disservice by not teaching them how to ask for help properly.
* On the other hand: students are (legitimately) frustrated when they're using infrastructure they haven't been extensively trained in, and they can't get it to work. If I try to get them to ask better questions, they'll feel like I'm being deliberately unhelpful and making them jump through hoops to get an answer to their question. (I know this because that's been their reaction the few times I tried this.) They may stop asking questions and just give up on the lab exercises.
**Should I risk the actual course goal (delivering content to the students) in favor of a general educational goal (teaching them how to ask questions)?**
**Is there a way to train students to ask better questions without making them feel like I'm not helping them?**
Just to clarify: I already provide answers to commonly asked questions, and a lot of material to help students formulate better questions *before* they ask. Some students ignore that material and ask very non-specific questions anyways. My question is how to address this once they've asked the question: should I walk them through the process of reformulating it before I answer? Is there a way to do so without frustrating them further?<issue_comment>username_1: You should recommend your students that before posting a question they should REALLY try for themselves to solve it out; and at the end if they send you the question, ask them to submit all the details to you. So questions like "my program does not run" are not acceptable. You will see a change in their attitudes.
Also remember that in the way you can get some questions that maybe will seem silly to you, but they are learning; and that is a process. I bet if you ask some question to another professor or a renewed researcher maybe your question will seem also silly to them.
Bottom line, try to give the advice that I told you in the first part of this post, and remember that your task is teaching for now; and that requires patience and skills (which you will get in the long run)
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like what you need is a couple of generalised forms/web forms and/or a student driven wiki/knowledge base specific to this lab. The latter is obviously more strenuous to implement, but might pay off in the longer term if you are going to be teaching this course for several more years.
As for the forms approach, a stickied post on your forum with clustering like below might be a good starting point:
* general interface issues: can't log on, can't work out how to find x/y/z command
* execution issues: errors and their likely resolutions
* other: can't find results, stylistic questions about approaches etc
Within each section you can indicate steps for them to proceed through on their own, both in resolution of specific issues outlined as well as in general, while also providing a format for a question if that doesn't solve their problem. This approach can address your goals simultaneously: showing them how to formulate technical questions properly, requiring a modicum of thought and problem solving to proceed and transferring knowledge with less burden on the teacher for the generic queries, freeing you up to spend more time on the specific or advanced ones!
To answer you more specifically: I think it is reasonable to require that the effort put into the question at least equals the effort required to answer it. Asking if they have tried the solutions in the FAQ or other questions should be a standard first response to such a vague question, then using logs/user to steer a dialogue to reach a solution. I think a good benchmark for focus/specificity would be 'could I help them without omniscient access?'
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In class there are always good students and not so good students (I know you are teaching an online lab, but still). Do you feel that even goods students are having problems formulating questions?
If only not so good students have that problem, then it is probably a case of laziness or not care attitude. There is no much you can do about that. If you try they'll probably just get frustrated. And they probably can ask very good questions about something care about. [I think this is the case].
If even goods students have that problem, you should explain that their future co-workers or people in online-communities would not be able to help them, if they don't provide more details, and therefore they should provide more details in questions. Good students should pick it up quickly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Being a student myself I know how frustrating it can be to work with technics or facilities you don't know enough about. Sometimes this means asking fully detailed questions can be tricky.
But there is a difference between a student that tries to ask a question to get help with their problem, and one that just declares that they have a problem and thinks it is another persons business to deal with it. What you posted above is the latter.
They have encountered a problem and instead of trying to get help to solve it they try to make you solve it. That might even be clever, because as long as you DO solve the problem, they get maximum effect with a minimum of effort. And as soon as students realise that, even the good students won't bother to read your FAQs anymore, because it is a waste of time, when you obviously can identify and solve a problem as soon as they write "Help, I have a problem."
Additionally you have to keep in mind, that as a student you often take from the experience that people don't respond to your question of, "can anyone help me" as indicating that this person is just checking, whether someone responds. It is not meant to be a question, but a phrase to start a communication about the problem. That is something adapted from face to face communication. In the real world you don't go to people and start with a 5 minute monologue to your problem, you ask "Hey would you help me?" Wait for a "Sure what is it." And than give your monologue.
So what I read above is not a question it is the reflex of a student to a problem. Before even thinking they are posting (in my generation a common reflex in every situation - we are the tldr - too long didn't read generation). If I were you I would respond with a reflex. Just answer with a standard answer that explains, that you need more detail to help. Students who get frustrated by this are already frustrated and beyond your reach.
If on the other hand a student tried to ask a proper question and just failed, you should provide the answer and give a hint on how his question could have been better.
How frustrated your student will be is less a question of what you respond, than of how you
respond. "I could solve your problem, but I wont because of your stupid question" is of course frustrating. But even in a standard answer you can demonstrate that you care, that you take the other person and his time serious, that you would like to help and that you need more information in order to do so. I would try to phrase it, but as you undoubtedly realised I'm not a native English speaker, so I leave that to you. Just don't advertise the fact that you are trying to teach them something.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: In teaching martial arts, what we expect from a new student, and what we expect from an experienced student are completely different. Even a student experienced in one style, is not expected to be of the same skill as a student of equal belt or rank, when they change style.
The methodology here, as applied to your situation would be as follows...
Ask the correct question, along with providing the answer. Over time, the expectation is that there will be fewer times when the correct question will need to be explained and more times when it will be asked in the first place.
Something along the lines of:
The question you asked: "blah blah blah"
The place where the question is answered: document, memo, FAQ, whatever
The question you should have asked: "how do I do Xxxx?"
The answer: "insert tab a into slot b"
The first couple of times each person gets the whole answer.
After that, you start removing lines of the answer.
Telling them where the answer is, and make them go look it up, is the first step.
Over time, you get to the point where you just parrot back bad questions, with no additional response. In the case of "good" questions, you provide both the answer, and some sort of recognition of the form "this was a good question".
The hard part of this sort of approach, is remembering to reset your expectations with each new batch of students. Remembering that each of them will arrive at the level of competence at different times.
Hope that helps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: To me it seems pretty simple. Stop beating around the bush and tell them to not waste your time. If they want a specific answer then they have to give you a specific question. Or as an alternative you can ask equally bad questions until they ask you more in detail.
In your examples above:
>
> Q - I can't log in to the website, please help.
>
>
> A - How did you try to log in? Please help.
>
>
> Q - When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help
> me???
>
>
> A - Help me first? What experiment and what error?
>
>
> Q - I can't see the results of the experiment.
>
>
> A - What experiment? What steps did you take?
>
>
>
After going back and forth a few times even "slow" students will catch on to that to loose less time emailing back and forth, they have to ask more specific questions from the start.
Keep your answers equally short, and use "their" language. When they give you more information, ask more detailed questions. They will find out the answer in time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Nobody replies with RTFM and STFW anymore, we are losing the traditions of the Internet and that is only bad.
Students should learn to make better questions, but they should also learn something much more important *how to answer their own questions*, because at some point they will not be students anymore and they may not have anyone to ask their questions (specially in research, where people are meant to find knowledge beyond the state of the art).
There are some related readings (I can think of now) in this context:
* [How to ask questions](http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html)
* [How not to ask questions](http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=172086)
* [Ask the duck](http://hwrnmnbsol.livejournal.com/148664.html)
* [How to ask](https://superuser.com/questions/how-to-ask)
Also, don't give a man a fish, teach him to fish. In general I agree with this: [Rubber duck problem solving](http://blog.codinghorror.com/rubber-duck-problem-solving/)
But... (there is always a but, nothing is ever so simple not to have it), additionally to giving students the tools for them to answer their own questions it's important to give them the information so that they can do that. There are a number of things that work quite well in that sense.
* Clear definitions, terms, pointers, references and maybe even a glossary. It's much easier to search on the Internet for additional information when you can write a few words on a search box.
* Detailed step-by-step instructions of the set-up and all the things they should do to get their work done. (RTFM is quite pointless if there is no manual in the first place).
* A FAQ. If you are getting the same question repeatedly, then it's likely that something is not clear (which we could say it's your fault...) and it may be good to have a FAQ. If the FAQ deals not only with singular and particular questions but groups of questions then that's even better. E.g.(@cs): "I have an error in the code, how can I solve it?" There are many possible errors and the way to solve most of them is debugging, some instructions about how to debug would be very useful to solve *many* questions.
About your final questions:
>
> should I walk them through the process of reformulating it before I
> answer? Is there a way to do so without frustrating them further?
>
>
>
Yes, definitively. I would consider forcing them to reformulate the question is good for them and helping them to do so is very kind. Frustration may be good as well, as long as it is not desperation. Desperation could be good, but it's not for everyone (sorry, I've to link [this](http://www.heavensinspirations.com/carrots-eggs-coffee.html)). I'd personally suggest to help them to improve their questions by asking your own, which very likely you can copy and paste from a template, because there should be a pattern in those questions. Allegedly, Socrates didn't make many friends by [asking questions](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method), so try not to ask more than necessary.
In any case, this "template" or process is something they should be able to learn and do by themselves, to make better questions and (if possible) to answer their own questions by themselves. Answering in this way would be teaching by example. You can also make the template explicit and part of the FAQ or a sticky post, teaching by example is not incompatible with other forms of teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: All this is a life style preference.
What do you have the attention span for? There is no "right way".
How do you want things to happen.
Answering inconsiderate questions leads to only one thing, more inconsiderate questions.
The only way to significantly reduce the number of inconsiderate questions being asked is to get a reputation for low tolerance to them. Many people fail to consider what information is useful or required to supply an answer when asking. Why bother thinking when you can use someone else's brain at the price of only moving your mouth a little?
Most people take the rude approach when they get bored of this, which is just as useless. I use the sarcastic. Last time someone walked to me and asked me what I was doing when I was making a salad in front of their eyes I said, "Building a vegetable based space ship, what did you think I was doing?"
For the persistently annoying people you can add a sour note: "Here's the salad, want some extra cyanide to go with your lazy question?" (and you put a bit of salt when you say it).
When I have the attention span for it, I say "try to answer your own question from my perspective..." They then ask it again and realise that they need extra information to go with it. When they've made this extra effort you can then choose to answer their question.
The shortest way of doing this is using one word "Define?", "How?" , "Why?" ... mostly people understand they need to rephrase or add detail.
In any case there is no polite way of doing it. You will always find people unhappy about YOU not going out of YOUR way to solve THEIR problems. Makes no difference if they could solve them by applying a brain cell to the task for 30 seconds...
You no doubt have co workers who get asked way less broken questions. Observe their behavior and emulate or integrate.
Regards username_8.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> Should I risk the actual course goal (delivering content to the students) in favor of a general educational goal (teaching them how to ask questions)?
>
>
>
No, and you don't really have to. (Though the goal definitely is lofty.)
It is certainly frustrating when people offer no context or *appear* to make no effort in the question, because that makes it more difficult and costly for you to help them. You also seem to be in a position where it is expected of you to help them to the best of your ability, so ignoring people may not be an option.
When helping people in general, I find two strategies especially helpful:
* Assume ignorance over malice/laziness. For all we know, the students are computer-illiterate. It takes experience and knowledge to know what context is relevant and what isn't. Computers are magic!
* Frame any questions as you asking them for help, rather than telling them that they failed to provide information you need. Avoid sarcasm or jokes at their expense. ("Sure, I'll just scroll through a couple of days of network traffic to look for failed login attempts. Not too many of those, right?")
>
> Is there a way to train students to ask better questions without making them feel like I'm not helping them?
>
>
>
To prevent it from feeling like a brush-off, show that you care about solving their problem by leaving the door open and offering an inviting hand. **Do** refer them to standard texts that you or your institution have provided, perhaps even quote a relevant part if possible, but do not end the reply there, because it will appear as final.
Give it your best guess, even if your best guess is a sort of standard response, and solicit extra information from them if it doesn't resolve their issue. Ask specific questions that you may need, like user name, estimated time of the problem, and let them know that this sort of information helps you find and diagnose the issue for them.
Some (most?) people won't write back to you. That's okay. Perhaps the problem was temporary and resolved itself. Perhaps they solved it. Perhaps a fellow student helped them. Or perhaps they really have given up, and you've done what can be reasonably expected.
Examples:
>
> I can't log in to the website, please help.
>
>
>
You'll need your XYZ user name and password to log in to the website. If it's been a while and you've forgotten your password, our FAQ (link) gives instructions on how to get a new one.
Do you have an idea about when you tried logging in? Did you get an error message? This will help me find anything in the logs.
>
> When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help me???
>
>
>
If I can find out what experiment and what error! :) Some of the more common issues are listed at our FAQ (link); did you take a look there?
If the FAQ doesn't address your issue, could you let me know what experiment you are having issues with, and what the error message is? That will help me narrow down the search.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Here is a bit of real world, non academia experience.
We sell a software package to school districts - funny that. When a problem occurs, I'd say maybe half of new clients tell us about it in an actionable way. We get emails with nothing more than "it doesn't work" all the time.
Now, this is a hosted service and we maintain some fairly detailed logs. So we can usually reconstruct exactly what was going on at the time of the "problem". However, that takes time and we typically don't go that route unless we are talking about either an irate client or an issue in which the client couldn't possibly give us the details.
Instead our support people reply with a message such as "What were you doing? What was your expectation? Approximately when did it occur? Here's how to send a screen shot..." It takes maybe a couple times of that before that client sends us the needed info the first time.
The thing is, they are busy so their first instinct is to fire off a general query hoping someone will just take care of it for them. However once they realize that we aren't going to do anything without details then they learn that the fastest way to a resolution is to gather those details to begin with.
The key is to simply be polite. I'd think the same thing applies to students. They are busy with several classes. As soon as a roadblock occurs in one they are going to raise a flag for help and move onto the next thing. If you consistently require them to provide details up front then they will learn that the fastest way to resolution is to get those to begin with.
**tldr;**
It's not a problem specific to academia. Rather, it's a more generalized problem based on how much work everyone has to do combined with the hope that someone else will just take care of it.
That said, some people just won't learn. For those, especially in academia, I wouldn't put forth any more effort than they are willing to as they need to be responsible for their own education.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I think you'll teach them a valuable lesson if they learn that *when you start writing, nobody knows what you're asking about. You have to communicate that*. As you've observed on StackExchange and we've probably all seen at work from time to time, a lot of people struggle when it comes to asking detailed questions or just describing what they see vs. what they wanted. They can get better at *everything* by improving this skill.
They'll only think you're being deliberately unhelpful if they realise that you can solve the problem without any further information. And if they know that, then you can't conclude from what they write that they're bad at asking questions. If I know that you know which experiment I'm working on and what I typed, then it's pretty reasonable for me to write, "why didn't my experiment work?", and I don't think you can really "teach me a lesson" by "making me do it properly" and not seem obstructive. If I don't know that you know that, then I should know better than to ask such a vague question. If I know you can find it out but it's time-consuming for you to do so, then there's a lesson in there somewhere about being respectful of other people's time, but I can't say whether this is the place to fight that battle.
Aside from this, the process of asking a good question often solves the problem because you spot your own mistake. They might benefit from learning that too, and solving their own problems might reduce their frustration with the system since it turns it from "something that never works and ff524 has to sort out" into "something that's difficult to use but I can make work".
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/14 | 5,145 | 21,584 | <issue_start>username_0: In Spain, it is fundamental to do the first 3 years of bachelor and the last two years of master to get a job, so I find very difficult to understand the UK system. I am currently enrolled in Computer Science and I have to find out whether I want to do MEng or BSci.
For what I understand:
* with BSci I can later do a master MSci for a total of 4 years
* with MEng I can in the fourth year choose master courses but MEng is considered undergrad course
The **M** in front of Eng is really confusing. I don't want to go into research but I would like to get a greater insight of Artificial intelligence and Big Data, thing that I could do either way choosing MEng or BSc+MSc.
What is the difference between MEng and MSc in the industry? Given that I will spend 4 years any way, should I invest my time in MEng or Msc?<issue_comment>username_1: You should recommend your students that before posting a question they should REALLY try for themselves to solve it out; and at the end if they send you the question, ask them to submit all the details to you. So questions like "my program does not run" are not acceptable. You will see a change in their attitudes.
Also remember that in the way you can get some questions that maybe will seem silly to you, but they are learning; and that is a process. I bet if you ask some question to another professor or a renewed researcher maybe your question will seem also silly to them.
Bottom line, try to give the advice that I told you in the first part of this post, and remember that your task is teaching for now; and that requires patience and skills (which you will get in the long run)
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like what you need is a couple of generalised forms/web forms and/or a student driven wiki/knowledge base specific to this lab. The latter is obviously more strenuous to implement, but might pay off in the longer term if you are going to be teaching this course for several more years.
As for the forms approach, a stickied post on your forum with clustering like below might be a good starting point:
* general interface issues: can't log on, can't work out how to find x/y/z command
* execution issues: errors and their likely resolutions
* other: can't find results, stylistic questions about approaches etc
Within each section you can indicate steps for them to proceed through on their own, both in resolution of specific issues outlined as well as in general, while also providing a format for a question if that doesn't solve their problem. This approach can address your goals simultaneously: showing them how to formulate technical questions properly, requiring a modicum of thought and problem solving to proceed and transferring knowledge with less burden on the teacher for the generic queries, freeing you up to spend more time on the specific or advanced ones!
To answer you more specifically: I think it is reasonable to require that the effort put into the question at least equals the effort required to answer it. Asking if they have tried the solutions in the FAQ or other questions should be a standard first response to such a vague question, then using logs/user to steer a dialogue to reach a solution. I think a good benchmark for focus/specificity would be 'could I help them without omniscient access?'
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In class there are always good students and not so good students (I know you are teaching an online lab, but still). Do you feel that even goods students are having problems formulating questions?
If only not so good students have that problem, then it is probably a case of laziness or not care attitude. There is no much you can do about that. If you try they'll probably just get frustrated. And they probably can ask very good questions about something care about. [I think this is the case].
If even goods students have that problem, you should explain that their future co-workers or people in online-communities would not be able to help them, if they don't provide more details, and therefore they should provide more details in questions. Good students should pick it up quickly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Being a student myself I know how frustrating it can be to work with technics or facilities you don't know enough about. Sometimes this means asking fully detailed questions can be tricky.
But there is a difference between a student that tries to ask a question to get help with their problem, and one that just declares that they have a problem and thinks it is another persons business to deal with it. What you posted above is the latter.
They have encountered a problem and instead of trying to get help to solve it they try to make you solve it. That might even be clever, because as long as you DO solve the problem, they get maximum effect with a minimum of effort. And as soon as students realise that, even the good students won't bother to read your FAQs anymore, because it is a waste of time, when you obviously can identify and solve a problem as soon as they write "Help, I have a problem."
Additionally you have to keep in mind, that as a student you often take from the experience that people don't respond to your question of, "can anyone help me" as indicating that this person is just checking, whether someone responds. It is not meant to be a question, but a phrase to start a communication about the problem. That is something adapted from face to face communication. In the real world you don't go to people and start with a 5 minute monologue to your problem, you ask "Hey would you help me?" Wait for a "Sure what is it." And than give your monologue.
So what I read above is not a question it is the reflex of a student to a problem. Before even thinking they are posting (in my generation a common reflex in every situation - we are the tldr - too long didn't read generation). If I were you I would respond with a reflex. Just answer with a standard answer that explains, that you need more detail to help. Students who get frustrated by this are already frustrated and beyond your reach.
If on the other hand a student tried to ask a proper question and just failed, you should provide the answer and give a hint on how his question could have been better.
How frustrated your student will be is less a question of what you respond, than of how you
respond. "I could solve your problem, but I wont because of your stupid question" is of course frustrating. But even in a standard answer you can demonstrate that you care, that you take the other person and his time serious, that you would like to help and that you need more information in order to do so. I would try to phrase it, but as you undoubtedly realised I'm not a native English speaker, so I leave that to you. Just don't advertise the fact that you are trying to teach them something.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: In teaching martial arts, what we expect from a new student, and what we expect from an experienced student are completely different. Even a student experienced in one style, is not expected to be of the same skill as a student of equal belt or rank, when they change style.
The methodology here, as applied to your situation would be as follows...
Ask the correct question, along with providing the answer. Over time, the expectation is that there will be fewer times when the correct question will need to be explained and more times when it will be asked in the first place.
Something along the lines of:
The question you asked: "blah blah blah"
The place where the question is answered: document, memo, FAQ, whatever
The question you should have asked: "how do I do Xxxx?"
The answer: "insert tab a into slot b"
The first couple of times each person gets the whole answer.
After that, you start removing lines of the answer.
Telling them where the answer is, and make them go look it up, is the first step.
Over time, you get to the point where you just parrot back bad questions, with no additional response. In the case of "good" questions, you provide both the answer, and some sort of recognition of the form "this was a good question".
The hard part of this sort of approach, is remembering to reset your expectations with each new batch of students. Remembering that each of them will arrive at the level of competence at different times.
Hope that helps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: To me it seems pretty simple. Stop beating around the bush and tell them to not waste your time. If they want a specific answer then they have to give you a specific question. Or as an alternative you can ask equally bad questions until they ask you more in detail.
In your examples above:
>
> Q - I can't log in to the website, please help.
>
>
> A - How did you try to log in? Please help.
>
>
> Q - When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help
> me???
>
>
> A - Help me first? What experiment and what error?
>
>
> Q - I can't see the results of the experiment.
>
>
> A - What experiment? What steps did you take?
>
>
>
After going back and forth a few times even "slow" students will catch on to that to loose less time emailing back and forth, they have to ask more specific questions from the start.
Keep your answers equally short, and use "their" language. When they give you more information, ask more detailed questions. They will find out the answer in time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Nobody replies with RTFM and STFW anymore, we are losing the traditions of the Internet and that is only bad.
Students should learn to make better questions, but they should also learn something much more important *how to answer their own questions*, because at some point they will not be students anymore and they may not have anyone to ask their questions (specially in research, where people are meant to find knowledge beyond the state of the art).
There are some related readings (I can think of now) in this context:
* [How to ask questions](http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html)
* [How not to ask questions](http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=172086)
* [Ask the duck](http://hwrnmnbsol.livejournal.com/148664.html)
* [How to ask](https://superuser.com/questions/how-to-ask)
Also, don't give a man a fish, teach him to fish. In general I agree with this: [Rubber duck problem solving](http://blog.codinghorror.com/rubber-duck-problem-solving/)
But... (there is always a but, nothing is ever so simple not to have it), additionally to giving students the tools for them to answer their own questions it's important to give them the information so that they can do that. There are a number of things that work quite well in that sense.
* Clear definitions, terms, pointers, references and maybe even a glossary. It's much easier to search on the Internet for additional information when you can write a few words on a search box.
* Detailed step-by-step instructions of the set-up and all the things they should do to get their work done. (RTFM is quite pointless if there is no manual in the first place).
* A FAQ. If you are getting the same question repeatedly, then it's likely that something is not clear (which we could say it's your fault...) and it may be good to have a FAQ. If the FAQ deals not only with singular and particular questions but groups of questions then that's even better. E.g.(@cs): "I have an error in the code, how can I solve it?" There are many possible errors and the way to solve most of them is debugging, some instructions about how to debug would be very useful to solve *many* questions.
About your final questions:
>
> should I walk them through the process of reformulating it before I
> answer? Is there a way to do so without frustrating them further?
>
>
>
Yes, definitively. I would consider forcing them to reformulate the question is good for them and helping them to do so is very kind. Frustration may be good as well, as long as it is not desperation. Desperation could be good, but it's not for everyone (sorry, I've to link [this](http://www.heavensinspirations.com/carrots-eggs-coffee.html)). I'd personally suggest to help them to improve their questions by asking your own, which very likely you can copy and paste from a template, because there should be a pattern in those questions. Allegedly, Socrates didn't make many friends by [asking questions](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method), so try not to ask more than necessary.
In any case, this "template" or process is something they should be able to learn and do by themselves, to make better questions and (if possible) to answer their own questions by themselves. Answering in this way would be teaching by example. You can also make the template explicit and part of the FAQ or a sticky post, teaching by example is not incompatible with other forms of teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: All this is a life style preference.
What do you have the attention span for? There is no "right way".
How do you want things to happen.
Answering inconsiderate questions leads to only one thing, more inconsiderate questions.
The only way to significantly reduce the number of inconsiderate questions being asked is to get a reputation for low tolerance to them. Many people fail to consider what information is useful or required to supply an answer when asking. Why bother thinking when you can use someone else's brain at the price of only moving your mouth a little?
Most people take the rude approach when they get bored of this, which is just as useless. I use the sarcastic. Last time someone walked to me and asked me what I was doing when I was making a salad in front of their eyes I said, "Building a vegetable based space ship, what did you think I was doing?"
For the persistently annoying people you can add a sour note: "Here's the salad, want some extra cyanide to go with your lazy question?" (and you put a bit of salt when you say it).
When I have the attention span for it, I say "try to answer your own question from my perspective..." They then ask it again and realise that they need extra information to go with it. When they've made this extra effort you can then choose to answer their question.
The shortest way of doing this is using one word "Define?", "How?" , "Why?" ... mostly people understand they need to rephrase or add detail.
In any case there is no polite way of doing it. You will always find people unhappy about YOU not going out of YOUR way to solve THEIR problems. Makes no difference if they could solve them by applying a brain cell to the task for 30 seconds...
You no doubt have co workers who get asked way less broken questions. Observe their behavior and emulate or integrate.
Regards username_8.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> Should I risk the actual course goal (delivering content to the students) in favor of a general educational goal (teaching them how to ask questions)?
>
>
>
No, and you don't really have to. (Though the goal definitely is lofty.)
It is certainly frustrating when people offer no context or *appear* to make no effort in the question, because that makes it more difficult and costly for you to help them. You also seem to be in a position where it is expected of you to help them to the best of your ability, so ignoring people may not be an option.
When helping people in general, I find two strategies especially helpful:
* Assume ignorance over malice/laziness. For all we know, the students are computer-illiterate. It takes experience and knowledge to know what context is relevant and what isn't. Computers are magic!
* Frame any questions as you asking them for help, rather than telling them that they failed to provide information you need. Avoid sarcasm or jokes at their expense. ("Sure, I'll just scroll through a couple of days of network traffic to look for failed login attempts. Not too many of those, right?")
>
> Is there a way to train students to ask better questions without making them feel like I'm not helping them?
>
>
>
To prevent it from feeling like a brush-off, show that you care about solving their problem by leaving the door open and offering an inviting hand. **Do** refer them to standard texts that you or your institution have provided, perhaps even quote a relevant part if possible, but do not end the reply there, because it will appear as final.
Give it your best guess, even if your best guess is a sort of standard response, and solicit extra information from them if it doesn't resolve their issue. Ask specific questions that you may need, like user name, estimated time of the problem, and let them know that this sort of information helps you find and diagnose the issue for them.
Some (most?) people won't write back to you. That's okay. Perhaps the problem was temporary and resolved itself. Perhaps they solved it. Perhaps a fellow student helped them. Or perhaps they really have given up, and you've done what can be reasonably expected.
Examples:
>
> I can't log in to the website, please help.
>
>
>
You'll need your XYZ user name and password to log in to the website. If it's been a while and you've forgotten your password, our FAQ (link) gives instructions on how to get a new one.
Do you have an idea about when you tried logging in? Did you get an error message? This will help me find anything in the logs.
>
> When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help me???
>
>
>
If I can find out what experiment and what error! :) Some of the more common issues are listed at our FAQ (link); did you take a look there?
If the FAQ doesn't address your issue, could you let me know what experiment you are having issues with, and what the error message is? That will help me narrow down the search.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Here is a bit of real world, non academia experience.
We sell a software package to school districts - funny that. When a problem occurs, I'd say maybe half of new clients tell us about it in an actionable way. We get emails with nothing more than "it doesn't work" all the time.
Now, this is a hosted service and we maintain some fairly detailed logs. So we can usually reconstruct exactly what was going on at the time of the "problem". However, that takes time and we typically don't go that route unless we are talking about either an irate client or an issue in which the client couldn't possibly give us the details.
Instead our support people reply with a message such as "What were you doing? What was your expectation? Approximately when did it occur? Here's how to send a screen shot..." It takes maybe a couple times of that before that client sends us the needed info the first time.
The thing is, they are busy so their first instinct is to fire off a general query hoping someone will just take care of it for them. However once they realize that we aren't going to do anything without details then they learn that the fastest way to a resolution is to gather those details to begin with.
The key is to simply be polite. I'd think the same thing applies to students. They are busy with several classes. As soon as a roadblock occurs in one they are going to raise a flag for help and move onto the next thing. If you consistently require them to provide details up front then they will learn that the fastest way to resolution is to get those to begin with.
**tldr;**
It's not a problem specific to academia. Rather, it's a more generalized problem based on how much work everyone has to do combined with the hope that someone else will just take care of it.
That said, some people just won't learn. For those, especially in academia, I wouldn't put forth any more effort than they are willing to as they need to be responsible for their own education.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I think you'll teach them a valuable lesson if they learn that *when you start writing, nobody knows what you're asking about. You have to communicate that*. As you've observed on StackExchange and we've probably all seen at work from time to time, a lot of people struggle when it comes to asking detailed questions or just describing what they see vs. what they wanted. They can get better at *everything* by improving this skill.
They'll only think you're being deliberately unhelpful if they realise that you can solve the problem without any further information. And if they know that, then you can't conclude from what they write that they're bad at asking questions. If I know that you know which experiment I'm working on and what I typed, then it's pretty reasonable for me to write, "why didn't my experiment work?", and I don't think you can really "teach me a lesson" by "making me do it properly" and not seem obstructive. If I don't know that you know that, then I should know better than to ask such a vague question. If I know you can find it out but it's time-consuming for you to do so, then there's a lesson in there somewhere about being respectful of other people's time, but I can't say whether this is the place to fight that battle.
Aside from this, the process of asking a good question often solves the problem because you spot your own mistake. They might benefit from learning that too, and solving their own problems might reduce their frustration with the system since it turns it from "something that never works and ff524 has to sort out" into "something that's difficult to use but I can make work".
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/14 | 555 | 2,352 | <issue_start>username_0: Background:
I applied for several masters programs this season (taking into account the advice given on this site) and have received a request for a telephone/Skype interview with one of the German universities I applied for. The response came much more quickly than I expected and I still have no replies from other universities.
The mail contained suggested date and time (ten or so days from the date the mail was sent) and asked me to confirm it. Unfortunately, at the specified time, I'll be on a highway, in a different country, traveling between two cities. In my response, I explained that I'll be on a trip and that I'm coming back two days after the suggested date and that I'll be available pretty much at any time after I return from my trip. The reply I got is that the time suggested is the only available time for the interview.
Question:
My unfortunate situation aside, I wanted to ask is it normal for universities to be this inflexible when scheduling admissions interviews? Did I go out if line by attempting to negotiate the interview date? This is the first time I'm having any sort of interview, so I really have no idea what are the cultural norms in such case.<issue_comment>username_1: It's fairly normal if course admission is competitive, and if one's application really hasn't stood out so far as exceptionally good. The interviewers might have many dozens of interviews to wade through, and the only way to do that is on a very tightly planned schedule.
Given it's a Skype interview, and given the prevalence of laptops, wifi and high-speed mobile data, I don't think it's that extraordinary to expect that for such a significant interview, an applicant would schedule a stop during a trip, at a place with a decent data connection to do the interview.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it was perfectly reasonable of you to ask to reschedule. Of course, it's unfortunate that they weren't able or willing to accommodate you, but that's up to them.
You'll now have to decide what you want to do: interview while traveling, or alter your travel plans, or skip the interview altogether. It might be worth considering whether an institution that seems so unwilling to accommodate prospective students is an institution that you'd want to attend at all!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/14 | 2,217 | 9,428 | <issue_start>username_0: I am PhD student in computer engineering and visiting a foreign university. My project is near to the end and, since my colleague and I got excellent results, we are writing a scientific paper about it.
I would like to submit the paper to the top best journal in our field.
I sent the draft to my supervisor here, that replied that he does not think that the paper is going to be accepted by the top best journal. He suggested to submit it to another journal, that we can consider the 5th best journal in the field. He said that we can still submit it to the top journal if we want it, but, in that case, we have to remove his name from the author list.
So what should we do?
**Should we remove his name from the author list and submit it to the top journal?
Or should we satisfy him and submit the paper to the 5th most prestigious journal?**<issue_comment>username_1: In my view, using authorship as a bargaining chip like this is ethically inappropriate.
Either the supervisor's contributions to the paper warrant including him as an author, or they don't.
If they do, then he needs to be listed as a co-author no matter where you publish, and you need his agreement on where the paper is to be submitted.
If they don't, then he should not be listed as a co-author, no matter where you publish, and you and the remaining authors can make your own decision about where to submit (though you still might value his input).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: **Edit:** people are talking a lot about the requirements for being an author in this thread. That's not the question, the question is what should the student do. And giving the advisor some benefit of the doubt - since he is included for authorship in one condition - I'm assuming he meets the standard requirements for the field. Making this a choice about which journal and the relationship with the advisor, and not authorship. *It's a weird choice, but the one the student has none the less.*
---
I agree with what username_1 said. It is bizarre. Does the "top journal" in question use blind review? If it's not blind the absence of his name could hurt you if he is well known. If it's blind, it won't affect the review process.
If time is an issue - definitely do it his way.
If time is not an issue - Call his bluff and try at the top tier journal and hopefully get lucky, or at least get good reviews that you can roll into the next submission.
What is your relationship with your advisor? Sadly this is an apprenticeship not a democracy. The biggest mistake you can make as a PhD student is to not be on the same page as your advisor. If you are on rocky footing with him already don't start problems do it his way. number 5 vs. number 1, eh? what are their different impact factors? It might not matter that much and save you pain. If you are on great standing, and this wasn't an ultimatum from him and you think you have the time and want to try... Just remember you are there to learn from him and he is the more experienced one / possibly better judge.
Have you compared your work to other things that have been published in either of these journals? Is it more like one than the other? Is it "big enough" for the top one? Have you seen similar papers there in terms of scope and number and size of experiments etc.?
This is a highly political thing. Get advice from your peers. Especially about dealing with your advisor. As we don't know the specifics this is tricky.
summary: top is better, but #5 is good - I'd honestly probably lean the safer route (and assume his experience is guiding his decision)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I disagree slightly with @username_2 (so I provide a different answer).
>
> I agree with what username_1 said. It is bizarre. Does the "top journal" in question use blind review? If it's not blind the absence of his name could hurt you if he is well known. If it's blind, it won't affect the review process.
>
>
>
Matter-of-fact, that's certainly true to some extent, but it's not something you should exploit. For instance, adding some important coauthor to the paper often helps your chances even if he contributes nothing, but doing that is unethical, because it advances careers without merit. Furthermore, all authors are individually responsible for the accuracy of the content.
(Actually collaborating with an important scientist is an entirely different thing, but you should do it to improve the content).
Therefore, I'd be more careful: reviewers should not judge the paper merit based on who authors it, especially not consciously (with a few exceptions, say if the author intentionally defrauded the system in the past); unfortunately, this does happens even to people who try to avoid it, and that happens more in some communities than in others, so papers by famous scientists have sometimes unfair advantages in acceptance.
---
In any case, your supervisor should only be in the author list if he contributes something to the paper. Since you already have a draft, I can imagine his contribution would be help in revising this draft before submission — which can certainly be useful and deserve coauthorship (though I think there could be some debate about this, which hinges on how much creativity is left in writing the paper after doing the work. Some computer scientists argue that writing the paper is 50% of the job, because most of our papers are mostly not reports on experiments, but argumentative texts which use experiments to support some of their claims).
In this case, I think the correct question would be the following. Is your supervisor potential contribution to the paper useful enough to involve him in the project?
If the supervisor will not provide any contribution except his name, then he should not be there. If he forces you to have his name, that's clearly unethical behavior, and you should think about calling him on it; unfortunately that's typically hard as long as he is your supervisor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Well, my interpretation of the situation is (yet again) somewhat different. So I'll try to put in my two cents.
(I am not a supervisor, but I did often discuss the different quality journals/conferences with my supervisor, as well as what he considers are good reasons to submit to a top-quality track and what are good reasons to submit to a good-quality track).
The description, to me, does not sound like anybody is trying to do anything unethical, or use the authorship as a bargaining chip.
I would propose that the *supervisors own interpretation of the results* (i.e. the draft) is such that **he does not deem it quality enough** to publish in a **top-quality track**, but **does believe it is good work**. (An average paper in a top-journal is probably expected to have a stronger contribution when compared to the fifth-top journal, even though works published in both will be valid and strong contributions in the field.)
While not exactly unethical, it is a wide-spread opinion that *vastly over-reaching*, and submitting *when you strongly believe the contribution is too weak for the conference/journal where you submit* is disrespectful towards the reviewers' time and bad form (several excellent explanations on [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/9392/4249)). I, for one, agree with my supervisor on the fact that **is it wrong to submit something even *we* deem to low-quality for a certain track**, with the sole purpose of e.g. getting useful reviews, because:
* That way we would only spend the reviewers time, which should be respected especially since they are giving it for free.
* Also, probably more valid for small communities but possibly also in bigger ones, if the review process is not double-blind, just the reviewers seeing your name on the paper with valid but too small contribution might damage your reputation slightly.
So, I think the **"two options" offered by your supervisor are both valid**, and these are the **possible reasons**:
* In case you decide to go against his advice, and submit to a top-journal, he can not stop you since the *work is rightfully yours* and you can do what you deem fit with it.
He will thus *not give you any input on your writing*, or help you prepare the paper or present the results, and of course *does not expect an authorship*. You are, however, free to submit your work wherever you see fit.
* On the other hand, he would help you with *supervisor-y, author-y* stuff if you decided to *submit somewhere he deems more appropriate for the quality of the work* (as he perceives it).
He would then (hopefully) help you writing the paper, polishing the presentation, and offer other suggestions and advice he can offer as a senior scientist. Since he would be *investing his time and expertise*, he would naturally want to be *included in the author list*.
---
I do not want to get in to the discussion of what deserves authorship in this question... but I'll just shortly state my opinion on which my answer is based: In Computer Science, the supervisor contributes mostly by leading your research, and then by advising you on how to write well, present the results, put them in the right context. The supervisor does not need to substantially contribute to methods presented in the paper, but his contribution can still be very valuable and substantial in other ways.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/04/14 | 1,144 | 4,450 | <issue_start>username_0: I went through [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19256/is-it-okay-to-report-classmates-cheating-on-exams) and still can't fathom why cheating *isn't* black-and-white. Nevertheless, <https://www.csusm.edu/dos/studres/wwwc.html> says,
>
> "A cheater receives through deception what honest students work hard for; and in classes graded on a curve, he lowers their grades to boot."
>
>
>
Ok, I get why people don't cheat(moral fortitude) and why people don't rat(social fortitude); and that's just me saying I'm on the "I'll force all you cheaters to pay for your injustices" side; but is it the grading system that makes it bad for honest students? If honest students honestly receive high marks, but are "curved down" in rank because cheaters get near perfect marks, then grading based on a curve must be one of the only things that makes it unfair.
--- clarification:
Grading on a Curve: means to statistically conform grades of all those measured to a curve that measures performance based on a norm-referenced assessment.
Would cheating still be considered unfair if we drop the concept of grading according to a curve? (which we should)<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Would cheating still be considered unfair if we drop the concept of grading according to a curve? (which we should)
>
>
>
Of course!
Let's assume that without cheating 10% of students get As. Therefore, students who earned As are a small group. Having an A might help getting funding, or finding an internship or a job. Now let's say that with cheating, 50% (no normalizing) of students get As, now an A is no longer that valuable because a lot of people have them. Therefore, the value of As that honest students earned has diminished.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Cheating is unfair regardless of how you handle grading, but *how* unfair it is depends on the grading scheme. Let's assume that the cheater's efforts earn him among the highest raw scores in the class.
No matter how you adjust the grades (unless you flip high and low grades!) the cheater will have a higher grade that they deserve, and anything which is grade dependent and competitive (e.g. getting a job, getting into grad school, etc.) will be unfairly easier for the cheater and unfairly harder for everyone else. So there's a baseline unfairness to cheating.
If, additionally, you keep the percentage of A's fixed (grading on a curve), the cheater will bump someone out of an A, which will likely impact them negatively (career, grad school, etc.). Someone else may be bumped out of a B, etc, down to where the cheater would have been if they hadn't cheated. So there is direct and noticeable harm to the cheater's fellow classmates. It's a pretty rotten thing to do. (This is also related to why students fight so ardently for every grade or grade step.)
If you keep the requirements fixed, then everyone will get the same grades they would have, save the cheater, but the average fraction of A's will go up. The net impact is the same--a 3.2 average now looks worse than it did before because the averages have gone up--but the negative effects are not felt by individual classmates but rather averaged over everyone from the university with cheaters. By spreading the harm among more people, in some ways the effects are less acute; aside from the cheater, everyone else is still going to have the same relative standing.
So, especially if cheating is rare, it's even more unfair if you're grading on a curve\* since those people who have the bad luck to be stuck with a cheater will be unfairly punished in addition to the cheater being unfairly rewarded.
\* There is an argument for grading on a curve, however: there is also unfairness due to differences in grading schemes between universities. Grading on a curve helps to combat this, as instead of measuring various different expectations of mastery (e.g. if Harvard expects you to do more to get an A than does Yale, then your GPA will be lower if you go to Harvard than Yale), it just measures students against each other, and there are enough of those for statistical sampling help even out the other differences (e.g. if the incoming classes to Harvard and Yale are of similar quality, and both grade on similar curves, regardless of which one you'll know who was in the top 10%, and those top 10% will be similar regardless of where they went).
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 1,614 | 6,070 | <issue_start>username_0: Is there a standard model for the number of citations an article will receive over time? If not, is there a good source for data on citation counts for articles divided up over time? Furthermore, does this vary by field
It seems plausible to me that the number of citations decays approximately exponentially, with the rate of decay depending on the article, but I have empirical evidence for this conjecture.
Such a model would be useful because a few years after an article was published, one could use the MLE method to estimate the number of citations the article would receive over any time period. This would allow us to count citations in a way that does not bias older articles, one of the chief problems with straight citation counts. Additionally, it would give us a better idea of the inaccuracies of metrics like impact factor.<issue_comment>username_1: I imagine you'd have an initial publication lag where citations might be lower for example in year 1 than in year 2 and that then aggregate citation counts over time would have to be monotonically decelerating. You'd also have substantial variability in terms of individual articles. For example, I've heard of articles which accelerate in their citation count over time as they become the standard citation for a particular topic.
Independent of overall number of citations received, journals and fields differ dramatically in the rate at which citations accumulate. A good starting point is to look at "[citation half life](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor#Other_measures_of_impact)" (i.e., the median time it takes a journal or field to acquire half of its total citations). If you can access ISI you can examine how different fields and journals differ in citation half life.
For example, I just had a quick look at a few fields from ISI 2012 which yielded the following data:
```
Field Citation Half-Life (in years)
PSYCHIATRY 7.6
ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS 6.9
MATHEMATICS >10.0
PSYCHOLOGY >10.0
```
So clearly psychiatry and astronomy tend to cite more recent articles, whereas mathematics and psychology often cite older articles.
The implication is that impact factors (which are based on the last 2 or possibly 5 years post publication) should be higher in psychiatry/astronomy than in mathematics/psychology. It also means that early career researchers in psychiatry/astronomy should accumulate a better h-index more quickly than researchers in mathematics/psychology, all else being equal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com) will plot the number of citations over time for papers. I don't know whether it will do so for arbitrary papers, but it will for any paper listed on an author's page (e.g., [<NAME>](http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=TFx_gLQAAAAJ)).
I haven't studied the data systematically, but some things are clear from browsing:
1. Citation statistics for individual papers can be incredibly noisy. For example, a paper may have 5 citations one year, 15 the next, then 7, 2, 12, etc., with no obvious pattern or explanation. Furthermore, different papers written by the same person on similar topics and with similar citation rates sometimes show visibly different levels of noise, and I don't know why. For papers with particularly high citation counts (e.g., 50+ citations per year), noise is not as big a factor, but such papers are uncommon.
2. Different papers can take radically different trajectories. For example, some of my papers have a consistent growth in their yearly citation counts over ten or more years. Others seem relatively stable, probably decreasing a little over time but with yearly fluctuations that are substantially larger than the decrease. Some have fallen completely off the map and only get cited occasionally (perhaps a Poisson process). These different scenarios are correlated with how good I consider the paper, but only loosely, and I think the trajectory would be tough to predict from the first few years of citation counts.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think **the** model for all kinds of papers is very unlikely to exist. Certainly, the trajectory will be different for very strong and fundamental contributions vs. small incremental improvements, that often become more or less irrelevant in a few years. Further, looking through Google Scholar data (already mentioned by username_2), I would hypothesize that there is also a difference between fields. In my rather hype-driven research field (services / software engineering), citations often seem to roughly follow a bell curve:
[Example 1](http://scholar.google.com.sg/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=wZ9f8CAAAAAJ&citation_for_view=wZ9f8CAAAAAJ%3aqjMakFHDy7sC)
[Example 2](http://scholar.google.com.sg/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=wZ9f8CAAAAAJ&citation_for_view=wZ9f8CAAAAAJ%3aUeHWp8X0CEIC)
[Example 3](http://scholar.google.com.sg/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=0n5S6uUAAAAJ&citation_for_view=0n5S6uUAAAAJ%3ad1gkVwhDpl0C)
These papers, if they are timely, generally need one or two years to pick up steam, then there are a few years with lots of citations, after which interest in the presented ideas dies down again.
More fundamental work often seems to have a less clear trajectory:
[Example 4](http://scholar.google.com.sg/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=2T3H4ekAAAAJ&citation_for_view=2T3H4ekAAAAJ%3aAde32sEp0pkC)
And then of course you have publications which are just "weird":
[Example 5](http://scholar.google.com.sg/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=KK2le2UAAAAJ&citation_for_view=KK2le2UAAAAJ:9yKSN-GCB0IC)
Note that all examples I have provide have a not-too-small number of citations on them. I would say for publications < 50 citations on Google Scholar (i.e., most of them), all bets go out through the window anyway. Fluctuations are too large for any sort of statement over the shape of their trajectory.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 867 | 3,732 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been trying to find the dissertation of someone who advertises that they hold a "doctorate of management" from the "University of Phoenix". The degree requires a dissertation, but the school does not require the dissertation to be published, apparently, because neither is the work listed on ProQuest, nor does the University's own library hold it. My liaison indicated that the author may have deliberately chosen not to distribute the work. I have not yet been able to obtain a copy.
Is this obscurantist practice rare at good universities & common at for-profit universities?
Any other factors at play in the unavailability of a graduate dissertation in the United States?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know about for-profit universities, but the practice at "good" US universities is generally as follows. Before being eligible to graduate, the student must submit a copy of the dissertation to the library and to ProQuest. By default, after being processed, it is then immediately available to the public from both sources. (In some cases it might not necessarily be available online, or might require a fee, a visit to the university's library, or an inter-library loan request.)
The student may be able to request an "embargo", in which case access to the dissertation's text is restricted for a period of time. For example, this could be used if the student intended to commercially publish the dissertation or related material. At my PhD institution, this period can be up to 2 years; any longer embargo requires the special approval of the graduate dean. Even in such cases, I would expect that the library and ProQuest would still show the dissertation in their catalogs; they just wouldn't allow access to the text.
In your case, "embargo" sounds like the only possibly legitimate explanation. But if the student graduated several years ago, or if the university library and/or granting department cannot confirm the dissertation's existence, I would [**declare shenanigans**](http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/150844/south-park-calls-shenanigans). (Maybe NSFW).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Have any of you considered that the person simply did not graduate? I am attending the University of Phoenix in the Doctor of Health Administration program at the dissertation proposal phase. The requirements are some of the most difficult I have ever seen and include publication in the ProQuest Dissertation Abstracts. One of my committee members is a graduate of NYU and when we tried to view her award winning dissertation in the abstracts it was no longer there because she graduated over 10 years ago. Why doesn't the person you are referencing have a copy of her signed dissertation, I certainly will? Did Phoenix have any evidence that she graduated from there? If not, I would take a look at the candidate not the school. Consider this example, One of my committee members' dissertation was not available online even though she is referenced in nearly every scientific article written since her graduation, was lauded in newspapers for her work, and now sits as a department chair for an Ivy League university? She was surprised that there was no record about her dissertation based on her status as a highly prized employment candidate. SHe ultimately had to send to the education clearing house to get her transcripts. She didn't even realize that NYU should have given her copies of her transcripts and didn't seem to know that she had transcripts at the doctoral level.
Maybe you guys are just looking at the entire process wrong and should simply ask the University of Phoenix Office of the Registra rather than friends.
Good luck
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/04/15 | 3,318 | 12,573 | <issue_start>username_0: How much do [Springer-Verlag authors](https://www.springer.com/authors/) make per book sold?<issue_comment>username_1: This varies substantially, depending on the sort of book, how well the author negotiated (each book involves an individually negotiated contract), the price of the book, etc. Based on one Springer contract I'm familiar with, here's a first approximation. I can't say for sure how representative it is, but it's at least one data point, and I'd guess it's typical for Springer and competing publishers.
For regular sales, the author may get 9-12% of "net cash receipts", defined as what the publisher made on the sale (excluding taxes), with the percentage depending on things like how well the book has sold. Note that "regular sales" excludes some special cases, for which there may be lower royalty rates.
Then the question is how much Springer charged the bookseller for the book. You can download a 6 megabyte zip file of [Springer wholesale prices](http://static.springer.com/sgw/documents/1446721/application/zip/Springer_PriceChanges2014.zip). I glanced at a few math books, and the prices look like they are about 60% of what bookstores are charging. That's certainly the right ballpark, but I haven't computed any real statistics.
So a first approximation is that the author's royalty is probably 5-7% of the price you pay in a bookstore. Considering that academic books are expensive, that's not bad, but nobody's going to grow rich off it. For advanced books, selling 1000 copies in total is very good and selling 10,000 is amazing.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Here's what Springer says:
>
> § 6 Royalty
>
>
> For each sold and paid copy of the Work or part thereof, print or
> electronic, sold as an individual book or individual part thereof,
> Springer shall pay to Author a royalty of 6% based on the net income
> received by Springer (list-price minus discount and VAT, withholding
> tax and any other applicable taxes). For the avoidance of doubt, this
> includes (but is not limited to) such individual sales to digital and
> non-digital libraries.
>
>
> If there is a legal requirement for Springer to withhold any taxes on
> a royalty payment, the taxes will be deducted from the royalty payment
> to Author. If the Work is sold electronically as part of a Springer
> e-book package, Author will receive an equitable share of royalties
> from the income generated by Springer from the e-book package. The
> share formula for each individual title within the e-book package will
> be determined by Springer no later than April for the preceding
> calendar year. This amount will be paid in addition to the royalty
> described above and shown separately on the annual royalty statement.
>
>
> In the case of Bulk Sales, Author's exclusive royalty for the
> respective Bulk Sale will be 0 % of the related Net Proceeds, with
> “Bulk Sale” being defined as the production and/or distribution of a
> special number of copies of the Work or parts thereof at a special
> price regardless of whether it be performed by Springer or by third
> parties, regardless of whether in print or electronic format and
> further regardless of whether in a layout identical to the normal normal edition or not. For the purpose of this Clause 6 Royalty, the term "Net Proceeds" shall be defined as the net amount Springer actually receives after deduction of all discounts, minus production costs incurred by Sprnger or any Springer Group Company and minus VAT, withholding tax and any other applicable taxes.
>
>
> If Springer grants licenses to use the Work or derivative works
> thereof or parts of either in non-Springer products and the related
> use is not covered by the above subsections of this clause 6 “Royalty”
> (e.g., a license to translate the work and to distribute the
> translation, or a license to distribute parts of the Work in a third
> party book), Author’s exclusive royalty for the respective license and
> any related use will be a share of the Springer’s Net Proceeds
> according to industry standards (currently 50%).
>
>
> The aforesaid royalties shall be the sole compensation to be paid to
> Author with respect to the Work and the rights granted. In case the
> Work contains or links (e.g. through frames or in-line links) to
> media, social or functional enhancements, the royalties, complimentary
> copies and/or access rights granted under this contract, are deemed to
> be adequate consideration. For the avoidance of doubt, the aforesaid
> royalties will be paid as a total to the joint group of authors if
> “Author” comprises several individual authors. Each co-author will
> receive an equal share of any payment.
>
>
> Accounts will be settled annually in April for the preceding calendar
> year, with payment to follow soon thereafter.
>
>
> Authors are responsible for the taxation of their royalties. Springer
> is entitled to report related information (including personal and
> financial data) to the respective authorities.
>
>
> Free copies which are provided by Springer for the purposes of review,
> promotion, sample or otherwise free of charge are not subject to
> royalty payments. Likewise, copies that are damaged and cannot be sold
> are not subject to royalty payments.
>
>
> Any publisher's proceeds from rights managed by national copyright
> organizations (collecting societies including but not limited to
> societies such as Copyright Clearance Center) are the sole property of
> Springer. Any such author’s proceeds are the sole property of Author,
> and if applicable, registration and taxation of such proceeds is the
> Author’s sole responsibility. This subsection shall have precedence
> over any other subsection of this Clause 6 Royalty.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you live in Germany, don't forget to register with VG Wort when your book is published. They only pay out once a year, as does Springer. But I got more money from VG Wort than I did from Springer for my book published in 2014. As an answer above noted: you aren't going to get rich.
Also, do read the proofs very carefully. They seem to employ people who don't understand the manuscripts to do what little editing they do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am a Springer author of [a book in the *Boston Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science* series](https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-18515-6), and I made 6% off the gross sales.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My answer is close to $0.00. I published a book with Springer in 2007, and it is a standard work found in most university libraries. I have never received a royalty cheque, as there was a threhshold number for sales. However, now sales are close to zero, as the book is available electronically via SpringerLink and other platforms, and Springer essentially does not pay royalties on downloads via SpringerLink, as they have no way of calculating the proportion owing - so they avoid the issue, and authors are totally shafted.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: With Springer, the royalties accounting report does consider only book sales for individuals while excluding institutional and group sales which constitute the majority of revenues. For highly specialized expensive books whose price exceeds the capability of individuals, sales are considerably low while institutional and group sales are high.
Even when the detailed chapter by chapter downloads for books on Springer site are high, they are excluded from the royalties accounting report. The authorship rights are thus subdivided into full rights against the minority of individual readers, and zero rights against the majority of institutional and group readers. Highly unfair to totally exclude the author from institutional and group online downloads and hardcopies.
Totally upsetting and frustrating experience for the authors, specially when emails are not answered!!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> How much do Springer-Verlag authors make per book sold?
>
>
>
I am getting roughly EUR 2 to 4 for each copy of my Springer book - eBook, softcover, and hardcover, respectively. That's 10% of net sales, and then 25% of that, since my co-author wrote 75% of the book. The annual royalty statements from Springer have been a nice surprise since they also include royalties for eBook packages that universities and other institutions purchase. Plus the book added almost EUR 500 to my VG Wort payout; too bad that's only in the year of publication! So, I am pretty happy with Springer, with the premise that I did not expect (and need) to make any money from this project - indeed the hourly pay is probably something like EUR 2. What may also be of interest to some is that the book is being cited at a rate of 25 to 50 times a year, which is significantly higher than any of my articles. It's a research monograph in a technical field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Beware of publishing with Apress (Springer-Nature) on two issues:
* Payments for SpringerLink downloads are not issued
* Data for sales is not shared
I published [5 books](http://bookmuft.com/my-books/) through Apress. These books were earlier published on Amazon's KDP program a year before (2016 to 2017) they were republished by Apress (December 2017 onwards).
At Amazon's KDP program they were provided in self-published mode. There I use to get 70% for e-book and 50% for physical book. I could set my own price for different regions. Sales data is shown live too. I was making decent sales of ~10-50 USD per day.
Then Apress approached me to publish the books again (they used the term "adopting") and paid me 3000 USD for all 5 of them (1000 USD for book on Julia programming and 500 USD each for other four). This amount was suggested to be "bonus for signing in" and was in addition to 10% of sales as royalty payments for first 4000 copies, 12.5% for next 4000 copies, 15% for next 4000 copies and 20% henceforth.
But there was a catch. Within the contract, the bonus payments (3000USD) were added for Subscription services like SpringerLink too. Being first-time author dealing with publishers, I was too naive to understand the consequences.
The payments are made on quarterly basis. Payments of one quarter are made at the end of next quarter. My books got published in December 2017. For fourth quarter of 2017, I got payments of ~180 USD which was decent sale of books considering just a month worth of sales. But second payment of Quarter-1 of 2018 which was released in July 2018 was just ~250 USD. This was surprising since the books were decently ranked in Amazon sales data all through the time and Julia book was quite popular. When I asked for sales data based on which royalty statements were issues, the e-mails are simply not relied to. Also at this point of time I realised the issued with subscription based downloads at SpringerLInk where the books got downloaded well over 25000 times within those 3 months of 2018, but I wasn't paid a single dime.
Hence my advice to new authors:
* Of course you should not be naive as myself while reading the contract. Even better if you ask a legal expert to do the same.
* Ask for payments for subscription based services too. The downloads run in thousands there whereas sales might be less than hundred (if you believe royalty statements!)
* To avoid the hassles, go for one-time payments either for life or 5 year basis (royalty paid every 5 years). A decent book priced 20 USD should easily fetch yourself at-least 20,000 USD by the time its obsolete. Of course the estimates varies on type of books and subjects.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Royalties amount to a couple of candybars a year.
It is hilarious to see the looks on students' faces when you recommend your own book for the course. "<NAME>, he's getting rich off our backs."
*No sunshine, I recommend it because this is the course I intend to teach and you can always download a PDF from the previous years archive, since obviously my book started its life as a set of lecture notes.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I published a book with Springer in 2018. The first years I received less than 100 Euro per year - after that I received less than 10 Euros per year.
If you are based in the German-speaking countries, I urge you to have a look at VG Wort. It will dramatically increase your income once a "Wahrnehmungsvertrag" is signed.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/04/15 | 2,883 | 11,867 | <issue_start>username_0: This question was inspired by this [fascinating discussion about cheating](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19256/is-it-okay-to-report-classmates-cheating-on-exams/19300).
If grades, degrees, test scores are important for getting a job/internship/assistantship, even more so than the actual knowledge that they measure, I can see how cheating on a test can be considered unethical. Is it ethically better to hire an expensive tutor to prepare, say, for the SAT or for the GMAT, or for some test at school, than to attempt to cheat on the exam?
Here is some context: [New York Times: Tutors Hold Key to Higher Test Scores, for a High Fee](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/01/nyregion/01tutor.html) .
**Assume that the tutor has no secret/insider knowledge about the test**. Assume that the tutor is essentially teaching you only some tricks for beating this particular test, no real knowledge. Assume also that many people in class do not have the money to hire a tutor of the same qualification.
Conversely, is it okay to cheat for those less financially fortunate, if they cannot afford a tutor?
As further context, Princeton Review explicitly states that their SAT prep program does only one thing: raises scores. Princeton Review argues that test prep is right and ethical, because (paraphrasing) SAT is a stupid, almost meaningless thing, and those without quality test preparation are put at a disadvantage.<issue_comment>username_1: Measuring the ability to learn tricks (including financial ability) is actually of use to most employers etc., while measuring the ability to cheat is if anything a measure of what employers etc. want to avoid (since typically the risk/reward scheme for them is very different from individuals).
Thus, while having a tutor is not completely fair to those who cannot afford it, it is still a reasonable proxy for desirability. Cheating is (usually) not. So it's ethically better than cheating inasmuch as the right people for the positions will tend to be selected for them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Both are dubious. But cheating is a problem with your personal ethics, and you risk being caught. If the exams are based on some secret knowledge, which is not available to wider public, the whole system is corrupt. If you adapt, you support that system, but you don't risk getting 'caught', since you know something that is accepted by the system.
The problem is quite abstract since you won't have either-or situation in real life. If the system enforces bribing the examinators or buying secret knowledge, the system would enforce no-cheating policy on the exam very well (because it's in the financial interest of the examinator).
For me, it's like the pickpocketing vs. corruption dilemma. **Both are bad**. But cheating is easier to fix (more control on exams etc.). In case of paid tutoring the whole system needs fixing, which is hard to fix because the system will oppose and you need some external force to change that (like revolution etc.).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Very theoretical, but let’s think this:
* If you cheat, you are doing sth. very unethical, as you are not following the rules that every one must obey, thus, you're obtaining an unfair advantage. Rules are for everyone and you’re breaking them – that’s bad.
* If you pay someone (who doesn’t have any real knowledge about the questions in the exam) to help you with the exam, you’re following the rules. So, you aren’t doing anything bad.
Some people may complain saying: “But it’s unfair for those poor little guys who have no money to afford a tutor. They’re in disadvantage; it’s not ethical; it’s unfair.” And I respond: “Yes, it’s unbalanced. People with money will have advantage. **But** people who don’t have to spend X hours in work will have more time to study, having an advantage too over the workers. And people who can study in silence will have advantage over those who live in noisy places, …”
So, we must put some rules to try to give the same starting position to everyone. But there will be always disadvantages. The better the rules, the less the disadvantages. So, the student can’t do anything unethical if he/she follows the rules.
The question should be: Is it fair/ethical that exams are made in a way that someone with knowledge of tricks not related with the subject can obtain a huge advantage enough to overtake those who don’t know the tricks? Why are those “tricks” not published by the “teachers” or the exam providers?
The problem is in the way the exams are, not wether people can pay a tutor.
In any case, cheating is explainable, but **never** justifiable.
Edited to include my own comment:
Are you doing something that breaks the rules? No. You are pursuing a finish line, with all your effort and possibilities. If you have the money and the will, pay for it. If you have the time and the will, study more than others. If you have skills, use them to learn better than others. If there are rules and you follow them, nobody can say you’re doing something incorrect. You’re just doing as best as possible – through effort, money, skills … If you stick to the rules, you’re ok.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Thing One: The exams are generally *intended* to measure how good you are at performing certain tasks (working out or knowing the correct answers to questions). On a given day, etc.
Thing Two: the exams are *actually used* to estimate how good you might be at other tasks (studying for a degree, doing a job, being "smart"). Of course SATs and the like are not great at estimating those things. For that matter intelligence doesn't easily admit being measured at all. But it's one piece of evidence and people seem to care about them.
So, get one consideration out of the way. Is it unethical to train for the test at all? Maybe, because that makes it a less good proxy for general ability. But you can train for the test with or without a tutor (perhaps more effectively with). Just practicing questions makes a significant difference. A good (but not off the charts) SAT score from someone who has never seen a SAT-style test before is impressive. A good (but not off the charts) SAT score from someone who has seen them before just means they're capable of studying. I think in this question we're not interested in whether receiving tuition is unethical. We'll assume it isn't and then we're interested in whether *paying* for it is unethical, right?
Cheating on the test subverts both Things. The first because what ends up getting measured is not anything you can work out for yourself (aside from avoiding getting caught), but something someone else can do for you and pass you the answers to fill in. The second because you won't always be able to cheat at your job and you won't be able to cheat at being "smart".
Paying for a tutor doesn't subvert the first thing at all. You really can work out the questions on the day. The *reason* you have that ability is in part because you have money to spend on the problem of learning it, but the test doesn't set out to measure how the ability was acquired, only that you have it. So *from the point of view of standard testing*, cheating is unethical and tutoring is not.
Paid tutoring may well subvert the second Thing, since you won't always be able to hire a tutor to teach you how to do any task you need to complete in life. SATs are quite predictable (intentionally so), challenging tasks in real life aren't. You can reasonably argue that if someone uses SATs (or GMAT, or IQ, whatever) as a proxy for some other activity then it's *their* problem to figure out what correlation there is (if any) between what ability you need to pass the test and what ability they really want.
Personally I hold to some socialist principles, so I think it's regrettable that opportunity and power in the country I live in is distributed primarily according to wealth. Which in turn is primarily inherited, at least when talking about people's early education, where any benefits like this coaching are typically paid for by parents. It's possible that this question is inspired by similar principles, in which case I sympathise, but the only way to apply those principles is to consider what it is and is not ethical to acquire through wealth. Different people will have different answers. Education? The ability to pass silly standard tests? A house to live in while you're educated? You can acquire free time through wealth, does that make it unethical after all to practice for SATs? If you think it's unethical to acquire advantage through wealth, sure it does.
In a perfect free market, people for whom a SATs tutor is a worthwhile investment would be able to borrow money to do so regardless of their economic background, and get the same benefit. In a perfect socialist state, access to education and jobs would not be based on wealth at all (indeed, 'wealth' could be meaningless or at least would not significantly vary across the population). Each system has its own idea of what equal opportunity means.
The actual world is neither of those things: some people can get an educational advantage by paying for a better education and others cannot, purely by the wealth of their parents. Society is not fair. Tutors are part of that privilege. As such I think they are part of the broader question of whether it is ethical to be rich, but there's nothing special about tuition in particular that makes it less ethical than spending money on anything that gives you an advantage of those who can't afford it.
It's probably *less reputable* to pay for coaching to a syllabus like the SATs that (for the purpose of this question) we assume to contain no real knowledge, than it is to pay for tutors to teach you something more educationally worthwhile. The more people train directly to a test, the less valuable the test becomes under Thing Two. But I don't think either is held to be actually unethical except by those who want the student's wealth taken out of education more generally.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This is not so much a self-contained answer, as a longer comment in response to a number of the answers here.
Cheating seems to be categorized here into a single huge category, but it seems relevant to split it up:
* Cheating by *copying information* from other students: Absolutely unethical **and** requires no useful skills from the student.
* Cheating by *using cheatsheets*: Absolutely unethical (as the playing field isn't equal), however it still requires the student to comprehend the material and even more so requires the student to behave more similarly to real life where, unlike in exams, forced memorization isn't all that relevant.
Now, getting to your question, is it more ethical to hire a tutor? Definitely, as there are academic rules and expectations a student has to play by. Which one will teach a student more:
1. Learning self made cheat sheets by hard
2. Learning by hard
3. Cheating by using self made cheat sheets
4. Using a tutor learning only tricks as defined in OP
5. Cheating by copying
Is what follows from the presented argument.
Lastly I would like to point out that in real life cheating by copying isn't called cheating but called collaboration (in the context of colleagues working for the same institution as is the case with students). In a lot of positions it's more important to know when to 'cheat' then having all the knowledge at hand by hard. This does not however in any way justify cheating, nor is the current system designed in a way that would allow correct measurements in spite of such cheating, but it is worth noting in the context of this question, especially as there is a slow paradigm shift from individual examinations to more heavily graded group work.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/15 | 997 | 4,243 | <issue_start>username_0: What is policy are you following about publishing data analysis code on GitHub? Do you do it after publishing or as a work-in-progress?
I developed a number of Python algorithms to analyse a large dataset, and I would like to make my work visible.<issue_comment>username_1: There is a movement gathering strength lately to encourage publishing the code:
[Nature-Publish your computer code: it is good enough](http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467753a.html)
Or, more vehement:
[If there is no code, there is no paper](http://simplystatistics.org/2013/01/23/statisticians-and-computer-scientists-if-there-is-no-code-there-is-no-paper/)
The reasons outlied on the article are very reasonable. If you are expected to publish detailed derivations, experimental methods, and proofs of theorems, why would you be allowed to keep the code? No one will accept a theorem if you claim: "the proof is too messy to show, but hey, here are three cases where it works".
I think the best way is to publish the code used as supplementary material, and include a link to the repository, so people can get the improved versions. If you are concerned about people using too bleeding edge versions, make releases, but leave the development public. This will also help you get bugfixes and contributions.
Thank you for wanting to release your code. I really believe this attitude will help make research better.
**Edit:**
After some time, I have something to add. Most of the code in an application is there for "administrative purposes": load and write data, massage, check conditions... For publishing, that part can be as hackish as one needs it to be. The real "research" is usually in a small part. That is where one should dedicate one or two hours of adding a few comments and clearing the code.
For the rest, a docstring in the functions or a paragraph explaining the aim, should be fine.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Styles and technologies come and go. Git and Github are the flavor of the moment. Tomorrow it will be something else.
What is more fundamental is that scientific results are normally expected to be reproducible. If the code has secret details in it that are crucial for producing the result, then the result is not reproducible. If the code is simply the embodiment of the methods described in the paper, then there is no problem with not publishing the code.
As an example, there is a device called the Bodybugg that people buy and strap onto their arms in order to measure (or attempt to measure) how many calories they're burning each day. There is publicly available information on what sensors the device has built into it, but the algorithms used for putting the sensor readings together to get an estimate of energy consumption are proprietary. That means that any scientific research that uses a Bodybugg is basically worthless.
On the other hand, there can be perfectly legitimate reasons for not wanting to release one's code. For example, there could be a concern that people who lack the relevant expertise will play with it and use it to publish their own half-baked "gee-whiz" papers that turn out to be wrong. That then harms the reputation of the original author. The author may also not want to be in the business of answering questions from lots of people using their code, or they may want the freedom to make major changes that would upset users who were counting on the code to remain stable and backward-compatible. Science is not software development. Scientists want to focus on doing science, not on software distribution, licensing, making regular releases, and supporting a user community.
It may not even be legally possible to release a working version of the code. E.g., it may have some old FORTRAN routines in it that calculate Clebsch–Gordan coefficients, and if the author of those routines is dead, then it may not be legally possible to publish them.
I'm also skeptical about the long-term value of releasing code in most cases. Github will be gone in five or ten years, and the vast majority of the software it hosts will then cease to exist, since the vast majority of coders will not bother to migrate their code.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 2,567 | 10,964 | <issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that many professors seem to impose extremely tight time limits on their exams, even though the subject in question would never have such extreme time constraints in real life. For example, I cannot imagine a situation where I have to write 50 lines of code on a piece of paper in less than 15 minutes.
Is it reasonable for me to complain about such constraints or is it normal to expect fast exam performance from students?
Note that I'm not talking about the actual exam difficulty, just the time constraint built around it.<issue_comment>username_1: This is not really an answer but some educated guess. Most instructors do not plan to impose a challenging time constraint for exams. Usually we *tend to overestimate* how easy is the exam. The younger is the instructor, the more optimistic he/she is about students and more eager to write interesting questions. For subjects that require lots of drilling, tight time constraints are helpful in the sense one can immediately screen out the students who did lots of homework/problem solving from those who have to think from scratch.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is reasonable to bring up the issue of exam difficulty, although I would try to bring it up in a way that is not accusing the professor of being unfair, perhaps bringing it up as part of a question of how to study next time, or asking if this is going to be typical of his exams.
It may be that the professor sees value in the tight time constraint that you aren’t aware of. For example, they might be asking something very challenging, knowing that very few students will succeed completely. It is very common to have test questions ranging from fairly easy to very difficult, with the expectation that most students will miss the most difficult questions. Partially correct answers show partial understanding. In this case, a coding question with a time limit will show up problems that might be harder to see in an assignment where a student has unlimited time. One sort of issue that will show up is that there's big difference between the uncompleted code of somebody who starts writing random code in the hopes it will sort itself out as it comes, vs somebody who takes 3 minutes to plan an approach, and the rest of the time implementing that approach. But if all you are looking at is the final result is a problem set, the difference is less obvious, even if the first person takes twice as long to reach the same result. There could be other possible benefits to this type of question as well.
It’s also possible that the professor isn’t aware of just how difficult the test is, and your question will bring that to his attention. Although if nobody finishes that question, that alone will give most instructors a clue that their estimated difficulty was off. But generally, exams have very little to do with career prep, and more to do with assessing student ability.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The objective of an assessment can vary from one lecture to another. Quite often, the point is simply to validate whether the expected learning outcomes of the lecture have been met. For instance, if an expected outcome is to know almost by heart how to write an array sorting program, then it's quite reasonable to ask to write a small amount of lines of code in a fixed amount of time.
If, on the other hand, the expected outcome is at a higher level of understanding (in the sense of [Bloom's taxonomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_Taxonomy)), for instance by asking to design and assess a new data structure to handle a new problem, then it could be more reasonable to expect more time.
The problem you are referring to by "*would never have such extreme time constraints in real life*" is addressed with the notion of *authentic learning* [(Rule, 2006)](https://dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/bitstream/handle/1951/35263/editorial_rule.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y), which identifies the four following themes for a learning to be authentic:
>
> 1) the activity involves real-world problems that mimic the work of professionals in the discipline with presentation of findings to audiences beyond the classroom;
>
>
> 2) open-ended inquiry, thinking skills, and metacognition are addressed;
>
>
> 3) students engage in discourse and social learning in a community of learners; and
>
>
> 4) students are empowered through choice to direct their own learning in relevant project work.
>
>
>
Authentic learning comes with its upsides and downsides (the reference linked acts as a survey paper, if you are interested), so it's not necessarily the best approach. In particular, [(Lombardi, 2007)](http://engage.wisc.edu/dma/research/docs/Lombardi-AuthenticLearning.pdf) note that *the reliance on traditional instruction is not simply a choice made by individual faculty—students often prefer it.* For instance, not everybody wants to be tested on writing code in a highly complex environment, using bugged code written by other people, implementing specifications that are sub-optimal, but the client want them in this way, which could be a typical real world situation.
**I don't think you should complain about time constraints**, but if you believe that authentic learning would be more beneficial to you and your fellow students, **you should probably discuss with the professor about the objective of the assessment**.
---
<NAME>. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Educause learning initiative, 1(2007), 1-12.
Rule, <NAME>. (2006). The Components of Authentic Learning. Journal of Authentic Learning, Volume 3, Number 1, Pages 1-10, August 2006
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Some professors seem to be using this paradigm of testing; instead of giving ample time so that it's reasonable to finish the test, they'll intentionally make it so even the best-prepared testee will only have time to finish 75% of the test. Of course it will be curved based on this. It separates those who know the material really well from the people who only know a little, and apparently creates a pretty good bell curve, which seems to be what everyone is after these days.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In my experience, challenging time constraints are a hindrance because they induce panic, which inhibits the ability to reason through a problem and make a thoughtful answer to it.
I'm currently tutoring two students on grammar for a business English class. Their teacher sets 100 questions for each 50 minute exam. That comes down to 30 seconds for each question. This tactic makes a mockery of all my attempts to teach them the logic and reason behind grammar. The students barely have enough time to figure out what's being asked of them, let alone apply any rules or reasoning principles.
The students feel this is unfair; they learned the rules, did the homework (which average 300 questions per set), and now they're failing the tests because they can't go through the whole process of reading a problem, conjuring up the correct rule, and finding the correct answer in 30 seconds. This causes bitterness and low morale. It makes them feel that all the work they put in to the homework was a waste of time.
It's not feasible in the standard method of testing to give students unlimited time, and most schools don't have the resources to set aside computer labs for exams so CS students can write code on them. But there's no reason to make the time constraints more of a problem than they need to be. Make the questions easier; put fewer questions; and split long questions into multiple parts, which are graded independently. I've found all of these reduce the pressure, and the second two options let you still put challenging problems on the exam.
In short, yes, I do think it's wrong to impose a challenging time constraint on an exam. Not only because it's unrealistic, but also because it puts artificial limits on the students' performance, which the students will recognize as artificial and react badly to. Unless you're trying to teach people to program on the bridge of the Starship Enterprise during a Red Alert while an anomaly is sucking the ship in, lighten up the time limits.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: It's not uncommon to have challenging time constraints. Some American tests like the ACT and SAT have a tight limit built in to reward students for being fast.
However, many of these tests are scaled, in that no matter how well or how badly the students do, the grades are normally distributed..
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Tests with tight time constraints are probably created by instructors who are not familiar with personality profiles like those revealed in Meyers-Briggs personality tests. People with some personality types tend to test slowly but deliberately, while others will test quickly but haphazardly. Of course, I'm also sure that there are those that test quickly and deliberately, as well as slowly and haphazardly. But, in the end, if instructors thought about it, they would find that they most likely prefer students go slowly but deliberately, thereby raising their percentage of correct answers. I imagine that most employers prefer slow production in order to achieve a high rate of perfection, thereby limiting wasted time and material.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Opinions on this vary, but personally I prefer to avoid cases where the major difficulty of the exam is the time limit. If the time constraints are too challenging then the process becomes a test of who can write the fastest, rather than who knows the material well. Personally, I prefer to give a time constraint that allows students to think about each question and go at a reasonable pace, with questions that range from easy marks to hard marks, to test their actual understanding of the subject matter. I have also adopted the following rules for time limits in exams:
* **Exam length for undergraduate-level courses:** As a rule-of-thumb, the teacher should be able to correctly complete the exam in one-third of the time allocated to students, from a position of initial ignorance of the answers. So if you are setting a three-hour exam, you should be able to do the whole thing, including all working out and writing up of answers, in one hour.
* **Exam length postgraduate-level courses:** As a rule-of-thumb, the teacher should be able to correctly complete the exam in one-half of the time allocated to students, from a position of initial ignorance of the answers. So if you are setting a three-hour exam, you should be able to do the whole thing, including all working out and writing up of answers, in one-and-a-half hours.
These time limits have served me well in my courses, and it ensures that I am testing students on their knowledge of the material, rather than their ability to write really fast.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 1,301 | 5,471 | <issue_start>username_0: I understand why it would be a bad idea to allow math students access to paper materials as it is necessary for students to know the basic math formulas by heart.
But what about advanced practical courses where it is important to "understand" rather than "know"? For example, knowing statistical formulas won't help if you haven't understood how to apply them. Knowing STL commands by heart is also useless for programming, unless you're actually good at programming. Intel's x86 developer manual won't help a complete newbie in Assembly programming.
Therefore the question is whether it is reasonable to believe that good courses should be focused on "understanding" the subject rather than "memorizing" it, meaning that the instructor should have no problems with his students using paper materials on the exam?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe there are two main counterarguments to this line of thinking:
* Examinations in which students are given unlimited access to material tends to lead to more challenging exams, since everyone in principle has access to all of the available material they can get their hands on.
* If unlimited resources are allowed, this potentially gives students who can access more materials an advantage over those who don't.
The second problem is the more serious, in my opinion, but both are major challenges that must be overcome.
Personally, I "split the difference": I allow students to bring in a limited amount of notes to help them. They can decide what they need to include or not, but it's their choice. Also, by placing the restriction, no one is inherently advantaged
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You might find this article on a computer science class valuable (1). The tl;dr is that sections allowed student-prep notes showed no overall improvement, but mostly because many students didn't bother to create good student-prep notes. Good notes = good grades.
A quick browse of a review/ meta-analysis article on the topic (2), indicates that open-note exams can decrease student anxiety, and that student-prepared notes tend to produce larger improvements than open-book exams.
As an instructor, I've found students often spend energy only where they feel it is needed. I would recommend providing sample exam questions (as a group activity in class?) that gives students a good idea of what will be required and what sorts of notes would be helpful. This will help them expend the energy in preparation instead of frantic in-exam page-flipping.
Thanks for wanting to trigger deep learning in students!
1. Duncan, D.G. (2007). Student performance shows slight improvement when open notes are used during information system exams. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 361–370.
2. Larwin, <NAME>., <NAME>, and <NAME>. "Assessing the Impact of Testing Aids on Post-Secondary Student Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation." Educational Psychology Review 25.3 (2013): 429-443.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: When I don't want students spending a lot of time memorizing things, I simply provide supplemental information on the exam itself.
For example, imagine a course textbook lists 12 reasons why something might happen. Rather than expecting them to memorize all 12, I might list all 12 on the exam, with an application question such as:
>
> The book lists these 12 causes; which of the 12 is most likely to lead to a catastrophic failure? Explain.
>
>
>
In the case of a statistics class where "it is important to understand rather than know," and, "knowing statistical formulas won't help if you haven't understood how to apply them," you could simply compile a list of formulae from the course textbook and put them on the last page of the exam.
By the way, I agree with Moriarty's comment: "The act of carefully constructing this summary sheet is usually much more useful than the notes on it." My approach doesn't have this benefit, but it does have a few advantages of its own. For one, a student is less likely to get a better score simply because of a better-prepared cheat sheet. For another, the student might focus on understanding the material at a higher level instead of transcribing lower-level details.
My general rule is: If something is hard for me to remember without looking it up, then I don't expect students to memorize it for an exam. I will supply it instead.
---
Here's another idea to consider. (I haven't used this one, but I had a professor who did, and I admit I liked his reasoning.)
One professor of mine had a custom of administering open book, closed notes exams. (In other words, you could use your book, but **not** a cheat sheet.) Why this way, instead of the other way around? Because, he said, "Most students won't keep their cheat sheets, but a lot of them will keep their textbooks." There were no restrictions on writing inside the margins or the back cover (in fact, that practice was encouraged). Sure enough, I still have a book from his course, and I just opened the front cover, and found my cheat sheet still intact, with plenty of complex equations and hyroglyphics in my own handwriting.
As more and more campus bookstores offer e-readers, this approach might become outdated. But I still think it's worth sharing; I always appreciated how this particlar professor was always looking years down the road, as opposed to just the end of the term.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 862 | 3,582 | <issue_start>username_0: I have seen this question ([Unable-to-attend conferences in CV](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17483/unable-to-attend-conferences-in-cv)), but the situation is a bit different. In my field, we don't usually submit papers for conferences. Rather, the organizers directly invite a number of persons whom they think interesting to give talks (sometimes participants can contribute talks or posters, but that is not the case here). I received such an invitation, but for a number of reasons am not sure yet whether I will attend.
Can I still add the invitation to my CV?
One could of course argue that it is strange to get credit for something (a talk) I might not do. But one could also think that the invitation itself is a distinction and therefore worth mentioning.<issue_comment>username_1: I would say no.
I often turn down invitations that could be considered a distinction, i.e. an indication that *somebody* thinks I am reasonably competent at this research thing:
* Will you speak on this panel at this research open house?
* Are you willing to review this paper for this journal?
* Would you want to do a research internship with us this summer?
* Do you want to submit an invited paper to this workshop?
* Can you mentor this undergrad who is doing research in the lab?
All of these things would go on my CV if I actually do them, but not if I turn down the invitation.
An invitation to speak at a conference is no different, in my opinion. It's certainly a nice validation of your work that the conference organizers recognized your ability to contribute. But if you don't actually give the talk, it doesn't go on the CV.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If your CV is short, say less than 2 pages, then I think you should mention this invitation to fill up the spaces. However, you need to be ready to answer the question, why did you not attend the conference?
If you already have a long enough CV, I don't see the point to include the invitation in your CV unless it is from an extremely reputable conference. In that case, the invitation itslef is a high honor that others may want to know. Again, people would wonder why you did not attend the conference?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you put other conferences you plan to attend on your CV, then I think it's fine to include this one (from an ethical viewpoint, which is how I view "can"). You can just remove it if you don't go. In general though, I would be pretty cautious about looking like you're trying too hard to pad your CV. It depends a bit on what you're using it for, but in general having a few more entries on the list of places you've spoken (this is for fields where conferences are not peer-reviewed) isn't going to look especially impressive and could just distract from the good things on your CV.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you think you will not attend, it is generally better to not put it because people may ask you later why you did not attend it. Many researchers receive several invitations but decline many. So it is best to only list what you actually do.
There are a few exceptions where it could make sense to mention an invitation. For example, I have seen some people writing in their CV that their conference paper has been invited for an extension in a special journal issue as it was evaluated as one of the top 10 papers at the conference. This is interesting because even though the invitation was declined, it says that the paper was among best papers of that conference.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/15 | 6,357 | 26,440 | <issue_start>username_0: I work in a field (Philosophy) where co-authorship is uncommon and advisors and grad students very seldomly co-author a paper. I've seen a lot of posts on Academia.se though about the ethics of co-authoring papers with mentors, such [as this question.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19319/is-it-better-to-submit-a-paper-to-an-important-journal-without-the-supervisor-na)
My sense is that it must be somewhat common in the natural sciences for the head of the lab/dissertation advisor to be automatically added as a co-author to every paper that his or her graduate students produce.
My questions are:
* Is this really common, and if so, in which fields?
* Is this really ethical?
My view is that adding your name to something that you had no part in creating is just plagiarism: it's taking credit for the work of others.
The opposite argument, that the work wouldn't have been possible without the PI's grant funding also cuts no ice. I wouldn't have been able to write my dissertation if my parents hadn't had sex, but that doesn't mean they should get credit as coauthoring my work.
That's the way it seems to me, but maybe somebody from these fields can give us a better rationale for (what seems to be) the widespread practice.
**Edit:**
Another argument against the practice. Suppose I'm a billionaire who knows nothing about science, but I take it into my head that I want to be (regarded as) a famous scientist. Suppose I just spend billions of dollars to fund other people to do research. But, I ask each of those people to come and report to me for fifteen minutes ever week about what they've worked on, or discovered that week. Then, every time one of them finds a result, I demand that my name be added to the paper as a co-author, since we have "discussed" the work in progress and it is, after all, by my grace that the funds for the work have been provided. Suppose I just have hundreds of these postdocs, producing thousands of papers a year, all of which I am a coauthor for.
Now ask yourself if I really deserve to be regarded as a famous scientist at all? It seems to me that I don't, because I haven't done any of the science--I haven't suggested any research methods, I haven't designed any experiments, I haven't collected any data, I haven't even helped junior researchers know the shape of the existing literature. You might regard my existence as good for science in some sense--you might think of me as a beneficial patron of the sciences. But you wouldn't think of me as a scientist, right? And you wouldn't think I deserved to be considered for a Nobel Prize, or membership in the American Academy of the Arts and Sciences, or whatever. If I demanded that I be given those awards because of the thousands and thousands of papers that I have coauthored, which have been cited tens of thousands of times, you would call me an idiot, right? We give those prizes for discovery, not for being rich. The same thing is true of tenure too. You shouldn't be able to buy your role as a tenured professor. You should have to prove that you, personally, are capable of making a serious contribution to your field. And of course you demonstrate that capability by publishing papers.
So when a prof is automatically added as a coauthor to a paper that he or she did not contribute to in any way except financially, then she is trying to *buy* a reputation as a scholar, or the other perks like tenure or membership in the AAAS that come with that reputation in just the same kind of way that the absurd billionaire is doing.<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on many factors, and there is no general answer. In a field like experimental particle physics, you can have a paper with 500 authors. These experiments are huge collaborations. For people doing theoretical work in the sciences, it's more common to have only one or two authors; the question is then whether the adviser made a significant contribution.
Yes, it does happen sometimes that people get added as coauthors when they shouldn't. At a lab where I once worked, the director of the lab got his name on every paper done by anybody at the lab, even if he had made no contribution. (His c.v. proudly listed his vast number of scientific publications.) I once had a coauthor who refused to read and comment on the paper before it was submitted, but who also wanted his name on it. He was backed by our PI, because he had done work on the experiment.
In the natural sciences, the norm is basically that if you made a significant contribution to the work, your name goes on the paper. Typically a grad student's adviser *will* make a significant contribution to any work the student carries out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is this really common, and if so, in which fields?
>
>
>
I guess it is reasonably common in many fields. As a rule of thumb, it seems to me that the more applied a field is, the more likely you are to see groups where the lab head co-authors every or almost every paper in the lab. In my field (software engineering), I would say at least 50% - 75% of all groups operate like this. Academia.SE tells me that this is not the case e.g., in Theoretical CS.
Note that this does not *necessarily* mean that the lab head is added to each paper without contribution (although there are certainly groups where it means exactly that). In some cases, it is just that all research in a lab directly runs through the lab head (i.e., nobody works on research without the direct involvement of the lab head). In such cases, co-authorship on all papers may be academically warranted (but this might actually be the worse practice in reality, as it allows for no growth to independence at all for the PhD students and postdocs in the lab).
>
> Is this really ethical?
>
>
>
I would argue that things are more complicated than you seem to think, mostly because the funding argument that you claim "holds no ice" is in fact not so bad. Your comparison with your parents having sex is pretty silly. Big research labs depend on senior researchers acquiring grant money. This takes **a lot** of time - time, that said researchers cannot use to write actual papers. Researchers on any level are mostly evaluated via papers. Under these circumstances, if senior researchers don't get a "kickback" on some level from the money they acquire, what would motivate them to write grant proposals in the first place?
There is also the added difficulty that in many STEM fields it is just darn difficult to decide whether somebody has *made a contribution* (see also here: [What are the minimum contributions required for co-authorship](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship?lq=1)). Is discussing ideas enough? What if all the important ideas and suggestions came from the advisor? Oftentimes, the research work of a PhD student is basically an implementation of a high-level plan laid out by the advisor in the funding proposal. In that case, has the advisor not by default "contributed" to all papers?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: In fundamental mathematics, at least in France, the custom is for advisors never to co-author (important) papers with their students. If an advisor does coauthor a paper with a PhD student, then it is assumed that he or she had to help the student more than should be expected, and this can prevent the student from getting a job afterward.
This goes to the point of being arguably unethical in the opposite way than asked in the question, as most of the time advisors do have a role (if only of suggesting the question and the angle of attack) in PhD student papers.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I doubt I have anything too original to say here, but I couldn't resist a chance to add my 2c. This might be the most fraught question in academia, as least if you are a student or a post-doc.
>
> Is it ethical for advisors to automatically coauthor papers?
>
>
>
I assume that by advisor you are also including a postdocs PI, for example. So let us consider the question as this more general one. The basic answer in my opinion, is... No, of course, not.
I've seen various positions/justifications on/for this. They include:
1. That's just the way it is. The advisor provides the funding. Without
him, you would have no funding, no job, and no paper. So be
grateful. This might be described as the "capitalist justification"
for this practice. Similar viewpoints are expressed to justify why
capitalism and capitalists are good things.
2. Well, the advisor is providing value even if you don't think or know
it. It is easy for a junior researcher to underestimate the value of
an overarching research plan, and the value in discussion and the
perspective of a senior researcher.
3. Well, the senior faculty need a payoff, or else why is it worth
their while? This was expressed by @username_2 for example.
That might be some value/validity in all these viewpoints, but I personally don't think that any of these is a justification for such practices.
As far as 1 goes, you can basically use the same justification for a sweatshop.
As far as 2, I think that the help provided by one individual spreading himself as thin as the kinds of people we are talking about do, is likely to be realistically very low, unless the person in question is very energetic and very talented. Such people are rare. Plus senior people don't usually have that kind of energy anyway. Also, research questions are just too hard, complicated, and non-obvious. You need to dig in. But you can't dig in 20 holes at the same time.
Additionally, in the kind of complex multi-disciplinary areas that are getting more common these days, it is increasingly difficult to have a sufficiently broad skill-set to be able to keep up with more than a fraction of what is going on in a typical research lab.
My experience of mentors/advisors contributions is that their contributions tended to be useless/rubbish because they did not really understand the issues, either because they didn't have or didn't want to take the time, or their training had simply not equipped them to do so.
3 is really the hardest to respond to; I'm not sure I have a good response. However, it is not really a justification so much as a pragmatic observation.
So, to the subquestions
>
> Is this really common, and if so, in which fields?
>
>
>
It is really hard to know this. You can't pass out a survey which includes a box to tick saying "yes, I'm a crook and fraud". However... @username_2 writes
>
> I guess it is reasonably common in many fields. As a rule of thumb, it
> seems to me that the more applied a field is, the more likely you are
> to see groups where the lab head co-authors every or almost every
> paper in the lab. In my field (software engineering), I would say at
> least 50% - 75% of all groups operate like this.
>
>
>
Based on my experience, I think this sounds pretty accurate, though I would not venture any percentages. I've worked in more theoretical fields, notably Math and Statistics, and in Biomed type fields; this kind of thing is much less common in the theoretical fields, and practically the norm in Biomed. In fact, I didn't see *any* of this in Math. I don't think this is because mathematicians are inherently any more virtuous than anyone else. I think it is because
applied work just inherently has more overhead in practical terms than theoretical work, at least in the implementation end of the work. If a mathematician has an idea, he has to prove it, which may not be so easy, but once he has done that, he is basically done. In an applied area, if you have an idea, you are just getting started. You have to collect data and/or perform experiments, probably write some code, write the paper, make figures, etc. etc. So there is just more room for monkey work which a junior person can do.
If I am an applied researcher, I'm probably under immense pressure to perform, to get tenure, or maybe just keep my job. I could try to be good, and contribute to every paper that I am putting my name on, but given the immense overhead of applied work as described above, and also, given that your colleagues are probably happily abusing the system, there is immense temptation, I imagine, to abuse the system as well. Just to keep up.
In any case, in my experience, most people who do this seems to have completely internalized this behavior, and seem to take it for granted.
>
> Is this really ethical?
>
>
>
No, of course not. Ultimately, my objections are really that of straight morality. I think it is just *wrong*. These practices are a form of fraud and a form of reputation/credit theft. Granted, in the grand scheme of things they are fairly minor offenses, but regardless...
I think Shane (the poster) makes a good point with his billionaire hypothesis.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I work in pure mathematics, where advisors are not co-authors unless they have significant input. My perception is that the convention the question speaks of occurs primarily in the laboratory sciences, so my point of view is that of an outsider
Nevertheless, I do not consider the practice unethical. First of all, there is no deception, because in those fields it is well-established convention that the last name on the paper is the lab PI, and other scientists reading the paper will recognize that she didn't contribute to the paper in the same way the first author did, but that the research was performed in her lab with her grant money.
Secondly, the lab PI doesn't just bring in the money, she also decides which direction the lab's research should focus on, and she often has to organize a large team of people- something that an advisor never has to do in say, mathematics. This is where the billionaire analogy breaks down. If your hypothetical benefactor also has to make decisions what equipment to buy, which skills to recruit in postdocs and grad students, and which (and how much) resources are worth pouring into which scientific questions, then yes, she deserves last author credit.
Thirdly (and I may be a little unfair in this point) my perception is that the standards of co-authorship are lower in the lab sciences compared to math and philosophy, e.g. people who perform tedious monkeying with equipment, or perform statistical analyses in data get their names on papers despite not contributing to the "thinking part" of the project. So if Joe who did nothing but mess with a spectrometer for a couple of days has his name as third author, then Susie who manages the lab should get her name on it too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **No, automatic co-authorship is not ethical – irrespectively of the discipline!**
The following is from the ["DFG Proposals for Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice"](https://www.dfg.de/download/pdf/foerderung/rechtliche_rahmenbedingungen/gute_wissenschaftliche_praxis/kodex_gwp_en.pdf) (pp.82f, emphasis added), which, for instance, strictly forbids "automatic" co-authorships and gives a couple of common negative examples:
>
> Authors of an original scientific publication shall be all those, and only those, who have made **significant contributions** to the conception of studies or experiments, to the generation, analysis and interpretation of the data, and to preparing the manuscript, and who have consented to its publication, thereby assuming responsibility for it. [...]
> Therefore, the following contributions on their own **are not sufficient to justify authorship**:
>
>
>
>
> * merely **organisational responsibility for** obtaining the funds for the research,
>
>
>
* providing standard investigation material,
* the training of staff in standard methods,
* merely technical work on data collection,
* merely technical support, such as only providing equipment or experimental animals,
* regularly providing datasets only,
* **only reading the manuscript** without substantial contributions to its content,
* **directing an institution** or working unit in which the publication originates
>
> Help of this kind can be acknowledged in footnotes or in the foreword.
>
>
>
In fact, DFG (the German Research Council) requires you to sign strict adherence to this ethical code on each and every grant proposal. Other funding agencies have similar regulations.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: The correct analogy to draw in fields where grant-writing is a critical aspect of the research is architecture: the act of preparing the grant is akin to doing the conceptual design of a new building; the work of the graduate students and postdocs (or other researchers) is the research equivalent of fleshing out the design into a practical design, and converting it into a real building. The master architect (the one overseeing the vision) is going to get a substantial amount of credit, regardless of not being the one to plan everything out to the finest detail. But the important thing is that the end product (the building in one case, the research in the other) would not result without the initial rough sketches for the specific project (the conceptual design or the grant proposal).
This is very different from the billionaire example provided above, because writing a grant requires the construction of a specific framework in which the research will be carried out, not just handing over money to others to do work within some grandiose but completely unspecific vision.
Now, as a further practical matter, very few advisors are "absentee landlords" who merely acquire the grant, and then do nothing else. They almost certainly don't run the code or perform the experiments, but they are active in helping to interpreting the data, design future experiments, and evaluating and editing the manuscripts that are produced. In part, this is a matter of safeguarding one's reputation: if you let people publish bad work under your name, your reputation will suffer as a result in the long run.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Answers to your question of the ethics of co-authorship need to consider what is the role of (or signal conveyed by) authorship in a publication. This role may 1) differ among disciplines and 2) be evolving all the time.
In the case of large research groups or collaborative projects—as some seen in genetics or physics—the roles of a head researcher involve managing the direction of the research and to create an environment where that research can thrive. The latter may involve obtaining funding, hiring post-docs & PhD students, managing people so research happens in a productive way. Whatever output from that group would probably not happen if it wasn't for the head researcher; in that sense, he/she has a very strong involvement in the creation of a research output. Good research heads will know very well where the different pieces/outputs fit in the overall research project, although they may not be familiar with the details of a calculation in a publication. They will guide provide post-docs and students so their publications fit within the overall project. In my book, this merits co-authorship in a publication.
In addition, there is co-authorship as a signal of group productivity, which is then used to improve the standing of the head researcher when it comes to funding application. This is a game played by many labs in the world; one may not agree with the 'corruption' of traditional authorship, but it is certainly used that way. Thus, I do not think we can discuss the ethics of co-authorship in a vacuum, without understanding its role in modern research practice.
Disclaimer: I do work in a small group, where there is no assumption of automatic co-authorship. I am, however, evaluated on the 'creation and support of research environment' when applying for academic promotion.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Any question involving the words "Automatic" and "Authorship" raises red flags for me, and my inclination is always to say "No".
From the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, which is the group that sets authorship guidelines not only for medical journals, but also many journals in closely related fields like public health:
>
> Authorship confers credit and has important academic, social, and financial implications. Authorship also implies responsibility and accountability for published work. The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are given credit as authors, but also that contributors credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.
>
>
>
Automatic authorship doesn't confer either this responsibility, or imply that they've made substantive intellectual contributions to the papers. Their four suggested criteria is as follows:
>
> Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
> Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
> Final approval of the version to be published; AND
> Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
>
>
>
I think that in *most* cases an advisor should have met the first criteria, and *should* have met all the subsequent ones for papers with their name on it done by one of their students (otherwise, what exactly is the advisor doing besides signing the occasional form?), but it's entirely possible they haven't.
For example, in my dissertation, I have two papers that do not have my advisors name on them - one because it was a side musing born out of trying to graph a set of results, and pretty much the product of my own brain over the course of a week, and another because they felt they hadn't met those criteria.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I don't think one can claim this is ‘unethical’ in general.
We can (at least for the purpose of argument) take ‘unethical’ to mean ‘deceptive’, in which case ‘is automatic authorship unethical?’ can be read as ‘is automatic authorship deceptive?’ But that depends on who, in the readership, is being deceived, and different disciplines may ‘read’ the author list differently.
My presence in an author list may indicate a claim that:
1. I contributed to this paper, and my position in the list order reflects the importance of my contribution.
2. I contributed to this paper, and my position in the list reflects the alphabetisation of my name.
3. I contributed to this paper, and my position in the list represents the order in which the various authors first committed edits to the text in github.
4. I at least read this paper, and my inclusion in the list reflects the fact that I, along with 800 other people, was during the relevant period funded 50% or more of my time to work on this collaboration (actually, in this case you can't really tell whether or not I'm even aware the paper exists).
5. I'm aware of this paper (which happened in my lab) and am the PI who got the funding (I get the impression, as others have remarked, that this is common in biomedical fields).
As long as the readership of the paper parses the author list in the way I expect, then no-one has been deceived, even if someone from a different area, who parses author lists differently, would get the wrong impression, and might think I was claiming something I'm not (and therefore reproach me for being unethical in doing so).
**So** – I think the answer to the question ‘is “automatic authorship” unethical?’ is: it depends on what you mean by ‘automatic’, ‘authorship’ and ‘unethical’ (we can perhaps take ‘is’ as unproblematic), and depends *crucially* on what author and reader believe is being communicated by one's presence and location in an author list.
---
I've written papers under each set of rules apart from the fifth. In one similar case, however (anecdote alert), I was on a five-author paper where almost all of the actual writing was done by the PI of the grant and me, in that order; the PI sequenced me first in the author list, then the second, third and fourth authors, then him last, to log the fact that he was the PI, even though you couldn't then tell how much he'd written. I didn't think this was very fair to him, but he asserted this was the norm in his discipline (a different area of physics).
Some disciplines seem to observe more than one of these parsing rules.
Of course, all of this means that bibliometrics which count things like ‘first-author papers’ are so errorprone as to be essentially pointless, for this as for so many other reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: First point to counter the "taking credits away": it is your choice to add an "author's contribution" chapter to your manuscript. If you feel pressure to put your supervisor or chief of lab you can do so. If they did not participate in your research, you can simply write "chief - responsible for project fundings". Two things can happen, the reviewers or the editor in chief reject this author for not participating enough. Then it is less pressure that you yourself offended your supervisor, who will later grade you. Or they do not care and the paper goes published, but with exactly this authors contribution. You always have the chance, to not even write this on your own. You can ask all coauthors to give you a summary of their contribution. Formulate that you consider this too sensitive to write on your own and sent to all co-authors. An "empty" co-author has to visibly lie in their response, which is a lot less likely to happen.
Also question yourself, if your supervisor is really not participating? If it is only 5 minutes per week discussion, but within the 5 minutes he/she prevents you with their knowledge from wasting 2 weeks on the wrong statistical method, there is no ethical conflict to grant and offer them co-authorship. If they never participate though it is unethical in my opinion. Regardless of the field. But strongly question yourself, how much has this person influenced your scientific thinking.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/15 | 1,131 | 4,939 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an American professor in a branch of theoretical science at a US institution. There is a Japanese postdoc in our group who has nearly finished writing a paper with one of the American postdocs. We're having a bit of a conflict over authorship: the Japanese postdoc wants my name to be on the publication, and I don't think it's appropriate. I chatted about the project with them while it was in progress and made a few suggestions, but fundamentally all the ideas and computations originated with the two postdocs. I think that they should take full credit for the work and I that I should take none, and this seems consistent with US authorship norms to me. However, the postdoc from Japan seems very unhappy that I don't want to sign my name on the paper. He said that if I don't, then he won't feel like he can discuss his future work-in-progress with me because he will think I am disavowing the work or that I have no time for him. I've insisted that I'm happy to discuss his work, I just think that he deserves his share of credit for it and that if my name is attached it might be perceived by others as more my work than his.
I've never encountered this situation before. At times I've been in the opposite situation, when I was a postdoc, feeling that professors were claiming undue credit for my work, so actively wanting a professor who did none of the actual work to claim authorship is difficult for me to understand. But I assume this is a difference in cultural norms; I know professors from certain countries in our field who have such a large number of publications that it's clear they're claiming authorship over this sort of project that they had very little involvement in. (I don't necessarily mean that as a criticism of them; I think that within their local academic culture, this is expected and ethical behavior.)
How should I negotiate this cultural clash?
(Also, to forestall one possible set of comments, I'm in a field where alphabetical author order is conventional, so that isn't an issue here.)<issue_comment>username_1: Your view is in line with international norms as expressed by guidelines for authorship (see for example [Council of Science Editors](http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3355), [BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal)] and ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has written up guidelines for [authorship and contributorship](http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html) based on the Vancouver Protocol.).
Since there is international agreements in place you can simply point at these and say that it is what your adhere to. I can see that the student wants to be affiliated with your name and having a recognized name on a paper may be of use both for personal and review reasons. Nevertheless, it seems clear that with the ethical rules in place, the student should realize that the request is not correct. You could of course also suggest that your name appear in the acknowledgements. that seems appropriate to me and could be a golden middle way.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I feel like the right answer must be to continue the conversation with the Japanese postdoc and ultimately give him the responsibility to understand and accept your position.
I understand that *at first* he interpreted your lack of desire for coauthorship in a certain way. And then you explained your position, as you have written here. How did he react to that? If someone insists on interpreting your behavior in a way different from how you are explicitly identifying it as being meant to be interpreted, what can you really do other than ensure that your future actions are consistent with the interpretation of your present behavior that you have conveyed?
I don't see any insurmountable "cultural differences" here. In my field (mathematics, which sounds like it is equal or close to yours) there are plenty of singly authored papers by Japanese people, so obviously the practice of supervisory coauthorship is not a fundamental tenet of Japanese culture or anything like that. Even if it were: if the postdoc is in the US working in your group, then he has volunteered in a very strong sense to participate in your local brand of Western academic culture. If he cannot understand that actions can have different meanings in your neck of the woods than what he was used to earlier in his career (whether by virtue of his being Japanese or for some other reason), then he's headed for big trouble.
I would say: clearly explain the situation as best you can, in several sittings if necessary. Don't put your name on a paper that you don't feel you contributed to just because that makes the postdoc uncomfortable. In the near future, try to go a little out of your way to show that you still want to do business with the postdoc (assuming you still do, which sounds reasonable).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/04/15 | 1,598 | 6,847 | <issue_start>username_0: Reading the various questions about open-book and closed-book examinations got me wondering:
>
> Is there any sound **pedagogical** reason for a time-limited examination (closed or open) at the undergraduate/advanced UG level ?
>
>
>
I understand that there are many good logistical reasons, including:
* classroom management in a big group
* a desire to prevent cheating
and at (say) the elementary school level, I understand that timed tests (say of multiplication tables) create a certain level of felicity with manipulating numbers that helps with more complex tasks later on.
But at the UG/advanced UG level, it seems to me that deep understanding is usually more important.
Note: [This question on the unreasonableness of the prescribed time limits](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19350/is-it-wrong-to-impose-a-challenging-time-constraint-on-exams) is related, but not exactly the same (i.e it takes as given the **existence** of time limits and merely questions the actual time span set)<issue_comment>username_1: Oooo. What an intriguing question.
My "answer" is that there is no pedagogical reason, merely practical ones. This is based on the attached study (1) that shows the difficulty with assuming only learning disabled students benefit from more time for exams. Apparently the "time doesn't matter" idea is called the Maximum Potential Thesis.
I certainly am guilty of writing questions that push student time limits to the max... essentially creating a reading exam in addition to a biology one. Student recall of vocabulary and definitions should be quick. But my main learning goal is thoughtful, connected thinking rather than fast thinking.
1. <NAME>. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 13(1), 99-117.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not sure if in the field of Pedagogy there is any study on the topic, but in the field i studied (Electronic Engineering), doing things fast is very important. Not only you need to be able to understand a topic, but you need to be able to solve problems in a restricted time period, as is the case in the real life profession. When you are working on a project and you need to design something, or are presented with a problem in a system, the engineer in this case needs to be able to identify and solve the problem in the shortest time possible. It is basic competition, "The fast drives out the slow, even if the fast is wrong".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is there any sound **pedagogical** reason for a time-limited examination (closed or open) at the undergraduate/advanced UG level ?
>
>
>
For many subjects, yes. For others, no.
I had an exam for a subject in school called "technical graphics". It involved drawing parabolas and projections and so forth on a big sheet of A3 paper with pencils and protractors and compasses. It was widely-regarded to be a subject of skill more than knowledge: the exam was timed and you had to accurately and quickly and carefully draw up four or five questions. A small inaccuracy becomes compounded through the rest of the drawing. Given unlimited time and some basic knowledge, nearly anyone could ace the exam since acquiring the necessary knowledge was easy; but acquiring the skill to do the timed exam was hard. And it was the skill we practised in class. Was this skill useful? Was it a learning outcome to draw quickly? I would say yes, of course; if I were to become a draughtsman (leaving aside CAD et al. for the purposes of the analogy), learning to draw quickly and accurately would be important to my livelihood. And it was the tightly-timed test that put emphasis on this learning outcome.
Likewise if I were doing a cookery lesson, cooking quickly would be important. If I were doing a programming lesson, programming quickly would not be as important, but it would still be important. And so we get into the usual varying shades of grey.
Generalising, we can define different types of learning based on the two main types of memory targeted: procedural memory (residing below the level of conscious awareness) and declarative memory (facts and/or knowledge that can be consciously recalled or inferred from other such facts/knowledge). Some subjects – like technical graphics or cookery or programming – put a strong focus on development of procedural memory alongside declarative memory. Other subjects – like biology or history – emphasise declarative memory far far more than procedural memory.
As such, I would say that the importance of a time-limited exam for a subject is correlated with the emphasis on procedural learning for that subject. A teacher may then wish to consider whether or not procedural learning is important for their subject or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Open book exams
---------------
A particular reason for time limits is the open book exam. Such an exam without any time limits would allow the student to simply study all the relevant topics on the spot, and be useless for evaluation; however, an open book exam with an appropriate time limit will separate students based on their knowledge and obtained skill, while allowing the benefits of open-book exams for subjects where people aren't expected to memorize everything but use reference material as needed, and in those disciplines where you should teach students a habit to always doublecheck and verify in case of doubt, instead of guessing, e.g. medicine.
In essence, the time limit is a tool to check if you need to look up 5% of issues or 95%.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It is often the case that a problem can be solved in multiple ways, some of which involve more "brute force" and some of which involve deeper understanding of the material. The "brute force" approaches are often also much slower than the approaches involving deeper understanding.
Time limits are then one tool that can help to distinguish the depth of understanding that a student has for the material, by making it difficult to accomplish with "brute force" methods in the allotted time.
I had personal experience with this myself as a teaching assistant for the introductory artificial intelligence class at MIT. Many of the things that we taught in that class and the questions that we used to test for them had this property. Students who understood the material well typically finished tests with lots of time to spare and left early, while the ones who were struggling to rediscover the material during the exam came to complain to us afterward about the lack of time --- not the most pleasant thing for any involved, but one that we found no good way to address in the time that I was a TA for that class.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/04/15 | 1,222 | 5,321 | <issue_start>username_0: I was wondering if reviewing papers for established journals was a way to increase ones credibility as a researcher?
My question is related to the fact that the journal editors, that are (frequently) known scientists in your domain, will read the review you made.
I was wondering if we can therefore assume that they will, to some degree, evaluate your reviewing work, and therefore yourself as a scientist, based on your review? Lets imagine I know the editor, and I might want to have a position in his/her lab, then my reviewing work might weight in my evaluation?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it helps in more than one way. *Community service* is a relevant part on an academic CV. Although reviewers for individual papers are normally secret, it does *not* need to be secret that you have reviewed articles for journal *X*. You can write that you have done so on your CV, and if needed (but I don't think it should be), a journal editor can confirm.
It works the other way around too: being asked to review a paper is an independent confirmation of your credibility as a researcher. The first times it happened to me, it was really an ego boost. Wow, someone else than my supervisor thinks I know something about something! Great!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Possibly, although many peer-reviewed journals use a double-blind review system, so identities of reviewers can get buried -- and your "reputation" as such won't get enhanced.
However, I think reviewing papers -- and books, and other items of scholarship -- is a really valuable activity for a number of reasons. First, it gives you exposure to what active scholarship looks like and to other people's research and writing styles. Second, it's a way of contributing to the community of researchers in your field, a way of giving back to the system we all want to work well. Third, if you're in a tenure-track position this is an example of service to the profession that most TT profs are expected to contribute.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I was once asked to referee a paper for a well-known journal and accepted because I was flattered that someone took a chance on me. I must have done a pretty good job because I ended up doing more than a dozen for this particular editor. I don't think my service, which I did willingly and took seriously, increased my reputation as a researcher. I do think it enhanced my reputation as far as knowledge of the field and professional judgement in it. It was a good feeling to have someone value my opinion, and it felt good to give something back to the discipline.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Just to add to the other answers with some other points to think about in terms of profile:
* Reviewers for conferences are often made explicit as Programme Committee members. People who do good work in the PC eventually become Senior Programme Committee members, then Track Chairs, then Programme Chairs, then General Chairs, etc. Even PC membership for good conferences helps your academic profile, where higher-up positions help even more.
* Journals work a little differently since reviews are solicited directly and are typically not noted anywhere public (with the exception of some journals employing a transparent peer-review model). But in my case, I was invited to the Editorial Board of a new journal in my area on the basis of my reviewing work for them. If you do *good* reviews, editors *will* notice. (Of course, this might not always result in an EB membership, but ...)
* Conferences and journals (at least in CS) sometimes award "Best Reviewer" awards. I've picked up a couple of these and they look good in CVs.
Of course, reviewing in a community is an excellent way of keeping your finger on the pulse of not only what are the hot topics, but how papers in the area are evaluated (this is esp. true for serving in committees of conferences where seeing how the sausages are made is an enlightening experience).
(And on a more philosophical note: I always saw reviewing a bit like seeding in Bittorrent. Submitting lots of papers for review but never doing reviews is plain greedy. Complaining about the quality of the reviews you get and then doing crappy reviews is hypocritical. ... not so related to the question, but it's good to vent now and again.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I suspect that it indeed **has** an impact. Although reviewers are often anonymous, they are not for the editor and the editorial boards. There are important, influential and well connected people on editorial boards and if you provide useful reviews they will notice you. First, this news may spread by gossip and this will for sure be helpful. Second, people on editorial boards are often the same people that will be asked for reports and evaluation (e.g. in Germany, one collects expert opinions to fill positions) and if they know you through your referee reports this may be of great help.
I have no data how large of an effect these two points really make but there is some anecdotal evidence: I remember that I once heard a conference chair introducing the next speaker by saying that he always asks her with the toughest papers he gets submitted as an editor. At least to me that made some impression…
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/16 | 1,777 | 7,513 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it ever a good idea to apply (and interview) to a faculty position at an institute if you know for certain (or with very high probability) that you are not going to accept a position there.
Possible advantages are:
1. Networking and letting people hear about your work.
2. Practice for later interviews.
3. Leverage: If a top institute offers you a position, that could be used to improve negotiating position with other institutes that you are interested in.
Is this something which is frowned upon? On one hand, I am guessing that departments wouldn't want to waste their time and money on a candidate that will not accept a position. But on the other hand it might be acceptable if the faculty are interested in hearing/talking with the candidate anyway.
If this is acceptable (or if it is not but someone still recommends it from the candidate's perspective), should the candidate give the impression that they are enthusiastic about the institution? (of course I realize the interests of the candidate might be different than those of the institution)<issue_comment>username_1: Please don't do this- you'll only be wasting the time of the search committee members. Furthermore, you'll be doing something that is dishonest, and you do should not get into the habit of lying to people.
If it becomes apparent early in the search process that you aren't truly interested in the position then the committee will probably not invite you for an on-campus interview. If you actually are invited for an on-campus interview, then there's a good chance that it will become apparent during the interview that you really aren't interested in the position. If you feign interest and do get an on-campus interview and then get an offer but reject that offer, then you'll have left a bad impression with the faculty in that department which will effect your relations with them in the future.
The ways in which this can hurt the candidate are fairly limited, so the reality is that people can get away with this if they want to. However, that doesn't make it right.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It seems a little inconsiderate to me; the department will waste their time considering your application, and the further along in the interview process you get, the more of their time (and yours) you will waste. But I don't think it's necessarily unacceptable. You could argue that an interview might convince you that you would be interested in working there after all.
I'm not sure it's actually very helpful to you, though.
Your point 1 doesn't make sense to me. If you want to tell someone about your work, just send them an email and tell them. Sending an application seems ineffective; yours will probably be one of hundreds of applications read on that day, which won't help your chances of having them remember you.
For point 2, "practice application" seems a little silly to me. But if you really think it would help, you'll get just as much practice by writing the application and then *not* submitting it.
Point 3 has some justification. But for it to be effective, you have to go all the way through the interview process and get an offer. Consider the amount of time you'll spend writing a compelling application and traveling to an on-campus interview. And you'll have to spend that day-long on-campus interview insincerely convincing them how much you want to work there; not a very pleasant task for most people. (If you don't do that, you almost certainly won't get an offer and it will truly be a waste of your time as well as theirs.) Even if you do get an offer, it may still be lower than the offer you actually want, and thus useless as leverage. Is it worth it?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You already answered your question. You listed the advantages of going on an interview. You might think that you already have a decision not to accept an offer should they make one, however, you can never be certain unless you go on interview. If you dont have other commitments that are more important than this interview, I think it will be only beneficial to do an interview especially if this is a phone interview.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm going to give a contrarian position and say yes, for two reasons:
1. There's something to be said for practicing for interviews you *do* care about. The job search visit is something of a unique and intimidating beast, and being able to approach it once or two without the pressure of feeling heartbroken if you don't get the position is a good thing.
2. You have the capacity to be surprised.
Now if you're genuinely *certain* you're not going to take the position, then I don't think you should bother. But if it just seems merely unlikely? I can tell you the position that I'm at right now was one where, both at the application and interview phase, I considered unlikely to be the right fit. **I was wrong**, and ended up taking the position and being quite happy.
What you do need to do is approach is with seriousness. It's still a job interview, and these people are spending their time and money to invite you out. Even if it's unlikely that it'll end up being the right fit, that deserves your respect. Similarly, if it's clear it's not going to work out, turn them down quickly so they can move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I want to argue for going to interviews where you are not 100% certain you would accept the job. However, I think that the reasons 1-3 proposed by the OP are probably not the right perspective, so I'll propose #4. (My assumption here is that the reason you are not likely to take the position is about fit, or research activity level at the university - not location.)
1. If you would not work with these people at these university, how seriously are you going to take networking with them? Even if you want to do this, no guarantee the effect will be positive if they think you aren't considering them honestly.
2. Practice is valuable. But once again, if there is a giant mismatch in fit between this place and your intentions, you can take the wrong lesson from your experience!
3. I don't think having an offer from a university on a different "tier" gives you much leverage. In fact, I'd be worried about snobbery from some universities - "If a candidate would consider working for University X, they can't possibly be good enough for the Ivy League," etc.
Instead, here's the 4th reason, which I think is much more reasonable:
4. You probably don't know what you want as well as you think. Are you sure you couldn't work at a place without a PhD program? I know brilliant, well-funded researchers at places like that. Wrong department name? Maybe the culture is aligned with your field more than you think - after all, they're trying to hire you! Don't want to live in [Region X]? Maybe there's a huge population of immigrants from your country there, which make it a much happier place than you'd expect.
I went on four interviews at places where I had serious skepticism about fit. Two of them I realized would be great, one plausible, and one was a worse fit than I had thought. Sometimes that happens - you just have to go in with an open mind, and an honest understanding of what your dealbreakers are. If you can truly 100% rule it out, don't go there - heck, don't apply in the first place! But unless you were choosing applications by throwing darts, you had a reason to apply to that department.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/16 | 934 | 3,913 | <issue_start>username_0: As someone who returned (part-time) to academic pursuit in a different area a number of years ago, in which time I have completed my BA and now am in my first year of a MLitt, I am wondering is it a good idea to start to compile an academic CV? I am unsure as to if their would be any benefit of it for me, as a part time student, and at what point I should start to compile it.
At the moment in my own head the advantages are;
* It may be of use in applying for funding.
* I may need it if I wish to go on to future study
* It would be good for myself to keep track of what I have achieved.
I have read a number of question on the site about what to put in a CV and realise that at the moment mine would be pretty sparse, as I have no publications, but my advisor has mentioned about me presenting at a conference and I have just applied for my first funding.
In general is it a case of everyone should keep an academic CV or do you just compile and tailor one when and if it is needed?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I am wondering is it a good idea to start to compile an academic CV?
>
>
>
Start as you mean to continue: it is certainly a good time to start keeping track of all of your academic achievements in a structured way. Later down the line, this will prove invaluable as you will have a record of all your presentations (with dates, slides, venue, etc.), all your publications (with venue, full-text pre-prints, maybe a .bib item), all your reviewing activity, all your visits, and so forth.
Otherwise the cost of trying to recall all these details later might be prohibitive and you might forget things. At the moment, you may be able to remember everything you've done, but trust me when I say that what you were doing four years ago can become hazy.
You could keep your record as a CV in LaTeX format or a database or an Excel file or a HTML homepage. Even a journal notebook would be preferable to nothing. Keep one format canonical so that you don't have to synchronise multiple versions. And keep back-ups!
Of these options, I would recommend a homepage. It helps your impact to have a public personal homepage where you list all the pertinent details of your research (and to link to it where you can, short of spamming). Also consider getting a personal domain: hosting homepages on work spaces is convenient, but there's a chance you might lose that space (and the associated links/ranking) if/when you move institute. If you get a personal domain, some soft advice is to get a `.org` ... they're more trendy in academia (otherwise `.edu`, etc.).
In any case, whatever version you keep canonical, get in the habit of keeping it up-to-date in a consistent style. Mapping the records to a CV format for specific purposes further down the line then becomes trivial enough.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Of course!
You are doing some great work now, right? You already have experiences, degree(s), awards, presentations, perhaps even publications. Create an academic CV now, and update at least every six months (I've been told I should update every quarter, but that usually doesn't happen.) As time goes on and you add new and better content, you will want to drop some of the items you now have.
I encourage students to create an academic CV as undergrads, because having an updated CV or resume is often necessary (or at least very handy) when applying for scholarships, conferences, or transfer institutions. Certainly it is not too early for you to begin your academic CV. Although you may not use it right now, you will find it a great advantage to have the framework in place when you need one, instead of having to begin from scratch. Also, you will be able to craft a stronger portrait of yourself as a scholar if the work is created over time. You will be able to refine and strengthen the original draft.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/04/16 | 433 | 1,797 | <issue_start>username_0: Quite often one comes across a really succinct and precise explanation of a concept. I'm wondering if it is permissible to use this explanation verbatim, if the source work is cited in your paper (next to the explanation)? What's in question here is at most 3 sentences.<issue_comment>username_1: No, it's not permissible. Some minor overlap in wording can occur naturally (e.g., you couldn't possibly avoid all two-word phrases anyone has ever used before), but deliberately copying text is different. If the copied text is special or remarkable and says something better than you could have said it, then you should attribute it to its source and not seem to be presenting it as your own words. Citing the source nearby is not considered enough to indicate a verbatim quote. On the other hand, if there's nothing special about the copied text, then there's no reason to copy it. (I suppose it could save you a few minutes of work in writing your own explanation to replace these sentences, but that's not considered a good excuse.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This looks like a textbook example of when you should use a block quote, e.g.:
The research of <NAME> [1] determined the root cause of the phenomenon:
>
> Bart and Homer's explanation, indented one to the right and left of the main text.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: No. It is never acceptable to use another person's exact words without quotes and a citation that includes the page number. What you are suggesting is plagiarism. If extensive quoting is not common in your field, and most people paraphrase, then I suggest you paraphrase, even if it seems that you cannot write this in any way better or even equal to what was already written.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/04/16 | 1,256 | 5,379 | <issue_start>username_0: I have ADHD (real, diagnosed ADHD, not just "I-say-I-have-ADHD-because-it's-trendy" ADHD). I have never taken the extended time exams that are offered for ADHD students, because I have never needed to, and it was diagnosed just a year ago. However, exams do stress me out and I am certain I would do better on them with some more time - but this is true for almost anyone, not just ADHD students. Thus, would it be unethical to make use of the ADHD services offered to me?
(Edit: You might ask - why would you want to / feel it is justified? Well, hypothetically say ADHD students only achieve 75% of their "non-ADHD" potential in a standard-time setting. Maybe, even though I am doing well, I would be doing even better if I did have the extended time or didn't have ADHD, i.e. due to my exhaustive preparation, even with the disadvantage of my ADHD I am still managing to get a high score. But, with a "level playing field" [extended time for me], I would be at the top of the class. However, I still don't know if this is logical / ethical.)<issue_comment>username_1: Absolutely not. If you meet the full requirements set up by your University, it is perfectly ethical to use all of the resources made available to you. ADHD is a real medical condition and medical experts and policy makers have decided that special test accommodations are the fairest solution. Accommodations like this are based on medical decisions, not whether you are doing well in the course. Take the extra time if you want it. There is no need to feel guilty about doing so.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say it is definitely not unethical. Those are the rules, there is nothing wrong with taking full advantage of them.
I am dyslexic and would never think of not taking my extra time (fortunately no more exams for me!). There have been some cases where I didn't need it (school level maths mainly) I either asked if I could leave with everyone else or sat for 15 mins and reread my answers/twiddled by thumbs.
It is important to remember most exams aim to test your understanding not reading/writing speed (or why ever else people need extra time).
I agree giving people extra time is a pretty blunt tool and not ideal in that pretty much everyone gets the same amount extra irrespective of their particular needs but I think that is a more logistical issue with how the system is setup and would be quite hard to fix and assess.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The purpose of an exam is to measure how well you understand the material. Giving you extra time should make this measurement more precise, so you should take it. Keep in mind that if you really didn't know the material, more time wouldn't help, anyway.
I say this as someone who got extra time throughout school because of a physical disability and now does curriculum development at the college level.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I have dyspraxia sometimes known as developmental coordination disorder. Most of the problems I have extra time cannot make up for, but I do get extra time if I want it. The reason I get extra time is I write extremely slow it takes me much much longer to write things out and even then my handwriting is barely legible this is due to the small motor skill problems that are a part of my particular brand of dyspraxia. I believe that in cases where you would genuinely struggle or you might not do as well as you could have because of your condition that's when it's ethical to take your time.
In my case this means on any exam that requires short answer questions or essay questions, but not for example a multiple choice exam. I actually did an experiment this term I tried to take my midterms without extra time in both of my classes, because of the nature of the first exam which did not require long answers I was barely able to finish. However, the second exam required longer answers and by half way through my hands were screaming from the pain of trying to write fast enough to finish. I did not do as well in this exam. I have decided for the second one to ask for extra time for the final exam mostly due to the pain from trying to write fast enough, but not ask for extra time on the final exam for the first class.
Each class is different the decision of whether to take your extra time to compensate for having ADHD in order to be ethical should be made on a class by class basis taking into consideration how much you believe your ADHD will effect you on the exams for that particular class. No one can make these decisions for you they are personal judgement calls.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It depends on the subject matter. In math and physics, you are typically given way more time than you need. Most 3 hour exams can be completed in one hour or less, if you have mastered the subject perfectly. The reason why some exams are 3 hours is to minimize the failure rate due to trivial problems, like making a mistake somewhere, and then having to backtrack and start the exercise anew, causing you to not finish on time and possibly failing the exam. Only the students who don't study well will experience the time pressure during an exam.
This is why I would not ask for extra time, unless I had an handicap that causes me to to take way more time to read the problems and/or write up answers.
Upvotes: -1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.