label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B | POST: Is anyone planning to leave academia early and do something else? I've been in academia a few years since achieving my PhD, and I don't know if I can sustain the level of expected output forever without making huge sacrifices in other areas of my life. So this got me thinking that this may not be a forever thing for me. Is anyone else in the same boat? If so, what's your exit plan? What are your plans for the future?
RESPONSE A: Same boat ... I'm looking into industry jobs / insight fellow program
RESPONSE B: My master's advisor had this group of researchers who put their names on all their publications kinda, they had a system where a paper written by A was published with A+B+C names and cited by D (so it counts as a citation outside the authors) and the next paper written by B was published with B+C+D names and cited by A, then it was C... That way, they write 1 or 2 articles a year, ended up with several publications, all of them with several citations (this was as much as I could understand by then, almost 10 years ago). I thought that was unethical. Now I see it's necessary. They were all from different countries, so it counted as internationalization and it was published in English, Spanish and sometimes French. Now I appreciate the genius of that collaboration.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is anyone planning to leave academia early and do something else? I've been in academia a few years since achieving my PhD, and I don't know if I can sustain the level of expected output forever without making huge sacrifices in other areas of my life. So this got me thinking that this may not be a forever thing for me. Is anyone else in the same boat? If so, what's your exit plan? What are your plans for the future?
RESPONSE A: My master's advisor had this group of researchers who put their names on all their publications kinda, they had a system where a paper written by A was published with A+B+C names and cited by D (so it counts as a citation outside the authors) and the next paper written by B was published with B+C+D names and cited by A, then it was C... That way, they write 1 or 2 articles a year, ended up with several publications, all of them with several citations (this was as much as I could understand by then, almost 10 years ago). I thought that was unethical. Now I see it's necessary. They were all from different countries, so it counted as internationalization and it was published in English, Spanish and sometimes French. Now I appreciate the genius of that collaboration.
RESPONSE B: I’m planning on being out at the end of the year. I’m teaching remotely this semester and taking the time to apply for other jobs. I’ve already started and the only problem is that I studied/teach English and all those jokes from college about not being able to get a job have started to seem too real lol
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to overcome bullying in academia Without backlash? My thesis advisor verbally threatens me and my work. This has happened with other of his thesis students and the supervisors and committee are aware and won’t do anything about it. I have options for a PhD and I’m worried of not being able to apply without his letter of recommendation. I am trying to keep going but it’s getting bizarre and I don’t know what is the right thing to do. A little context: I’m in the second year of my masters degree and the due date for the defense keeps getting posponed because of him.
RESPONSE A: It's difficult to give advice without knowing more about what your advisor is doing. What do you mean by "threatens me and my work"? If you just mean that your advisor tends to be negative and request revisions that push a defense date back, this is common behavior. If you mean his behavior goes into the realm of "bullying," how does he exhibit this behavior?
RESPONSE B: Speak to the department chair or college dean.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to overcome bullying in academia Without backlash? My thesis advisor verbally threatens me and my work. This has happened with other of his thesis students and the supervisors and committee are aware and won’t do anything about it. I have options for a PhD and I’m worried of not being able to apply without his letter of recommendation. I am trying to keep going but it’s getting bizarre and I don’t know what is the right thing to do. A little context: I’m in the second year of my masters degree and the due date for the defense keeps getting posponed because of him.
RESPONSE A: It's difficult to give advice without knowing more about what your advisor is doing. What do you mean by "threatens me and my work"? If you just mean that your advisor tends to be negative and request revisions that push a defense date back, this is common behavior. If you mean his behavior goes into the realm of "bullying," how does he exhibit this behavior?
RESPONSE B: Maybe contact the ombundsman
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to overcome bullying in academia Without backlash? My thesis advisor verbally threatens me and my work. This has happened with other of his thesis students and the supervisors and committee are aware and won’t do anything about it. I have options for a PhD and I’m worried of not being able to apply without his letter of recommendation. I am trying to keep going but it’s getting bizarre and I don’t know what is the right thing to do. A little context: I’m in the second year of my masters degree and the due date for the defense keeps getting posponed because of him.
RESPONSE A: Speak to the department chair or college dean.
RESPONSE B: Get them damn papers first. You can take the fight from there.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to overcome bullying in academia Without backlash? My thesis advisor verbally threatens me and my work. This has happened with other of his thesis students and the supervisors and committee are aware and won’t do anything about it. I have options for a PhD and I’m worried of not being able to apply without his letter of recommendation. I am trying to keep going but it’s getting bizarre and I don’t know what is the right thing to do. A little context: I’m in the second year of my masters degree and the due date for the defense keeps getting posponed because of him.
RESPONSE A: Get them damn papers first. You can take the fight from there.
RESPONSE B: Maybe contact the ombundsman
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to overcome bullying in academia Without backlash? My thesis advisor verbally threatens me and my work. This has happened with other of his thesis students and the supervisors and committee are aware and won’t do anything about it. I have options for a PhD and I’m worried of not being able to apply without his letter of recommendation. I am trying to keep going but it’s getting bizarre and I don’t know what is the right thing to do. A little context: I’m in the second year of my masters degree and the due date for the defense keeps getting posponed because of him.
RESPONSE A: Maybe contact the ombundsman
RESPONSE B: I understand your pain. I had a math advisor who told me to quit twice and to change my program once. Instead of being critical of her, I became curious and wanted to understand her more. She was an older advisor who grew up in a different era of math. She was so strict and unrelenting when it came to expectations. I had to draw boundaries when she would make comments that would normally hurt my feelings and i turned it into motivation. She was identifying an area i needed more work in. Still to this day I wish her happy birthday and get updates on what she is doing. I closed that chapter in my life and accepted that she was a tough sob because she knew i could take and excel.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: after taking all the time to stay on top of courses. I’m definitely not that passionate about engineering, I think it’s mainly a career for me rather than a calling. I’m hanging in but everyday is a struggle and I’ve never been this level of anxious/depressed before. I’m thinking about quitting and doubling my efforts to land a job as things reopen at the tail end of the pandemic to work for awhile to figure out what I do/don’t like. I’m unsure how much of this is just first semester growing pains, and how much is my gut telling me that this isn’t what I want to do right now. I suspect it’s a little of both. Anyone have any similar experiences? I feel like I started grad school with no goals or passion as a backup plan and I’m starting to think it may have been a mistake. Any insight is welcome!
RESPONSE A: Well things vary from person to person but I think most of the people that I've known who were fellow graduate students totally loved the courses. That's not to say it wasn't difficult but most of us generally enjoyed the challenges. I mean it's one of those things that you really immerse yourself in and you really enjoy if you belong there. From everything you've said it sounds like you don't. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't finish. And you can probably do a masters that isn't really research heavy. You might want to talk to your advisor but you definitely don't wanna go on for a phD
RESPONSE B: i'm nearing my 5th and final year of my PhD, and I realized academia isn't for me when I started resenting the fact that I had to go home and still think about my chemistry. i just want a normal life, and i don't want to be in this constant circle jerk of people trying to boast how great their research is, try to run a research lab, beg for funding from the government, etc. i want a normal 9-5 and a normal life. but that's just how i personally feel. others may have their own reasons
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: unsure how much of this is just first semester growing pains, and how much is my gut telling me that this isn’t what I want to do right now. I suspect it’s a little of both. Anyone have any similar experiences? I feel like I started grad school with no goals or passion as a backup plan and I’m starting to think it may have been a mistake. Any insight is welcome!
RESPONSE A: i'm nearing my 5th and final year of my PhD, and I realized academia isn't for me when I started resenting the fact that I had to go home and still think about my chemistry. i just want a normal life, and i don't want to be in this constant circle jerk of people trying to boast how great their research is, try to run a research lab, beg for funding from the government, etc. i want a normal 9-5 and a normal life. but that's just how i personally feel. others may have their own reasons
RESPONSE B: > I’m thinking about quitting and doubling my efforts to land a job as things reopen at the tail end of the pandemic to work for awhile to figure out what I do/don’t like. that's a good idea. I think there's a lot of good/valid reasons to get a PhD. Some people do it out of some intrinsic sense, because they love research or a challenge, some out of an extrinsic goal, e.g. because they want to work in academia or a PhD is a good resume boost for them in industry. Probably most people have a mix of these reasons. And imo it's hard to say anything but "when you know you know". I think, as long as you're not doing it because you don't know what else to do or out of some unhealthy notion (like that your mom won't love you if you don't get a PhD), it's fine. Also, not being sure that you want the degree is definitely a red flag and a sign that you should take time to figure out what you want. You can always come back - academia will always be there!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: bit because of the stress, uncertainty about career goals, and some personal things as well. I don’t enjoy the research work at all, it seems like torture after taking all the time to stay on top of courses. I’m definitely not that passionate about engineering, I think it’s mainly a career for me rather than a calling. I’m hanging in but everyday is a struggle and I’ve never been this level of anxious/depressed before. I’m thinking about quitting and doubling my efforts to land a job as things reopen at the tail end of the pandemic to work for awhile to figure out what I do/don’t like. I’m unsure how much of this is just first semester growing pains, and how much is my gut telling me that this isn’t what I want to do right now. I suspect it’s a little of both. Anyone have any similar experiences? I feel like I started grad school with no goals or passion as a backup plan and I’m starting to think it may have been a mistake. Any insight is welcome!
RESPONSE A: Research/education/working from home is unbearable for me. Grad school can be tough, and I imagine that wfh would be really biasing my experiences. But if you are unhappy, just go find a job you like and leave your program. People do it all the time, and definitely doesn’t mean you are a “failure” or anything, you are just learning what you like to do. Grad school is all extra credit anyways and nobody will care if you don’t finish.
RESPONSE B: i'm nearing my 5th and final year of my PhD, and I realized academia isn't for me when I started resenting the fact that I had to go home and still think about my chemistry. i just want a normal life, and i don't want to be in this constant circle jerk of people trying to boast how great their research is, try to run a research lab, beg for funding from the government, etc. i want a normal 9-5 and a normal life. but that's just how i personally feel. others may have their own reasons
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: at all, it seems like torture after taking all the time to stay on top of courses. I’m definitely not that passionate about engineering, I think it’s mainly a career for me rather than a calling. I’m hanging in but everyday is a struggle and I’ve never been this level of anxious/depressed before. I’m thinking about quitting and doubling my efforts to land a job as things reopen at the tail end of the pandemic to work for awhile to figure out what I do/don’t like. I’m unsure how much of this is just first semester growing pains, and how much is my gut telling me that this isn’t what I want to do right now. I suspect it’s a little of both. Anyone have any similar experiences? I feel like I started grad school with no goals or passion as a backup plan and I’m starting to think it may have been a mistake. Any insight is welcome!
RESPONSE A: i'm nearing my 5th and final year of my PhD, and I realized academia isn't for me when I started resenting the fact that I had to go home and still think about my chemistry. i just want a normal life, and i don't want to be in this constant circle jerk of people trying to boast how great their research is, try to run a research lab, beg for funding from the government, etc. i want a normal 9-5 and a normal life. but that's just how i personally feel. others may have their own reasons
RESPONSE B: If you went into grad school because you thought it was just an extension of undergrad, then of course you're having a hard time. The first semester is usually one of the hardest for everyone and would be especially so if you didn't know what to expect. Of course it is up to you, but it will probably be a bit easier next term so you may want to stay and see! I don't think a master's in mechanical engineering would ever hurt your career. However if you are going into debt for this and aren't sure then I suggest stepping back for a while until you know what you want.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: taking all the time to stay on top of courses. I’m definitely not that passionate about engineering, I think it’s mainly a career for me rather than a calling. I’m hanging in but everyday is a struggle and I’ve never been this level of anxious/depressed before. I’m thinking about quitting and doubling my efforts to land a job as things reopen at the tail end of the pandemic to work for awhile to figure out what I do/don’t like. I’m unsure how much of this is just first semester growing pains, and how much is my gut telling me that this isn’t what I want to do right now. I suspect it’s a little of both. Anyone have any similar experiences? I feel like I started grad school with no goals or passion as a backup plan and I’m starting to think it may have been a mistake. Any insight is welcome!
RESPONSE A: i'm nearing my 5th and final year of my PhD, and I realized academia isn't for me when I started resenting the fact that I had to go home and still think about my chemistry. i just want a normal life, and i don't want to be in this constant circle jerk of people trying to boast how great their research is, try to run a research lab, beg for funding from the government, etc. i want a normal 9-5 and a normal life. but that's just how i personally feel. others may have their own reasons
RESPONSE B: Its difficult to say if you'd be happier if you didn't stay the course. What was your emotional state like before your masters program? If you're the unfortunate host to any lurking mental health issues, any long term stressful situation (like grad school) can potentially exacerbate them. If you truly feel thus is a hollow endeavor, there is no shame in pulling out. If you feel that sticking it out will improve your future AND you have access to mental health resources to soften the blow you're taking, it might be worth sticking with. Thats a big 'if' though, do not underestimate the health risks of long term stress with no reward.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: further research collaboration for ethical and liability reasons. As an informed patient, I am not bound by the same ethical or professional constraints of my medical team. Over the past year, I have progressed the interventions, still outside the standard of care, and I would now like to independently present the results as an N=1 study at a Conference in June. I am uncertain as to the appropriateness of this effort but feel very strongly that the research would be immensely valuable to other patients suffering with the same disease. Currently, there is no cure or therapy for this progressive and debilitating disease and my research might offer some hope for others. Any academic advice on strategies for navigating through the publication process would be very much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: At N=1, it will be very hard to draw conclusions from your case. Could you write and subsequently publish a case report on yourself? Sure. I’d read that and I’d find it interesting. It might make me ask questions for a well constructed research study applied to a larger group of people. Most physicians and scientists are not going to trust the results of a “research study” that’s based entirely on one individual. At the core, it’s a statistics problem. On a broader clinical level—you’re one human being. One. People are vastly different for a variety of reasons—it’s almost impossible to draw conclusions from an intervention preformed on a single individual. It is, however, possible to see that an intervention is worth studying on bigger playing field from one individual. Rare disease or not, a true clinical research effort among multiple physicians at multiple hospital centers could gather together a group of you for a research intervention. That’s something the scientific community would put more stock in. So write a case report with yourself as the patient. Publish it. Suggest in your discussion that your modus operandi be tested in a larger patient group.
RESPONSE B: I think you should contact a Swedish woman, Sara Riggare. webpage She is what i Sweden is called “spetspatient” and her reasoning is that she is the expert of her own disease, not doctors. She is doing a PhD in this area and is very active in promoting patient centered care as well as actually talking to patients.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Can an educated patient with a rare disease present and publish self researched interventions? I am not a scientist or healthcare professional. I do have a very rare genetic disease with no therapy or cure. I am university educated ( arts degrees) and self researched and applied lifestyle interventions that were unexpectedly successful. As I track all data regarding my interventions, my medical team and I, as first author, published an article this Spring. As I am acting outside the standard of care for someone with my disease, albeit with proven success, my medical team has now backed away from further research collaboration for ethical and liability reasons. As an informed patient, I am not bound by the same ethical or professional constraints of my medical team. Over the past year, I have progressed the interventions, still outside the standard of care, and I would now like to independently present the results as an N=1 study at a Conference in June. I am uncertain as to the appropriateness of this effort but feel very strongly that the research would be immensely valuable to other patients suffering with the same disease. Currently, there is no cure or therapy for this progressive and debilitating disease and my research might offer some hope for others. Any academic advice on strategies for navigating through the publication process would be very much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I think you should contact a Swedish woman, Sara Riggare. webpage She is what i Sweden is called “spetspatient” and her reasoning is that she is the expert of her own disease, not doctors. She is doing a PhD in this area and is very active in promoting patient centered care as well as actually talking to patients.
RESPONSE B: Well not a academic advice but why don't you make a website and try to reach other people who been suffering from that disease and tell them about your experiences?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Can an educated patient with a rare disease present and publish self researched interventions? I am not a scientist or healthcare professional. I do have a very rare genetic disease with no therapy or cure. I am university educated ( arts degrees) and self researched and applied lifestyle interventions that were unexpectedly successful. As I track all data regarding my interventions, my medical team and I, as first author, published an article this Spring. As I am acting outside the standard of care for someone with my disease, albeit with proven success, my medical team has now backed away from further research collaboration for ethical and liability reasons. As an informed patient, I am not bound by the same ethical or professional constraints of my medical team. Over the past year, I have progressed the interventions, still outside the standard of care, and I would now like to independently present the results as an N=1 study at a Conference in June. I am uncertain as to the appropriateness of this effort but feel very strongly that the research would be immensely valuable to other patients suffering with the same disease. Currently, there is no cure or therapy for this progressive and debilitating disease and my research might offer some hope for others. Any academic advice on strategies for navigating through the publication process would be very much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I think you should contact a Swedish woman, Sara Riggare. webpage She is what i Sweden is called “spetspatient” and her reasoning is that she is the expert of her own disease, not doctors. She is doing a PhD in this area and is very active in promoting patient centered care as well as actually talking to patients.
RESPONSE B: Some journals have pretty strict criteria about what they will publish, and may require that a study was approved by an IRB, had an adequate sample size, etc. You may not personally require IRB approval to collect data on yourself, yet a journal could still require IRB approval to publish it. I think you will get more traction if you can develop a collaboration with a professional or team of professionals. However valuable your insights may be, there are good reasons that scientific norms and standards have been put into place, and attempting to bypass them will undermine your ultimate goal.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Can an educated patient with a rare disease present and publish self researched interventions? I am not a scientist or healthcare professional. I do have a very rare genetic disease with no therapy or cure. I am university educated ( arts degrees) and self researched and applied lifestyle interventions that were unexpectedly successful. As I track all data regarding my interventions, my medical team and I, as first author, published an article this Spring. As I am acting outside the standard of care for someone with my disease, albeit with proven success, my medical team has now backed away from further research collaboration for ethical and liability reasons. As an informed patient, I am not bound by the same ethical or professional constraints of my medical team. Over the past year, I have progressed the interventions, still outside the standard of care, and I would now like to independently present the results as an N=1 study at a Conference in June. I am uncertain as to the appropriateness of this effort but feel very strongly that the research would be immensely valuable to other patients suffering with the same disease. Currently, there is no cure or therapy for this progressive and debilitating disease and my research might offer some hope for others. Any academic advice on strategies for navigating through the publication process would be very much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I think you should contact a Swedish woman, Sara Riggare. webpage She is what i Sweden is called “spetspatient” and her reasoning is that she is the expert of her own disease, not doctors. She is doing a PhD in this area and is very active in promoting patient centered care as well as actually talking to patients.
RESPONSE B: Agree with the rest of the comments on case reports. Will you be monetizing your intervention? If so, might be worth it to keep quiet about it until you can collaborate with the industry to perhaps explore more robust evidence generation (randomized control trials).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: immensely valuable to other patients suffering with the same disease. Currently, there is no cure or therapy for this progressive and debilitating disease and my research might offer some hope for others. Any academic advice on strategies for navigating through the publication process would be very much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Since you've already published your work in a peer-reviewed journal, under normal circumstances it would be quite normal to present it or an update of it at a conference as well. However, in your case there is the risk of the conference reviewers or (if you're accepted) audience getting the impression that you're some quack who is trying to publish in a medical conference without even any basic medical training. Obviously in the paper this was easy to avoid with the inclusion of your medical team as co-authors. Now that they aren't included, you will need to very carefully prepare your written and verbal material to navigate this situation. When your write your abstract, make sure you heavily reference your own published work along with the rest of the literature in the field. Use phrases like "As we have demonstrated in our paper..." more than would be typical in a conference abstract. It might even be worth contacting the chair of the conference or session to explain the unusual authorship situation so they don't think you're omitting your previous co-authors because of some spat or unethical behaviour, but I don't know whehter this is likely to work out. It's hard to tell from your post, of course, how much you yourself have mastered the language used by medical professionals amongst themselves, and whether you're familiar with the format and style of conference papers and presentations in this field. Usually a grad student (for example) would get feedback and revisions from their supervisors on their first few talks before they do them, and they would of course have been also attending talks in the mean time. You could consider asking one of your doctors if they would look over your material with you to ensure you are hitting the right target, if you feel this would be appropriate given your relationship.
RESPONSE B: Well not a academic advice but why don't you make a website and try to reach other people who been suffering from that disease and tell them about your experiences?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Have many academic friends do you have? Or, are your friends mainly non-academics? Hi all, Hope this post is allowed here. I'm curious as to how easy or difficult academics find it to make friends in similar fields or their institution. I know people define 'friendship' differently, but I guess for the purposes of my question, I mean someone you would see socially and with whom you'd discuss your personal lives beyond polite small talk (maybe Level 4 and higher?). Personally, after 8 years as a PhD student and postdoc, I know three people, all of whom I met as MPhil/PhD students, who I might call friends. We've talked about personal stuff but we're very low contact which is partially due to geography. I also initiate most of the conversations. My two proper close friends are non-academic and I have lots of academic colleagues/acquaintances. It seems like lots of other people in my field have circles of academic friends but maybe this is a misperception from social media. I see people thanking loads of friends in their thesis intros and I can't relate haha. I have, unsuccessfully, tried to put myself out there with people but I think it's a combination of incompatibility and some being understandably busy with their own stuff. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
RESPONSE A: Very few. I find them irritating to be friends with in general. When I'm with friends, I don't like the possibility of competition and posturing. To me friends are people I can be myself around, not people I have to watch my back with. I have one close friend from my institution, and a few from other schools. Otherwise socially, no thanks
RESPONSE B: Honestly, except for my family I don't know anyone outside of academia anymore
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Have many academic friends do you have? Or, are your friends mainly non-academics? Hi all, Hope this post is allowed here. I'm curious as to how easy or difficult academics find it to make friends in similar fields or their institution. I know people define 'friendship' differently, but I guess for the purposes of my question, I mean someone you would see socially and with whom you'd discuss your personal lives beyond polite small talk (maybe Level 4 and higher?). Personally, after 8 years as a PhD student and postdoc, I know three people, all of whom I met as MPhil/PhD students, who I might call friends. We've talked about personal stuff but we're very low contact which is partially due to geography. I also initiate most of the conversations. My two proper close friends are non-academic and I have lots of academic colleagues/acquaintances. It seems like lots of other people in my field have circles of academic friends but maybe this is a misperception from social media. I see people thanking loads of friends in their thesis intros and I can't relate haha. I have, unsuccessfully, tried to put myself out there with people but I think it's a combination of incompatibility and some being understandably busy with their own stuff. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
RESPONSE A: Very few. I find them irritating to be friends with in general. When I'm with friends, I don't like the possibility of competition and posturing. To me friends are people I can be myself around, not people I have to watch my back with. I have one close friend from my institution, and a few from other schools. Otherwise socially, no thanks
RESPONSE B: Most of my friends are those I made during my undergrad 20-something years ago. I've picked up a few along the way during work - more from some jobs than others, and from some jobs none at all. I've picked up a few from places I've lived while moving that had nothing to do with academia too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , are your friends mainly non-academics? Hi all, Hope this post is allowed here. I'm curious as to how easy or difficult academics find it to make friends in similar fields or their institution. I know people define 'friendship' differently, but I guess for the purposes of my question, I mean someone you would see socially and with whom you'd discuss your personal lives beyond polite small talk (maybe Level 4 and higher?). Personally, after 8 years as a PhD student and postdoc, I know three people, all of whom I met as MPhil/PhD students, who I might call friends. We've talked about personal stuff but we're very low contact which is partially due to geography. I also initiate most of the conversations. My two proper close friends are non-academic and I have lots of academic colleagues/acquaintances. It seems like lots of other people in my field have circles of academic friends but maybe this is a misperception from social media. I see people thanking loads of friends in their thesis intros and I can't relate haha. I have, unsuccessfully, tried to put myself out there with people but I think it's a combination of incompatibility and some being understandably busy with their own stuff. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
RESPONSE A: Most of my friends are those I made during my undergrad 20-something years ago. I've picked up a few along the way during work - more from some jobs than others, and from some jobs none at all. I've picked up a few from places I've lived while moving that had nothing to do with academia too.
RESPONSE B: I find it easier to be friends with people in academia the longer I am in it. A lot of people don't understand what a post-doc is, even after you explain what you'll be doing (oh so you're a student still? do you get paid? do you get college credit?). And it's easier to talk to people who understand why that your career takes 10+ years after graduating to even reach a point where you'd be considered "successful" or that you're not just trying to get rich in life.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: to make friends in similar fields or their institution. I know people define 'friendship' differently, but I guess for the purposes of my question, I mean someone you would see socially and with whom you'd discuss your personal lives beyond polite small talk (maybe Level 4 and higher?). Personally, after 8 years as a PhD student and postdoc, I know three people, all of whom I met as MPhil/PhD students, who I might call friends. We've talked about personal stuff but we're very low contact which is partially due to geography. I also initiate most of the conversations. My two proper close friends are non-academic and I have lots of academic colleagues/acquaintances. It seems like lots of other people in my field have circles of academic friends but maybe this is a misperception from social media. I see people thanking loads of friends in their thesis intros and I can't relate haha. I have, unsuccessfully, tried to put myself out there with people but I think it's a combination of incompatibility and some being understandably busy with their own stuff. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
RESPONSE A: About 3 that i’d call friends. Met these whilst doing my masters and PhD. Friends with mainly non-academics that I grew up with in my home town. Don’t get me wrong there’s a lot of great people in academia, some not so great, but wouldn’t go as far as calling them friends
RESPONSE B: I moved half way across the country for my PhD program. Naturally many of the people I developed friendships with were those I met through the program. I tried getting involved with young adult groups at churches in the area but those events often conflicted with my class schedule. However, my closest friends are those from college who live elsewhere. None of them are academics and they frequently don't understand what I do, lol. I love them dearly. My boyfriend did receive an MA but is not in academia. His friends are not in academia. IT'S SO NICE HANGING OUT WITH NON ACADEMICS. Like, I enjoy hanging out with my academic friends but I can only handle so much office gossip/despair over research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , I mean someone you would see socially and with whom you'd discuss your personal lives beyond polite small talk (maybe Level 4 and higher?). Personally, after 8 years as a PhD student and postdoc, I know three people, all of whom I met as MPhil/PhD students, who I might call friends. We've talked about personal stuff but we're very low contact which is partially due to geography. I also initiate most of the conversations. My two proper close friends are non-academic and I have lots of academic colleagues/acquaintances. It seems like lots of other people in my field have circles of academic friends but maybe this is a misperception from social media. I see people thanking loads of friends in their thesis intros and I can't relate haha. I have, unsuccessfully, tried to put myself out there with people but I think it's a combination of incompatibility and some being understandably busy with their own stuff. Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts.
RESPONSE A: About 3 that i’d call friends. Met these whilst doing my masters and PhD. Friends with mainly non-academics that I grew up with in my home town. Don’t get me wrong there’s a lot of great people in academia, some not so great, but wouldn’t go as far as calling them friends
RESPONSE B: Most of my broader circle of friends are current or former academics - we have built a network of support and respect over the years. Much of it is rooted in relationships forged in grad school and post-doc, and some who came along later. We have supported each other through marriages, children, divorces, deaths, tenure decisions both up and out, ethical dilemmas both at work and at home, and every other bump and scrape for the last twenty-odd years. It’s taken a long time to build this cadre, and to find people we each trust and admire. We have lost quite a few people to divergent interests or skullduggery over the years, too. And most people of our acquaintance never made it into the group in the first place. I mean, who else would understand what it means to get a paper in Cell?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: moving away from that? Or am I being dramatic and exaggerating a non-issue?
RESPONSE A: It's a common gripe indeed but it's also accurate signposting that you're playing the game and winning at it, with all the connections and privileges that that entails, and some places want to select for exactly that. They want people who'll do well with the grant agencies and who have the right in's with gatekeepers and so on. Obviously the winners of the game will tend to think this is all highly correlated with real scientific quality and the losers will tend to think it's somewhere between high false negatives and actively negative, corrupt nepotism. I do note that when yet another fraud case rolls along, there's a thundering silence on how much grant money, given by which agencies, the fraud had received for being such a top scientist. There is some movement against the general old power structures, e.g., they've introduced basic-threshold-plus-lottery-based grant awards in Germany I believe, which do no worse than "we'll pick the winners" grant agencies and save massive amounts of time and money. But the people at the top I've personally encountered over the last decades were pretty much all still products of the traditional system. They didn't get there for producing, like, thoughtful, creative academic work. I definitely hope it changes somehow, but I think it'll be outside forces saying, hey, we wasted a lot of taxpayer money on, say, the replication crisis and all these so-called brilliant researchers who caused that.
RESPONSE B: High impact factor journals are mostly a load of rubbish imo. They aren't assessing the work to some higher standard that others within the same publisher group, they're just more picky about the topics they take to preserve their curated impact factor. That's not to say there aren't benefits if you've got work that matches those journals, but all journals by the big publishers are subjected to the same quality of peer review in my experience. I don't think IF is the most important thing - I'd rather my work be in a midrange open access journal that is accessible to all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , it is not professional to try to measure a researcher with articles at the beginning of his/her academic life. I would personally consider citations, number of views, etc. more important rather than where the work was published.' To me there's a glaring omission which is the quality of the researcher's work. Assessing their work by reading it, seeing how well they write, etc. On one hand, I can see why this is important. High-quality publications act as proofs of the researchers' ability, production, etc. Maybe this is considered the most non-discriminatory and least subjective. And when deciding whether someone is worth admitting/hiring/sucking up to etc., who cbs to read someone's work when they can peep their h-index. For a noob like me, it isn't intuitive yet to assess a piece of work based on what journals they have published. But with some of my colleagues, it's the first point of reference. I get it's the game, and to win, you gotta play. But who would want to win a rigged game. Is this a common gripe amongst academics? And if so is the space moving away from that? Or am I being dramatic and exaggerating a non-issue?
RESPONSE A: High impact factor journals are mostly a load of rubbish imo. They aren't assessing the work to some higher standard that others within the same publisher group, they're just more picky about the topics they take to preserve their curated impact factor. That's not to say there aren't benefits if you've got work that matches those journals, but all journals by the big publishers are subjected to the same quality of peer review in my experience. I don't think IF is the most important thing - I'd rather my work be in a midrange open access journal that is accessible to all.
RESPONSE B: > number of views, etc. more important This will go so well............... not. I can already see the clickbaiting headline already: "10 solved Theorems on 3D Fluid PDE you will not believe it!"
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: You know my h-index, not my story. As a disclaimer, I don't know shit about fuck. I've done around a year of research and only starting post-grad this year. Today, I was reading a thread on this subreddit asking how bad it was to publish in a low-impact journal. One of the replies struck me, which was: 'I believe, it is not professional to try to measure a researcher with articles at the beginning of his/her academic life. I would personally consider citations, number of views, etc. more important rather than where the work was published.' To me there's a glaring omission which is the quality of the researcher's work. Assessing their work by reading it, seeing how well they write, etc. On one hand, I can see why this is important. High-quality publications act as proofs of the researchers' ability, production, etc. Maybe this is considered the most non-discriminatory and least subjective. And when deciding whether someone is worth admitting/hiring/sucking up to etc., who cbs to read someone's work when they can peep their h-index. For a noob like me, it isn't intuitive yet to assess a piece of work based on what journals they have published. But with some of my colleagues, it's the first point of reference. I get it's the game, and to win, you gotta play. But who would want to win a rigged game. Is this a common gripe amongst academics? And if so is the space moving away from that? Or am I being dramatic and exaggerating a non-issue?
RESPONSE A: > number of views, etc. more important This will go so well............... not. I can already see the clickbaiting headline already: "10 solved Theorems on 3D Fluid PDE you will not believe it!"
RESPONSE B: Your intuitions are right and I personally would love the system to change. Take a look at the DORA declaration and it’s signatures.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . But with some of my colleagues, it's the first point of reference. I get it's the game, and to win, you gotta play. But who would want to win a rigged game. Is this a common gripe amongst academics? And if so is the space moving away from that? Or am I being dramatic and exaggerating a non-issue?
RESPONSE A: High impact factor journals are mostly a load of rubbish imo. They aren't assessing the work to some higher standard that others within the same publisher group, they're just more picky about the topics they take to preserve their curated impact factor. That's not to say there aren't benefits if you've got work that matches those journals, but all journals by the big publishers are subjected to the same quality of peer review in my experience. I don't think IF is the most important thing - I'd rather my work be in a midrange open access journal that is accessible to all.
RESPONSE B: Another big issue with h-index is that it doesn’t screen for authorship gifting. If a lab takes on the all too common practice of sharing authorship with every member of that lab (i.e., giving authorship to everyone irrespective of input), then you’ll end up with a huge number of publications per member. Hardy any of these are first author papers though, so value as a scientist isn’t well reflected and is heavily propped up by other people’s work. I don’t think everyone is playing by the rules or being judged to “the same standard” — the system encourages manipulation. Some people choose to lean in to this, some don’t. So yeah, it’s pretty woeful. A major funding body in my home country has just announced a new system for grant applications, whereby PIs have to list their top 10 publications (rather than listing all their pubs). I think this is a slightly better method, because more accurately judges quality and impact on an individual level. But it’s also a challenge for early career researchers who haven’t had an opportunity to build up their track record, so far from perfect.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: proofs of the researchers' ability, production, etc. Maybe this is considered the most non-discriminatory and least subjective. And when deciding whether someone is worth admitting/hiring/sucking up to etc., who cbs to read someone's work when they can peep their h-index. For a noob like me, it isn't intuitive yet to assess a piece of work based on what journals they have published. But with some of my colleagues, it's the first point of reference. I get it's the game, and to win, you gotta play. But who would want to win a rigged game. Is this a common gripe amongst academics? And if so is the space moving away from that? Or am I being dramatic and exaggerating a non-issue?
RESPONSE A: The issue is that, it’s not really possible for most people to assess work by reading it - academic writing is generally obscure enough that unless you’re in the field, or maybe the sub-field, or the sub-sub-field, you can’t understand the work and it’s context well enough to distinguish mediocre work from brilliant work. That’s why administrators are so focused on it, but for instance my field (math) is so specialized that there’s typically at most one person in the department who can really assess the quality of someone’s work for themself, so the rest of us how to depend on proxies like where it was published and many citations it has.
RESPONSE B: In my field it’s more about venues and who you publish with. There’s a handful of high profile conferences that you really need to publish in even during your graduate studies — also to get seen when presenting and to network. Journals are less important, and impact factor is not much of a consideration, but there are a few important ones that will get you noticed (typically ACM Transactions). On the other hand, in my native country they’ve developed a tiered system of venues that is used to assess your research production. It’s an imperfect system but gives PhD students and postdocs an idea of where to publish for impact.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Graduating incompetent PhDs This question is inspired by the story of a professor acquaintance, who is currently line-editing an advisee's dissertation because they are unable to write coherently and don't understand the sources they're citing. They're hoping to sign off on the dissertation at the end of this academic year, meaning the student will graduate with a PhD despite (from what I understand) not having the basic skills that a PhD holder is supposed to have. I've heard a similar story before from people in real life and online. So I'm sitting here a lil rattled and wondering: is graduating incompetent PhDs, like, a thing?
RESPONSE A: Haha, am I the only one who’s got enough of an imposter syndrome to think that the title is almost directed at me? I had to like immediate go through lists of external validation (papers published, jobs I had gotten in my field even before my phd) to assure myself that I’m not completely incompetent , but nonetheless the dissertation that I handed in last week was way weaker than I thought a phd thesis should be *shrugs* Moving aside from me though, I’ve heard that my faculty has almost never rejects someone based on their phd defense; and we don’t have quals so almost no one gets rejected earlier either. So yes I’m sure degrees have been given to people who are incompetent .
RESPONSE B: In the UK I've seen people fail their PhD at the viva stage (i.e. finally oral examine nation after the thesis is submitted). I've seen more people be directed towards going for an MPhil before that point because their supervisors didn't think they were PhD capable. I've also seen one shit student get a PhD because the supervisor got their mates to examine the viva. These are all in a very small minority.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Graduating incompetent PhDs This question is inspired by the story of a professor acquaintance, who is currently line-editing an advisee's dissertation because they are unable to write coherently and don't understand the sources they're citing. They're hoping to sign off on the dissertation at the end of this academic year, meaning the student will graduate with a PhD despite (from what I understand) not having the basic skills that a PhD holder is supposed to have. I've heard a similar story before from people in real life and online. So I'm sitting here a lil rattled and wondering: is graduating incompetent PhDs, like, a thing?
RESPONSE A: Haha, am I the only one who’s got enough of an imposter syndrome to think that the title is almost directed at me? I had to like immediate go through lists of external validation (papers published, jobs I had gotten in my field even before my phd) to assure myself that I’m not completely incompetent , but nonetheless the dissertation that I handed in last week was way weaker than I thought a phd thesis should be *shrugs* Moving aside from me though, I’ve heard that my faculty has almost never rejects someone based on their phd defense; and we don’t have quals so almost no one gets rejected earlier either. So yes I’m sure degrees have been given to people who are incompetent .
RESPONSE B: Seen it a few times, unfortunately. In those cases it was generally done to get rid of a student who was clearly not qualified for the degree but had basically made so much of a stink and fought so hard to avoid being dismissed the department/PI/uni caved. Pisses me off.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Graduating incompetent PhDs This question is inspired by the story of a professor acquaintance, who is currently line-editing an advisee's dissertation because they are unable to write coherently and don't understand the sources they're citing. They're hoping to sign off on the dissertation at the end of this academic year, meaning the student will graduate with a PhD despite (from what I understand) not having the basic skills that a PhD holder is supposed to have. I've heard a similar story before from people in real life and online. So I'm sitting here a lil rattled and wondering: is graduating incompetent PhDs, like, a thing?
RESPONSE A: It does indeed happen. The professor and/or supervisors looks bad, and there may be monetary reasons to let one through (such as for each PhD student that graduates the group gets some chuck of money). I've heard of one incident where the jury for the defence had to be convinced by the professor to give the passing grade, and the final reason to pass the student was that the student would leave academia anyway.
RESPONSE B: Haha, am I the only one who’s got enough of an imposter syndrome to think that the title is almost directed at me? I had to like immediate go through lists of external validation (papers published, jobs I had gotten in my field even before my phd) to assure myself that I’m not completely incompetent , but nonetheless the dissertation that I handed in last week was way weaker than I thought a phd thesis should be *shrugs* Moving aside from me though, I’ve heard that my faculty has almost never rejects someone based on their phd defense; and we don’t have quals so almost no one gets rejected earlier either. So yes I’m sure degrees have been given to people who are incompetent .
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Graduating incompetent PhDs This question is inspired by the story of a professor acquaintance, who is currently line-editing an advisee's dissertation because they are unable to write coherently and don't understand the sources they're citing. They're hoping to sign off on the dissertation at the end of this academic year, meaning the student will graduate with a PhD despite (from what I understand) not having the basic skills that a PhD holder is supposed to have. I've heard a similar story before from people in real life and online. So I'm sitting here a lil rattled and wondering: is graduating incompetent PhDs, like, a thing?
RESPONSE A: I've seen some questionable Ph.Ds get pushed through after a PI either dies or accepts a new job overseas.
RESPONSE B: Haha, am I the only one who’s got enough of an imposter syndrome to think that the title is almost directed at me? I had to like immediate go through lists of external validation (papers published, jobs I had gotten in my field even before my phd) to assure myself that I’m not completely incompetent , but nonetheless the dissertation that I handed in last week was way weaker than I thought a phd thesis should be *shrugs* Moving aside from me though, I’ve heard that my faculty has almost never rejects someone based on their phd defense; and we don’t have quals so almost no one gets rejected earlier either. So yes I’m sure degrees have been given to people who are incompetent .
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Complicated feelings around leaving academia I'm doing a post-doc in a STEM field that has pretty good industry options. For a while, I entertained the possibility of staying in academia but it's becoming clearer to me that I need better work-life balance and that I enjoy working in teams more than being a PI. I've been slowly applying for industry jobs and I'm generating a decent number of follow up interviews. But the truth is that I feel... strange... about this idea of leaving academia. I did have an industry job for 4 years before starting grad school and I also was always lukewarm about the idea of getting in academia as a career (as opposed to getting a Ph.D. for cooler jobs in my area). I feel sad and like I'm grieving, even though I'm sure I don't want to stay in academia any more. I guess I'm also worried about telling my PI that I'm leaving. I have my own grant, and he hasn't been super helpful or supportive either along the way, so I don't know why I'm feeling this guilt. My Ph.D. advisor is quite supportive of whichever direction I choose. But I just feel weird about this. I just don't want to make my entire life about some scientific endeavor that isn't even earth-shattering. Why do I feel guilt for not doing that?
RESPONSE A: Change is always difficult. Particularly difficult when you are changing from an environment where you have been successful... That said, from the perspective of this retired university professor, nothing indicates that the academic environment is going to improve anytime soon... Number of traditional age college age students declining, competition for money increasing, as well as student debt levels increasing. Absolutely normal to have some trepidation when contemplating a change. Do your research about where in industry you want to work... Make a plan. Work you plan. Best of luck!
RESPONSE B: What was your industry job then and what is your stem field now?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: STEM field that has pretty good industry options. For a while, I entertained the possibility of staying in academia but it's becoming clearer to me that I need better work-life balance and that I enjoy working in teams more than being a PI. I've been slowly applying for industry jobs and I'm generating a decent number of follow up interviews. But the truth is that I feel... strange... about this idea of leaving academia. I did have an industry job for 4 years before starting grad school and I also was always lukewarm about the idea of getting in academia as a career (as opposed to getting a Ph.D. for cooler jobs in my area). I feel sad and like I'm grieving, even though I'm sure I don't want to stay in academia any more. I guess I'm also worried about telling my PI that I'm leaving. I have my own grant, and he hasn't been super helpful or supportive either along the way, so I don't know why I'm feeling this guilt. My Ph.D. advisor is quite supportive of whichever direction I choose. But I just feel weird about this. I just don't want to make my entire life about some scientific endeavor that isn't even earth-shattering. Why do I feel guilt for not doing that?
RESPONSE A: A PhD trains you to lead a group of researchers, in an academic setting by default, so it's natural to feel weird that you're headed to a different destination than the railroad tracks you're currently on. Doing things differently than the group is always going to feel strange for humans. What you describe makes perfect sense to me. Good luck in industry!
RESPONSE B: I felt a little bit that way when I first left, but I was encouraged to go indirectly when, during an interview, an asst prof with small kids said it was good to get them to bed at 8, because then you could stay up and write until 12. Then a few years later, we met with some academics for a collaboration on a Monday. We were like, hey there was great weather this weekend. The academics said, we wouldn't know, we all had to write grant applications all weekend.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Complicated feelings around leaving academia I'm doing a post-doc in a STEM field that has pretty good industry options. For a while, I entertained the possibility of staying in academia but it's becoming clearer to me that I need better work-life balance and that I enjoy working in teams more than being a PI. I've been slowly applying for industry jobs and I'm generating a decent number of follow up interviews. But the truth is that I feel... strange... about this idea of leaving academia. I did have an industry job for 4 years before starting grad school and I also was always lukewarm about the idea of getting in academia as a career (as opposed to getting a Ph.D. for cooler jobs in my area). I feel sad and like I'm grieving, even though I'm sure I don't want to stay in academia any more. I guess I'm also worried about telling my PI that I'm leaving. I have my own grant, and he hasn't been super helpful or supportive either along the way, so I don't know why I'm feeling this guilt. My Ph.D. advisor is quite supportive of whichever direction I choose. But I just feel weird about this. I just don't want to make my entire life about some scientific endeavor that isn't even earth-shattering. Why do I feel guilt for not doing that?
RESPONSE A: What was your industry job then and what is your stem field now?
RESPONSE B: I felt a little bit that way when I first left, but I was encouraged to go indirectly when, during an interview, an asst prof with small kids said it was good to get them to bed at 8, because then you could stay up and write until 12. Then a few years later, we met with some academics for a collaboration on a Monday. We were like, hey there was great weather this weekend. The academics said, we wouldn't know, we all had to write grant applications all weekend.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Complicated feelings around leaving academia I'm doing a post-doc in a STEM field that has pretty good industry options. For a while, I entertained the possibility of staying in academia but it's becoming clearer to me that I need better work-life balance and that I enjoy working in teams more than being a PI. I've been slowly applying for industry jobs and I'm generating a decent number of follow up interviews. But the truth is that I feel... strange... about this idea of leaving academia. I did have an industry job for 4 years before starting grad school and I also was always lukewarm about the idea of getting in academia as a career (as opposed to getting a Ph.D. for cooler jobs in my area). I feel sad and like I'm grieving, even though I'm sure I don't want to stay in academia any more. I guess I'm also worried about telling my PI that I'm leaving. I have my own grant, and he hasn't been super helpful or supportive either along the way, so I don't know why I'm feeling this guilt. My Ph.D. advisor is quite supportive of whichever direction I choose. But I just feel weird about this. I just don't want to make my entire life about some scientific endeavor that isn't even earth-shattering. Why do I feel guilt for not doing that?
RESPONSE A: What was your industry job then and what is your stem field now?
RESPONSE B: I had this too even though I knew being a PI wasn't for me. I think part of it is that the knowledge that transitioning out of academia is largely a one way street, and committing to something unfamiliar is always uncomfortable. I think the bigger part is that life in academia is more than just a career path. It's a community, culture, and lifestyle that you've been heavily invested in for 5-10 years at this stage. That's a lot to leave behind.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Complicated feelings around leaving academia I'm doing a post-doc in a STEM field that has pretty good industry options. For a while, I entertained the possibility of staying in academia but it's becoming clearer to me that I need better work-life balance and that I enjoy working in teams more than being a PI. I've been slowly applying for industry jobs and I'm generating a decent number of follow up interviews. But the truth is that I feel... strange... about this idea of leaving academia. I did have an industry job for 4 years before starting grad school and I also was always lukewarm about the idea of getting in academia as a career (as opposed to getting a Ph.D. for cooler jobs in my area). I feel sad and like I'm grieving, even though I'm sure I don't want to stay in academia any more. I guess I'm also worried about telling my PI that I'm leaving. I have my own grant, and he hasn't been super helpful or supportive either along the way, so I don't know why I'm feeling this guilt. My Ph.D. advisor is quite supportive of whichever direction I choose. But I just feel weird about this. I just don't want to make my entire life about some scientific endeavor that isn't even earth-shattering. Why do I feel guilt for not doing that?
RESPONSE A: A PhD trains you to lead a group of researchers, in an academic setting by default, so it's natural to feel weird that you're headed to a different destination than the railroad tracks you're currently on. Doing things differently than the group is always going to feel strange for humans. What you describe makes perfect sense to me. Good luck in industry!
RESPONSE B: What was your industry job then and what is your stem field now?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: going to be for colleges requiring the COVID19 vaccine? Rutgers just announced it is mandatory. My university has begun to vaccinate current students on campus, but does anyone know if universities nationwide will require it in the fall? I would suspect the big hurdle is that currently they are an EUA, which I am not sure how that effects requirements for students vs employees. If a vaccine does get officially approved, I would see all colleges instantly requiring it, but I am not sure if we will be there by the fall. People seem pretty mum at my school at the moment regarding a requirement.
RESPONSE A: The question itself is US-centric, so I feel comfortable blasting along the US-centric line of thinking: Just to complicate the issue a bit, there's the issue of mutual recognition for vaccinations for international students. Quite a few international students, whether arriving to study in the US for the first time or continuing their studies after being forced back to their home countries for the pandemic, will have been received vaccines approved in their home countries but currently not recognized by the US. How this situation will evolve by the fall is unclear, and will probably influence how university administration approach the issue. A lot of times, universities aren't announcing things because they are still working furiously behind the scenes to iron things out. This wouldn't be the first time hold-ups were caused by government policies rather than adversarial university administration.
RESPONSE B: Labor laws apply to employee-employer relationships, so I wouldn't look to that for any indication of what could or will happen. I would not be surprised if most major universities required proof of vaccination or medical certification that it's a contraindication, at least for students living on campus. I think smaller conservative private schools won't require it and will use that as a selling point. I could also see far-right legislature/governors forbidding their "liberal elite" state schools from requiring it, just to make a political statement. I could also see a fair number of schools not "requiring" it, but still asking for vaccination records, heavily promoting the vaccine at campus health, and juts hoping they end up with herd immunity that way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone heard through the grapevine what the general trend is going to be for colleges requiring the COVID19 vaccine? Rutgers just announced it is mandatory. My university has begun to vaccinate current students on campus, but does anyone know if universities nationwide will require it in the fall? I would suspect the big hurdle is that currently they are an EUA, which I am not sure how that effects requirements for students vs employees. If a vaccine does get officially approved, I would see all colleges instantly requiring it, but I am not sure if we will be there by the fall. People seem pretty mum at my school at the moment regarding a requirement.
RESPONSE A: My guess (worth less than the paper I'm typing on) is that most won't make it a hard requirement for fear of lawsuits and other complications like sorting out individuals who have legitimate reasons not to get it. Instead, it will be highly incentivized. For example, maybe students will be allowed to choose whether to return in person with the vaccine or continue online. Of course the online offerings will be extremely limited and mostly unpopular classes.
RESPONSE B: I imagine this will vary a lot by school and location. I'm also in New Jersey and would not be surprised if we adopted the same requirement as Rutgers. Our school already requires full-time students to be vaccinated for lots of other things (measles, mumps, rubella, meningitis, hep B, TB, and varicella). Adding COVID to that list would not change much. They have already started tracking who is vaccinated, and having us submit proof to HR.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone heard through the grapevine what the general trend is going to be for colleges requiring the COVID19 vaccine? Rutgers just announced it is mandatory. My university has begun to vaccinate current students on campus, but does anyone know if universities nationwide will require it in the fall? I would suspect the big hurdle is that currently they are an EUA, which I am not sure how that effects requirements for students vs employees. If a vaccine does get officially approved, I would see all colleges instantly requiring it, but I am not sure if we will be there by the fall. People seem pretty mum at my school at the moment regarding a requirement.
RESPONSE A: Depends on the school. Students who were never vaccinated as kids are still allowed on campus, so student who rwfus the covid vaccine will also be allowed on campus. Eventually some school dorms may require that you register as a non vaccinated but they normally can't prevent you from living on campus, unless again your state has a law for college kids to be vaccinated, which might not be true since some primary schools (k-12) are still not required to have eveyone vaccinated.
RESPONSE B: I imagine this will vary a lot by school and location. I'm also in New Jersey and would not be surprised if we adopted the same requirement as Rutgers. Our school already requires full-time students to be vaccinated for lots of other things (measles, mumps, rubella, meningitis, hep B, TB, and varicella). Adding COVID to that list would not change much. They have already started tracking who is vaccinated, and having us submit proof to HR.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone heard through the grapevine what the general trend is going to be for colleges requiring the COVID19 vaccine? Rutgers just announced it is mandatory. My university has begun to vaccinate current students on campus, but does anyone know if universities nationwide will require it in the fall? I would suspect the big hurdle is that currently they are an EUA, which I am not sure how that effects requirements for students vs employees. If a vaccine does get officially approved, I would see all colleges instantly requiring it, but I am not sure if we will be there by the fall. People seem pretty mum at my school at the moment regarding a requirement.
RESPONSE A: My institution, at least so far, is strongly encouraging vaccination for students in Fall 2021, but is stopping short of requiring it. We'll see how that shapes up. I personally would like to see colleges and universities require that anyone who is on campus A) demonstrate proof of vaccine, B) demonstrate other evidence of immunity, such as a positive COVID test, or C) provide a doctor's note conveying that the student has a valid medical reason for not getting the vaccine. I'm sure the situation will continue to evolve between now and the Fall. Among the many possible variables include 1) how bad are outbreaks come later summer, 2) how widespread are various variants of COVID that may be more easily spread or cause more serious illness, and 3) do any of the vaccines have full approval (rather than emergency authorization -- it can be a little dicier to require that someone get a medical intervention that only has emergency authorization rather than full approval).
RESPONSE B: Ours is "encouraging" us to submit photos of our vaccination cards by excluding those who have done so from randomized testing. I suspect they may do the same with students, who may choose a couple of jabs over byweekly nasal expeditions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone heard through the grapevine what the general trend is going to be for colleges requiring the COVID19 vaccine? Rutgers just announced it is mandatory. My university has begun to vaccinate current students on campus, but does anyone know if universities nationwide will require it in the fall? I would suspect the big hurdle is that currently they are an EUA, which I am not sure how that effects requirements for students vs employees. If a vaccine does get officially approved, I would see all colleges instantly requiring it, but I am not sure if we will be there by the fall. People seem pretty mum at my school at the moment regarding a requirement.
RESPONSE A: My institution, at least so far, is strongly encouraging vaccination for students in Fall 2021, but is stopping short of requiring it. We'll see how that shapes up. I personally would like to see colleges and universities require that anyone who is on campus A) demonstrate proof of vaccine, B) demonstrate other evidence of immunity, such as a positive COVID test, or C) provide a doctor's note conveying that the student has a valid medical reason for not getting the vaccine. I'm sure the situation will continue to evolve between now and the Fall. Among the many possible variables include 1) how bad are outbreaks come later summer, 2) how widespread are various variants of COVID that may be more easily spread or cause more serious illness, and 3) do any of the vaccines have full approval (rather than emergency authorization -- it can be a little dicier to require that someone get a medical intervention that only has emergency authorization rather than full approval).
RESPONSE B: We are requiring vaccination for all Fall 2021 students. I'm sad to see that this is not the norm.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: my graduation. I got informed the other day that the University that I applied to (Dutch university, but I have also applied for a Scottish one and I have been accepted) will be switching to online teaching until January 2021, at least. So, I really don't know what I should do here. I have been planning for this for 2 years now and I was really hoping to migrate abroad and start a new life there (obviously I need to network and find a job). What would you do if you were me? What will you do if you are already in a position like me?
RESPONSE A: If you needed a visa, I would definitely recommend you to defer. But since you're an EU citizen and aren't under as much time pressure, you can still network and find a job even if you only get the spring semester to do that effectively - most people waste their first semester anyway. That said, if you have a stable job right now, I'd definitely think twice about leaving that. The field you're trying to go into will be especially impacted at the end of this.
RESPONSE B: Hi there, as a lecturer at a Dutch university, it might be worth noting that online lecturing until January 2021 is the ‘worst’ case scenario. The joint position of the Dutch universities at the moment is that online teaching will happen if necessary - so as to prevent disruption for students - but on campus if this is possible, depending on the progression of the virus and government measures. The government has also just announced today that they will be loosening the current measures (high schools are reopening, restaurants gradually as well). This is not to say that there isn’t still a high likelihood that teaching will be online at the start of the academic year, but hopefully things will continue to improve. It would seem unlikely that you will be able to completely escape having to take at least some online classes if you are set on starting in September - there will be a similar situation in Scotland, and most other countries in Europe most likely. I would let your choice be guided by the university which is the best fit for you based on the programme, and whether you see yourself settling in the country afterwards.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Universities switching to online education for 2020-2021. International students, will you still go for it or defer? Any advice appreciated. Hello guys, I am an applicant for a 1-year full time Master's Programme (Int. Relations/Politics), looking to study abroad and to settle there for good after my graduation. I got informed the other day that the University that I applied to (Dutch university, but I have also applied for a Scottish one and I have been accepted) will be switching to online teaching until January 2021, at least. So, I really don't know what I should do here. I have been planning for this for 2 years now and I was really hoping to migrate abroad and start a new life there (obviously I need to network and find a job). What would you do if you were me? What will you do if you are already in a position like me?
RESPONSE A: Can you please tell me what University? I am pursuing a Bachelor in the Netherlands and I would like to continue the Master here as well.
RESPONSE B: Hi there, as a lecturer at a Dutch university, it might be worth noting that online lecturing until January 2021 is the ‘worst’ case scenario. The joint position of the Dutch universities at the moment is that online teaching will happen if necessary - so as to prevent disruption for students - but on campus if this is possible, depending on the progression of the virus and government measures. The government has also just announced today that they will be loosening the current measures (high schools are reopening, restaurants gradually as well). This is not to say that there isn’t still a high likelihood that teaching will be online at the start of the academic year, but hopefully things will continue to improve. It would seem unlikely that you will be able to completely escape having to take at least some online classes if you are set on starting in September - there will be a similar situation in Scotland, and most other countries in Europe most likely. I would let your choice be guided by the university which is the best fit for you based on the programme, and whether you see yourself settling in the country afterwards.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Universities switching to online education for 2020-2021. International students, will you still go for it or defer? Any advice appreciated. Hello guys, I am an applicant for a 1-year full time Master's Programme (Int. Relations/Politics), looking to study abroad and to settle there for good after my graduation. I got informed the other day that the University that I applied to (Dutch university, but I have also applied for a Scottish one and I have been accepted) will be switching to online teaching until January 2021, at least. So, I really don't know what I should do here. I have been planning for this for 2 years now and I was really hoping to migrate abroad and start a new life there (obviously I need to network and find a job). What would you do if you were me? What will you do if you are already in a position like me?
RESPONSE A: Where are you based now/what is your nationality? Assuming that you are a British citizen, you can still move to the Netherlands after finishing your masters. I don't see the point in attending an online college if it is going to be some kind of improvisation theatre. The Open University has been doing remote teaching for its whole existence and they need two years to develop a good course. So you will not be getting the quality you deserve at online teaching. It is a completely different way of teaching. As such: If you want to study abroad, defer. If you want to finish soon and move abroad: take the Scottish offer.
RESPONSE B: Can you please tell me what University? I am pursuing a Bachelor in the Netherlands and I would like to continue the Master here as well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anyone have traditions for celebrating their academic successes? I’m a PhD student and my first publication is a book chapter coming out in December. I’m proud of my work, but don’t really want to come across as bragging by posting about it or throwing a party or something crazy. I was thinking I’d like to do a little something special just for myself to acknowledge my success, and thought it would be nice to do something I could make into a career-long tradition every time I publish (). Does anyone do anything like that? Or have ideas for what might be a cool thing to do?
RESPONSE A: I reward myself with a nice house plant. I have a lucky bamboo from the day I started my masters, a peace lily from the day I finished it, and various other houseplants for times i feel i made significant progress through my PhD so far!
RESPONSE B: Champagne. Sometimes, also a fountain pen for a big pub. Congratulations!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anyone have traditions for celebrating their academic successes? I’m a PhD student and my first publication is a book chapter coming out in December. I’m proud of my work, but don’t really want to come across as bragging by posting about it or throwing a party or something crazy. I was thinking I’d like to do a little something special just for myself to acknowledge my success, and thought it would be nice to do something I could make into a career-long tradition every time I publish (). Does anyone do anything like that? Or have ideas for what might be a cool thing to do?
RESPONSE A: I reward myself with a nice house plant. I have a lucky bamboo from the day I started my masters, a peace lily from the day I finished it, and various other houseplants for times i feel i made significant progress through my PhD so far!
RESPONSE B: When I was a post-doc, going out to eat and a few drinks after was our lab's traditional celebration for a publication.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anyone have traditions for celebrating their academic successes? I’m a PhD student and my first publication is a book chapter coming out in December. I’m proud of my work, but don’t really want to come across as bragging by posting about it or throwing a party or something crazy. I was thinking I’d like to do a little something special just for myself to acknowledge my success, and thought it would be nice to do something I could make into a career-long tradition every time I publish (). Does anyone do anything like that? Or have ideas for what might be a cool thing to do?
RESPONSE A: Congrats. What's this "academic success" you speak of? After my first publication I got an email from my advisor asking for an outline for the next project and for me to help out with someone else's project.
RESPONSE B: Champagne. Sometimes, also a fountain pen for a big pub. Congratulations!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: anyone have traditions for celebrating their academic successes? I’m a PhD student and my first publication is a book chapter coming out in December. I’m proud of my work, but don’t really want to come across as bragging by posting about it or throwing a party or something crazy. I was thinking I’d like to do a little something special just for myself to acknowledge my success, and thought it would be nice to do something I could make into a career-long tradition every time I publish (). Does anyone do anything like that? Or have ideas for what might be a cool thing to do?
RESPONSE A: When I was a post-doc, going out to eat and a few drinks after was our lab's traditional celebration for a publication.
RESPONSE B: I get super stoned and take a bubble bath.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anyone have traditions for celebrating their academic successes? I’m a PhD student and my first publication is a book chapter coming out in December. I’m proud of my work, but don’t really want to come across as bragging by posting about it or throwing a party or something crazy. I was thinking I’d like to do a little something special just for myself to acknowledge my success, and thought it would be nice to do something I could make into a career-long tradition every time I publish (). Does anyone do anything like that? Or have ideas for what might be a cool thing to do?
RESPONSE A: I get super stoned and take a bubble bath.
RESPONSE B: Drinks or dinner with the hubby. I do this even if its just an R&R. It either means I like to celebrate the small wins or an alcoholic. Or both. Probably both.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What separates a great PhD student from a good one? I want to be the best I can be!
RESPONSE A: Adopt this habit (work ethic) now and you’ll be doing yourself a big favor! I stop myself about weekly from sending my associate dean an email with a problem.... instead I remind myself that she wants an email with a solution. (I’m an associate professor).
RESPONSE B: People here are saying things like the ability to think for yourself and yes, that's a great thing to shoot for but its not really an action item you can suddenly act upon. If you can reliably and usefully think for yourself through new scientific problems you encounter, you should be given your degree immediately since that's essentially what a PhD means. As a student, who is supposedly on the way to being able to think through things independently, your goal should be to: (1) Make sure you understand what you are doing, why it works, how it could fail, what alternatives exist, etc. Do not take someones word for it, even your adviser. If you ever say you are doing something because someone said so or its "black magic" you are not a great student. Not even a good one. (2) Shoot for the highest quality and care in your work. Goes with (1) - you have to understand what aspects of your methods are important, and what are the failure modes, and account for them. (3) Don't think that long hours in the lab make you somehow amazing. Efficient use of time is much more important. The absolute best students are those who can do (1) and (2) and still go home at 5pm.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What separates a great PhD student from a good one? I want to be the best I can be!
RESPONSE A: People here are saying things like the ability to think for yourself and yes, that's a great thing to shoot for but its not really an action item you can suddenly act upon. If you can reliably and usefully think for yourself through new scientific problems you encounter, you should be given your degree immediately since that's essentially what a PhD means. As a student, who is supposedly on the way to being able to think through things independently, your goal should be to: (1) Make sure you understand what you are doing, why it works, how it could fail, what alternatives exist, etc. Do not take someones word for it, even your adviser. If you ever say you are doing something because someone said so or its "black magic" you are not a great student. Not even a good one. (2) Shoot for the highest quality and care in your work. Goes with (1) - you have to understand what aspects of your methods are important, and what are the failure modes, and account for them. (3) Don't think that long hours in the lab make you somehow amazing. Efficient use of time is much more important. The absolute best students are those who can do (1) and (2) and still go home at 5pm.
RESPONSE B: Motivation. The drive to do the work not to finish it, but to find out the answer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What separates a great PhD student from a good one? I want to be the best I can be!
RESPONSE A: Working hard is good. Working hard and smart is great.
RESPONSE B: People here are saying things like the ability to think for yourself and yes, that's a great thing to shoot for but its not really an action item you can suddenly act upon. If you can reliably and usefully think for yourself through new scientific problems you encounter, you should be given your degree immediately since that's essentially what a PhD means. As a student, who is supposedly on the way to being able to think through things independently, your goal should be to: (1) Make sure you understand what you are doing, why it works, how it could fail, what alternatives exist, etc. Do not take someones word for it, even your adviser. If you ever say you are doing something because someone said so or its "black magic" you are not a great student. Not even a good one. (2) Shoot for the highest quality and care in your work. Goes with (1) - you have to understand what aspects of your methods are important, and what are the failure modes, and account for them. (3) Don't think that long hours in the lab make you somehow amazing. Efficient use of time is much more important. The absolute best students are those who can do (1) and (2) and still go home at 5pm.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What separates a great PhD student from a good one? I want to be the best I can be!
RESPONSE A: Independence.
RESPONSE B: People here are saying things like the ability to think for yourself and yes, that's a great thing to shoot for but its not really an action item you can suddenly act upon. If you can reliably and usefully think for yourself through new scientific problems you encounter, you should be given your degree immediately since that's essentially what a PhD means. As a student, who is supposedly on the way to being able to think through things independently, your goal should be to: (1) Make sure you understand what you are doing, why it works, how it could fail, what alternatives exist, etc. Do not take someones word for it, even your adviser. If you ever say you are doing something because someone said so or its "black magic" you are not a great student. Not even a good one. (2) Shoot for the highest quality and care in your work. Goes with (1) - you have to understand what aspects of your methods are important, and what are the failure modes, and account for them. (3) Don't think that long hours in the lab make you somehow amazing. Efficient use of time is much more important. The absolute best students are those who can do (1) and (2) and still go home at 5pm.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How does the “I want to teach but not be a research professor” after PhD route go Ignorant and naive phd student here. My plan a has always to work towards being a professor but the thought crosses my mind that I may just want to be a full time educator. What are the options like? I assume instructor positions at state schools are slim pickings? In physical sciences for reference
RESPONSE A: A couple things to consider I have not seen mentioned - some research universities do have teaching-track positions (Math calls them Professors of Practice), which have more focus on teaching and maybe less, but not none on research. You might want to look at getting experience in whatever your university calls their projects on improving the quality of teaching. These might be university-wide or program or faculty-based. There likely will be opportunities for classes and training, but there may also be active projects to experiment on curriculum or specific teaching projects, and those will both give you experience and help you know if this is a track you want to pursue.
RESPONSE B: I know some tenured professors at State University who only have around 20% of their contract for research. The rest is teaching and extension work. The salary is of course lower than research based positions. It’s like $80,000/year vs $150,000/year for those I know.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: minate research findings? Academics of Reddit, I’ve seen lots of professors using Twitter to discuss their & others’ research (at least in my field of biomechanics) and it always seemed odd to me that Twitter was the chosen forum to do that, with its low character count and lack of barrier between academic & non-academic content, or even between different fields of academia. Is there a reason they use Twitter over Reddit? I’d imagine that having field-specific subreddits to facilitate & organize discussion in the field (at least compared to Twitter) in a public forum would be ideal. I know that some of these conversations do happen on ResearchGate, but it would also not be ideal for this because it can’t keep various disciplines organized together like Reddit can, nor does it have the non-academic public attention that Reddit does so that the public can see how science is done.
RESPONSE A: Twitter is generally more useful because Twitter is designed to allow you to follow people *or* topics, whereas Reddit is designed to allow you to follow boards. Further, Twitter allows an individual user to curate their feed, whereas an individual user can't curate a board unless they're a mod of said board. Further, Reddit is anonymous, meaning literally *anyone* can come into a given thread or board and derail conversation. The only way to fix that is with *extremely* aggressive and thorough moderation (e.g. /r/AskHistorians). Finally; a lot of fields deal in controversial topics and thus they like to have discussions behind closed doors entirely because it minimizes the noise. Energy related fields are *especially* leery of having open discussions, entirely because open discussions get targeted by protestors for not meeting the protestor's impossible standards on climate issues and emissions. And, of course; the real interesting conversations don't happen over social media anyway. COVID has made virtual conferencing a much bigger thing, and a lot of researchers have discovered that they actually *really* like virtual conferencing.
RESPONSE B: Everyone I know who has written a scholarly book in the last five years has done an AMA.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: t there more academics using Reddit to disseminate research findings? Academics of Reddit, I’ve seen lots of professors using Twitter to discuss their & others’ research (at least in my field of biomechanics) and it always seemed odd to me that Twitter was the chosen forum to do that, with its low character count and lack of barrier between academic & non-academic content, or even between different fields of academia. Is there a reason they use Twitter over Reddit? I’d imagine that having field-specific subreddits to facilitate & organize discussion in the field (at least compared to Twitter) in a public forum would be ideal. I know that some of these conversations do happen on ResearchGate, but it would also not be ideal for this because it can’t keep various disciplines organized together like Reddit can, nor does it have the non-academic public attention that Reddit does so that the public can see how science is done.
RESPONSE A: I'm here for the drama..
RESPONSE B: Twitter is generally more useful because Twitter is designed to allow you to follow people *or* topics, whereas Reddit is designed to allow you to follow boards. Further, Twitter allows an individual user to curate their feed, whereas an individual user can't curate a board unless they're a mod of said board. Further, Reddit is anonymous, meaning literally *anyone* can come into a given thread or board and derail conversation. The only way to fix that is with *extremely* aggressive and thorough moderation (e.g. /r/AskHistorians). Finally; a lot of fields deal in controversial topics and thus they like to have discussions behind closed doors entirely because it minimizes the noise. Energy related fields are *especially* leery of having open discussions, entirely because open discussions get targeted by protestors for not meeting the protestor's impossible standards on climate issues and emissions. And, of course; the real interesting conversations don't happen over social media anyway. COVID has made virtual conferencing a much bigger thing, and a lot of researchers have discovered that they actually *really* like virtual conferencing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: specific subreddits to facilitate & organize discussion in the field (at least compared to Twitter) in a public forum would be ideal. I know that some of these conversations do happen on ResearchGate, but it would also not be ideal for this because it can’t keep various disciplines organized together like Reddit can, nor does it have the non-academic public attention that Reddit does so that the public can see how science is done.
RESPONSE A: I did try, even created an account with my real name. Simply put, not worth it, my posts got limited engagement and what engagement they did get was usually negative. Twitter gives me far more control over who I engage with and how, would be the simple answer.
RESPONSE B: Because Reddit is anonymous. There is no way to prove on an anonymous forum that someone is a PhD in chemistry or a ninja turtle, for example. The only "assurance" we have is that this sub in particular is small. Small communities can maintain their focus, and also we have a good moderation team on board. Even so, sometimes we will have random posts about undergrad studies, spam or once when a nutjob said that cheating should be allowed else it'd be discrimination against people with attention deficit.. So yeah, no real way of differentiating apples from oranges on Reddit. What we can rely here, to some extent, is in the kindness of other random Internet strangers who are also either looking for help, or looking forward to helping others. Lastly, networks where we know who is who: LinkedIn and ResearchGate. The first is a horrible place, won't talk much on that. The problem with research gate is that there are no "forum" features as in reddit, create a thread and everyone sees it. It exists for stuff like Quora, ask a question and hope for answers. While knowing who is who is good, its also a problem, because people can be identified. Someone denouncing their advisor could be rattled to said advisor. A professor shit talking the academic/grant board (or anything) would be identified and likely suffer the consequences. A student wouldn't openly post online to avoid a toxic advisor and bad lab environment.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I love this sub for the general advice it provides, but why aren’t there more academics using Reddit to disseminate research findings? Academics of Reddit, I’ve seen lots of professors using Twitter to discuss their & others’ research (at least in my field of biomechanics) and it always seemed odd to me that Twitter was the chosen forum to do that, with its low character count and lack of barrier between academic & non-academic content, or even between different fields of academia. Is there a reason they use Twitter over Reddit? I’d imagine that having field-specific subreddits to facilitate & organize discussion in the field (at least compared to Twitter) in a public forum would be ideal. I know that some of these conversations do happen on ResearchGate, but it would also not be ideal for this because it can’t keep various disciplines organized together like Reddit can, nor does it have the non-academic public attention that Reddit does so that the public can see how science is done.
RESPONSE A: I did try, even created an account with my real name. Simply put, not worth it, my posts got limited engagement and what engagement they did get was usually negative. Twitter gives me far more control over who I engage with and how, would be the simple answer.
RESPONSE B: Everyone I know who has written a scholarly book in the last five years has done an AMA.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: First faculty job offer. How am I supposed to feel? After ten years of school and four more of postdoc, a year of dozens of applications, I finally got an offer. Still waiting to hear from one more I did a campus interview with. It's less pay than I wanted, isolated location, less startup funds, and they "don't do tenure." Should I be happy? It's almost what I wanted. A lab, an office, teaching, low cost of living and a solid middle class salary. More than many will ever get. Should I feel disinfranchised? I just feel tired.
RESPONSE A: Great to have an offer. But be careful as you work there. If it forces you to a narrow path and doesn't provide a lot of support, it can hurt later on. I accepted something similar, had a good time there, grew to enjoy it. 5 year later, with no possibility of tenure, my position is eliminated and it's tough to get into the same field because this job wasn't as broad as necessary.
RESPONSE B: If you don't want it, can I have it?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: First faculty job offer. How am I supposed to feel? After ten years of school and four more of postdoc, a year of dozens of applications, I finally got an offer. Still waiting to hear from one more I did a campus interview with. It's less pay than I wanted, isolated location, less startup funds, and they "don't do tenure." Should I be happy? It's almost what I wanted. A lab, an office, teaching, low cost of living and a solid middle class salary. More than many will ever get. Should I feel disinfranchised? I just feel tired.
RESPONSE A: If you don't want it, can I have it?
RESPONSE B: Don't count it out yet. Getting your foot in the door is half the battle. It could be a good stepping stone entry job as a full time faculty member.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: First faculty job offer. How am I supposed to feel? After ten years of school and four more of postdoc, a year of dozens of applications, I finally got an offer. Still waiting to hear from one more I did a campus interview with. It's less pay than I wanted, isolated location, less startup funds, and they "don't do tenure." Should I be happy? It's almost what I wanted. A lab, an office, teaching, low cost of living and a solid middle class salary. More than many will ever get. Should I feel disinfranchised? I just feel tired.
RESPONSE A: No tenure? Fuck that. Or use as a stepping stone and jump ship as soon as possible.
RESPONSE B: If you didn't actually get what you wanted yet, don't settle, don't give up. Focus on whatever it is in your discipline that will get you from where you are to where you want to be.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: First faculty job offer. How am I supposed to feel? After ten years of school and four more of postdoc, a year of dozens of applications, I finally got an offer. Still waiting to hear from one more I did a campus interview with. It's less pay than I wanted, isolated location, less startup funds, and they "don't do tenure." Should I be happy? It's almost what I wanted. A lab, an office, teaching, low cost of living and a solid middle class salary. More than many will ever get. Should I feel disinfranchised? I just feel tired.
RESPONSE A: My wife worked at a school that 'didn't do tenure.' They fired people after working there for fifteen years. The point is that, if a new administration comes in, you could be going out.
RESPONSE B: If you didn't actually get what you wanted yet, don't settle, don't give up. Focus on whatever it is in your discipline that will get you from where you are to where you want to be.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: First faculty job offer. How am I supposed to feel? After ten years of school and four more of postdoc, a year of dozens of applications, I finally got an offer. Still waiting to hear from one more I did a campus interview with. It's less pay than I wanted, isolated location, less startup funds, and they "don't do tenure." Should I be happy? It's almost what I wanted. A lab, an office, teaching, low cost of living and a solid middle class salary. More than many will ever get. Should I feel disinfranchised? I just feel tired.
RESPONSE A: "Don't do tenure?" Ugh. Religious school? Bankrupt technical college? That's really very worrisome regardless. Are they able to retain faculty for long, or is everyone always looking for a path out? Hopefully the second interview will pan out...I wish none of us had to even consider schools that "don't do tenure" and that's the primary reason academics are willing to accept shitty compensation-- job security.
RESPONSE B: My wife worked at a school that 'didn't do tenure.' They fired people after working there for fifteen years. The point is that, if a new administration comes in, you could be going out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: that we are even in class, and last week he went to get in the couch that is in the class room, but before he did he took his pants off. I think he has alzheimers or something, but I'm afraid that this is going to be like the last time I had him and hes going to just give me a B- without ever giving homework, tests, or a finale.. I dont know what to do. I've been to the head of my department to tell them about this, but they havent done a thing about it. The only advice inwas offered, was this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it.
RESPONSE A: >this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it. Lmao I've been in graduate school for a while and not once have I had a professor take their pants off in class Go extremely to the dean, ASAP. Go in person, but send an email detailing your concerns on which you CC the ombudsman, the department head - hell, the VP and the president as well. Be extremely polite and professional, but lay out everything that's happened - emphasizing the pants removal - and make it clear that you have already spoken to the department head but, since you do not feel that your concerns were adequately addressed and since the behavior under consideration is so egregious, you feel the need to escalate. Handing out other student's tests *has* to be a FERPA violation, so I would stress that as well. The syllabus and lack of homework stuff is more easily dismissed; I'd mention it, but you need to stress the pants and the test thing.
RESPONSE B: I would email the Chair again reiterating your concerns, and his lack of action. Copy the Dean of the College, the Provost, and the Title IX / Compliance coordinator (he took off his pants???). Do this via email so there is a record, in person conversations can be denied. I would have other members of the class do the same thing. If nothing happens and you get a grade without being properly evaluated then follow the grade appeal process with your school and demand records for why you got the grade you did
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: this, but they havent done a thing about it. The only advice inwas offered, was this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it.
RESPONSE A: > That’s what grad school is like, get over it. Hi, grad student here and that’s complete **BS.** Just....no. He can’t even keep track of which class is which and apparently randomly takes his pants off (I assume because he thinks he’s at home?)....No. What the hell kind of grad school did the head of your dept go to? Sounds like it’s time to go over their head and go up the chain of command until somebody does something. Let’s have this professor retire with *some* shred of his dignity intact- those who ignore his incompetence as a way of “protecting” him are actually ensuring that he’s remembered as a scattered, mentally-feeble old man- a disservice to him.
RESPONSE B: Certainly reporting up is the way to go, but, as you do, try to consider the possibility that what the professor seems to be a person who needs help and is a kind of person who is very hard to help. The chair probably knows this and just doesn't know what to do (probably at some point this professor was the chair's supervisor). Certainly what the chair is doing by ignoring this is wrong, but the thing happening to this professor is super terrifying to experience and observe (which is why denial is the usual response). *As a student* it shouldn't be your responsibility to do that work, but this professor could basically be any of us in 60 years. The most significant problem is that people are unwilling to properly care for this person. What's happening to you is inexcusable and really bad, but if the professor has dementia what's happening to you is really being done by the chair, the dean, etc. If the professor has dementia, then probably the professor is not taking off the pants - the dementia is doing it. I say all this not just because it's true, but also because you're probably more likely to get help from other people if you communicate the issue with them in this way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: that, this semester he thought that it was an extension of last semester, so he gave us other students tests to take home and think about because he thought that it was us. Moreover, sometimes he forgets that we are even in class, and last week he went to get in the couch that is in the class room, but before he did he took his pants off. I think he has alzheimers or something, but I'm afraid that this is going to be like the last time I had him and hes going to just give me a B- without ever giving homework, tests, or a finale.. I dont know what to do. I've been to the head of my department to tell them about this, but they havent done a thing about it. The only advice inwas offered, was this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it.
RESPONSE A: > That’s what grad school is like, get over it. Hi, grad student here and that’s complete **BS.** Just....no. He can’t even keep track of which class is which and apparently randomly takes his pants off (I assume because he thinks he’s at home?)....No. What the hell kind of grad school did the head of your dept go to? Sounds like it’s time to go over their head and go up the chain of command until somebody does something. Let’s have this professor retire with *some* shred of his dignity intact- those who ignore his incompetence as a way of “protecting” him are actually ensuring that he’s remembered as a scattered, mentally-feeble old man- a disservice to him.
RESPONSE B: Oh dear. All the advice already here is good. I want to add another voice to support that this isn't acceptable behavior--not from a prof or the administration. I'm sorry you've been put in this position. I hope you see traction on this issue soon. I'm sure the professor's family members are also concerned. I'd be concerned about this man getting safely to his own home, driving, cooking a meal and remembering to turn off the burner, etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . I do not know what we're supposed to be doing in this class, other than its is a statistics course. For instance, we have had no tests, no homework assigned, and regularly he mixes us up with his combintorics class before us. Besides that, this semester he thought that it was an extension of last semester, so he gave us other students tests to take home and think about because he thought that it was us. Moreover, sometimes he forgets that we are even in class, and last week he went to get in the couch that is in the class room, but before he did he took his pants off. I think he has alzheimers or something, but I'm afraid that this is going to be like the last time I had him and hes going to just give me a B- without ever giving homework, tests, or a finale.. I dont know what to do. I've been to the head of my department to tell them about this, but they havent done a thing about it. The only advice inwas offered, was this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it.
RESPONSE A: >...I'm afraid that this is going to be like the last time I had him and hes going to just give me a B-... Wait, you took him for a second course? Or am I misunderstanding?
RESPONSE B: > That’s what grad school is like, get over it. Hi, grad student here and that’s complete **BS.** Just....no. He can’t even keep track of which class is which and apparently randomly takes his pants off (I assume because he thinks he’s at home?)....No. What the hell kind of grad school did the head of your dept go to? Sounds like it’s time to go over their head and go up the chain of command until somebody does something. Let’s have this professor retire with *some* shred of his dignity intact- those who ignore his incompetence as a way of “protecting” him are actually ensuring that he’s remembered as a scattered, mentally-feeble old man- a disservice to him.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How do.i go about with dealing with a senile professor? Hello, perhaps you all could help with this problem that I am having. Currently I am a junior in college, and I'm taking a class with a professor who I am sure incompetent. The semester has started in January, and as of March we still have not received a syllabus. I do not know what we're supposed to be doing in this class, other than its is a statistics course. For instance, we have had no tests, no homework assigned, and regularly he mixes us up with his combintorics class before us. Besides that, this semester he thought that it was an extension of last semester, so he gave us other students tests to take home and think about because he thought that it was us. Moreover, sometimes he forgets that we are even in class, and last week he went to get in the couch that is in the class room, but before he did he took his pants off. I think he has alzheimers or something, but I'm afraid that this is going to be like the last time I had him and hes going to just give me a B- without ever giving homework, tests, or a finale.. I dont know what to do. I've been to the head of my department to tell them about this, but they havent done a thing about it. The only advice inwas offered, was this is what graduate school is like and to just get over it.
RESPONSE A: Oh dear. All the advice already here is good. I want to add another voice to support that this isn't acceptable behavior--not from a prof or the administration. I'm sorry you've been put in this position. I hope you see traction on this issue soon. I'm sure the professor's family members are also concerned. I'd be concerned about this man getting safely to his own home, driving, cooking a meal and remembering to turn off the burner, etc.
RESPONSE B: You say you're a junior but also graduate school? This + the rest of the story sound like you're trolling.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to Detect Papers from Online Essay Mills? I am a Composition instructor, and I'm 99% certain some of my students use essay mills (sites where students pay for others to write essays). It's pretty easy to tell when it happens, especially if the student's homework assignment vocabulary does not at all match the essay vocabulary (or syntax, grammar, spelling). I use SafeAssign, but that only goes so far and cannot detect original papers written by ghostwriters. Is there any way I could prove students have used an essay mill?
RESPONSE A: It helps if he includes the receipt when he submits it. No I’m not joking. This was actually done by a student at my college and a fairly respectable college at that. He somehow never looked at all the pages and stapled the order confirmation to the back of it.
RESPONSE B: Ask for an easy (like, two sentence assignment) to be turned in to you as Word .docx file. They will probably do that themselves you have the metadata for what a word doc written by them is. Ask all papers be turned in as .docx files. They probably won't think to change the metadata of where the word file was written. Not bullet proof but at least confronting them with that they'll know you're on to them and may actually write their own stuff. You may just make them better cheaters in the process but hey you tried.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: with the study but finds that the manuscript is “poorly written” I sat with the manuscript and bluntly told my boss that the reviewer is right and I want to rewrite it my way. He said it goes exactly the way it is and if the editor isn’t happy he’ll pull it out and ask one of his friends to publish it in another journal. This is where I blew up.. I said it’s my paper and I’m not going to let him. Pulling strings is bastardising the experience and I’ve worked too hard to allow this. He then said that I should pull out the paper and he’s going to exclude me from the paper. “A dozen people have worked on it” he said. I don’t need the academic points or recognition, but I can’t see my hard work being ruined. I also can’t risk losing my job.. how badly screwed am I?
RESPONSE A: I feel most of the posts here are missing a lot of context. OP, I snooped your profile and it looks like you are in India. The answers you are getting are very US/western European-centric. You really need an answer from other in a medical setting in India. International journals have standards for authorship, and by those, your boss should not be first author. Collecting data (through his clinic), providing manuscript revisions, and presumably providing funding are things that would make him a legitimate co-author, but typically in biomedical papers, this would be as the last author called the senior author. That being said, he sounds like an ass and I have no idea what types of job protections you have. People saying you just need to explain to him the rules of a journal have no idea. He knows what the rules are, he does not care. If your medical center has a research ethics/integrity office, this is where you would file a complaint, but if you are dependent on this person for a job, it will end bad for you unless you have protection from some type of union or tenure. This is why you really need to find someone trusted who knows your system.
RESPONSE B: Your boss sounds insufferable
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: another journal. This is where I blew up.. I said it’s my paper and I’m not going to let him. Pulling strings is bastardising the experience and I’ve worked too hard to allow this. He then said that I should pull out the paper and he’s going to exclude me from the paper. “A dozen people have worked on it” he said. I don’t need the academic points or recognition, but I can’t see my hard work being ruined. I also can’t risk losing my job.. how badly screwed am I?
RESPONSE A: I feel most of the posts here are missing a lot of context. OP, I snooped your profile and it looks like you are in India. The answers you are getting are very US/western European-centric. You really need an answer from other in a medical setting in India. International journals have standards for authorship, and by those, your boss should not be first author. Collecting data (through his clinic), providing manuscript revisions, and presumably providing funding are things that would make him a legitimate co-author, but typically in biomedical papers, this would be as the last author called the senior author. That being said, he sounds like an ass and I have no idea what types of job protections you have. People saying you just need to explain to him the rules of a journal have no idea. He knows what the rules are, he does not care. If your medical center has a research ethics/integrity office, this is where you would file a complaint, but if you are dependent on this person for a job, it will end bad for you unless you have protection from some type of union or tenure. This is why you really need to find someone trusted who knows your system.
RESPONSE B: The study should be independent of the patient doctor contract so unless they did work on the research none of the doctors doing treatment should receive authorship. Authors should be those that designed or delivered the study. Authorship shouldn’t be as thanks. I’d imagine if your boss was involved in supervision and design of your study they would probably be last author and you would be first author if you did the majority of work.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: to publish it in another journal. This is where I blew up.. I said it’s my paper and I’m not going to let him. Pulling strings is bastardising the experience and I’ve worked too hard to allow this. He then said that I should pull out the paper and he’s going to exclude me from the paper. “A dozen people have worked on it” he said. I don’t need the academic points or recognition, but I can’t see my hard work being ruined. I also can’t risk losing my job.. how badly screwed am I?
RESPONSE A: I feel most of the posts here are missing a lot of context. OP, I snooped your profile and it looks like you are in India. The answers you are getting are very US/western European-centric. You really need an answer from other in a medical setting in India. International journals have standards for authorship, and by those, your boss should not be first author. Collecting data (through his clinic), providing manuscript revisions, and presumably providing funding are things that would make him a legitimate co-author, but typically in biomedical papers, this would be as the last author called the senior author. That being said, he sounds like an ass and I have no idea what types of job protections you have. People saying you just need to explain to him the rules of a journal have no idea. He knows what the rules are, he does not care. If your medical center has a research ethics/integrity office, this is where you would file a complaint, but if you are dependent on this person for a job, it will end bad for you unless you have protection from some type of union or tenure. This is why you really need to find someone trusted who knows your system.
RESPONSE B: How is he your boss? Scientific mentor? Department chair? Program director? Are you a resident or attending? Are you in academic medicine? Are you on a promotion track? This set up sounds atypical for American academic med but I can’t tell if you’re at a non-academically affiliated American hospital or an academic hospital elsewhere and your next steps really depend.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: is and if the editor isn’t happy he’ll pull it out and ask one of his friends to publish it in another journal. This is where I blew up.. I said it’s my paper and I’m not going to let him. Pulling strings is bastardising the experience and I’ve worked too hard to allow this. He then said that I should pull out the paper and he’s going to exclude me from the paper. “A dozen people have worked on it” he said. I don’t need the academic points or recognition, but I can’t see my hard work being ruined. I also can’t risk losing my job.. how badly screwed am I?
RESPONSE A: Dude you are a surgeon.....so why are you worried about job? Should not you be on demand in the market? Also, your boss is stealing your work. Talk to the ethics committee of your institute. If your institute run clinical trials there will be option to complain anonymously.
RESPONSE B: I feel most of the posts here are missing a lot of context. OP, I snooped your profile and it looks like you are in India. The answers you are getting are very US/western European-centric. You really need an answer from other in a medical setting in India. International journals have standards for authorship, and by those, your boss should not be first author. Collecting data (through his clinic), providing manuscript revisions, and presumably providing funding are things that would make him a legitimate co-author, but typically in biomedical papers, this would be as the last author called the senior author. That being said, he sounds like an ass and I have no idea what types of job protections you have. People saying you just need to explain to him the rules of a journal have no idea. He knows what the rules are, he does not care. If your medical center has a research ethics/integrity office, this is where you would file a complaint, but if you are dependent on this person for a job, it will end bad for you unless you have protection from some type of union or tenure. This is why you really need to find someone trusted who knows your system.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: s the "soundtrack" of your PhD? Inspired by a post in a different forum for shaving where people described the scent of their aftershave as music, I'm curious: how would your PhD sound if it were a song? In my case it'd be probably along the lines of Swans - The Seer. A 30min progressive rock song, super long, quite confusing and chaotic to listen to. Sounds like something you'd hear in a cult. Some people like this type of music, including me depending on my mood. But if I'd show this to my friends and family, I'd get a lot of weird stares. Alternative choice would be a horribly improvised jazz piece by a bunch of people who never played jazz before. (research is in information systems btw)
RESPONSE A: I never comment, but this is too good to pass up... Great story alert: When I was stuck on a chapter, for six weeks I listened to the Grateful Dead's "Ripple" on repeat. Let me repeat that: for six weeks only one song on repeat. I was obsessed with the line, "That path is for your steps alone" in the song and would get chills up my spine each time I heard it in the thousands of times I listened. Fast forward to the day I graduate. We all go to the pub to celebrate. I walk into the door and what song is playing the second I walk in? Ripple. What part? "That path is for your steps alone". You can't make this shit up. The universe winked at me and said, "See what I did there?" ;)
RESPONSE B: Honestly, I’ve been thinking about it and I do not think there’s a song that perfectly represents what I’ve been doing. But I *have* been going through (another) Twilight phase. So I would say either Possibility by Lykke Li or Roslyn by Bon Iver & St Vincent, literally just because they’re my favorite songs from the movies, and I’ve been listening to the Twilight soundtrack on repeat. So they’re quite literally the soundtrack to my PhD. I’m doing psychology research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What's the "soundtrack" of your PhD? Inspired by a post in a different forum for shaving where people described the scent of their aftershave as music, I'm curious: how would your PhD sound if it were a song? In my case it'd be probably along the lines of Swans - The Seer. A 30min progressive rock song, super long, quite confusing and chaotic to listen to. Sounds like something you'd hear in a cult. Some people like this type of music, including me depending on my mood. But if I'd show this to my friends and family, I'd get a lot of weird stares. Alternative choice would be a horribly improvised jazz piece by a bunch of people who never played jazz before. (research is in information systems btw)
RESPONSE A: I never comment, but this is too good to pass up... Great story alert: When I was stuck on a chapter, for six weeks I listened to the Grateful Dead's "Ripple" on repeat. Let me repeat that: for six weeks only one song on repeat. I was obsessed with the line, "That path is for your steps alone" in the song and would get chills up my spine each time I heard it in the thousands of times I listened. Fast forward to the day I graduate. We all go to the pub to celebrate. I walk into the door and what song is playing the second I walk in? Ripple. What part? "That path is for your steps alone". You can't make this shit up. The universe winked at me and said, "See what I did there?" ;)
RESPONSE B: Laid back, with minimal changes and absolute focus.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What's the "soundtrack" of your PhD? Inspired by a post in a different forum for shaving where people described the scent of their aftershave as music, I'm curious: how would your PhD sound if it were a song? In my case it'd be probably along the lines of Swans - The Seer. A 30min progressive rock song, super long, quite confusing and chaotic to listen to. Sounds like something you'd hear in a cult. Some people like this type of music, including me depending on my mood. But if I'd show this to my friends and family, I'd get a lot of weird stares. Alternative choice would be a horribly improvised jazz piece by a bunch of people who never played jazz before. (research is in information systems btw)
RESPONSE A: Comfortably Numb LOL
RESPONSE B: Carry on my wayward son, There'll be peace when you are done. Lay your weary head to rest... Don't you cry no more...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What's the "soundtrack" of your PhD? Inspired by a post in a different forum for shaving where people described the scent of their aftershave as music, I'm curious: how would your PhD sound if it were a song? In my case it'd be probably along the lines of Swans - The Seer. A 30min progressive rock song, super long, quite confusing and chaotic to listen to. Sounds like something you'd hear in a cult. Some people like this type of music, including me depending on my mood. But if I'd show this to my friends and family, I'd get a lot of weird stares. Alternative choice would be a horribly improvised jazz piece by a bunch of people who never played jazz before. (research is in information systems btw)
RESPONSE A: Carry on my wayward son, There'll be peace when you are done. Lay your weary head to rest... Don't you cry no more...
RESPONSE B: Honestly, I’ve been thinking about it and I do not think there’s a song that perfectly represents what I’ve been doing. But I *have* been going through (another) Twilight phase. So I would say either Possibility by Lykke Li or Roslyn by Bon Iver & St Vincent, literally just because they’re my favorite songs from the movies, and I’ve been listening to the Twilight soundtrack on repeat. So they’re quite literally the soundtrack to my PhD. I’m doing psychology research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What's the "soundtrack" of your PhD? Inspired by a post in a different forum for shaving where people described the scent of their aftershave as music, I'm curious: how would your PhD sound if it were a song? In my case it'd be probably along the lines of Swans - The Seer. A 30min progressive rock song, super long, quite confusing and chaotic to listen to. Sounds like something you'd hear in a cult. Some people like this type of music, including me depending on my mood. But if I'd show this to my friends and family, I'd get a lot of weird stares. Alternative choice would be a horribly improvised jazz piece by a bunch of people who never played jazz before. (research is in information systems btw)
RESPONSE A: Bleed it out by Linkin Park
RESPONSE B: Carry on my wayward son, There'll be peace when you are done. Lay your weary head to rest... Don't you cry no more...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: s: do you get insecure not having industrial experience? I find my supervisor (who doesn't have any industrial experience) a bit insecure when facing some of the industrial folks. He often asks, "is that how it works over there? I got more insecure for him being my supervisor by asking that for some reason. My sister who has been working in the industry for her whole life didn't quite like working with people who have been "stuck" in school - she finds them as people that couldn't really solve real problems - no offence but she said that "these people" are more complaining and using "methods" people don't understand. She says she doesn't care for "the references", "the literature review" or SCOPUS Indexed if it can't solve the business problem - I literally laughed hearing that. Academics - do you get insecure not having industrial experience?
RESPONSE A: I don't think anyone who has developed deep and comprehensive expertise in a subject matter as well as rigorous research skills should feel insecure about anything. That said, practitioners and academics often have very different mentalities, approaches, culture and even skillset. Practitioners typically prize breadth and efficiency, whereas academics typically prize depth and rigor. As such, academic mentality and approaches tend to clash with practitioner environments - but that doesn't mean it's inferior, just different. Their suitabilities are likewise different. A practitioner's approach isn't very suitable for an in-depth rigorous, research driven study, whereas an academic approach isn't very suitable in a fast-paced generalized, heuristic/gut driven environment. And it's not trivial for someone steeped in practice or academia to one day put on the cap of the other. That's why in many fields there is a lot of demand for academics to advise and consult for government and the private sector, and to do studies.
RESPONSE B: Are you sure it's insecurity? Often people really like talking about themselves/how *they* do things. Asking these kinds of questions even if you don't care that much about the answers can be a good social move, especially when dealing with industry contacts or partners.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Academics: do you get insecure not having industrial experience? I find my supervisor (who doesn't have any industrial experience) a bit insecure when facing some of the industrial folks. He often asks, "is that how it works over there? I got more insecure for him being my supervisor by asking that for some reason. My sister who has been working in the industry for her whole life didn't quite like working with people who have been "stuck" in school - she finds them as people that couldn't really solve real problems - no offence but she said that "these people" are more complaining and using "methods" people don't understand. She says she doesn't care for "the references", "the literature review" or SCOPUS Indexed if it can't solve the business problem - I literally laughed hearing that. Academics - do you get insecure not having industrial experience?
RESPONSE A: I don't think anyone who has developed deep and comprehensive expertise in a subject matter as well as rigorous research skills should feel insecure about anything. That said, practitioners and academics often have very different mentalities, approaches, culture and even skillset. Practitioners typically prize breadth and efficiency, whereas academics typically prize depth and rigor. As such, academic mentality and approaches tend to clash with practitioner environments - but that doesn't mean it's inferior, just different. Their suitabilities are likewise different. A practitioner's approach isn't very suitable for an in-depth rigorous, research driven study, whereas an academic approach isn't very suitable in a fast-paced generalized, heuristic/gut driven environment. And it's not trivial for someone steeped in practice or academia to one day put on the cap of the other. That's why in many fields there is a lot of demand for academics to advise and consult for government and the private sector, and to do studies.
RESPONSE B: No.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I find my supervisor (who doesn't have any industrial experience) a bit insecure when facing some of the industrial folks. He often asks, "is that how it works over there? I got more insecure for him being my supervisor by asking that for some reason. My sister who has been working in the industry for her whole life didn't quite like working with people who have been "stuck" in school - she finds them as people that couldn't really solve real problems - no offence but she said that "these people" are more complaining and using "methods" people don't understand. She says she doesn't care for "the references", "the literature review" or SCOPUS Indexed if it can't solve the business problem - I literally laughed hearing that. Academics - do you get insecure not having industrial experience?
RESPONSE A: No. This is just my experience, but the kinds of problems people wanted to solve where I worked weren't meaningful to me and there was a lot of value placed on making money vs. making long-term, impactful improvement. Industry doesn't interest me, so I have no FOMO or insecurities about it.
RESPONSE B: I don't think anyone who has developed deep and comprehensive expertise in a subject matter as well as rigorous research skills should feel insecure about anything. That said, practitioners and academics often have very different mentalities, approaches, culture and even skillset. Practitioners typically prize breadth and efficiency, whereas academics typically prize depth and rigor. As such, academic mentality and approaches tend to clash with practitioner environments - but that doesn't mean it's inferior, just different. Their suitabilities are likewise different. A practitioner's approach isn't very suitable for an in-depth rigorous, research driven study, whereas an academic approach isn't very suitable in a fast-paced generalized, heuristic/gut driven environment. And it's not trivial for someone steeped in practice or academia to one day put on the cap of the other. That's why in many fields there is a lot of demand for academics to advise and consult for government and the private sector, and to do studies.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Academics: do you get insecure not having industrial experience? I find my supervisor (who doesn't have any industrial experience) a bit insecure when facing some of the industrial folks. He often asks, "is that how it works over there? I got more insecure for him being my supervisor by asking that for some reason. My sister who has been working in the industry for her whole life didn't quite like working with people who have been "stuck" in school - she finds them as people that couldn't really solve real problems - no offence but she said that "these people" are more complaining and using "methods" people don't understand. She says she doesn't care for "the references", "the literature review" or SCOPUS Indexed if it can't solve the business problem - I literally laughed hearing that. Academics - do you get insecure not having industrial experience?
RESPONSE A: No. This is just my experience, but the kinds of problems people wanted to solve where I worked weren't meaningful to me and there was a lot of value placed on making money vs. making long-term, impactful improvement. Industry doesn't interest me, so I have no FOMO or insecurities about it.
RESPONSE B: Are you sure it's insecurity? Often people really like talking about themselves/how *they* do things. Asking these kinds of questions even if you don't care that much about the answers can be a good social move, especially when dealing with industry contacts or partners.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhD students, academia and Covid-19. How this will affect our future? Hello, I am a PhD student at the end of its second year. As many PhD students I believe that many have student scholarships over a limited number of years, in my case three in total. My concerns are about how this pandemy will affect us PhD students, but more in general the academic environment. Of course, in such period is possible to focus on writing and reading, however, for a successfull thesis the quality and the presence of good results are fundamental.
RESPONSE A: I just lost my postdoc position in a government research laboratory because they need to redirect their research fundings to pay employees that are being affected.
RESPONSE B: This question is so myopic it is borderline frustrating me. Academia will be one of the sectors that will suffer the least from this situation. Work continues on with minimal limitations in most fields, especially those which do not require laboratory presence. The only problem I foresee is catching up with courses and new student admissions. This is the only problem I so far see, because we don't really know how long this will go on. Ok, you missed some conferences and a few workshops. Funding will most likely get extended for those who have limited contracts. Meanwhile, other people lose their jobs, have to continue working in this fear infused environment and shops have to shut down but have to maintain payroll. Academia's focus should be on understanding the social, economic and psychological outcomes of such events and not ask rhetorical questions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: PhD students, academia and Covid-19. How this will affect our future? Hello, I am a PhD student at the end of its second year. As many PhD students I believe that many have student scholarships over a limited number of years, in my case three in total. My concerns are about how this pandemy will affect us PhD students, but more in general the academic environment. Of course, in such period is possible to focus on writing and reading, however, for a successfull thesis the quality and the presence of good results are fundamental.
RESPONSE A: This question is so myopic it is borderline frustrating me. Academia will be one of the sectors that will suffer the least from this situation. Work continues on with minimal limitations in most fields, especially those which do not require laboratory presence. The only problem I foresee is catching up with courses and new student admissions. This is the only problem I so far see, because we don't really know how long this will go on. Ok, you missed some conferences and a few workshops. Funding will most likely get extended for those who have limited contracts. Meanwhile, other people lose their jobs, have to continue working in this fear infused environment and shops have to shut down but have to maintain payroll. Academia's focus should be on understanding the social, economic and psychological outcomes of such events and not ask rhetorical questions.
RESPONSE B: I'm mostly concerned about a bunch of hiring freezes (ala 2008) if state budgets take a huge hit from this. NIH funding might be afffected too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhD students, academia and Covid-19. How this will affect our future? Hello, I am a PhD student at the end of its second year. As many PhD students I believe that many have student scholarships over a limited number of years, in my case three in total. My concerns are about how this pandemy will affect us PhD students, but more in general the academic environment. Of course, in such period is possible to focus on writing and reading, however, for a successfull thesis the quality and the presence of good results are fundamental.
RESPONSE A: You'll get more information from people on the other side of the job market. However, it is too soon to know for sure. If things unfold as they are, the economy hit will be far worse than 2008. We'll still be dealing with the public health crisis at the start of the new job cycle. If you can stay another year in whatever position you are in, prepare to do that. Even if that means remaining as a student. My institution is far from destitute, but the second the economic future looks shaky, they'll freeze hiring. As others have noted, however, academia's problems will be short lived.
RESPONSE B: This question is so myopic it is borderline frustrating me. Academia will be one of the sectors that will suffer the least from this situation. Work continues on with minimal limitations in most fields, especially those which do not require laboratory presence. The only problem I foresee is catching up with courses and new student admissions. This is the only problem I so far see, because we don't really know how long this will go on. Ok, you missed some conferences and a few workshops. Funding will most likely get extended for those who have limited contracts. Meanwhile, other people lose their jobs, have to continue working in this fear infused environment and shops have to shut down but have to maintain payroll. Academia's focus should be on understanding the social, economic and psychological outcomes of such events and not ask rhetorical questions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhD students, academia and Covid-19. How this will affect our future? Hello, I am a PhD student at the end of its second year. As many PhD students I believe that many have student scholarships over a limited number of years, in my case three in total. My concerns are about how this pandemy will affect us PhD students, but more in general the academic environment. Of course, in such period is possible to focus on writing and reading, however, for a successfull thesis the quality and the presence of good results are fundamental.
RESPONSE A: Well, I'm watching my friend's zoom dissertation defense in a few minutes. When I defended five years ago, I had to drop a member from my committee because they couldn't be there in person. Maybe we'll see other arbitrary/outdated rules fall by the wayside?
RESPONSE B: This question is so myopic it is borderline frustrating me. Academia will be one of the sectors that will suffer the least from this situation. Work continues on with minimal limitations in most fields, especially those which do not require laboratory presence. The only problem I foresee is catching up with courses and new student admissions. This is the only problem I so far see, because we don't really know how long this will go on. Ok, you missed some conferences and a few workshops. Funding will most likely get extended for those who have limited contracts. Meanwhile, other people lose their jobs, have to continue working in this fear infused environment and shops have to shut down but have to maintain payroll. Academia's focus should be on understanding the social, economic and psychological outcomes of such events and not ask rhetorical questions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhD students, academia and Covid-19. How this will affect our future? Hello, I am a PhD student at the end of its second year. As many PhD students I believe that many have student scholarships over a limited number of years, in my case three in total. My concerns are about how this pandemy will affect us PhD students, but more in general the academic environment. Of course, in such period is possible to focus on writing and reading, however, for a successfull thesis the quality and the presence of good results are fundamental.
RESPONSE A: Well, I'm watching my friend's zoom dissertation defense in a few minutes. When I defended five years ago, I had to drop a member from my committee because they couldn't be there in person. Maybe we'll see other arbitrary/outdated rules fall by the wayside?
RESPONSE B: Everyone will be in the same situation about it so the deadlines will be extended and/or the ways of doing things will change. Except of course in case of long-term total societal collapse - in which case you won't have a use for a PhD anyway.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: , impostor's syndrome. I know it's a real thing, but it seems like false flattery, convincing myself that I have some kind of syndrome and that I’m not a real-deal faker. I know in my bones that I'm an impostor. It’s getting worse. I lie awake recounting all the negative reviews and rejections, all the possible problems with my methods and results, all my personal flaws as a scientist. It seems too much. I want to give up. But how? Leaving academia isn't giving up, it's a whole 'nother set of problems. I resent this society where I have to decide---I don't want to decide! I'm a sweaty rat king of anxiety and self-loathing, and in no place to make a rational decision. Why can't there be some divine judge who decides what to do with me? Or some super advanced A.I.? Some bureaucrat or some workers' council? Anything, anyone, no matter how stupid, arbitrary, or venal... Just decide for me where I’ll best serve society, and I’ll accept: Is it doing physics? Cleaning toilets? Would society be better off putting me down for good and letting me fertilize a field? Can I plead *nolo contendere*?
RESPONSE A: Let me get this straight. With no publications you have: 1) a great recommendation letter 2) offers at top postdoc labs 3) a PhD 4) the respect of your adviser and peers 5) a poster prize Something doesn't add up for me. I come from an engineering PhD background but it would've been impossible for any of us to graduate with no publications. Is it possible that your thesis is amazing, and that you're just having trouble navigating the publishing world?
RESPONSE B: Bro, sometimes I feel like this too. One thing that sticks in my mind is that our program essentially never kicks someone out, unless it's an egregious violation. What if I'm just skating by and the only reason I'll finish is that no one really gives enough of a crap to kick me out?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: s it doing physics? Cleaning toilets? Would society be better off putting me down for good and letting me fertilize a field? Can I plead *nolo contendere*?
RESPONSE A: OP, believe it or not, I have felt exactly the way you do. In fact, I'm hesitant to even comment and advice you, because what good would advice from a retarded failure like me do? Like you, I too (I believe) am liked and respected by my peers and professors. I'm still friends with my PhD advisor, and I'm certain my postdoc advisor (who is an internationally renowned neuroscientist) will write me beautiful recommendation letters when I'm on the job market. But I still feel inadequate. I can't code (and seek help from the talented grad student in the lab for my analyses), my knowledge and understanding of molecular genetics is pretty terrible, and here I am, a neuroscience postdoc with some good publications, in big part due to good fortune. My advice would be to do what you're doing. Continue presenting well, continue to work hard and articulate your thoughts on why your experiments did not work out as well as you have wanted. MOST IMPORTANTLY, it is incredibly completely normal to feel like you've been punched in the gut after your paper has been thrashed by reviewers. Even with papers that were accepted, I have felt like shit. With paper rejections, I have wanted to quit science. Based on your post, I really think you're doing fine. Advisors and peers don't think mediocre scientists are wonderful. They aren't stupid. You're not a fraud. ^I ^am ^though.
RESPONSE B: Let me get this straight. With no publications you have: 1) a great recommendation letter 2) offers at top postdoc labs 3) a PhD 4) the respect of your adviser and peers 5) a poster prize Something doesn't add up for me. I come from an engineering PhD background but it would've been impossible for any of us to graduate with no publications. Is it possible that your thesis is amazing, and that you're just having trouble navigating the publishing world?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: impostor. It’s getting worse. I lie awake recounting all the negative reviews and rejections, all the possible problems with my methods and results, all my personal flaws as a scientist. It seems too much. I want to give up. But how? Leaving academia isn't giving up, it's a whole 'nother set of problems. I resent this society where I have to decide---I don't want to decide! I'm a sweaty rat king of anxiety and self-loathing, and in no place to make a rational decision. Why can't there be some divine judge who decides what to do with me? Or some super advanced A.I.? Some bureaucrat or some workers' council? Anything, anyone, no matter how stupid, arbitrary, or venal... Just decide for me where I’ll best serve society, and I’ll accept: Is it doing physics? Cleaning toilets? Would society be better off putting me down for good and letting me fertilize a field? Can I plead *nolo contendere*?
RESPONSE A: Let me get this straight. With no publications you have: 1) a great recommendation letter 2) offers at top postdoc labs 3) a PhD 4) the respect of your adviser and peers 5) a poster prize Something doesn't add up for me. I come from an engineering PhD background but it would've been impossible for any of us to graduate with no publications. Is it possible that your thesis is amazing, and that you're just having trouble navigating the publishing world?
RESPONSE B: >My advisor thinks I'm wonderful, and wrote me a beautiful letter. I’m afraid that he feels responsible for my failures, and wrote it out of guilt. I'm not sure how it is in the other departments, but I am just 100% honest with my supervisor. I sit down, say how I feel, and ask for feedback and usually it's given (truth albeit slightly sugarcoated, I feel). I work in the qualitative humanities department. Just go and talk to him/her and ask for feedback. They might be able to give you good advice for the upcoming years.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I know in my bones that I'm an impostor. It’s getting worse. I lie awake recounting all the negative reviews and rejections, all the possible problems with my methods and results, all my personal flaws as a scientist. It seems too much. I want to give up. But how? Leaving academia isn't giving up, it's a whole 'nother set of problems. I resent this society where I have to decide---I don't want to decide! I'm a sweaty rat king of anxiety and self-loathing, and in no place to make a rational decision. Why can't there be some divine judge who decides what to do with me? Or some super advanced A.I.? Some bureaucrat or some workers' council? Anything, anyone, no matter how stupid, arbitrary, or venal... Just decide for me where I’ll best serve society, and I’ll accept: Is it doing physics? Cleaning toilets? Would society be better off putting me down for good and letting me fertilize a field? Can I plead *nolo contendere*?
RESPONSE A: To add to other comments, I would suggest taking reviewers with a grain of salt. I don't know about physics, but in CS the reviewers are quite often either busy, or way outside of your field, or too salty/jaded, so they write piss-poor misinformed, degrading reviews that may not reflect things objectively. Some major conferences like SIGCHI try to battle this by hiring meta-reviewers and enforcing reviewing policies that ensure the quality of reviews, but as always YMMV.
RESPONSE B: Let me get this straight. With no publications you have: 1) a great recommendation letter 2) offers at top postdoc labs 3) a PhD 4) the respect of your adviser and peers 5) a poster prize Something doesn't add up for me. I come from an engineering PhD background but it would've been impossible for any of us to graduate with no publications. Is it possible that your thesis is amazing, and that you're just having trouble navigating the publishing world?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: and results, all my personal flaws as a scientist. It seems too much. I want to give up. But how? Leaving academia isn't giving up, it's a whole 'nother set of problems. I resent this society where I have to decide---I don't want to decide! I'm a sweaty rat king of anxiety and self-loathing, and in no place to make a rational decision. Why can't there be some divine judge who decides what to do with me? Or some super advanced A.I.? Some bureaucrat or some workers' council? Anything, anyone, no matter how stupid, arbitrary, or venal... Just decide for me where I’ll best serve society, and I’ll accept: Is it doing physics? Cleaning toilets? Would society be better off putting me down for good and letting me fertilize a field? Can I plead *nolo contendere*?
RESPONSE A: I have no first author publications, and I start a tenure track position this fall, after being a VAP. Publication isn't the be all and end all of being a good scientist. I've started and heavily intellectually contributed to other's projects. I'm second and middle author on a few, but never first, yet. It will happen, though. Sure, I had to end up at a SLAC instead of an R1, but I love my students, I love the research I can do, and I'm inspiring future scientists. Cool stuff. You'll be ok.
RESPONSE B: >My advisor thinks I'm wonderful, and wrote me a beautiful letter. I’m afraid that he feels responsible for my failures, and wrote it out of guilt. I'm not sure how it is in the other departments, but I am just 100% honest with my supervisor. I sit down, say how I feel, and ask for feedback and usually it's given (truth albeit slightly sugarcoated, I feel). I work in the qualitative humanities department. Just go and talk to him/her and ask for feedback. They might be able to give you good advice for the upcoming years.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to concentrate on exams when you are sad? Hi, these days I have a bit of shit in my head, and I need to concentrate to study because I have exams this week, and I can't do it, usually when I'm a sad, work or study helps me, because it distracts me, but this time it doesn't work. What do you do when you feel like this?
RESPONSE A: I agree with what everyone else said. You may also want to try lovingkindness meditation. Difficult emotions and complex thoughts make the mind feel very hot and claustrophobic. Meditation can help cool the mind and slow things down. Lovingkindness meditation also helps to bring some joy into the meditation and can make seeking peace enjoyable rather than a chore. I’ve attached a guided meditation by a teacher I admire. https://youtu.be/NgfSjKOQbbI
RESPONSE B: One thing that I've started doing recently is trying to compartmentalize my feelings and set a time at which I can deal with them. So, if I find myself unable to focus on work, I tell myself, I'll think about this thing that's eating at me at 3pm. Then I set aside time for it. Mentally, it helps me push it away and work on what I need to work on and then I do take the time to think about it when it's time. I find my own thoughts less intrusive when I acknowledge them but also restrict them so I can get things done. Hope this helps you too!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to concentrate on exams when you are sad? Hi, these days I have a bit of shit in my head, and I need to concentrate to study because I have exams this week, and I can't do it, usually when I'm a sad, work or study helps me, because it distracts me, but this time it doesn't work. What do you do when you feel like this?
RESPONSE A: One thing that I've started doing recently is trying to compartmentalize my feelings and set a time at which I can deal with them. So, if I find myself unable to focus on work, I tell myself, I'll think about this thing that's eating at me at 3pm. Then I set aside time for it. Mentally, it helps me push it away and work on what I need to work on and then I do take the time to think about it when it's time. I find my own thoughts less intrusive when I acknowledge them but also restrict them so I can get things done. Hope this helps you too!
RESPONSE B: Study in a new place. Sometimes it helps to be around other people studying, like positive peer pressure. Being watched by strangers seems to help make you want to visibly perform studying. Go to the library, or some other study space on campus. If you’re not near your campus, even a coffee shop can help, or a park. If it doesn’t help, well at least you got out of the house, and that’s good for depression. This is also part of the “fake it till you make it” approach to depression, which isn’t the best and doesn’t do hot for me, but since you’re looking for short term solutions, it’s definitely that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Any academic book made you go: ''Wow... This is so underrated and good...''? It can be academic books of any discipline (STEM, non-STEM etc) be it classical (19-20 century) or modern texts (21 century). Any english or foreign (english-translated) texts are welcomed too!
RESPONSE A: Definitely pop sci but I picked up Stuff Matters: Exploring the Marvelous Materials That Shape Our Man-Made World, Book by Mark Miodownik in an airport as an undergrad in chem and it inspired me to become a materials scientist
RESPONSE B: *Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences* by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star "A revealing and surprising look at how classification systems can shape both worldviews and social interactions."
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Any academic book made you go: ''Wow... This is so underrated and good...''? It can be academic books of any discipline (STEM, non-STEM etc) be it classical (19-20 century) or modern texts (21 century). Any english or foreign (english-translated) texts are welcomed too!
RESPONSE A: *Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences* by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star "A revealing and surprising look at how classification systems can shape both worldviews and social interactions."
RESPONSE B: Annals of the former world by John McPhee. Won the Pulitzer for nonfiction in 1999. Great geology book written in a narrative format with basically extended interviews with geologists in the field
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Any academic book made you go: ''Wow... This is so underrated and good...''? It can be academic books of any discipline (STEM, non-STEM etc) be it classical (19-20 century) or modern texts (21 century). Any english or foreign (english-translated) texts are welcomed too!
RESPONSE A: *Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences* by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star "A revealing and surprising look at how classification systems can shape both worldviews and social interactions."
RESPONSE B: In sociology and anthro: every 12 seconds, a fantastic ethnographic study of a slaughter house and its (racialized) workers that connects human and animal politics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Any academic book made you go: ''Wow... This is so underrated and good...''? It can be academic books of any discipline (STEM, non-STEM etc) be it classical (19-20 century) or modern texts (21 century). Any english or foreign (english-translated) texts are welcomed too!
RESPONSE A: *Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences* by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star "A revealing and surprising look at how classification systems can shape both worldviews and social interactions."
RESPONSE B: Nowadays forgotten and underrated given the hype in data-driven approaches, but the "The Society of Mind" from Marvin Minsky is a great read. Regardless if you are in technical AI, cognitive science, or philosophy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Any academic book made you go: ''Wow... This is so underrated and good...''? It can be academic books of any discipline (STEM, non-STEM etc) be it classical (19-20 century) or modern texts (21 century). Any english or foreign (english-translated) texts are welcomed too!
RESPONSE A: *Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences* by Geoffrey C. Bowker and Susan Leigh Star "A revealing and surprising look at how classification systems can shape both worldviews and social interactions."
RESPONSE B: Into the Kill Zone: A Cop’s Eye View of Deadly Force is my favorite crim book, and students loooove it when I assign it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: . My s/o & I do not live together, but we have been together for a few years & have spent enough time around each other to know our habits/routines. We alternate staying at each other’s apartments for X amount of days. He graduated from uni years ago & has been in his career ever since. My partner is a pretty self-sufficient person, but I still worry that grad school will consume me & I will not have any time for him & our relationship. I would just like to know other people’s experiences of what it is like being in a committed relationship with someone who isn’t in grad school. I’ll take all the advice/opinions/thoughts that I can get. Thank you SO much in advance!!
RESPONSE A: My boyfriend and I have been dating for 3 years. We were both PhD students in the same school, same department (There are 300+ phd students in our department). Although I’m grateful to have him around during these tough days. But we always talk about how stressful work is, how to improve the system we are developing. Everything is about stress, work, work more. I’m not sure this is healthy ...
RESPONSE B: In my experience it’s very difficult, but manageable. A PhD requires you to be very selfish with your time - plans get delayed and canceled. Meetings/project commitments/travel opportunities come up and you aren’t really in a position to say “no” to most of them. There is time off, and you need to prioritize that time with your partner rather than individual activities. But still, you’d need a very understanding partner to make all this work. Excelling in a PhD program requires you to make it the most important thing in your life, and I don’t think it’s something that can be done working 9-5. Weekends/late nights/off hours happen, and that’s just part of the game. If there was a period in your life where you should really buckle down and grind, this is it. With all of this said, I’ve made it work and many others have. Communicate when you’re overwhelmed and short on time and make the best of the time you do have.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.