label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B | POST: Other very average postdocs out there, how do you feel? I see myself as a very average STEM postdoc in terms of research output. For publications, I’d say 50% of other postdocs I come across have “better” records, and 50% have “worse” ones. The publication record from my PhD is equally average (first-author papers in good but not top tier journals, not very well cited). For the others in the same boat, how are you feeling? Do you feel that you’ll still have a chance at a faculty position? Do you feel that you’ll have to aim for departments that focus more on teaching than research? Do you think about going into industry? For those who are no longer postdocs, what did you end up doing?
RESPONSE A: It depends on what how you define as top-tier journal. I gradually lost faith in obtaining a faculty position as I realized that the most recent hires at my research institute (R1 at the US east coast) all published at least 3 impact factor IF> 16 papers (we're talking about science, nature, cell, cancer cell, cell metabolism). Most of them spend at least 8+ years to get to that level of strong publications with their average age when applying for a faculty position \~40. Recently had my first postdoc paper accepted at a decent journal that recently got bumped up to IF>10. By the time I was done with the revision, i was already feeling a bit burnt out. Currently contemplating if i should accept a staff scientist position at a new place or bit the bullet and continue on my postdoc experience. I still have 3 years remaining in my postdoc clock that I can either continue or just move on to a new lab.
RESPONSE B: I had an above average PhD and maybe just below average post doc. I left academia for industry. I work 35-40 hours a week at a fun job that's very easy and I doubled my salary. Decent trajectory within my company and many opportunities outside of it. It's amazing how quickly I went from "I wanna be a professor" to "nah fuck that."
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Other very average postdocs out there, how do you feel? I see myself as a very average STEM postdoc in terms of research output. For publications, I’d say 50% of other postdocs I come across have “better” records, and 50% have “worse” ones. The publication record from my PhD is equally average (first-author papers in good but not top tier journals, not very well cited). For the others in the same boat, how are you feeling? Do you feel that you’ll still have a chance at a faculty position? Do you feel that you’ll have to aim for departments that focus more on teaching than research? Do you think about going into industry? For those who are no longer postdocs, what did you end up doing?
RESPONSE A: The answer is to look at who is getting jobs in your field. In some fields, its entirely bean counting, in which case, no, you have no chance. In many fields however, its all down to the random lottery of "fit", where your chances are determined by what you put in your application and networking, and publication records are largely irrelevant. In the first case, you absolutely need to look at industry or teaching-heavy positions if that's what you like and you have some teaching credentials. In the second case, you can absolutely get a faculty job but you need to scout out each job posting and find out what the secret "fit" sauce is, plus network aggressively.
RESPONSE B: I just have to say don’t count yourself out. I wouldn’t have imagined I’m in the position I’m in today (On job market, but very hopeful)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Other very average postdocs out there, how do you feel? I see myself as a very average STEM postdoc in terms of research output. For publications, I’d say 50% of other postdocs I come across have “better” records, and 50% have “worse” ones. The publication record from my PhD is equally average (first-author papers in good but not top tier journals, not very well cited). For the others in the same boat, how are you feeling? Do you feel that you’ll still have a chance at a faculty position? Do you feel that you’ll have to aim for departments that focus more on teaching than research? Do you think about going into industry? For those who are no longer postdocs, what did you end up doing?
RESPONSE A: I just have to say don’t count yourself out. I wouldn’t have imagined I’m in the position I’m in today (On job market, but very hopeful)
RESPONSE B: What do *you* want to do? Have you submitted fellowship applications? If not find opportunities and apply. If you want to get in at a research-focused R1 in the top 50 or so you will have to put together a research proposal for the application that the committee would consider fundable by whatever grant mechanisms it could be sent to. Most search committee members don't make it past the CV and only read the rest of the apps once shortlisted which means top 10-20%. So getting a job is one thing, then you'll be expected to get funding and with a weaker CV and 5-10% success rates be prepared for rejections based on reviewers biases. It is a terrible system but a lot of early career funding is heavily CV weighted so making the right moves early, and often, are the only way to make and keep an academic R1 stem career.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Other very average postdocs out there, how do you feel? I see myself as a very average STEM postdoc in terms of research output. For publications, I’d say 50% of other postdocs I come across have “better” records, and 50% have “worse” ones. The publication record from my PhD is equally average (first-author papers in good but not top tier journals, not very well cited). For the others in the same boat, how are you feeling? Do you feel that you’ll still have a chance at a faculty position? Do you feel that you’ll have to aim for departments that focus more on teaching than research? Do you think about going into industry? For those who are no longer postdocs, what did you end up doing?
RESPONSE A: While my PhD experience was above average with an amazing supervisor and I felt that things were relatively easy, I've always been an average student. I was an average PhD student and the publications I had were submitted to journals with an impact factor of 1.1-1.6 and my work wasn't cited much at all. I ended up doing a post-doc that is related to my PhD field, but I had no experience in. Currently my post-doc has been an amazing learning experience (I taught myself how to code on the job), but I still have no idea what I'm doing (I've been here 8-9 months), though I am working on a 2nd publication. In Canada, postdocs are paid pretty poorly so I've shopped around and will be moving into into industry next month at a job in the US that pays almost triple my salary.
RESPONSE B: I just have to say don’t count yourself out. I wouldn’t have imagined I’m in the position I’m in today (On job market, but very hopeful)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Other very average postdocs out there, how do you feel? I see myself as a very average STEM postdoc in terms of research output. For publications, I’d say 50% of other postdocs I come across have “better” records, and 50% have “worse” ones. The publication record from my PhD is equally average (first-author papers in good but not top tier journals, not very well cited). For the others in the same boat, how are you feeling? Do you feel that you’ll still have a chance at a faculty position? Do you feel that you’ll have to aim for departments that focus more on teaching than research? Do you think about going into industry? For those who are no longer postdocs, what did you end up doing?
RESPONSE A: Not all skills are in the lab. Personality and good humor and diplomacy and writing are all "intangibles" that will help you get to the next level. Source: Anxious postdoc who is starting R1 Asst. Prof in two months.
RESPONSE B: I just have to say don’t count yourself out. I wouldn’t have imagined I’m in the position I’m in today (On job market, but very hopeful)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: the search with a seed paper or group of papers (you can upload a bibtex file). Then it builds a network of papers based on citations and runs a series of graph network analysis algorithms against it to recommend similar articles, important articles, prominent authors, institutions, journals etc. From there you can iteratively add new papers to your search, this makes the search more targeted and your results more interesting. After you are done, you can export all of the results into a bibtex file for future reference. The second tool, which I just released yesterday, is what I am calling the "Literature Connector". With this tool, you enter two papers and it gives you an interactive visualization on how the two papers are connected. From here you can filter the papers, view common keywords, etc. What differentiates this tool is its ability to quickly construct the graph, allowing for rapid feedback to the user and a more pleasant interactive experience. The papers you discover here can be used as the seed for a Paper Discovery search. When doing research you often stumble across a few different papers that seem interesting but don't seem to directly talk to one another in the literature. Closing these gaps and connecting disparate ideas are often the places where you can make a significant contribution to your field. It's also great for interdisciplinary research! Inciteful was built off the backs of free and open metadata (from Microsoft Academic, Crossref, OpenCitations, and others) and I am paying it forward by doing the same with Inciteful. So anyone, anywhere can use it whenever they wish. Also, if you like the tool, please tell your friends as that is the best way your can help! I'm actively working on it so if anyone has any feedback, please just send me a message! Thanks!
RESPONSE A: This is a fun tool. Won't replace my library's engine or google scholar, but showed me some papers with similar citations to my own that I didn't know; I'll definitely be checking them out!
RESPONSE B: It works well on mobile, but on desktop its a bit buggy. It takes a few tries to get the same content I'm getting through mobile. But thanks for the effort👍
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: similar articles, important articles, prominent authors, institutions, journals etc. From there you can iteratively add new papers to your search, this makes the search more targeted and your results more interesting. After you are done, you can export all of the results into a bibtex file for future reference. The second tool, which I just released yesterday, is what I am calling the "Literature Connector". With this tool, you enter two papers and it gives you an interactive visualization on how the two papers are connected. From here you can filter the papers, view common keywords, etc. What differentiates this tool is its ability to quickly construct the graph, allowing for rapid feedback to the user and a more pleasant interactive experience. The papers you discover here can be used as the seed for a Paper Discovery search. When doing research you often stumble across a few different papers that seem interesting but don't seem to directly talk to one another in the literature. Closing these gaps and connecting disparate ideas are often the places where you can make a significant contribution to your field. It's also great for interdisciplinary research! Inciteful was built off the backs of free and open metadata (from Microsoft Academic, Crossref, OpenCitations, and others) and I am paying it forward by doing the same with Inciteful. So anyone, anywhere can use it whenever they wish. Also, if you like the tool, please tell your friends as that is the best way your can help! I'm actively working on it so if anyone has any feedback, please just send me a message! Thanks!
RESPONSE A: YES please! I can really imagine that thing as an addition to Google scholar — first work your way through the literature regularly, and if you're stuck or need a little bit more OR discover the whole field, then this app comes in perfectly. The next step would be a plugin for Zotero and I'm in heaven. P.S.: Shared this to my institute's Slack, I'm sure they'll love it!
RESPONSE B: It works well on mobile, but on desktop its a bit buggy. It takes a few tries to get the same content I'm getting through mobile. But thanks for the effort👍
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: To those who mastered out, how did you market yourself efficiently to the industry? Pretty much the title. Field is health administration as I understand this might depend a lot.
RESPONSE A: Don't say you mastered out would be a good start. Explain why you got a four year masters.
RESPONSE B: I'm in the process of leaving academia. Can't live off of an adjunct salary. Moving to support staff.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: To those who mastered out, how did you market yourself efficiently to the industry? Pretty much the title. Field is health administration as I understand this might depend a lot.
RESPONSE A: Find a way to network. For me it was volunteering at local museums and starting at the bottom with our local historical society. Not sure about health administration field but there are always flattering emails, self publishing, and the Twitter verse to build your reputation and raise your visibility. At a certain point you’ll find people who care less about the letters after your name and more about the strength of your knowledge. Don’t be scared to start at the bottom or in a related field.
RESPONSE B: Don't say you mastered out would be a good start. Explain why you got a four year masters.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Etiquette regarding reaching out to previous colleagues looking for jobs My current postdoc position is ending early next year, and I'm starting to look for my next position. Just wondering what is the etiquette regarding some of my previous work colleagues who are now at other universities. I don't mean previous supervisors, direct collaborators but for example admin staff from my PhD who I am on friendly terms with. Or other grad students I worked with before who are now at other universities. Is there some line that should be drawn when reaching out to your network?
RESPONSE A: I wonder whether it's really worth it, to be honest. If there's a vacancy, it'll be advertised when they're ready to anyway; and it might be a little awkward in the sense that if they're serving as a source of information for you at their new institute, it could easily come across as implicit support for one particular candidate (however much it's denied explicitly).
RESPONSE B: I've reached out to other grad students I worked with in my PhD for advice or introductions. I think if you knew each other and are on good terms it shouldn't be an issue at all. Where it comes to recommendations I would make sure you had worked with them enough for them to feel comfortable recommending you. Just give them an out when you ask and make it clear you won't be offended (e.g. "If don't feel you've seen enough of my work to be comfortable recommending me that's totally fine, but if you do I would greatly appreciate your help").
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Weird impostor syndrome... not “passionate” enough? I’m a fourth year PhD student in a neuroscience program. I’ve started feeling this weird impostor syndrome... or maybe it’s real, I don’t know — but I don’t feel “passionate” enough about science to be a scientist. I’m happy to do work when I work, I like attending talks and reading papers, but I don’t like to work weekends unless I have something time sensitive. I don’t seek out science in my free time (I enjoy listening to podcasts but I have never wanted to listen to a science one) and I never grew up liking science fiction. I’m super confused about what I want to do post-PhD — I’m not sure about academia, I’d like to explore positions in industry/data science but I haven’t ruled anything out yet. Thoughts? Can I be a successful scientist if I don’t want to live and breathe science all the time?? Is it normal to be confused?This sounds stupid but it’s genuinely been causing me so much stress of late!
RESPONSE A: Can you work at mcdonalds if you don't eat hamburgers everyday? your field isn't any different. jobs a job. if you do your job, that's all thats expected.
RESPONSE B: I really feel the podcast part. “Oh you must listen to...” “Oh x’s new book is brilliant!” No thanks. In my “spare” time, I’ll be watching comedy TV and reading mindless beach novels.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Weird impostor syndrome... not “passionate” enough? I’m a fourth year PhD student in a neuroscience program. I’ve started feeling this weird impostor syndrome... or maybe it’s real, I don’t know — but I don’t feel “passionate” enough about science to be a scientist. I’m happy to do work when I work, I like attending talks and reading papers, but I don’t like to work weekends unless I have something time sensitive. I don’t seek out science in my free time (I enjoy listening to podcasts but I have never wanted to listen to a science one) and I never grew up liking science fiction. I’m super confused about what I want to do post-PhD — I’m not sure about academia, I’d like to explore positions in industry/data science but I haven’t ruled anything out yet. Thoughts? Can I be a successful scientist if I don’t want to live and breathe science all the time?? Is it normal to be confused?This sounds stupid but it’s genuinely been causing me so much stress of late!
RESPONSE A: Just want to chime in as another 4th year in a biomedical field and say I feel the EXACT same way :) good to know there are others out there who feel the same as me!!!
RESPONSE B: I really feel the podcast part. “Oh you must listen to...” “Oh x’s new book is brilliant!” No thanks. In my “spare” time, I’ll be watching comedy TV and reading mindless beach novels.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: passionate” enough? I’m a fourth year PhD student in a neuroscience program. I’ve started feeling this weird impostor syndrome... or maybe it’s real, I don’t know — but I don’t feel “passionate” enough about science to be a scientist. I’m happy to do work when I work, I like attending talks and reading papers, but I don’t like to work weekends unless I have something time sensitive. I don’t seek out science in my free time (I enjoy listening to podcasts but I have never wanted to listen to a science one) and I never grew up liking science fiction. I’m super confused about what I want to do post-PhD — I’m not sure about academia, I’d like to explore positions in industry/data science but I haven’t ruled anything out yet. Thoughts? Can I be a successful scientist if I don’t want to live and breathe science all the time?? Is it normal to be confused?This sounds stupid but it’s genuinely been causing me so much stress of late!
RESPONSE A: Just want to chime in as another 4th year in a biomedical field and say I feel the EXACT same way :) good to know there are others out there who feel the same as me!!!
RESPONSE B: I push my lab to take breaks and disengage from our work. There’s a lot of evidence that engaging with different material refreshes your mind and helps problem solving. I lead by example and take regular vacations and mental health days. Most of my colleagues work obsessively and continually, and push their labs to do the same. I’d say their work is not better than ours, and often not as good. You will find that people work in different ways - especially in open-ended, flexible setups like academic research. Focus on being productive - which usually means being efficient and organized. Part of that can be developing habits for reading more widely to sample your broader field - that’s part of the job, not your down time. FWIW this approach has gotten me to senior levels at an Ivy. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: ” enough? I’m a fourth year PhD student in a neuroscience program. I’ve started feeling this weird impostor syndrome... or maybe it’s real, I don’t know — but I don’t feel “passionate” enough about science to be a scientist. I’m happy to do work when I work, I like attending talks and reading papers, but I don’t like to work weekends unless I have something time sensitive. I don’t seek out science in my free time (I enjoy listening to podcasts but I have never wanted to listen to a science one) and I never grew up liking science fiction. I’m super confused about what I want to do post-PhD — I’m not sure about academia, I’d like to explore positions in industry/data science but I haven’t ruled anything out yet. Thoughts? Can I be a successful scientist if I don’t want to live and breathe science all the time?? Is it normal to be confused?This sounds stupid but it’s genuinely been causing me so much stress of late!
RESPONSE A: I push my lab to take breaks and disengage from our work. There’s a lot of evidence that engaging with different material refreshes your mind and helps problem solving. I lead by example and take regular vacations and mental health days. Most of my colleagues work obsessively and continually, and push their labs to do the same. I’d say their work is not better than ours, and often not as good. You will find that people work in different ways - especially in open-ended, flexible setups like academic research. Focus on being productive - which usually means being efficient and organized. Part of that can be developing habits for reading more widely to sample your broader field - that’s part of the job, not your down time. FWIW this approach has gotten me to senior levels at an Ivy. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.
RESPONSE B: Lol by the time I finished my engineering degree I was ready to shoot myself if i had to do one more physics problem that took 10-15 pages of calculations and free body diagrams. Dont feel bad, just do you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Weird impostor syndrome... not “passionate” enough? I’m a fourth year PhD student in a neuroscience program. I’ve started feeling this weird impostor syndrome... or maybe it’s real, I don’t know — but I don’t feel “passionate” enough about science to be a scientist. I’m happy to do work when I work, I like attending talks and reading papers, but I don’t like to work weekends unless I have something time sensitive. I don’t seek out science in my free time (I enjoy listening to podcasts but I have never wanted to listen to a science one) and I never grew up liking science fiction. I’m super confused about what I want to do post-PhD — I’m not sure about academia, I’d like to explore positions in industry/data science but I haven’t ruled anything out yet. Thoughts? Can I be a successful scientist if I don’t want to live and breathe science all the time?? Is it normal to be confused?This sounds stupid but it’s genuinely been causing me so much stress of late!
RESPONSE A: Just want to chime in as another 4th year in a biomedical field and say I feel the EXACT same way :) good to know there are others out there who feel the same as me!!!
RESPONSE B: I love science. I am so passionate about everything I study. When I write, I get into a sense of flow like nothing else I experience. But once it's 6PM, I'm done. I'm down on my couch playing video games. On the weekends, I'm out hiking. I don't give more than my 35-40 hours each week unless I have a serious deadline coming up. I love what I do, but my life is more than science. My relationships, my pets, my hobbies, they are all just as, if not more important, than my career. Balance is necessary and prevents burnout. Some people want to work all the time, good for them. You don't have to do that to be successful.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Anthropology department and possible issue with Native American remains. Hi everyone. I am posting to get advice/resources on what to do. I just finished the second year of my masters as part of an Anthropology department. Recently, a professor in my department showed me a substantial collection of Native American remains the department has. When I started to ask questions about the collection, he told me that it was fine and legal for him to own the remains because "the man who owned them before me gifted them to me when he died". He never mentioned anything about attempting to repatriate the remains to the proper tribe(s). I don't know if I am over reacting but I don't want to stay silent if indeed these remains need to be repatriated. However, if I report my department I am worried that they will make the rest of my time at school a living hell. I am wondering if there are any ways to anonymously report this to either NAGPRA or a similar institution. I am not 100% positive that us having the collection at our university is wrong, but the whole thing feels very off to me and I think it warrants being checked on. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated and thank you in advance.
RESPONSE A: Wait a reasonable amount of time before reporting, so its less likely to be traced back to you. Report anonymously.
RESPONSE B: Anthropologist here. This is problematic, and I believe illegal. Speak up, speak out. Human remains aren't gifts, and its atrocious that an Anthropologist would be complicit in such a thing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . Recently, a professor in my department showed me a substantial collection of Native American remains the department has. When I started to ask questions about the collection, he told me that it was fine and legal for him to own the remains because "the man who owned them before me gifted them to me when he died". He never mentioned anything about attempting to repatriate the remains to the proper tribe(s). I don't know if I am over reacting but I don't want to stay silent if indeed these remains need to be repatriated. However, if I report my department I am worried that they will make the rest of my time at school a living hell. I am wondering if there are any ways to anonymously report this to either NAGPRA or a similar institution. I am not 100% positive that us having the collection at our university is wrong, but the whole thing feels very off to me and I think it warrants being checked on. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated and thank you in advance.
RESPONSE A: That is cause for concern regarding NAGPRA for sure especially if the prof. thinks that *he* owns the remains (illegal). Look up Effigy Mounds National Monument and the scandals that happened there in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Kenniwick man is also a good example of what can go wrong, even if a court decides to side with the prof. the communities that they are researching will likely shut him out for good. In general, dealing with human remains of any type without clear and continuing consent is a big no go and any results are unpublishable (due to human experimentation and ethical concerns of that nature). Source: Conversation to this hypothetical (but based on artifacts) that I had with 6 THPOs and several SHPOs a couple years ago. Mom, Senior LA with extensive experience with NAGPRA compliance (30+ years). Regional LA for the NPS. Multiple NPS superintendents that I am familiar with.
RESPONSE B: Anthropologist here. This is problematic, and I believe illegal. Speak up, speak out. Human remains aren't gifts, and its atrocious that an Anthropologist would be complicit in such a thing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Anthropology department and possible issue with Native American remains. Hi everyone. I am posting to get advice/resources on what to do. I just finished the second year of my masters as part of an Anthropology department. Recently, a professor in my department showed me a substantial collection of Native American remains the department has. When I started to ask questions about the collection, he told me that it was fine and legal for him to own the remains because "the man who owned them before me gifted them to me when he died". He never mentioned anything about attempting to repatriate the remains to the proper tribe(s). I don't know if I am over reacting but I don't want to stay silent if indeed these remains need to be repatriated. However, if I report my department I am worried that they will make the rest of my time at school a living hell. I am wondering if there are any ways to anonymously report this to either NAGPRA or a similar institution. I am not 100% positive that us having the collection at our university is wrong, but the whole thing feels very off to me and I think it warrants being checked on. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated and thank you in advance.
RESPONSE A: My department had a similar issue actually. Most of our collections are legacy collections and some of us grad students ended up reboxing a lot from the repository. Some of my colleagues work in CRM and have a lot of experience in differentiating bone and a lot of human remains and burial items were found. Our professor then had to go to the dean of the department to report it because we're following NAGPRA and we don't want to keep it. Obviously, we are now in the process of contacting descendants for repatriation. Also, if the remains were gifted to the department by the person themselves (like they donated their own remains to further science) then the department should have some paperwork/accessioning documents or something to prove that is the case.
RESPONSE B: Anthropologist here. This is problematic, and I believe illegal. Speak up, speak out. Human remains aren't gifts, and its atrocious that an Anthropologist would be complicit in such a thing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: tasked to do a job (and to write a paper about it) that I don't believe much in. So I keep asking my colleague (same "level" but life scientist instead of physical scientist) what she and the PI would like to have written in the paper. Today, I asked this colleague if I could have feedback on my work. And... she basically told me (in a positive way, she was trying to help me not to criticize me) to rewrite it from scratch. "Just copy the methods from the previous papers so that it finally follows a logical structure, and I'll take care about modifying the text to a publishable form". I'm lost. After 10 years in doing this job I'm still not able to produce a "decent" paper. WTF am I supposed to do?
RESPONSE A: Are you pursuing any training in writing? There are lots of great books for improving academic writing, including Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks, The Scientist’s Guide to Writing, Write It Up!, and more. You could also look at general writing guides like The Elements of Style, On Writing Well, and others. I’m not assuming that you’re a bad writer, but we all have room for improvement. Writing is a craft that we need to practice a lot to do it well.
RESPONSE B: I'm in life sciences and although I dont have papers published yet, I'm im the process of writing three. I'm currently doing up a diagnostics paper and my supervisor basically told me to copy the structure of a similar paper she did previously. Like the same layout, same description if methods just "in my own words" but not too different from the base. It's weird, it takes time, especially if english isn't your first language. Most of what my supervisors care about is structure and layout rather than content. So they want the paper to tell a clear and interesting story in a logical manner. Not fussy, reduced jargon, simple explanations of why you did it, what was done, how it was done, what was found and what does it mean. Dont know if that helps you but it's my 0.02c.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: paper. WTF am I supposed to do?
RESPONSE A: Our school has professional staff whose charge is to support faculty development both as writers and as teachers of writing. Does your school have anything like this?
RESPONSE B: Eh, your writing in this post isn't bad. I'm of the opinion that many scientists think that only their way of writing is ok, and all other styles are bad. This is why some PIs can't handle not "editing" (i.e. completely re-writing, rather than editing via comment) their students (including post-docs) writing. I'm a research scientist, meaning not a PI, as it wasn't a route I felt like taking, yet I have quite a few years of experience beyond a postdoc and a few dozen papers under my belt. My PI and I just write completely differently. I personally think he is overly vague and repetitive, whereas he thinks I am overly terse and too complicated. He edits my papers, I roll my eyes, make sure my thoughts are still in there, edit back sentences that I think he went overboard on, and call it a day. It's writing. The only thing that irks me too much is when people are vague in results sections and also insert what I think are discussion sentences into the results. I find sentences like "When we added x to y, we saw z (p = 0.003), therefore y made z)" very frustrating. A lonely p value without any description, especially when it's probably coming from some internal contrast after a complicated mixed-effects model, based on looking at the figure. Then also the "therefore," which is pure speculative discussion and doesn't belong in the results where it can taint a reader's ability to self-interpret. That said, even this is just style, and there are many journals where the results and the discussion are combined! A very bad decision, in my opinion, but I guess it makes it easier to write and easier to convince readers of your viewpoint. Sorry, I got off-topic. It's probably style. Don't imposter syndrome yourself.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: of 10, with 6 the passing vote). Now, I've been tasked to do a job (and to write a paper about it) that I don't believe much in. So I keep asking my colleague (same "level" but life scientist instead of physical scientist) what she and the PI would like to have written in the paper. Today, I asked this colleague if I could have feedback on my work. And... she basically told me (in a positive way, she was trying to help me not to criticize me) to rewrite it from scratch. "Just copy the methods from the previous papers so that it finally follows a logical structure, and I'll take care about modifying the text to a publishable form". I'm lost. After 10 years in doing this job I'm still not able to produce a "decent" paper. WTF am I supposed to do?
RESPONSE A: I'm in life sciences and although I dont have papers published yet, I'm im the process of writing three. I'm currently doing up a diagnostics paper and my supervisor basically told me to copy the structure of a similar paper she did previously. Like the same layout, same description if methods just "in my own words" but not too different from the base. It's weird, it takes time, especially if english isn't your first language. Most of what my supervisors care about is structure and layout rather than content. So they want the paper to tell a clear and interesting story in a logical manner. Not fussy, reduced jargon, simple explanations of why you did it, what was done, how it was done, what was found and what does it mean. Dont know if that helps you but it's my 0.02c.
RESPONSE B: > Now, I've been tasked to do a job (and to write a paper about it) that I don't believe much in. I'm a mediocre writer as well, but this might be more of the root case than anything else. It's really hard to write a good paper that you aren't really interested in writing in the first place (or that you get burned out on while writing).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: . I tell her no, it’s the job of the first author to write the paper. She says it will never get done, because she is too busy and her English is not good. I say I can be first author/paper writer, and I will put her as my co-first author. She says no, write this and you will be my co-first author. I know it’s more than I would normally do for second, but I agree so that the paper can be published before I apply for faculty positions. I write an agreement saying what I will do, what she will do, and if other things come up then it will be her responsibility to handle, she agrees in writing. She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author). I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
RESPONSE A: Keep with written communication. I would email her and write something. As a follow-up to your call were you indicated that you cannot Honor a written agreement we made. I would hold you to our original agreement and if you cannot Honor it this will need to be need to eveluated by your supervisor/PI prof head of the department. I expected someone from XXX center(center and appointment of her position) to Honor an agreement like this and I am disappointed in how you choose to handle this issue. Something like this. She should give up her spot for the grad student that's how it works btw. Anyway this is my advice. But console your own colleagues and supervisors as well
RESPONSE B: Sorry I don't have anything useful to offer, but I want to say how glad I am that my subject lists all authors alphabetically and all contributions are assumed equal.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: second, but I agree so that the paper can be published before I apply for faculty positions. I write an agreement saying what I will do, what she will do, and if other things come up then it will be her responsibility to handle, she agrees in writing. She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author). I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
RESPONSE A: I think it's good that you tried to work out the authorship in advance, and it's a shame that it didn't go smoothly this time. However, at least in my field (molecular bioscience), the order of authorship is based on the amount of work done and intellectual contribution to the paper, so any previous agreement as to authorship would generally be seen as a guideline and not a contract. If it's true that this graduate student has done more than you, than the graduate student gets to be higher on the paper than you. Now, of course, determining whose degree of contribution is larger isn't necessarily straightforward, so if you truly feel you're being slighted, then I think the only thing for you to do is to get the PIs involved, both yours and the other postdoc's. Whatever they decide will likely be the way it is. Everyone goes through this type of thing at least once during a career. The lesson to be learned is to choose your collaborators sparingly and well. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: Talk to her advisor. I’ve asked profs at MIT what they do in cases like this. Their reply is “talk to us ASAP. We are the CEOs of the paper, not the first author”.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: it’s more than I would normally do for second, but I agree so that the paper can be published before I apply for faculty positions. I write an agreement saying what I will do, what she will do, and if other things come up then it will be her responsibility to handle, she agrees in writing. She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author). I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
RESPONSE A: Sorry I don't have anything useful to offer, but I want to say how glad I am that my subject lists all authors alphabetically and all contributions are assumed equal.
RESPONSE B: I think it's good that you tried to work out the authorship in advance, and it's a shame that it didn't go smoothly this time. However, at least in my field (molecular bioscience), the order of authorship is based on the amount of work done and intellectual contribution to the paper, so any previous agreement as to authorship would generally be seen as a guideline and not a contract. If it's true that this graduate student has done more than you, than the graduate student gets to be higher on the paper than you. Now, of course, determining whose degree of contribution is larger isn't necessarily straightforward, so if you truly feel you're being slighted, then I think the only thing for you to do is to get the PIs involved, both yours and the other postdoc's. Whatever they decide will likely be the way it is. Everyone goes through this type of thing at least once during a career. The lesson to be learned is to choose your collaborators sparingly and well. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: s in writing. She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author). I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
RESPONSE A: I think it's good that you tried to work out the authorship in advance, and it's a shame that it didn't go smoothly this time. However, at least in my field (molecular bioscience), the order of authorship is based on the amount of work done and intellectual contribution to the paper, so any previous agreement as to authorship would generally be seen as a guideline and not a contract. If it's true that this graduate student has done more than you, than the graduate student gets to be higher on the paper than you. Now, of course, determining whose degree of contribution is larger isn't necessarily straightforward, so if you truly feel you're being slighted, then I think the only thing for you to do is to get the PIs involved, both yours and the other postdoc's. Whatever they decide will likely be the way it is. Everyone goes through this type of thing at least once during a career. The lesson to be learned is to choose your collaborators sparingly and well. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: It's really first vs second author. Could you use your work for a separate article? If so, you can just tell her sorry but you'll do that instead. If you can't, then stick to your guns. It's not your fault she overpromised to two people. In fact is it possible to propose you as co-first with this other author? Both of you seem to have done more than the actual first author.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: it will be her responsibility to handle, she agrees in writing. She calls me now to say she can no longer honor the contract as she had a grad student do more than me, and she should give the grad student second. She asks me to do even more (for third author). I know she manipulated me and likely the grad student into writing her paper for her, and I know I have a case with my written agreement, but it might be best to just never work with her again. Should I contact her advisor? I have no idea what to do but do not want to face retaliation or be dragged into a time consuming and emotionally draining experience, for something that is inconsequential(second vs third author).
RESPONSE A: I think it's good that you tried to work out the authorship in advance, and it's a shame that it didn't go smoothly this time. However, at least in my field (molecular bioscience), the order of authorship is based on the amount of work done and intellectual contribution to the paper, so any previous agreement as to authorship would generally be seen as a guideline and not a contract. If it's true that this graduate student has done more than you, than the graduate student gets to be higher on the paper than you. Now, of course, determining whose degree of contribution is larger isn't necessarily straightforward, so if you truly feel you're being slighted, then I think the only thing for you to do is to get the PIs involved, both yours and the other postdoc's. Whatever they decide will likely be the way it is. Everyone goes through this type of thing at least once during a career. The lesson to be learned is to choose your collaborators sparingly and well. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: > I tell her no, it’s the job of the first author to write the paper. She says it will never get done, because she is too busy and her English is not good. Do you need the pub? Then write the paper. You get to make your own narrative about your contribution later on when you make your tenure case. If you don't need the pub, don't write the paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What kind of reading schedule do you maintain to be on top of everything while completing a major research project and going through day to day life? I only ask because I'm a final year undergrad who has gotten by through bursts of productivity on some days and days where I am out of commission. I might read 4 articles/book chapters a week in depth and loads of skimmed material ie. stuff I didn't have time/energy to complete. There is no regularity or sense of control involved. I am always fighting against the clock, my mental health and my ability to get it done. I hope that understanding the day to day workload of someone undertaking a major research project like a pHD can help me plan out my own routine when I take on my thesis next year. I want to take some control back. I know with my mental health issues, it will always be a struggle but being prepared is what has gotten me this far! I know answers differ individually! I'm just trying to get a rough idea so I can build towards my own goals little by little.
RESPONSE A: Leave everything until the last minute, then panic read and have a low-grade meltdown ahead of the deadline. It helps with weight loss, too.
RESPONSE B: This was kind of my schedule for my MA and during my dissertation research. Note that I didn’t really have a stable part time job or anything so I could really dedicate myself to studying. General MA term consisted of 4 modules - I aimed to complete at least 2 readings per module so that was 8 per week, which tallied up to about 2ish a day and I would just regulate that against way day my classes were. During my thesis research (I had about 6-7 months) I was only for serious towards the latter half where I aimed for 1 reading or more a day because that adds up really quickly.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How did people do literature reviews prior to the internet? Can any 40+ yr old academics share their experiences with the literature review process prior to the internet? I can't even imagine what a cumbersome process that would be.
RESPONSE A: Physically tracking down every reference from every paper you could find. (This was laborious but at least possible; what was essentially impossible was seeing who cited a certain paper. That's why that Google Scholar feature is a godsend.) Tons of photocopying. Help from librarians. Relying on the savvy of older colleagues in the field to suggest seminal work. Making friends with obsessive coworkers with huge filing cabinets who would save every paper they read. You were furious if you tracked down a paper with a grandiose title and/or abstract that actually covered only a nuance of a subset of what it claimed to cover.
RESPONSE B: Driving to multiple libraries.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How did people do literature reviews prior to the internet? Can any 40+ yr old academics share their experiences with the literature review process prior to the internet? I can't even imagine what a cumbersome process that would be.
RESPONSE A: At my uni it was called the stacks, a deep part of the library that had so much shit in it they put the shelves on electric rollers so it would fit. Only 3 or 4 aisles could be open at once so you had to sit and frown at some grad student while debating if their field was even worth researching. Good times.
RESPONSE B: I'm in the U.S., and had to request a paper that was only available from a library in Europe. It took 2 months to get to us, and I don't actually think it was relevant once I read it. Was it the dark ages? No, it was 2003.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How did people do literature reviews prior to the internet? Can any 40+ yr old academics share their experiences with the literature review process prior to the internet? I can't even imagine what a cumbersome process that would be.
RESPONSE A: Index cards. Lots and lots of index card. And a paid typist.
RESPONSE B: Umberto Eco's academic writing book (I think the English name is How to write a thesis) has a great guidance for this. He describes how you navigate the index card cabinets, and I think it even discusses how you get funding to travel to the library that has the books. Everything else in the book is still applicable, so I recommend it to all students.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How did people do literature reviews prior to the internet? Can any 40+ yr old academics share their experiences with the literature review process prior to the internet? I can't even imagine what a cumbersome process that would be.
RESPONSE A: Umberto Eco's academic writing book (I think the English name is How to write a thesis) has a great guidance for this. He describes how you navigate the index card cabinets, and I think it even discusses how you get funding to travel to the library that has the books. Everything else in the book is still applicable, so I recommend it to all students.
RESPONSE B: At my uni it was called the stacks, a deep part of the library that had so much shit in it they put the shelves on electric rollers so it would fit. Only 3 or 4 aisles could be open at once so you had to sit and frown at some grad student while debating if their field was even worth researching. Good times.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How is it that the standard time for a PhD in Germany is 3 years whereas in the US it can be as long as 10 years? Are they treated equally?
RESPONSE A: German PhDs require you get a 2 year masters first so they’re still roughly equivalent. Very rarely do PhDs last 10 years in the US except in some fields like education. Typically, US PhDs are 5-7 years. Americans consider the American PhD to carry more weight. Not sure of the converse. Note also there are many European PhDs that don’t require the masters like some British ones but they do tend to last longer
RESPONSE B: Same title earned, but a North American PhD is generally thought to carry more depth/experience and creditials.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How is it that the standard time for a PhD in Germany is 3 years whereas in the US it can be as long as 10 years? Are they treated equally?
RESPONSE A: I’m not sure many people take 10 years in the US. My (US) university required students to graduate between 3 and 7 years. I think many universities in the US are going to a similar policy to prevent students from graduating too early and/or to keep PIs from holding on to grad students for too long because they are cheap labor. Most of the students in my program graduated around the 5-6 year mark.
RESPONSE B: Same title earned, but a North American PhD is generally thought to carry more depth/experience and creditials.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How is it that the standard time for a PhD in Germany is 3 years whereas in the US it can be as long as 10 years? Are they treated equally?
RESPONSE A: In the US, 2-3 years for the master's portion and 3-4 years for the PhD portion is more common, so you are looking at 5-7 total years. As others have said, most schools I have been associated with have 7 year limits on doc programs and most students are out around 5-6 years unless there is an unusual circumstance. One thing that can make it take longer is people who come in with master's degrees already. In my experience, PhD programs do not transfer in many, if any, credits, so you may end up repeating most if not all of your master's coursework. So a 2 year master's plus a 6 year PhD program might make the total time in grad school look longer.
RESPONSE B: In the Humanities, taking 5-6 years for the Dr.phil. is nothing out of the ordinary and not really frowned upon. *Gut Ding will Weile haben*, as a German saying goes. And at least in my field the PhD is usually considered inferior to the Dr.phil..
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What are some exceptionally well-written articles? Bonus points if it's in STEM. I'm looking to improve my scientific writing and I already read some style guides. In addition, I'm looking for some really well-written articles for inspiration.
RESPONSE A: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/23431001/ Im a big fan of this article. Both for its writing and its snark.
RESPONSE B: I don't have anything specific coming to mind, but there's nothing I hate more than pretentious writing. If I have to reread something more than once (or maybe twice, depending) to understand what it's saying, then I believe that it's bad writing. Keep things straightforward and to the point. Or maybe I'm just thick.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What are some exceptionally well-written articles? Bonus points if it's in STEM. I'm looking to improve my scientific writing and I already read some style guides. In addition, I'm looking for some really well-written articles for inspiration.
RESPONSE A: Anything at Distill.pub. I recommend their article on research debt on why all scientific articles should be well written: Research Debt. In summary: writing a good article is hard... but it's the responsibility of the author to write well. If they don't write well, they're just transferring the work of distilling the research to their audience (which is typically more people than the authors).
RESPONSE B: I've always been a fan of the writing in most the articles that come out of David Julius' Lab: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Julius%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30463955 One of his former postdocs who has had her own lab for a while now does an even better job: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bautista%20DM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30653930 ​ ​ ​
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What are some exceptionally well-written articles? Bonus points if it's in STEM. I'm looking to improve my scientific writing and I already read some style guides. In addition, I'm looking for some really well-written articles for inspiration.
RESPONSE A: I've always been a fan of the writing in most the articles that come out of David Julius' Lab: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Julius%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30463955 One of his former postdocs who has had her own lab for a while now does an even better job: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bautista%20DM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30653930 ​ ​ ​
RESPONSE B: An oldie but goodie. 1977's Evolution and Tinkering by Francois Jacob. It was a talk he gave at Berkeley that year, published in Science. Jacob won the Nobel in 1965 with Monad for his work on transcription. It's just beautifully written and argued, and has this great kind of meandering logic to it. Especially prescient for all the interest in evo-devo that would come later, and still really really solid fifty years later. Required reading for all biologists IMO.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What are some exceptionally well-written articles? Bonus points if it's in STEM. I'm looking to improve my scientific writing and I already read some style guides. In addition, I'm looking for some really well-written articles for inspiration.
RESPONSE A: https://www.nature.com/articles/npjbiofilms20164 Pretty good article addressing a significant and underlooked hurdle in my field TLDR we shouldn't use 16S rRNA to infer functional capabilities of microbial communities. Got followed up by a bunch of articles ripping on a tool called PICRUST that lots of microbial community researchers trust way too much
RESPONSE B: I've always been a fan of the writing in most the articles that come out of David Julius' Lab: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Julius%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30463955 One of his former postdocs who has had her own lab for a while now does an even better job: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bautista%20DM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30653930 ​ ​ ​
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What are some exceptionally well-written articles? Bonus points if it's in STEM. I'm looking to improve my scientific writing and I already read some style guides. In addition, I'm looking for some really well-written articles for inspiration.
RESPONSE A: “Why has critique run out of steam” by Bruno Latour
RESPONSE B: I've always been a fan of the writing in most the articles that come out of David Julius' Lab: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Julius%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30463955 One of his former postdocs who has had her own lab for a while now does an even better job: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bautista%20DM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor\_uid=30653930 ​ ​ ​
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Weird Academia Twitter As a student (Bachelor’s and Masters) would it be weird to follow professors on Twitter to keep up with research and topics in your field?
RESPONSE A: Not weird at all. It's a very convenient way to find out about their most recent publications.
RESPONSE B: Weird, no. But academic Twitter is a horrible twisted place that I’d recommend avoiding.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Weird Academia Twitter As a student (Bachelor’s and Masters) would it be weird to follow professors on Twitter to keep up with research and topics in your field?
RESPONSE A: That's what it's there for, I can't think of a reason why that's weird.
RESPONSE B: I had one lecturer during my undergrad who told us to follow his Twitter and YouTube channel, on his YT channel he would just make a weekly video where he would go into the Forrest or the beach and tell us what we'll be doing the following week, as well as that on his Instagram he would just tweet about his dog, wanting to make a crypto based around his dog, and also used our class name as a hashtag so we can see relavent news articles. That man was precious
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Weird Academia Twitter As a student (Bachelor’s and Masters) would it be weird to follow professors on Twitter to keep up with research and topics in your field?
RESPONSE A: Not weird but remember that your tutors are likely to use Twitter for more than just their research (e.g. union stuff, sharing good news, politics, silly posts, football/music/etc interests) so you might be disappointed by the content! You could also set up a Google Scholar alert for keywords you're interested in or join a Jiscmail list for your discipline.
RESPONSE B: I had one lecturer during my undergrad who told us to follow his Twitter and YouTube channel, on his YT channel he would just make a weekly video where he would go into the Forrest or the beach and tell us what we'll be doing the following week, as well as that on his Instagram he would just tweet about his dog, wanting to make a crypto based around his dog, and also used our class name as a hashtag so we can see relavent news articles. That man was precious
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Weird Academia Twitter As a student (Bachelor’s and Masters) would it be weird to follow professors on Twitter to keep up with research and topics in your field?
RESPONSE A: I had one lecturer during my undergrad who told us to follow his Twitter and YouTube channel, on his YT channel he would just make a weekly video where he would go into the Forrest or the beach and tell us what we'll be doing the following week, as well as that on his Instagram he would just tweet about his dog, wanting to make a crypto based around his dog, and also used our class name as a hashtag so we can see relavent news articles. That man was precious
RESPONSE B: I've got two: one personal where I talk shite, one where I tweet work stuff. They're clearly labelled but I think the point of twitter a bit is that 'follower' is far less involved than say friends on facebook.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Weird Academia Twitter As a student (Bachelor’s and Masters) would it be weird to follow professors on Twitter to keep up with research and topics in your field?
RESPONSE A: It's not weird for you to do this but be careful on Academic Twitter. It's a cesspit of bigotry, slap fights, and terrible takes. Unfortunately many academics will forget that their expertise is extremely limited. It's never fun to find out a professor you respect is a Nazi sympathizer.
RESPONSE B: That's what it's there for, I can't think of a reason why that's weird.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do professors have freedom? Hi everyone. To any professor or anyone that knows one, what’s being a professor like, do you have freedom regarding your schedule/working hours and research topics or do you get told what to do?
RESPONSE A: I can't think if a job with more freedom. Some will disagree here, but this is my life.
RESPONSE B: I'm a professor at a community college in Canada. Don't do any research or anything, just do the teaching. I make $86k a year (will max out around $100k), I essentially get 5 months of "work from home", May-August and most of December (2 of those months are actual vacation). When I do work "full time", I have somewhere between 22 and 30 hours of scheduled work a week. There is a lot of class preparation and marking that needs to be done in that time, but this is *by far* the best job I have ever had.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do professors have freedom? Hi everyone. To any professor or anyone that knows one, what’s being a professor like, do you have freedom regarding your schedule/working hours and research topics or do you get told what to do?
RESPONSE A: Yea. It's probably one of the most flexible jobs there are. Think of it as a mini company CEO. If you go to all your meetings and classes. The rest of the time is yours to figure out.
RESPONSE B: I'm a professor at a community college in Canada. Don't do any research or anything, just do the teaching. I make $86k a year (will max out around $100k), I essentially get 5 months of "work from home", May-August and most of December (2 of those months are actual vacation). When I do work "full time", I have somewhere between 22 and 30 hours of scheduled work a week. There is a lot of class preparation and marking that needs to be done in that time, but this is *by far* the best job I have ever had.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do professors have freedom? Hi everyone. To any professor or anyone that knows one, what’s being a professor like, do you have freedom regarding your schedule/working hours and research topics or do you get told what to do?
RESPONSE A: I'm a professor at a community college in Canada. Don't do any research or anything, just do the teaching. I make $86k a year (will max out around $100k), I essentially get 5 months of "work from home", May-August and most of December (2 of those months are actual vacation). When I do work "full time", I have somewhere between 22 and 30 hours of scheduled work a week. There is a lot of class preparation and marking that needs to be done in that time, but this is *by far* the best job I have ever had.
RESPONSE B: You have the freedom to do whatever your program officer / funding agency tells you to do
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do professors have freedom? Hi everyone. To any professor or anyone that knows one, what’s being a professor like, do you have freedom regarding your schedule/working hours and research topics or do you get told what to do?
RESPONSE A: It varies massively. My most recent university puts a lot of pressure on people to work according to faculty strategy, while at the one before that the research was pretty much totally free, barring anything that could embarrass the organization (also, there were no resources to do anything much anyway, but nobody tried to push you into "vision"-aligned collaborations or projects).
RESPONSE B: I'm a professor at a community college in Canada. Don't do any research or anything, just do the teaching. I make $86k a year (will max out around $100k), I essentially get 5 months of "work from home", May-August and most of December (2 of those months are actual vacation). When I do work "full time", I have somewhere between 22 and 30 hours of scheduled work a week. There is a lot of class preparation and marking that needs to be done in that time, but this is *by far* the best job I have ever had.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do professors have freedom? Hi everyone. To any professor or anyone that knows one, what’s being a professor like, do you have freedom regarding your schedule/working hours and research topics or do you get told what to do?
RESPONSE A: I'm a professor at a community college in Canada. Don't do any research or anything, just do the teaching. I make $86k a year (will max out around $100k), I essentially get 5 months of "work from home", May-August and most of December (2 of those months are actual vacation). When I do work "full time", I have somewhere between 22 and 30 hours of scheduled work a week. There is a lot of class preparation and marking that needs to be done in that time, but this is *by far* the best job I have ever had.
RESPONSE B: Yes, there is quite a bit of flexibility in your schedule and in terms of what research topics you pursue.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: m just exhausted from all of this want to figure out a way of distancing myself gracefully and moving on with my Ph.D. without being totally socially isolated.*
RESPONSE A: >I see graduate school as being a professional environment. It is and yet... more complicated than that. In grad school you're still in a cohort of students forming student-like bonds as you attend the same classes. And there are friendships that evolve that end up being deeper than what normally develop between coworkers. >I'm worried about my reputation in the department **given A's tendency to badmouth everyone.** >(she spread rumors and tried to complain to the department about one of the students she fell out with last year). This will sort itself out. A will eventually burn so many bridges that her reputation will stink worse than anyone else's and she'll lose credibility. >Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good Without knowing all the dynamics and nuances of relationships with B (and between A and B), I don't have a good recommendation here. I would caution against any steps that may paint *you* as trying to stir up drama/problems. >Does it make sense for me to distance myself from this friend group as a whole? Can I do that in academia or would that count as shutting the door on potentially useful relationships? Depends. As you go on through grad school, the bonds between classmates/cohort seem to weaken and become more lab/dept focused in my experience.
RESPONSE B: I completely relate to what you are going through, but in my case the involved parties are all members of our research group (lab) and I have to interact with or at least be together with “person A” a few times a week. It’s horrible. I just try to keep a professional attitude (open to help, but setting a distance) and try not to feel hurt when I notice them talking to others in the same room and clearly ignoring me. It sucks because we used to have friendly relations, but this person has consistently showed toxic behaviour and honestly, I just feel tired.. I hope you can get some peace, OP.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: ting the door on potentially useful relationships? * Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good, but I've had some friends give me the opposite advice. * Any tips for how I can avoid situations or people like this in the future? *TL;DR - I made a toxic friend in my first year of grad school. Now I'm just exhausted from all of this want to figure out a way of distancing myself gracefully and moving on with my Ph.D. without being totally socially isolated.*
RESPONSE A: >I see graduate school as being a professional environment. It is and yet... more complicated than that. In grad school you're still in a cohort of students forming student-like bonds as you attend the same classes. And there are friendships that evolve that end up being deeper than what normally develop between coworkers. >I'm worried about my reputation in the department **given A's tendency to badmouth everyone.** >(she spread rumors and tried to complain to the department about one of the students she fell out with last year). This will sort itself out. A will eventually burn so many bridges that her reputation will stink worse than anyone else's and she'll lose credibility. >Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good Without knowing all the dynamics and nuances of relationships with B (and between A and B), I don't have a good recommendation here. I would caution against any steps that may paint *you* as trying to stir up drama/problems. >Does it make sense for me to distance myself from this friend group as a whole? Can I do that in academia or would that count as shutting the door on potentially useful relationships? Depends. As you go on through grad school, the bonds between classmates/cohort seem to weaken and become more lab/dept focused in my experience.
RESPONSE B: Set your boundaries, reduce contact with A as much as you feasibly can (outside of necessary course interactions), and start developing friendships with other people (including those who are outside of your program/department/college).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: 't seem worth it. Here are my questions. However, really any advice or perspective would be great. * How should I handle this situation appropriately? I see graduate school as being a professional environment. How can I minimize damage? I'm worried about my reputation in the department given A's tendency to badmouth everyone. Typically if I didn't want to be friends with someone I would slowly distance myself by becoming busy with other things, but that seems hard given that everything with A generally seems very dramatic (she spread rumors and tried to complain to the department about one of the students she fell out with last year). * Does it make sense for me to distance myself from this friend group as a whole? Can I do that in academia or would that count as shutting the door on potentially useful relationships? * Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good, but I've had some friends give me the opposite advice. * Any tips for how I can avoid situations or people like this in the future? *TL;DR - I made a toxic friend in my first year of grad school. Now I'm just exhausted from all of this want to figure out a way of distancing myself gracefully and moving on with my Ph.D. without being totally socially isolated.*
RESPONSE A: I completely relate to what you are going through, but in my case the involved parties are all members of our research group (lab) and I have to interact with or at least be together with “person A” a few times a week. It’s horrible. I just try to keep a professional attitude (open to help, but setting a distance) and try not to feel hurt when I notice them talking to others in the same room and clearly ignoring me. It sucks because we used to have friendly relations, but this person has consistently showed toxic behaviour and honestly, I just feel tired.. I hope you can get some peace, OP.
RESPONSE B: Avoid these people and find friends outside of grad school to stay sane. Grad student friends (even good ones) feed each other's neurosis. The people in your cohort also don't control the success of your research or if you graduate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: complain to the department about one of the students she fell out with last year). * Does it make sense for me to distance myself from this friend group as a whole? Can I do that in academia or would that count as shutting the door on potentially useful relationships? * Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good, but I've had some friends give me the opposite advice. * Any tips for how I can avoid situations or people like this in the future? *TL;DR - I made a toxic friend in my first year of grad school. Now I'm just exhausted from all of this want to figure out a way of distancing myself gracefully and moving on with my Ph.D. without being totally socially isolated.*
RESPONSE A: Avoid these people and find friends outside of grad school to stay sane. Grad student friends (even good ones) feed each other's neurosis. The people in your cohort also don't control the success of your research or if you graduate.
RESPONSE B: I was like you my first semester of grad school, never really had to end a friendship before because I just never encountered much toxicity among my friend groups. It wasn't until grad school that I encountered this kind of behavior and it pretty much nuked my friend group(partially because I didn't know how to deal with it, partially because I didn't want to admit to myself what was going on). Luckily things seemed to work themselves out. Now I'm very lucky and was able to interact with other students who are supportive. Most of the people in grad school are just like most people everywhere, and I really want to believe that means they're basically good. People in grad school also tend to pick up on patterns quickly. Put together that means they aren't going to want to hang around toxic people if they don't have to. It sucks in the moment, but I really do believe these things will usually work themselves out. I can't give you much advice on what to do right now other than hang in there and work on building a support network. Grad school is hard and there's no reason to make it harder because of interpersonal issues.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: designed to hurt me. I also tried to talk with her about the badmouthing thing, which only resulted in her gaslighting me - she tried to tell me that she hadn't said any of those things, which is just BS because she said them all the time. At that point, I knew there was no recovering the relationship, and I was no longer interested in interacting with her. It doesn't seem worth it. Here are my questions. However, really any advice or perspective would be great. * How should I handle this situation appropriately? I see graduate school as being a professional environment. How can I minimize damage? I'm worried about my reputation in the department given A's tendency to badmouth everyone. Typically if I didn't want to be friends with someone I would slowly distance myself by becoming busy with other things, but that seems hard given that everything with A generally seems very dramatic (she spread rumors and tried to complain to the department about one of the students she fell out with last year). * Does it make sense for me to distance myself from this friend group as a whole? Can I do that in academia or would that count as shutting the door on potentially useful relationships? * Does B deserve to know? I am inclined not to say anything because I don't think it would do any good, but I've had some friends give me the opposite advice. * Any tips for how I can avoid situations or people like this in the future? *TL;DR - I made a toxic friend in my first year of grad school. Now I'm just exhausted from all of this want to figure out a way of distancing myself gracefully and moving on with my Ph.D. without being totally socially isolated.*
RESPONSE A: Set your boundaries, reduce contact with A as much as you feasibly can (outside of necessary course interactions), and start developing friendships with other people (including those who are outside of your program/department/college).
RESPONSE B: Avoid these people and find friends outside of grad school to stay sane. Grad student friends (even good ones) feed each other's neurosis. The people in your cohort also don't control the success of your research or if you graduate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Help? So long story short. I whistleblew on 2 cohort members that were doing some unethical stuff. Ive been to by Director of grad studies that student conduct board agreed there were some violations. Since then since one of cohort members is also a lab partner.. My advisor has taken a rather shitty attitude towards me. He made a few comments like "Learn to work with your lab partner, or I will shut the lab down" He insisted i was a "problem" looked at my very direct shaking his hands palms open, with a look in his eyes of anger. His emphasis on the word "you" was very strong as well as his rigid mannerisms. He is co-chair to my depart. An anon letter was sent to chair. When I opened up to my advisor and basically ousted myself as the letter writer, he said he was left in the dark and knew nothing. I know this to be false because my advisor had met with my lab mate the day before I got my ass chewed. Interesting was day before i got ass chewed advisor was like apply to PhD program. Then next day he rescinded saying he doesnt know me well enough to make that recommendation. My research interest align well with my advisor but since whistleblowing ive seen a dark side of him. I even tried to offer him a peace offering of a cookie, in hopes we could chat. He refused cookie. Stating he couldn't take it. Ive been told by director of grad studies that the school takes retaliation serious.. but when informed him of the aggression from advisor, he has not replied back.
RESPONSE A: >I even tried to offer him a peace offering of a cookie... > >He refused cookie. 😭
RESPONSE B: Unfortunately I cannot really understand your post. There’s a ton of missing context and it’s hard to understand your sentences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: palms open, with a look in his eyes of anger. His emphasis on the word "you" was very strong as well as his rigid mannerisms. He is co-chair to my depart. An anon letter was sent to chair. When I opened up to my advisor and basically ousted myself as the letter writer, he said he was left in the dark and knew nothing. I know this to be false because my advisor had met with my lab mate the day before I got my ass chewed. Interesting was day before i got ass chewed advisor was like apply to PhD program. Then next day he rescinded saying he doesnt know me well enough to make that recommendation. My research interest align well with my advisor but since whistleblowing ive seen a dark side of him. I even tried to offer him a peace offering of a cookie, in hopes we could chat. He refused cookie. Stating he couldn't take it. Ive been told by director of grad studies that the school takes retaliation serious.. but when informed him of the aggression from advisor, he has not replied back.
RESPONSE A: >I even tried to offer him a peace offering of a cookie... > >He refused cookie. 😭
RESPONSE B: I don’t know the details of your situation, nor can I imagine what kind of unethical “stuff” it is that your cohort did, but I myself am a graduate student. I suppose I’m confused at your shock. I could be wrong, but I get the feeling from your post that you are part of a smaller department. Did you, personally, speak to the two cohort you blew the whistle on or your advisor before you went all the way to the director of graduate studies? Again, we weren’t given many details to work with here, but from your post I’m inferring that you’re on a playing field similar to mine. I do find myself wondering if you properly weighed the *consequences* of doing something like this before doing so. I do hope you spoke to these people about your concerns before you blew the whistle on them. In general: what, exactly, did you think was going to happen?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: he doesnt know me well enough to make that recommendation. My research interest align well with my advisor but since whistleblowing ive seen a dark side of him. I even tried to offer him a peace offering of a cookie, in hopes we could chat. He refused cookie. Stating he couldn't take it. Ive been told by director of grad studies that the school takes retaliation serious.. but when informed him of the aggression from advisor, he has not replied back.
RESPONSE A: There's something called a "chain of command." I'm from Korea and learned this in the army. Basically, you report problems to people directly above you first. If the problem doesn't get resolved, only then can you skip a few steps and go directly to the top. Imagine that you're a student's supervisor and you realized that your lab was having some problems among students, not because one of your students came to you for help, but because _your_ supervisor (or whoever) confronted you about it. When your advisor says he was "left in the dark," he doesn't mean that he didn't know about the problem, but more that he was left in the dark by _you_. As of now I'm not sure what you can do to make the situation better. One thing that I suggest you could do to make up for it is to 1) stop reporting things (for now) and 2) apologize to your supervisor. Don't apologize because you blew the whistle, but apologize saying that you didn't mean to disrespect them that way and that you only went against the chain because you were afraid of what might happen, and ask him if there's anything you can do to lessen the damage done. Obviously it would be nice if people wouldn't be so childish and take care of issues properly, but as of now you're the one who needs his support.
RESPONSE B: The thing I'm left wondering is why you didn't speak to your advisor first, skipping to the director of grad studies makes your advisor look bad and he may have been willing to do something about it, granted he may not at which point it is acceptable while perhaps unwise to go the whistleblower route
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it just me that 20 something undergrads need a lot more these days? I'm just 33, but I'm beginning to feel like the newest crop of students needs a lot more handholding than I did when I was in school. I'm in a graduate program in counseling at a decent state institution in the midwest. We spend at least 20 minutes a class talking about how to do assignments that have fairly straightforward instructions. ​ I don't want to be "kids these days," but is this a common problem?
RESPONSE A: Yes I teach at a well known university and students need to be explained how to zip a file, what file extensions are, and how to hand in work on time.
RESPONSE B: It's very difficult for me to remember what college was like, because it was 20 years ago this year, but I certainly remember being much more afraid to ask for help than most kids these days. I think there was much more of a feeling of if you can't figure this out, you probably shouldn't in here in the first place.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it just me that 20 something undergrads need a lot more these days? I'm just 33, but I'm beginning to feel like the newest crop of students needs a lot more handholding than I did when I was in school. I'm in a graduate program in counseling at a decent state institution in the midwest. We spend at least 20 minutes a class talking about how to do assignments that have fairly straightforward instructions. ​ I don't want to be "kids these days," but is this a common problem?
RESPONSE A: It's very difficult for me to remember what college was like, because it was 20 years ago this year, but I certainly remember being much more afraid to ask for help than most kids these days. I think there was much more of a feeling of if you can't figure this out, you probably shouldn't in here in the first place.
RESPONSE B: Yes. It's a major problem.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it just me that 20 something undergrads need a lot more these days? I'm just 33, but I'm beginning to feel like the newest crop of students needs a lot more handholding than I did when I was in school. I'm in a graduate program in counseling at a decent state institution in the midwest. We spend at least 20 minutes a class talking about how to do assignments that have fairly straightforward instructions. ​ I don't want to be "kids these days," but is this a common problem?
RESPONSE A: I imagine that's something that people always feel. Memory is not as reliable as you'd think it is in terms of experience
RESPONSE B: Yes I teach at a well known university and students need to be explained how to zip a file, what file extensions are, and how to hand in work on time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: me for coming. I waited outside the room for 20 minutes or so waiting for everyone to come out. At that point, I was pretty frustrated, so I just left. A month passed. I got an offer for a TT position at an M1 college. I contacted the department chair at the Ivy for a chance at a counter. She thanked me but said they had chosen someone else. I took the TT position. A few weeks later, the Ivy announced that they had promoted a lecturer already teaching at their school into the position that I had interviewed for. What to make of all this? My guess is that they already wanted to promote the in-house candidate but had to interview a certain number of people. I also probably could have done more while there to improve my chances, instead of losing patience and leaving. I'm not bitter (I don't think!) and I'm happy with my new job but it all just seems... strange. Anyway, that's the update, for anyone who cares...
RESPONSE A: Been there, done that - for positions outside of academia. What is usually going on is that they have already selected someone, but needed to fulfill some administrative requirement tor N interviews or that they wanted to 'eyeball' you for some reason. In this case it looks like it was the former reason. Look at it this way - you racked up some free air miles, for a few hours of your time.
RESPONSE B: This kind of interview wouldn't be out of place in the UK, and I don't think it's terribly odd for a non-TT position in the US. I dunno - if someone's working in a department, they're probably already a good fit (and for a non-TT position, a known quantity). There's a lot of room between "the fix is in" and "everybody comes into the interview as equals", and that room is where most jobs lie. An insider may have knowledge of departmental needs and practices that puts them at a finite advantage. I dunno - if we were conducting actually fake interviews, we wouldn't waste the money to fly in people across the country.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: hard to have a good discussion in that environment. My plan: Talk to them more after my presentation. Eventually, about 75 percent of the faculty showed up. The department chair arrived two minutes before the presentation was supposed to start. This was the first time I had spoken with her - our prior communications were through email. We shook hands. I gave my presentation. It went well, I thought. Had a robust back-and-forth with faculty members. They seemed interested. On the hour, my presentation ended. I picked up my computer and expected to walk out with everyone else. But the department chair instead shook my hand and said the faculty would now conduct a meeting. She thanked me for coming. I waited outside the room for 20 minutes or so waiting for everyone to come out. At that point, I was pretty frustrated, so I just left. A month passed. I got an offer for a TT position at an M1 college. I contacted the department chair at the Ivy for a chance at a counter. She thanked me but said they had chosen someone else. I took the TT position. A few weeks later, the Ivy announced that they had promoted a lecturer already teaching at their school into the position that I had interviewed for. What to make of all this? My guess is that they already wanted to promote the in-house candidate but had to interview a certain number of people. I also probably could have done more while there to improve my chances, instead of losing patience and leaving. I'm not bitter (I don't think!) and I'm happy with my new job but it all just seems... strange. Anyway, that's the update, for anyone who cares...
RESPONSE A: Sorry you had to go through that. Btw, what is an "M1 college"?
RESPONSE B: Been there, done that - for positions outside of academia. What is usually going on is that they have already selected someone, but needed to fulfill some administrative requirement tor N interviews or that they wanted to 'eyeball' you for some reason. In this case it looks like it was the former reason. Look at it this way - you racked up some free air miles, for a few hours of your time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , and I am tired of it since I want a long-term healthy relationship leading up to marriage. My parents kept telling me to be practical about my goals, and I still struggled with making difficult decisions. However, I have read stories by Ph.D. people who got married during their Ph.D. program and graduated with flying colors, which is something I am willing to go through in that scenario. Some people have recommended pursuing a Master's degree before going for a Ph.D., which I am also willing to go through. However, I am concerned about losing my opportunity to pursue a Ph.D. when I start a family. I want to avoid ending up like my parents, who regretfully lost their chance to pursue a Ph.D. Any actual astrophysicist who had that experience as I am currently going through, please suggest what steps have worked for you and, hopefully, could help me make the right decision for all the things I want in life to meet my goals.
RESPONSE A: I have lived in an astronomy hub and as a nerd lots of my friends during my years there have PhDs in various astronomy fields. I also was in a domestic partnership for years with someone who received their PhD in astronomy from a top school and worked doing a 70/30 position in the field. I know a smattering of Dr.s in other disciplines, but, apart from two Literature people, Astronomy peeps seemed to have the hardest time for employment. Jobs in the field are way less in number than the number of students being pumped out with doctoral astro degrees. Some even struggle finding Post Docs. This means that when a job comes up you AND your partner have to be will to move there. Baltimore, Hawaii, Tucson, Chile, tiny college town teaching gen ed astro courses, wherever for whatever. Might be easier after you are already established or might be possible while a student. Almost all my friends in the field in successful relationships found their partner after graduating. (And like 80%+ of those were during their post docs now that I think about it.)
RESPONSE B: No masters, go straight PhD. Get married during or before, both are fine.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: who got married during their Ph.D. program and graduated with flying colors, which is something I am willing to go through in that scenario. Some people have recommended pursuing a Master's degree before going for a Ph.D., which I am also willing to go through. However, I am concerned about losing my opportunity to pursue a Ph.D. when I start a family. I want to avoid ending up like my parents, who regretfully lost their chance to pursue a Ph.D. Any actual astrophysicist who had that experience as I am currently going through, please suggest what steps have worked for you and, hopefully, could help me make the right decision for all the things I want in life to meet my goals.
RESPONSE A: I’m a current astro PhD student and, while I can’t say anything about marriage during a PhD, I can say that if you plan to pursue an astro PhD in the US, it is uncommon to get a master’s before your PhD. My understanding is that this is a bit different in Europe though.
RESPONSE B: I have lived in an astronomy hub and as a nerd lots of my friends during my years there have PhDs in various astronomy fields. I also was in a domestic partnership for years with someone who received their PhD in astronomy from a top school and worked doing a 70/30 position in the field. I know a smattering of Dr.s in other disciplines, but, apart from two Literature people, Astronomy peeps seemed to have the hardest time for employment. Jobs in the field are way less in number than the number of students being pumped out with doctoral astro degrees. Some even struggle finding Post Docs. This means that when a job comes up you AND your partner have to be will to move there. Baltimore, Hawaii, Tucson, Chile, tiny college town teaching gen ed astro courses, wherever for whatever. Might be easier after you are already established or might be possible while a student. Almost all my friends in the field in successful relationships found their partner after graduating. (And like 80%+ of those were during their post docs now that I think about it.)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: . when I start a family. I want to avoid ending up like my parents, who regretfully lost their chance to pursue a Ph.D. Any actual astrophysicist who had that experience as I am currently going through, please suggest what steps have worked for you and, hopefully, could help me make the right decision for all the things I want in life to meet my goals.
RESPONSE A: The duration of PhD programs is fairly predictable (4-7 years). The amount of time it takes for anyone to find a life partner is not. Let’s say you decide to put everything else aside and focus on finding your life partner first. Let’s say you get into two 2-year relationships, neither of which results in marriage. Then what? Also, what will you tell these people as you’re dating them? “As soon as we get married and have a baby on the way, I will quit this job I never wanted anyway, and go to graduate school”? How will they even know who you are, when you’re hanging a big change and uncertainty over their head? This is not a feasible path. You can only keep doing what you want to do, and see if a partner comes along while you’re doing those things. You can’t put plans that you can work on by yourself on hold while searching for a mythical partner.
RESPONSE B: Current phd student here (bio not physics so take my advice with a grain of salt), but I think overall academia is moving towards a better work-life balance. Pursuing a graduate degree should not prevent you from doing other things in your life, although there are things you definitely need to consider: will a PhD stipend be enough to support a family? If you stay in academia, will your family be ok moving to different places? Etc. I put in about 40 hours a week and I'm doing perfectly fine. My time is also largely unstructured (outside of classes and meetings) which is beneficial if you plan to have a family. If you set boundaries and expectations up front, and have a good advisor (this may take a good amount of research to find) there's no reason why you can't start a family and pursue a PhD.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: opportunity to pursue a Ph.D. when I start a family. I want to avoid ending up like my parents, who regretfully lost their chance to pursue a Ph.D. Any actual astrophysicist who had that experience as I am currently going through, please suggest what steps have worked for you and, hopefully, could help me make the right decision for all the things I want in life to meet my goals.
RESPONSE A: I am currently doing a PhD in your field of interest, Nuclear Astrophysics. As you have already heard, you absolutely have to pursue a Masters before. I have colleagues who are married, both PhD in Astro (in other topics), they seem to be handling PhD work well, part of the reason it's working great I feel is both in the same year in similar field at the same institute. PhD does require a lot of dedicated time, also you have to form collaborations, talk to other people, attend conferences/schools, it can take up majority of your time, so think of all these factors. The reason Masters is necessary is you get an idea by then if you really want to pursue a career in Research, or other fields. Also you will get to watch PhD students more closely, get to know their work, maybe then you will get a clearer idea on what exactly you prefer.
RESPONSE B: The duration of PhD programs is fairly predictable (4-7 years). The amount of time it takes for anyone to find a life partner is not. Let’s say you decide to put everything else aside and focus on finding your life partner first. Let’s say you get into two 2-year relationships, neither of which results in marriage. Then what? Also, what will you tell these people as you’re dating them? “As soon as we get married and have a baby on the way, I will quit this job I never wanted anyway, and go to graduate school”? How will they even know who you are, when you’re hanging a big change and uncertainty over their head? This is not a feasible path. You can only keep doing what you want to do, and see if a partner comes along while you’re doing those things. You can’t put plans that you can work on by yourself on hold while searching for a mythical partner.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: a Ph.D. Any actual astrophysicist who had that experience as I am currently going through, please suggest what steps have worked for you and, hopefully, could help me make the right decision for all the things I want in life to meet my goals.
RESPONSE A: The duration of PhD programs is fairly predictable (4-7 years). The amount of time it takes for anyone to find a life partner is not. Let’s say you decide to put everything else aside and focus on finding your life partner first. Let’s say you get into two 2-year relationships, neither of which results in marriage. Then what? Also, what will you tell these people as you’re dating them? “As soon as we get married and have a baby on the way, I will quit this job I never wanted anyway, and go to graduate school”? How will they even know who you are, when you’re hanging a big change and uncertainty over their head? This is not a feasible path. You can only keep doing what you want to do, and see if a partner comes along while you’re doing those things. You can’t put plans that you can work on by yourself on hold while searching for a mythical partner.
RESPONSE B: Honestly, in my experience, people meeting a life partner and getting married during a PhD program or soon after is rare (but filter that through the fact that it was \*my\* experience, not anyone else's). Getting a doctorate can be rough on relationships, esp if the other person (and their family) doesn't understand why you don't 'just finish it already'. That said, you're picking one of the fields that if I had to go back and do it again I'd pick that. I find computational cosmology to be very cool and the tools they have these days and the amount of open source stuff would make it a LOT easier than when I was in school and if you needed a piece of software you'd generally have to write the whole damn thing from the ground up. If you're an American, consider doing one overseas as the time to degree is shorter. You'll possibly have better work life balance too (I did two postdocs overseas and one job)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: new students. None of the students have worked out, they learned a lot but I ended up needing to redo all their work. (This could be my fault as well, not supervising them enough.) I have a lot of great collaborations, but that work has also been massively disrupted by my family issues, and they have lost patience with me (also understandably). Just down to it, much of the issue is that I do not have the energy and focus research requires. I need a new job, I just cannot perform at the level needed here, but I find myself feeling too burned out to go through the faculty job search process again. Also, I have not published in *years* and my last grant ran out in 2017, I have not had a new one (applied for a couple but no luck). My CV looks pretty sad right now. I should be manuscript-writing my ass off, job-applying my ass off, grant-writing my ass off, but I find I can barely get four hours of work done in a day. (As an aside, I'm not alone in all this. I have a husband, but he actually has had almost identical issues with his family and is also exhausted and grief-stricken. Additionally, he hates his job, whereas for me it feels more like my job hates me. I have seen a therapist and a psychiatrist. I am on anti-depressants and though I am not really depressed I think it maybe helps somewhat. They have both been sympathetic and helpful in some ways, but the consensus among them is that things are just really hard and my issues are a normal response to continuous stress.) Any advice on how to recover and revive?
RESPONSE A: Is anything you're dealing with covered under FMLA? A colleague of mine stopped the clock for reasons of family disaster, and made tenure in the end. She did however go a year without pay, and had benefits through her spouse, so it may not be viable. (This assumes you are in the USA, of course.)
RESPONSE B: sorry to hear this, it sounds really rough. we're rooting for you. post this question here as well http://thefora.org/index.php
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: My advisor submitted data he knew was false for a grant under my name I based my project off data showing a significant positive correlation from an experiment conducted before I joined the lab. However, when I reran the statistics myself, I found that there was no significant difference. My advisor thought that this was impossible, so we repeated the entire experiment (it took 6 months), but the results were still nonsignificant. I recently wrote a grant, and when my advisor reviewed my proposal he ADDED BACK IN THE INITIAL DATA we know is incorrect. I then pointed out the error, but he did not acknowledge my comment and submitted the grant under my name. Who can I talk to about how to navigate this issue without it being reported the the university, which could put my graduate career in jeopardy? I am speaking with a counselor about this, but he has limited knowledge of the academic research environment. Note: I am posting this from a friend’s alternate account.
RESPONSE A: If what you’re describing is accurate, your advisor is committing high-level scientific fraud. While it sounds scary, you *want* to talk to the university, starting at department level, about this, and create a paper trail quickly. I’d refer you to the case that just ended at UIUC with the firing of a tenure professor when this behavior was found for grants that were submitted and funded. *Not* letting the school know risks that, when found inevitably a few years from now, it’ll be harder to distance yourself from the falsification. Believe it or not, schools have rigorous procedures in place to handle these situations, and they usually prioritize protecting the student.
RESPONSE B: I don't have a ton of experience with grants and data-based projects, so I'll let other commenters tackle that, but the biggest thing I'd say is that you need to get this reported and the sooner, the better. If you have any documentation of your interactions with the advisor, particularly where you pointed out the error and he ignored it, make sure to save copies of it. Your career does not need to be put in jeopardy, but you need to protect yourself from your advisor throwing you under the bus.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Why are academic papers so difficult to read? This year was my first year working in a bio-statistics lab. I'm an undergrad with aspirations of pursuing a PhD in biostatistics. During lab meetings this year, we were required to read a paper once every two weeks or so, and I greatly struggled with understanding what was even trying to be said in most of these papers. When we spoke on the papers in meetings, the points seemed very simple and made the papers seem convoluted and full of jargon. Is this a common style in academic writing? Did any of you feel this way when you first began to read academic papers? I can't tell if I'm frustrated because I like to write in a simple style so most people can follow what I'm saying, or if I'm just not cut out for this kind of work. Any opinion on this? Reading so many papers has kind of discouraged me from writing my own papers in the future. I know I'll have to do it, but as of right now, I feel like I'll be awful at it.
RESPONSE A: > Why are academic papers so difficult to read? Academic papers are written by experts to communicate with other experts about their field of expertise. Doing a PhD means spending years delving into a subject that probably got at most a few days of mention in your undergrad coursework, so undergrads aren't really the target audience of papers meant to convey the details of that research. It makes perfect sense that you find it difficult. However, it will get easier: you'll learn more about the field and you'll get better at figuring out how to access the information you need to follow a paper.
RESPONSE B: how much do you read in general, if you don't mind me asking? in general, ANY specialised literature tends to be very dense. Try technical manuals for example - " page turners they are not" .
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: papers. When we spoke on the papers in meetings, the points seemed very simple and made the papers seem convoluted and full of jargon. Is this a common style in academic writing? Did any of you feel this way when you first began to read academic papers? I can't tell if I'm frustrated because I like to write in a simple style so most people can follow what I'm saying, or if I'm just not cut out for this kind of work. Any opinion on this? Reading so many papers has kind of discouraged me from writing my own papers in the future. I know I'll have to do it, but as of right now, I feel like I'll be awful at it.
RESPONSE A: I would say that the simple answer is that many scientists don't (or can't) write properly. Simplicity is best, but I think that we often have a tendency to imitate the impenetrable prose of much of the literature - because it seems "scientific". There is some increasing pushback against this style, but it takes time to change norms. I think people sometimes want to confuse peer reviewers into accepting (or to intimidate them with impenetrable prose). Less charitably, I would say that some authors explicitly use bullshit, and unclear writing, to hide bad science. Also: some level of jargon is unavoidable, and if you're new to a field it can make reading very slow. It will get easier in time, both as your knowledge grows, and you become better at recognising and deconstructing bullshit.
RESPONSE B: > Why are academic papers so difficult to read? Academic papers are written by experts to communicate with other experts about their field of expertise. Doing a PhD means spending years delving into a subject that probably got at most a few days of mention in your undergrad coursework, so undergrads aren't really the target audience of papers meant to convey the details of that research. It makes perfect sense that you find it difficult. However, it will get easier: you'll learn more about the field and you'll get better at figuring out how to access the information you need to follow a paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: for this kind of work. Any opinion on this? Reading so many papers has kind of discouraged me from writing my own papers in the future. I know I'll have to do it, but as of right now, I feel like I'll be awful at it.
RESPONSE A: As someone who studied both journalism and STEM as an undergrad, reading academic literature as a grad student can be infuriating. It’s not your imagination; there’s a lot of bad writing out there, whether on purpose or not. But like people have said, the best thing you can do is practice. You’ll need to learn the technical terms and the underlying assumptions in these papers. To do that, I recommend reading textbooks that explain these ideas in simple ways, or find the very old papers where the basic concepts were first established. These old papers are often much simpler and shorter simply because the technology and body of knowledge wasn’t as sophisticated back then. Also, don’t be scared to go to the more experienced people in your group and ask questions. I can assure you most if not all of them felt the way you do now. See if one of them can explain these concepts in a simple way. Heck, I spent something like three full meetings with my advisor just asking really stupid, basic questions about a few key papers, and he was happy to help. And as a final point, not all academic papers are dense and confusing. Once in a while you’ll find something truly well written, that explains concepts clearly without simplifying them; I find those moments pretty exciting
RESPONSE B: One is that academics aren't trained at writing well, in fact, we're trained to write badly. Second is that the format of academic articles doesn't lend itself to easy reading. Another is that articles are generally highly specialized for people in the field - ergo, they're specialist by default, which hampers readability. As I said a few weeks ago when this question was asked: The real issue is that academic journals are extremely specialized, and assume a level of sophistication that is simply not extant for non-experts. Academic journals are for advancing academic knowledge, not for educating the public. And they cannot be both, as those are two incredibly different things.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Professors and PhD supervisors, what do you look for in "cold emails" and supervision enquiries from potential students? Im in the biology field, but I think this question applies to every field. Im currently looking at cold emailing a few professors on some phd grad programs I love the look of or enquiring about supervision on their uni websites, but I suffer bad with imposter syndrome and have absolutely no clue what is expected from me in these "cold emails". im very worried about annoying any potential supervisors and ruining my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha
RESPONSE A: Be specific. I hate generic emails from students. Do your research, speak about my papers or work that I do. I get so many cold emails from students that are just so generic and not focused enough. I especially can’t take on students who want to work on things tangentially related to my research.
RESPONSE B: If you can tell that a professor is annoyed by your cold email, you probably wouldn’t want to work with them anyway 😬 Just be yourself, keep the email short, and ask to meet virtually (or in person if you’re in the area). *Also, if you don’t hear back from them in a week or two, just resend the email cause it probably got lost in the shuffle.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Professors and PhD supervisors, what do you look for in "cold emails" and supervision enquiries from potential students? Im in the biology field, but I think this question applies to every field. Im currently looking at cold emailing a few professors on some phd grad programs I love the look of or enquiring about supervision on their uni websites, but I suffer bad with imposter syndrome and have absolutely no clue what is expected from me in these "cold emails". im very worried about annoying any potential supervisors and ruining my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha
RESPONSE A: Keep in mind that professors have very very limited time. Most professors I know don't reply to cold emails at all, or have a standard reply they can copy and paste. I myself also send a standard reply, which explains that we have a set procedure for hiring PhD students. In my case that means I can only hire someone if they respond to a vacancy, and that they should periodically check the website for such vacancies. After that, I forget about it. I don't have the time to consider individual emails when I don't have the funds to hire someone. All of that is just to set your expectations, so that you don't take it personally if you receive no response. Personally I don't think any less of someone who cold emails me, it neither hurts nor helps their chances in a future application. If you're going to send emails, make sure to keep it brief and be very clear about what you want from the professor.
RESPONSE B: Be specific. I hate generic emails from students. Do your research, speak about my papers or work that I do. I get so many cold emails from students that are just so generic and not focused enough. I especially can’t take on students who want to work on things tangentially related to my research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Professors and PhD supervisors, what do you look for in "cold emails" and supervision enquiries from potential students? Im in the biology field, but I think this question applies to every field. Im currently looking at cold emailing a few professors on some phd grad programs I love the look of or enquiring about supervision on their uni websites, but I suffer bad with imposter syndrome and have absolutely no clue what is expected from me in these "cold emails". im very worried about annoying any potential supervisors and ruining my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha
RESPONSE A: Be specific. I hate generic emails from students. Do your research, speak about my papers or work that I do. I get so many cold emails from students that are just so generic and not focused enough. I especially can’t take on students who want to work on things tangentially related to my research.
RESPONSE B: Ask around and be sure your field/country does them. I hear a decent amount of frustration from friends getting cold emails when it’s not the norm of the field, as it comes across somewhere between spam and someone trying to get an unfair advantage by going around the regular application process. For instance, in the US in biology reaching out is common in EEB, less so in molecular bio.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: ing my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha
RESPONSE A: Echoing others. Be professional, get to the point, show you have done some basic research on the department and the professor. Include a brief summary of who you are and your academic achievements, and attach short CV and a 1-2 page research project (if that’s the norm in your field). Think about when you send the email too. When is the deadline? It needs to be well in advance of that, and not during any major conference in your field or during the first or last weeks of teaching, or the exam period if there is one. ETA: I’m not STEM, but Classics - if your field is one where PhD projects are routinely advertised rather than developed as individual projects then just check the websites and apply for those vacancies with whatever material they request. Don’t sent unnecessary emails just for the name recognition - it may go the other way! If you have a legitimate pre-application question then by all means email.
RESPONSE B: Keep in mind that professors have very very limited time. Most professors I know don't reply to cold emails at all, or have a standard reply they can copy and paste. I myself also send a standard reply, which explains that we have a set procedure for hiring PhD students. In my case that means I can only hire someone if they respond to a vacancy, and that they should periodically check the website for such vacancies. After that, I forget about it. I don't have the time to consider individual emails when I don't have the funds to hire someone. All of that is just to set your expectations, so that you don't take it personally if you receive no response. Personally I don't think any less of someone who cold emails me, it neither hurts nor helps their chances in a future application. If you're going to send emails, make sure to keep it brief and be very clear about what you want from the professor.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Professors and PhD supervisors, what do you look for in "cold emails" and supervision enquiries from potential students? Im in the biology field, but I think this question applies to every field. Im currently looking at cold emailing a few professors on some phd grad programs I love the look of or enquiring about supervision on their uni websites, but I suffer bad with imposter syndrome and have absolutely no clue what is expected from me in these "cold emails". im very worried about annoying any potential supervisors and ruining my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha
RESPONSE A: Echoing others. Be professional, get to the point, show you have done some basic research on the department and the professor. Include a brief summary of who you are and your academic achievements, and attach short CV and a 1-2 page research project (if that’s the norm in your field). Think about when you send the email too. When is the deadline? It needs to be well in advance of that, and not during any major conference in your field or during the first or last weeks of teaching, or the exam period if there is one. ETA: I’m not STEM, but Classics - if your field is one where PhD projects are routinely advertised rather than developed as individual projects then just check the websites and apply for those vacancies with whatever material they request. Don’t sent unnecessary emails just for the name recognition - it may go the other way! If you have a legitimate pre-application question then by all means email.
RESPONSE B: Ask around and be sure your field/country does them. I hear a decent amount of frustration from friends getting cold emails when it’s not the norm of the field, as it comes across somewhere between spam and someone trying to get an unfair advantage by going around the regular application process. For instance, in the US in biology reaching out is common in EEB, less so in molecular bio.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicize it. I am not familiar with the publication process or how to assemble a good "paper", because It is my first time doing it. And since I am a PhD student, I require some help with that. On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publicate anything, not even a review paper which would make me more employable. I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit. I know that it might sound "one-sided", but this is really how I feel. I talk with my secondary supervisor, and he shared the idea that my supervisor has his own agenda that he follows. What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much? Please help, Thanks
RESPONSE A: To be honest, with very limited information, I have a feeling just from reading what you wrote that you are more off-base than your PhD supervisor. At least in the USA, 3 years would be extremely short to graduate with a PhD unless I am misunderstanding something. Your stipend only covers 3 years? Did you already finish a masters in the same lab or something? What country are you in, and how long do students usually take to complete their PhD in your program? 2-3 research papers and a review doesn't unreasonable, especially if he made that clear from the beginning. >I talked with him again recently, and I said that I am happy to still sacrifice some time for my "main" lab project because I hope to have it published. The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicize it. I mean, yes. The publishing process takes time, I am not sure what you were expecting? He can try to help you publish, but the data has to be there. Just working hard doesn't guarantee you will have something publishable in a fairly short time frame. Sounds like your supervisor thinks more experiments need to be done? Without some more information it will be hard to help.
RESPONSE B: Sounds like a problem. Talk to your committee chair and your second supervisor.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: behind with that" (especially compared to the PhD students who haven't been coming to the lab that often). Also meantime I was preparing some review articles. I sent it to him for some feedback, however, feedback wasn't very helpful, and usually was saying to add something more. Now I ended up with a big chunk of text, that I do not really know how to handle. I believe I need more help with that, but it is not coming. I talked with him again recently, and I said that I am happy to still sacrifice some time for my "main" lab project because I hope to have it published. The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicize it. I am not familiar with the publication process or how to assemble a good "paper", because It is my first time doing it. And since I am a PhD student, I require some help with that. On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publicate anything, not even a review paper which would make me more employable. I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit. I know that it might sound "one-sided", but this is really how I feel. I talk with my secondary supervisor, and he shared the idea that my supervisor has his own agenda that he follows. What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much? Please help, Thanks
RESPONSE A: > What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. That sounds like a horrible idea. What would **you** gain by doing that? Your advisor will hate you for it and they still need to grade or sign off on your thesis. > Or maybe I just complain too much? It's a bit difficult to gather from your description, but it sounds like you were employed in a project (I'm assuming you're in Europe), which involves several research responsibilities. I don't see anything that sounds like your PhD advisor is taking advantage of you.
RESPONSE B: Sounds like a problem. Talk to your committee chair and your second supervisor.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: that, but it is not coming. I talked with him again recently, and I said that I am happy to still sacrifice some time for my "main" lab project because I hope to have it published. The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicize it. I am not familiar with the publication process or how to assemble a good "paper", because It is my first time doing it. And since I am a PhD student, I require some help with that. On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publicate anything, not even a review paper which would make me more employable. I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit. I know that it might sound "one-sided", but this is really how I feel. I talk with my secondary supervisor, and he shared the idea that my supervisor has his own agenda that he follows. What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much? Please help, Thanks
RESPONSE A: 2-3 first author papers doesn’t sound unreasonable, I don’t think the review article in addition is typical, but if that’s what he wants…
RESPONSE B: This is going to sound harsh, however take it from someone who's been in your shoes. What you have to do from now on is prioritize YOU. Take charge of whatever project seems most promising in terms of publication and absolutely grind out whatever is needed to get good data out of it for a month or two and add that data to the manuscript if needed. It's good you have a draft at hand so you can focus on it for that one or two months. After that, submit it to a journal and shift to your thesis and focus on that to the exclusion of all else. From your post, it looks like he doesn't respect your efforts to "help" the lab and it seems the other students don't as well so why should you care? Take charge, prioritize your time and increase your efficiency. Focus your efforts on work that is meaningful to your publication and thesis. You only have 5 months and you cannot bank on an extension.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , that I do not really know how to handle. I believe I need more help with that, but it is not coming. I talked with him again recently, and I said that I am happy to still sacrifice some time for my "main" lab project because I hope to have it published. The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicize it. I am not familiar with the publication process or how to assemble a good "paper", because It is my first time doing it. And since I am a PhD student, I require some help with that. On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publicate anything, not even a review paper which would make me more employable. I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit. I know that it might sound "one-sided", but this is really how I feel. I talk with my secondary supervisor, and he shared the idea that my supervisor has his own agenda that he follows. What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much? Please help, Thanks
RESPONSE A: Sounds like a problem. Talk to your committee chair and your second supervisor.
RESPONSE B: This is going to sound harsh, however take it from someone who's been in your shoes. What you have to do from now on is prioritize YOU. Take charge of whatever project seems most promising in terms of publication and absolutely grind out whatever is needed to get good data out of it for a month or two and add that data to the manuscript if needed. It's good you have a draft at hand so you can focus on it for that one or two months. After that, submit it to a journal and shift to your thesis and focus on that to the exclusion of all else. From your post, it looks like he doesn't respect your efforts to "help" the lab and it seems the other students don't as well so why should you care? Take charge, prioritize your time and increase your efficiency. Focus your efforts on work that is meaningful to your publication and thesis. You only have 5 months and you cannot bank on an extension.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: good "paper", because It is my first time doing it. And since I am a PhD student, I require some help with that. On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publicate anything, not even a review paper which would make me more employable. I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit. I know that it might sound "one-sided", but this is really how I feel. I talk with my secondary supervisor, and he shared the idea that my supervisor has his own agenda that he follows. What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much? Please help, Thanks
RESPONSE A: I am sorry if that is not what you want to hear but as the top comments have pointed out. I also see nothing wrong. I did my PhD in the same field as you had to take care of reagents and chemicals had to attend to students even if I had something else to do. Being involved in several projects is normal because there is always the option one might fail. So Yea cleaning and these things suck especially if you get no help but nothing what you describe is something that your PI takes advantage of you. Talk to him one on one tell him if he wants a well running lab everyone has to take on something or he needs to hire a designated lab manager. In the end I see not the slighted ground for a complaint Edit : in terms of publication I know very few that publish more than 1-2 paper during their PHD. Time is short and therefore maybe his expectations were still based on the US system. However, I see little issue to move on with just 1 paper from the PhD. However talk to him about expectations and that you get at least that one paper published. It’s however a bit unclear from what you say if the project you work on deliver publishable data. Because if not that might be the reason he lets you continue working to get the data needed.
RESPONSE B: 2-3 first author papers doesn’t sound unreasonable, I don’t think the review article in addition is typical, but if that’s what he wants…
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is there a place like this sub for people who work in humanities? I came here a few years ago because I wanted to read about people's experiences in academia and talk about my own too, specifically in humanities. But I feel 90% of what gets posted here doesn't concern me at all because it's STEM-related. As a matter of fact that's primarily why I don't even go on /r/gradschool (also because most of people's experiences are clearly unrelatable to what academia is like in Canada). So where else can I go? Is there another discussion board somewhere that is more used by people in humanities? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: I mean, if you're basically looking for a tightly-focused information feed that you can passively follow, I don't think reddit is the social medium for you. Follow some humanities academia accounts on instagram or twitter. I don't think that this sub is 90% STEM (I am also not in STEM, but I find more than 10% of topics relevant to me on basically any day that I look). I also think the strength of this platform is that it facilitates engagement. So if you want to engage on a topic of interest to you, post one.
RESPONSE B: r/Professors skews more toward humanities
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is there a place like this sub for people who work in humanities? I came here a few years ago because I wanted to read about people's experiences in academia and talk about my own too, specifically in humanities. But I feel 90% of what gets posted here doesn't concern me at all because it's STEM-related. As a matter of fact that's primarily why I don't even go on /r/gradschool (also because most of people's experiences are clearly unrelatable to what academia is like in Canada). So where else can I go? Is there another discussion board somewhere that is more used by people in humanities? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: There are humanists here, but obviously they are grossly outnumbered by STEM faculty. The best place was probably the old Chronicle of Higher Education fora (assuming OP is in the US) but they nuked those about three years ago. Many thousands of posters lost, but it was somewhat reconstituted here. In the bygone days the H-Net set of mailing lists offered very robust fora on a remarkable range of humanities specialties, but those have eroded away to almost nothing. Speaking personally I am still on some very active subfield mailing lists (like tens of posts per day) that are useful. But there's nothing like humanists had in the 90s or early 2Ks when everyone *had* to be on a given list to keep up professionally.
RESPONSE B: I'm a (former) Canadian humanities academic. Did my Masters and pulled the ripcord after reading the writing on the wall. I dont know everything, but I know some.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is there a place like this sub for people who work in humanities? I came here a few years ago because I wanted to read about people's experiences in academia and talk about my own too, specifically in humanities. But I feel 90% of what gets posted here doesn't concern me at all because it's STEM-related. As a matter of fact that's primarily why I don't even go on /r/gradschool (also because most of people's experiences are clearly unrelatable to what academia is like in Canada). So where else can I go? Is there another discussion board somewhere that is more used by people in humanities? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: It is inactive now, but I made r/Humanities_Scholars for you ;). If you choose to accept this mission, please add a pertinent discussion post to see if others are interested in joining the conversation
RESPONSE B: Humanities PhD here. I engage a bit on Twitter, but it's almost all traditional social networking/career building and clearly not anonymous. While their are fewer Humanities posts here, they do exist, and if you search through old threads you will find a lot of information.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I don't even care about grad school anymore. I don't know what to do. I hate myself for not seeing this coming after what happened last year. I was stupidly naive to believe it will be different this time. What should I do? I don't even feel I have a right to complain since I didn't try hard enough. I regret starting late but I was such a mess mentally before I started because of the assault, which I can't even tell anyone. I truly believe I'd make it in time if we cooperated, many students before me have made it in 4 weeks or so. The stress is killing my productivity though.
RESPONSE A: You totally have the right to be stressed as this is a very tough situation both emotionally and mentally! 5 weeks is a doable time, though it is not at all generous. I would personally suggest reaching out to your advisor/PI one more time, and if you don't hear back for a couple days, then take it to your department head or advisor (if you have one) and maybe seek council there. I think with such limited time, it's important that you put your work and yourself first. If the lack of communication is going to hinder you from everything you worked for, then it doesn't matter how much you like/appreciate your advisor/PI. For some reason, it seems like they are unwilling to work with you (maybe the circumstances, idk) and you should not feel stressed over something you cannot control. Take the matter into your own hands and be confident in your actions! If you have evidence of interacting with ur advisor/PI I'm, sure someone higher up within the deparment can help you out.
RESPONSE B: Who is the dean of students for your Master’s program? Gather your timeline and all your emails, put them in one PDF file, and ask your dean of students for help. Forget about having your advisor as a future recommender or anything of the sort—they’re not reliable, and they’re not even the same person from day to day. Escalate. Right now the most important thing is to finish your degree. Ask about options for academic leave if an extension is necessary so you won’t have to keep paying tuition.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to cope with fear of failing a PHD? Hi everyone! I am about to start a PHD in a field of machine learning and bioinformatics. The thing is, the doctoral topic i chose is not entirely within the field of my current study. Machine learning and neural networks are quiet new for me, as i've only started studying them a year ago. I am allowed to pick subjects during my PHD though. The reason i chose it, is because i genuinely like programming, and stuff such as machine learning interests me a lot. ​ Still, i constantly have this fear of failing, that i would not be able to accomplish what i signed up for and by now its driving me mad. I really enjoy doing research, but i often keep asking myself questions such as: 'What if i get stuck?', 'What if its impossible?', 'What if i won't be able to publish enough/ at all...?'. I have no idea how to cope with it. Can someone give me advice on how to approach this? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: If it makes you feel better, my friend made his first neural network in his 3rd year out of 5 (he does protein folding research). Remember it’s a marathon.
RESPONSE B: The good thing about a PhD is there's relatively little you can fail outright. You're going to fail and screw up lots of things and have to try again. You're going to get stuck. That's all absolutely normal. If you don't struggle at all and everything is stuff you already know, you're probably not pushing yourself hard enough and actually learning from this. Try not to worry about the big picture. A PhD is a job. Spend most of the time thinking about what you need to do for next month or next month, not for 5 years from time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: everyone! I am about to start a PHD in a field of machine learning and bioinformatics. The thing is, the doctoral topic i chose is not entirely within the field of my current study. Machine learning and neural networks are quiet new for me, as i've only started studying them a year ago. I am allowed to pick subjects during my PHD though. The reason i chose it, is because i genuinely like programming, and stuff such as machine learning interests me a lot. ​ Still, i constantly have this fear of failing, that i would not be able to accomplish what i signed up for and by now its driving me mad. I really enjoy doing research, but i often keep asking myself questions such as: 'What if i get stuck?', 'What if its impossible?', 'What if i won't be able to publish enough/ at all...?'. I have no idea how to cope with it. Can someone give me advice on how to approach this? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: The good thing about a PhD is there's relatively little you can fail outright. You're going to fail and screw up lots of things and have to try again. You're going to get stuck. That's all absolutely normal. If you don't struggle at all and everything is stuff you already know, you're probably not pushing yourself hard enough and actually learning from this. Try not to worry about the big picture. A PhD is a job. Spend most of the time thinking about what you need to do for next month or next month, not for 5 years from time.
RESPONSE B: Get yourself an action plan if you haven't formulated one yet, note down your strengths and weakness so you know what you might need to improve to meet the requirements of your PhD, and how you can apply the skills you already have. Look out for r/machinelearning and other related communities, get a mentor if needed and start coming up with ways to keep track of your project and research. And as with all the fears give it a face, why are you afraid of that, are you being objective about it, and what can you do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Machine learning and neural networks are quiet new for me, as i've only started studying them a year ago. I am allowed to pick subjects during my PHD though. The reason i chose it, is because i genuinely like programming, and stuff such as machine learning interests me a lot. ​ Still, i constantly have this fear of failing, that i would not be able to accomplish what i signed up for and by now its driving me mad. I really enjoy doing research, but i often keep asking myself questions such as: 'What if i get stuck?', 'What if its impossible?', 'What if i won't be able to publish enough/ at all...?'. I have no idea how to cope with it. Can someone give me advice on how to approach this? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: So, I am eminently qualified for this. I'm a 'non-traditional' student in that I did 5 years of work in industry prior to starting my program. I had very similar motivations as you - I love programming and saw the power of artificial intelligence/ML. I failed my qualifiers. In hindsight I certainly could have passed them, but honestly I was super unmotivated by my program at the time. I did some soul searching and realized I really want to get my PhD, but in a field that I was passionate about. I talked to some professors in other adjacent fields, did some trial work, and found a professor (who is at the forefront of his specialty) that was a good match for me in a different department that really excites me. I'm going to graduate with my MS in my current field and switch to PhD in another. So worst case scenario, you fail out and get a master's. You get an opportunity to be paid to learn what you want to learn about. I know that even if I didn't end up with a PhD, I would be happy with my time in academia.
RESPONSE B: If it makes you feel better, my friend made his first neural network in his 3rd year out of 5 (he does protein folding research). Remember it’s a marathon.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: failing, that i would not be able to accomplish what i signed up for and by now its driving me mad. I really enjoy doing research, but i often keep asking myself questions such as: 'What if i get stuck?', 'What if its impossible?', 'What if i won't be able to publish enough/ at all...?'. I have no idea how to cope with it. Can someone give me advice on how to approach this? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: Get yourself an action plan if you haven't formulated one yet, note down your strengths and weakness so you know what you might need to improve to meet the requirements of your PhD, and how you can apply the skills you already have. Look out for r/machinelearning and other related communities, get a mentor if needed and start coming up with ways to keep track of your project and research. And as with all the fears give it a face, why are you afraid of that, are you being objective about it, and what can you do.
RESPONSE B: So, I am eminently qualified for this. I'm a 'non-traditional' student in that I did 5 years of work in industry prior to starting my program. I had very similar motivations as you - I love programming and saw the power of artificial intelligence/ML. I failed my qualifiers. In hindsight I certainly could have passed them, but honestly I was super unmotivated by my program at the time. I did some soul searching and realized I really want to get my PhD, but in a field that I was passionate about. I talked to some professors in other adjacent fields, did some trial work, and found a professor (who is at the forefront of his specialty) that was a good match for me in a different department that really excites me. I'm going to graduate with my MS in my current field and switch to PhD in another. So worst case scenario, you fail out and get a master's. You get an opportunity to be paid to learn what you want to learn about. I know that even if I didn't end up with a PhD, I would be happy with my time in academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to cope with fear of failing a PHD? Hi everyone! I am about to start a PHD in a field of machine learning and bioinformatics. The thing is, the doctoral topic i chose is not entirely within the field of my current study. Machine learning and neural networks are quiet new for me, as i've only started studying them a year ago. I am allowed to pick subjects during my PHD though. The reason i chose it, is because i genuinely like programming, and stuff such as machine learning interests me a lot. ​ Still, i constantly have this fear of failing, that i would not be able to accomplish what i signed up for and by now its driving me mad. I really enjoy doing research, but i often keep asking myself questions such as: 'What if i get stuck?', 'What if its impossible?', 'What if i won't be able to publish enough/ at all...?'. I have no idea how to cope with it. Can someone give me advice on how to approach this? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: I got very stuck during my doctoral process, and it was 90% my own mental negativity. It took some therapy and this breakthrough with my therapist when she asked me “ok, so what is life going to look like if you don’t finish this?” And while I would have lost my current job, I basically ended up talking through how I would find another job and life would go on. Once I got it in my head that failing to get my doctorate would not define my life, suddenly I was able to move forward on it and finish.
RESPONSE B: If it makes you feel better, my friend made his first neural network in his 3rd year out of 5 (he does protein folding research). Remember it’s a marathon.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do you use social media to promote your research? Over the past couple of months, I held multiple discussions with my colleagues in academia on whether journal publications are the best way to achieve impact. There seems to be quite a difference in opinion between more senior colleagues (publications is the only way to share research) and younger colleagues (preprints and social media). As I'm mostly active on LinkedIn, I decided to test it and I shared the PDF copy (author version) of the paper that I published a couple of years ago. I saw much higher engagement with the audience in a couple of days after I posted on LinkedIn than in 3 years since the manuscript was published on the journal website. I share more details on my approach to sharing research over here: https://motivatedacademic.com/disseminate-research-social-media/ I wonder how do you share your research and what approaches you found most effective?
RESPONSE A: At my department we use Facebook as a Department pro-mo, main idea is to lure potential students mostly (most of the staff salary is calculated from amount of students), there is also page for lab, and two pages for bigger projects, last is informal group for active students. In most of the cases we do not promote specific papers and finds, but rather broader discipline, and to lure some audience to our conferences. But I do not belief that it is ideal way to make some impact in academia, and personal "scientific" pro-mo on any social media seems kinda lame, only one guy I know is doing so is uber-egoistic prick...
RESPONSE B: I know some famous academics maintain blogs that are quite popular. But the key to those is that the blogger is very active on it. Regularly posting new content/research and engaging with people in the comments section. It’s actually a great way to engage the community but sometimes I wonder how the blogger is able to make the time to constantly post and comment. Must be exhausting. For the really big academics, the blog is maintained by the key person and their team/lab. Again, the key to blogging is be active. All too often I stumble upon an academic’s blog and find it hasn’t been updated in years, which gives off a bit of a sad vibe
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: As a grad student, can I ask a professor (in another department) out? Okay, I need guidance from professors on if this would be very inappropriate. I'm a professional school student, a couple of years out of college. I'm taking a class in the college, in another department. This department has 0 overlap with mine, and will never have any impact on my professional or academic career. I actually really like the professor, and I *think* he may be interested, although we've both been careful to stay on the "plausible deniability" line. Next semester, I will not be in his class, and I intend to keep auditing classes in this department but not taking any more for a grade (it's far, far too much work and too stressful for a grade). Would it be completely out of line for me to ask him out once final grades are in? Is there some angle I'm missing where this would still be really inappropriate?
RESPONSE A: it's probably inappropriate but not the end of the world. It's taboo but people have done this and continue to do it. There are universities with policies in place where that would get the professor fired.
RESPONSE B: I wouldn’t say it’s inappropriate, but there are hassles that go along with it. You may be turned in for an academic review, though if your class work turns out fine, it’s fine. There will be talk. There will be rumors. I know because I was a non-trad student and started dating a professor when his contract was up. He’s sitting across from me now and we’ve been together for 3 years, living together in Germany for 1.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: As a grad student, can I ask a professor (in another department) out? Okay, I need guidance from professors on if this would be very inappropriate. I'm a professional school student, a couple of years out of college. I'm taking a class in the college, in another department. This department has 0 overlap with mine, and will never have any impact on my professional or academic career. I actually really like the professor, and I *think* he may be interested, although we've both been careful to stay on the "plausible deniability" line. Next semester, I will not be in his class, and I intend to keep auditing classes in this department but not taking any more for a grade (it's far, far too much work and too stressful for a grade). Would it be completely out of line for me to ask him out once final grades are in? Is there some angle I'm missing where this would still be really inappropriate?
RESPONSE A: Don't see any obstacles, once the semester is finished. Sure, there was a dependency relation when you met, but once that's resolved it becomes irrelevant. Maybe give it a few more weeks, but that's more for appearances than anything. Ignore everything about possible consequences for him: the best judge for that would be him, or for him to talk over with his manager, not Reddit. Solid go as far as I'm concerned.
RESPONSE B: I wouldn’t say it’s inappropriate, but there are hassles that go along with it. You may be turned in for an academic review, though if your class work turns out fine, it’s fine. There will be talk. There will be rumors. I know because I was a non-trad student and started dating a professor when his contract was up. He’s sitting across from me now and we’ve been together for 3 years, living together in Germany for 1.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: As a grad student, can I ask a professor (in another department) out? Okay, I need guidance from professors on if this would be very inappropriate. I'm a professional school student, a couple of years out of college. I'm taking a class in the college, in another department. This department has 0 overlap with mine, and will never have any impact on my professional or academic career. I actually really like the professor, and I *think* he may be interested, although we've both been careful to stay on the "plausible deniability" line. Next semester, I will not be in his class, and I intend to keep auditing classes in this department but not taking any more for a grade (it's far, far too much work and too stressful for a grade). Would it be completely out of line for me to ask him out once final grades are in? Is there some angle I'm missing where this would still be really inappropriate?
RESPONSE A: I wouldn’t say it’s inappropriate, but there are hassles that go along with it. You may be turned in for an academic review, though if your class work turns out fine, it’s fine. There will be talk. There will be rumors. I know because I was a non-trad student and started dating a professor when his contract was up. He’s sitting across from me now and we’ve been together for 3 years, living together in Germany for 1.
RESPONSE B: I don't get the negatives, let people have sex.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: As a grad student, can I ask a professor (in another department) out? Okay, I need guidance from professors on if this would be very inappropriate. I'm a professional school student, a couple of years out of college. I'm taking a class in the college, in another department. This department has 0 overlap with mine, and will never have any impact on my professional or academic career. I actually really like the professor, and I *think* he may be interested, although we've both been careful to stay on the "plausible deniability" line. Next semester, I will not be in his class, and I intend to keep auditing classes in this department but not taking any more for a grade (it's far, far too much work and too stressful for a grade). Would it be completely out of line for me to ask him out once final grades are in? Is there some angle I'm missing where this would still be really inappropriate?
RESPONSE A: I think there's a cultural difference, I know Americans are more wary of this than we are, but yes you can ask the professor out, might want to wait a bit to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, and of course be prepared for 'gossip' and 'funny looks' but no I don't think there's anything wrong with it, you're both consenting adults and there's no conflict of interest (though check your student handbook there might be a blanket rule about students dating faculty) FWIW i wouldn't date a student at my institution even if they're nowhere near my department
RESPONSE B: it's probably inappropriate but not the end of the world. It's taboo but people have done this and continue to do it. There are universities with policies in place where that would get the professor fired.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: As a grad student, can I ask a professor (in another department) out? Okay, I need guidance from professors on if this would be very inappropriate. I'm a professional school student, a couple of years out of college. I'm taking a class in the college, in another department. This department has 0 overlap with mine, and will never have any impact on my professional or academic career. I actually really like the professor, and I *think* he may be interested, although we've both been careful to stay on the "plausible deniability" line. Next semester, I will not be in his class, and I intend to keep auditing classes in this department but not taking any more for a grade (it's far, far too much work and too stressful for a grade). Would it be completely out of line for me to ask him out once final grades are in? Is there some angle I'm missing where this would still be really inappropriate?
RESPONSE A: Don't see any obstacles, once the semester is finished. Sure, there was a dependency relation when you met, but once that's resolved it becomes irrelevant. Maybe give it a few more weeks, but that's more for appearances than anything. Ignore everything about possible consequences for him: the best judge for that would be him, or for him to talk over with his manager, not Reddit. Solid go as far as I'm concerned.
RESPONSE B: I think there's a cultural difference, I know Americans are more wary of this than we are, but yes you can ask the professor out, might want to wait a bit to avoid the appearance of any impropriety, and of course be prepared for 'gossip' and 'funny looks' but no I don't think there's anything wrong with it, you're both consenting adults and there's no conflict of interest (though check your student handbook there might be a blanket rule about students dating faculty) FWIW i wouldn't date a student at my institution even if they're nowhere near my department
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: students I have not taught myself, but this isn't unusual since I'm a new prof. When I check their academic records, I am sometimes surprised to find that they have Cs and Ds in relevant courses. I tend to offer to meet with them anyway, because I like to see how they speak about their research interests, career aspirations, and see if they offer any explanation for their course performance. If the meeting does not improve the situation, I have a really hard time deciding how best to communicate to these students that it's a no. Should it be in person or by email? If it's by email, how do I close the meeting, since I definitely know by that point it's a no? And how do I tell them without kicking them while they're down? Should I simply thank them for their interest and say I can't offer them a position? It seems too harsh to say outright that their academic performance does not meet my expectations for a beginning graduate student. Should explanations like these be reserved for cases in which the student specifically asks for feedback? Help me, please.
RESPONSE A: Don't they have to apply and get accepted to the program before getting a commitment with a lab, or can you fast track them? Wish them luck on the application process but warn them that their GPA might be an obstacle.
RESPONSE B: As someone who just completed a round of applications and didn't get in, I would have LOVED more critical feedback on low points in my application. As much as it sucks to hear, it's going to suck more to waste 100s-1000s of dollars applying to schools if there is a high chance they they aren't going to get in because of their academics. That being said, I had a friend who worked in the same lab that I did and he had an advisor tell him that he wouldn't be taken seriously by grad schools (very bluntly) for whatever reason (lack of research experience I think) and he was devastated. He completely stopped doing research, ended up not applying at all, and basically gave up all his plans of getting a PhD. So make sure whatever you say it's tactful and helpful not just negative.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: not taught myself, but this isn't unusual since I'm a new prof. When I check their academic records, I am sometimes surprised to find that they have Cs and Ds in relevant courses. I tend to offer to meet with them anyway, because I like to see how they speak about their research interests, career aspirations, and see if they offer any explanation for their course performance. If the meeting does not improve the situation, I have a really hard time deciding how best to communicate to these students that it's a no. Should it be in person or by email? If it's by email, how do I close the meeting, since I definitely know by that point it's a no? And how do I tell them without kicking them while they're down? Should I simply thank them for their interest and say I can't offer them a position? It seems too harsh to say outright that their academic performance does not meet my expectations for a beginning graduate student. Should explanations like these be reserved for cases in which the student specifically asks for feedback? Help me, please.
RESPONSE A: "I think you have a lot of potential, but the work we do in my lab really requires a strong background in X, and from your transcripts I'm not sure you have that at this point. I don't like to take on students who I think are going to struggle unnecessarily with fundamentals in X. I think if you are really serious about this lab and this topic, you might need to take another course or two in X just to strengthen that background. Otherwise, I'd encourage you to reach out to my colleagues studying Y and Z, since you seem to have done very well in those topics" (or, alternatively "I'd encourage you to reach out to other faculty members, we all have different expectations and strengths, one of them may be better able to mentor you through the topics you seemed to struggle in should you be a good fit for their lab")
RESPONSE B: Don't they have to apply and get accepted to the program before getting a commitment with a lab, or can you fast track them? Wish them luck on the application process but warn them that their GPA might be an obstacle.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I tend to offer to meet with them anyway, because I like to see how they speak about their research interests, career aspirations, and see if they offer any explanation for their course performance. If the meeting does not improve the situation, I have a really hard time deciding how best to communicate to these students that it's a no. Should it be in person or by email? If it's by email, how do I close the meeting, since I definitely know by that point it's a no? And how do I tell them without kicking them while they're down? Should I simply thank them for their interest and say I can't offer them a position? It seems too harsh to say outright that their academic performance does not meet my expectations for a beginning graduate student. Should explanations like these be reserved for cases in which the student specifically asks for feedback? Help me, please.
RESPONSE A: This post is Interesting to me because I find increasingly that academia produces this kind of student. I had a terrible experience this year where I got a lot of serious complaints because I told a very average student that it was unlikely they would win extremely competitive graduate funding. The whole thing dragged on for a year, emails were read, meetings were had - it was awful. I am not sure whether this is a structural problem but I think there is a trend of these kinds of students expecting certain professional trajectories and it might get ugly if these expectations aren’t met. I would phrase everything you say very carefully.
RESPONSE B: this is how a professor from my department rejected me: I don't think a project in my lab is a good idea. I think that the trouble you had with both the exam and final project in xxx is a good indication that projects in my lab would likely not be successful. Because I am time constrained this year, I also think that I would not be able to support an independent study as much as would be needed. In any case, I'm sorry to give you a negative response and wish you the best in finding a good project. (I copied his email directly. imo you’re already very nice to give them all a chance, this professor didn’t even bother talking to me)
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.