label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B | POST: to those of you who burned out, how did you feel and what made you realise you needed time off? I think I might be a little burned out. I'm a second year postdoc way behind schedule and I would like to hear other people's experiences with burnout. How did you feel and how did you overcome it? All opinions welcome and thank you for the responses.
RESPONSE A: I am in Industry, in molecular diagnostics and it was a crazy 2.5 years. I took a 2 week international vacation and came back quite refreshed.
RESPONSE B: I literally stopped caring about shit, dreaded checking email, and had a really hard time mustering the gumption to handle even simple/5 min administrative tasks Edit: overcame by taking a sabbatical at the perfect time, and literally focusing on doing totally different stuff for awhile. It takes awhile to get over the cumulative stress that builds up from years of academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: to those of you who burned out, how did you feel and what made you realise you needed time off? I think I might be a little burned out. I'm a second year postdoc way behind schedule and I would like to hear other people's experiences with burnout. How did you feel and how did you overcome it? All opinions welcome and thank you for the responses.
RESPONSE A: Subconsciously I knew that I wasn't on a path to the kind of academic career I wanted; consciously I was going through the motions on my good days just enough to have the appearance of making progress. It's really hard when your postdoc lab is a disappointment compared to your Ph.D. experience and you have fundamental disagreements about science with the new advisor. On one hand, I probably should have left, on the other, my Ph.D. advisor was and is a nearly impossible act to follow so I justified staying. Only once it became abundantly clear that I wouldn't be competitive in job cycles did I decide to transition to industry.
RESPONSE B: I am in Industry, in molecular diagnostics and it was a crazy 2.5 years. I took a 2 week international vacation and came back quite refreshed.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: to those of you who burned out, how did you feel and what made you realise you needed time off? I think I might be a little burned out. I'm a second year postdoc way behind schedule and I would like to hear other people's experiences with burnout. How did you feel and how did you overcome it? All opinions welcome and thank you for the responses.
RESPONSE A: I am in Industry, in molecular diagnostics and it was a crazy 2.5 years. I took a 2 week international vacation and came back quite refreshed.
RESPONSE B: Crushing depression. Exhaustion. Anxiety.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Serious question: why does anyone do a PhD? It seems like I only seem to read posts on bad experiences while doing a PhD. (Relying on 1 advisor the whole time, they may be toxic, etc.) Not only that, but it seems like job security is ass even after completing a PhD with no promise whatsoever of a higher paying job or even job security. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just genuinely curious. Is it only because some jobs require a PhD?
RESPONSE A: Don’t treat PhD’s across disciplines as homogeneous.
RESPONSE B: I think the majority of your question has been answered, but I would also like to remind you that you have a biased sample here on Reddit. The people who are really happy with their PhD programs aren’t here complaining about them. On Reddit, you are going to have a large biased sample of people who are having issues. Getting my PhD with some of the happiest years of my life. I had a small scholarship that allowed me to live modestly, a good advisor, great friends, and loved every minute of graduate school. The journey was just as good for me as the destination.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: whatsoever of a higher paying job or even job security. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just genuinely curious. Is it only because some jobs require a PhD?
RESPONSE A: I think the majority of your question has been answered, but I would also like to remind you that you have a biased sample here on Reddit. The people who are really happy with their PhD programs aren’t here complaining about them. On Reddit, you are going to have a large biased sample of people who are having issues. Getting my PhD with some of the happiest years of my life. I had a small scholarship that allowed me to live modestly, a good advisor, great friends, and loved every minute of graduate school. The journey was just as good for me as the destination.
RESPONSE B: I agree with eviltwinkie and economistpunter, typically, a PhD in Science or Engineering has much higher job security. TLDR: If you're not invested heavily in a subject or a problem that you'd want to solve, it may not be the best move to get a PhD. It's not worth it for most people to just do it for a job requirement. Longer version: Many people get a PhD to enhance what they already know in order to become a professor, industry expert, tackle a specific and unsolved problem, etc. To give you my perspective, I want to go into biotech/biopharma and develop diabetic medication that's inexpensive. I can't do that with just a bachelor's or even masters. The training in a PhD program forces you to think about problems in a scientific manner(arguably all PhD routes do so) and develops your skills to tackle any problem or question you'd want to solve. Plus, many schools provide you with resources outside of equipment and internal researchers and professors. There's conferences, collaborations, etc. That can help get your name out there and work on advanced level work. If you're doing it to get rich, even in industry that's not a guarantee, much less in the academic setting. I'd say most people, including myself want to do it to get a much higher level knowledge of our subject matter. Hope this helps!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anyone do a PhD? It seems like I only seem to read posts on bad experiences while doing a PhD. (Relying on 1 advisor the whole time, they may be toxic, etc.) Not only that, but it seems like job security is ass even after completing a PhD with no promise whatsoever of a higher paying job or even job security. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just genuinely curious. Is it only because some jobs require a PhD?
RESPONSE A: I think the majority of your question has been answered, but I would also like to remind you that you have a biased sample here on Reddit. The people who are really happy with their PhD programs aren’t here complaining about them. On Reddit, you are going to have a large biased sample of people who are having issues. Getting my PhD with some of the happiest years of my life. I had a small scholarship that allowed me to live modestly, a good advisor, great friends, and loved every minute of graduate school. The journey was just as good for me as the destination.
RESPONSE B: People do a PhD because they are really into a topic, because they like learning, because they want to learn how to do research, and because they want to contribute somehow. Not because of the money. The training a PhD gives is incomparable and nowhere near what you would get in industry. The person you are before and after this experience is completely different. Some jobs are also simply not accessible without a PhD degree because they need someone that is aware of what is going on, that can explore ideas in a methodological and meticulous way, and that can navigate quite easily in a very uncertain and rapidly changing environment. Regarding what you see online, there is a huge bias towards negativity, as usual on the Internet. People don't come here to tell how happy they are, they come to vent, complain, and whine. Same thing everywhere. If you buy a product, if you are happy you say nothing unless you are asked for it. Unhappy? You go online and spontaneously complain. That's why you are often reminded when you use an app on your phone to rate it. This is just an attempt to compensate for this bias.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Serious question: why does anyone do a PhD? It seems like I only seem to read posts on bad experiences while doing a PhD. (Relying on 1 advisor the whole time, they may be toxic, etc.) Not only that, but it seems like job security is ass even after completing a PhD with no promise whatsoever of a higher paying job or even job security. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just genuinely curious. Is it only because some jobs require a PhD?
RESPONSE A: Because a PhD is an immensely rewarding experience on its own terms if you enjoy the work (and only some supervisors are truly terrible), and because it's required to go into academia. There are very few other experiences in the modern world where you get paid to produce a thing over several years with very few checks except for whether the final product is worthwhile.
RESPONSE B: I think the majority of your question has been answered, but I would also like to remind you that you have a biased sample here on Reddit. The people who are really happy with their PhD programs aren’t here complaining about them. On Reddit, you are going to have a large biased sample of people who are having issues. Getting my PhD with some of the happiest years of my life. I had a small scholarship that allowed me to live modestly, a good advisor, great friends, and loved every minute of graduate school. The journey was just as good for me as the destination.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Serious question: why does anyone do a PhD? It seems like I only seem to read posts on bad experiences while doing a PhD. (Relying on 1 advisor the whole time, they may be toxic, etc.) Not only that, but it seems like job security is ass even after completing a PhD with no promise whatsoever of a higher paying job or even job security. I’m not trying to offend anyone, just genuinely curious. Is it only because some jobs require a PhD?
RESPONSE A: I think the majority of your question has been answered, but I would also like to remind you that you have a biased sample here on Reddit. The people who are really happy with their PhD programs aren’t here complaining about them. On Reddit, you are going to have a large biased sample of people who are having issues. Getting my PhD with some of the happiest years of my life. I had a small scholarship that allowed me to live modestly, a good advisor, great friends, and loved every minute of graduate school. The journey was just as good for me as the destination.
RESPONSE B: To be clear though the “some jobs” is any TT professor position in almost every field. It’s an actual requirement so if you want to do that you have to get a PhD (or other terminal degree in your field). I really do like research though and I like the intellectual work that goes into it. You really can’t take part in that work without a PhD. For me, it’s worth it for that reason. Also remember this is Reddit. It’s a place where you can ask difficult questions with relative anonymity and those are often negative ones.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: the dinner restaurant and they aren't able to make anything I can eat. I can't eat anything as-is from the lunch catering either, unless they were able to request a special version of one dish without some of the ingredients on it. Should I let them know I won't be able to eat at the dinner place and ask if it would be possible to request a lunch without certain ingredients? Or plan on bringing my own food to everything? Or just not eat while I'm at interview events? I don't want to make a fuss but I also know (from going to meals for events in my own department as a grad student) it can be really socially awkward and make others uncomfortable if we all go to a restaurant and I don't eat anything, or it could make people feel offended if I bring my own food to everything. Would really appreciate some advice - thanks to anyone who can help.
RESPONSE A: Email the office admin back and explain that the restaurant won't be make anything that you can eat and ask whether the dinner could be scheduled at a different restaurant. There's likely a number, and if there is a search going on they will all be rotated through anyway so the search committee doesn't go crazy eating at the same place. Ask if they can request the special dish for lunch. I would also bring a little food when you go on the interview in case they mess up (especially for lunch), because you won't perform at your best starved. The reality is, if the department can't get their act together to deal with this, would you really want to work there? Every single department event will be a trial for you, and it shows that the help you will get organizing events, etc, will be minimal. When you interview, it's as much a chance for you to interview them as for them to interview you.
RESPONSE B: I’ve served on our appointments committee several times and I would much prefer to know about this in advance of the your visit. As a committee member, I’d be more comfortable knowing our guest is comfortable. Someone really should have asked you about dietary restrictions or accommodations right away. I’m sorry they didn’t.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: PhD in the humanities, USA, and have just been invited to my first campus visit. I have a lot of specific dietary restrictions for medical reasons, and I don't want to make things awkward or seem high maintenance, but I also don't want to end up having bad reactions to foods and being unable to perform well in the interview events, or having embarrassing medical issues in front of everyone, etc. After reading some advice online and talking to one advisor I did email the office admins organizing my trip to politely let them know my dietary restrictions and ask if it would be an issue. They gave the name of the place they were planning to have a dinner event and the place they use for lunch catering. I called the dinner restaurant and they aren't able to make anything I can eat. I can't eat anything as-is from the lunch catering either, unless they were able to request a special version of one dish without some of the ingredients on it. Should I let them know I won't be able to eat at the dinner place and ask if it would be possible to request a lunch without certain ingredients? Or plan on bringing my own food to everything? Or just not eat while I'm at interview events? I don't want to make a fuss but I also know (from going to meals for events in my own department as a grad student) it can be really socially awkward and make others uncomfortable if we all go to a restaurant and I don't eat anything, or it could make people feel offended if I bring my own food to everything. Would really appreciate some advice - thanks to anyone who can help.
RESPONSE A: I can relate. I have a lot of dietary restrictions as well. I prefer to eat before hand and not eat at the event. BUT MAKE SURE TO EAT BEFORE. And possibly a snack in your bag.
RESPONSE B: I’ve served on our appointments committee several times and I would much prefer to know about this in advance of the your visit. As a committee member, I’d be more comfortable knowing our guest is comfortable. Someone really should have asked you about dietary restrictions or accommodations right away. I’m sorry they didn’t.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: dietary restrictions and campus visit I'm a recent PhD in the humanities, USA, and have just been invited to my first campus visit. I have a lot of specific dietary restrictions for medical reasons, and I don't want to make things awkward or seem high maintenance, but I also don't want to end up having bad reactions to foods and being unable to perform well in the interview events, or having embarrassing medical issues in front of everyone, etc. After reading some advice online and talking to one advisor I did email the office admins organizing my trip to politely let them know my dietary restrictions and ask if it would be an issue. They gave the name of the place they were planning to have a dinner event and the place they use for lunch catering. I called the dinner restaurant and they aren't able to make anything I can eat. I can't eat anything as-is from the lunch catering either, unless they were able to request a special version of one dish without some of the ingredients on it. Should I let them know I won't be able to eat at the dinner place and ask if it would be possible to request a lunch without certain ingredients? Or plan on bringing my own food to everything? Or just not eat while I'm at interview events? I don't want to make a fuss but I also know (from going to meals for events in my own department as a grad student) it can be really socially awkward and make others uncomfortable if we all go to a restaurant and I don't eat anything, or it could make people feel offended if I bring my own food to everything. Would really appreciate some advice - thanks to anyone who can help.
RESPONSE A: We would absolutely change lunch and dinner if we had to accommodate your dietary needs.
RESPONSE B: I’ve served on our appointments committee several times and I would much prefer to know about this in advance of the your visit. As a committee member, I’d be more comfortable knowing our guest is comfortable. Someone really should have asked you about dietary restrictions or accommodations right away. I’m sorry they didn’t.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: dietary restrictions and campus visit I'm a recent PhD in the humanities, USA, and have just been invited to my first campus visit. I have a lot of specific dietary restrictions for medical reasons, and I don't want to make things awkward or seem high maintenance, but I also don't want to end up having bad reactions to foods and being unable to perform well in the interview events, or having embarrassing medical issues in front of everyone, etc. After reading some advice online and talking to one advisor I did email the office admins organizing my trip to politely let them know my dietary restrictions and ask if it would be an issue. They gave the name of the place they were planning to have a dinner event and the place they use for lunch catering. I called the dinner restaurant and they aren't able to make anything I can eat. I can't eat anything as-is from the lunch catering either, unless they were able to request a special version of one dish without some of the ingredients on it. Should I let them know I won't be able to eat at the dinner place and ask if it would be possible to request a lunch without certain ingredients? Or plan on bringing my own food to everything? Or just not eat while I'm at interview events? I don't want to make a fuss but I also know (from going to meals for events in my own department as a grad student) it can be really socially awkward and make others uncomfortable if we all go to a restaurant and I don't eat anything, or it could make people feel offended if I bring my own food to everything. Would really appreciate some advice - thanks to anyone who can help.
RESPONSE A: Agreed with the other commenters. Remember, you're interviewing them as much as they are you; and, if they aren't willing to make adjustments when informed, in what other ways will they try to impose their will upon you? **Edit:** Said as a pseudo-vegetarian whose department made appropriate accommodations when I was applying.
RESPONSE B: ask them to change it
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: reasons, and I don't want to make things awkward or seem high maintenance, but I also don't want to end up having bad reactions to foods and being unable to perform well in the interview events, or having embarrassing medical issues in front of everyone, etc. After reading some advice online and talking to one advisor I did email the office admins organizing my trip to politely let them know my dietary restrictions and ask if it would be an issue. They gave the name of the place they were planning to have a dinner event and the place they use for lunch catering. I called the dinner restaurant and they aren't able to make anything I can eat. I can't eat anything as-is from the lunch catering either, unless they were able to request a special version of one dish without some of the ingredients on it. Should I let them know I won't be able to eat at the dinner place and ask if it would be possible to request a lunch without certain ingredients? Or plan on bringing my own food to everything? Or just not eat while I'm at interview events? I don't want to make a fuss but I also know (from going to meals for events in my own department as a grad student) it can be really socially awkward and make others uncomfortable if we all go to a restaurant and I don't eat anything, or it could make people feel offended if I bring my own food to everything. Would really appreciate some advice - thanks to anyone who can help.
RESPONSE A: I recently did a campus visit and made my dietary needs known (I was not asked about them proactively, so I had to navigate the awkward power dynamics there and speak up for myself), and then the place we went to only had one item close to my dietary needs, but still not even fully aligned. Thankfully, I brought a lot of protein bars. Interestingly, this school was very proud of their inclusivity and accessibility….so…yeah. What others have said. If it’s a headache in the interview, it will be a headache if you work there. Their response to your needs will tell you a lot. *edit for clarity
RESPONSE B: ask them to change it
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: universities in that country can apply to ERC grant as full members of the funding scheme, and folks have won them). One of the other top pros for the job is that it's super close culturally and geographically to my home country and I could therefore feel much more at home and have family over or go see family much more often. The job also gives me a free round trip back and forth to my home country (expat package). I also know for a fact that it's not all promises--people I personally know there have been making use of all the abovementioned, whether research funding or health insurance and round trips back home. Downsides: I know from folks I trust who live and work there that admin is prickly at times. Nothing too horrible, but kind of toxic. Senior professors are also not good researchers, but juniors do great job and could be good collaborators. Procedures for traveling are also a little clunky and old school, but nothing abusive. My only serious concern is being able to move on after a few years. I'm young for a PhD graduate, and have a family, so I'd like to change jobs in a few years (4-5 years?). I don't feel like completely settling down somewhere so early in life. Do you think it would be a serious risk in today's academia? I mean there aren't enough jobs for everyone in NA and Europe, and work conditions have been degrading in that part of the world while new unis in developing world try to attract talents. **If I keep on doing good work and going to conferences, is taking that offer a shot in my foot?** I could always go to data science or government back to Canada, in case I REALLY want to leave and can't find anything in academia, but I'd like to stay in academia if possible, and go to Europe or NA after a few years. Thanks for the feedback folks!
RESPONSE A: I don't see why not? You seem to like the country and the opportunity. No uni is perfect. If you don't like it, you can always move back later.
RESPONSE B: what country is it? I'm curious and from MENA so advice can be tailored.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: it farther than what is required of me to finish my Master's. That being said - my advisor is very excited about it and consistently talks about what we'll do "when" I stay for my Ph.D. This is all well and good, and flattering honestly, but as I said I'm not interested in pursuing this line of research anymore OR staying at my current institution. I don't need to get too in-depth into the reasons but basically, my institution does not have a very well developed program component for my specialty, my research lacks broader implications and is too "academic" for my taste and my partner (not in school) and I have decided we don't like living here. I need to face the music and tell my advisor that I won't be continuing into a Ph.D. under their supervision or at the university BUT I'm scared their interest in my work/support will drop off precipitously if I do. I also don't know when the right time to do this is - sooner rather than later? Probably. Basically, I'm wondering if anyone has had a similar experience (from either perspective) and what are some paths they took to make things a bit easier for everyone involved. Thanks for any advice! TLDR: I don't like my project enough to stick with it through a Ph.D., nor do I want to stay at this institution with this advisor. How and when do I tell them? P.S. I'm not looking for any sort of encouragement to stay in this project/position. I've made my mind up.
RESPONSE A: Some supervisors do use that kind of talk to make it clear you could go on with them if you wanted to, but it doesn't mean they've set their heart on you doing that, or that things will be awkward if you make another choice. Focus on the decision to move cities if you want to keep it impersonal. From the way this post is written, right now you're probably the one at higher risk of making it awkward. Make sure you don't do that. It's most likely a non issue.
RESPONSE B: Just say no if they ask. If they don't ask, just don't apply.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Ph.D. This is all well and good, and flattering honestly, but as I said I'm not interested in pursuing this line of research anymore OR staying at my current institution. I don't need to get too in-depth into the reasons but basically, my institution does not have a very well developed program component for my specialty, my research lacks broader implications and is too "academic" for my taste and my partner (not in school) and I have decided we don't like living here. I need to face the music and tell my advisor that I won't be continuing into a Ph.D. under their supervision or at the university BUT I'm scared their interest in my work/support will drop off precipitously if I do. I also don't know when the right time to do this is - sooner rather than later? Probably. Basically, I'm wondering if anyone has had a similar experience (from either perspective) and what are some paths they took to make things a bit easier for everyone involved. Thanks for any advice! TLDR: I don't like my project enough to stick with it through a Ph.D., nor do I want to stay at this institution with this advisor. How and when do I tell them? P.S. I'm not looking for any sort of encouragement to stay in this project/position. I've made my mind up.
RESPONSE A: Just say no if they ask. If they don't ask, just don't apply.
RESPONSE B: I am in a similar situation. I’m doing an undergraduate research project over the summer and my supervisor is already talking about how this project will evolve into a masters project, then a PhD. However he did mention that if I am not interested in continuing then whatever research I produce will become the starting point of someone else’s Masters or PhD. My supervisor is similarly very enthusiastic and supportive of students however I don’t think I’ll be doing a PhD, or at least not this uni since my partner will likely need to move closer to London for work. I don’t think telling them you don’t want to do a PhD will necessarily spoil their enthusiasm, since they should be able to give the project to another student
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: org/wherehistorianswork (apparently, AHA is releasing the data for 2014-207 PhD awardees in 2022) Obviously, these data aren't glowing--I don't think anyone wants to endure a PhD program for a 40-50% chance of a getting a TT job and an 8% chance of being unemployed (if you assume all those with missing data are unemployed)--but they are honestly much better than I expected, especially assuming that at least some of the academic admin and outside of academia jobs are stable and decently paying and some of the NTT jobs may be stable as well. What do you all think of these data?
RESPONSE A: I'm not surprised in the slightest. My own PhD students all have secured TT jobs (but this is a very small number). More informatively, about 90% of the PhDs that I've been on their committee (a much larger number) have a job that they are very happy with--either a TT job, or a job at a museum, or a renewable Instructorship, or an NGO... . And I'm NOT at one of the top 15 PhD programs. HOWEVER: in many of these 'success' stories, there was (for many) much anguish and angst along the way, lasting a few years. Many new PhDs really *suffered* (economically and psychologically) for a few years before they found "their" place (be it TT, renewable instructor, or museum/NGO). So I am not pretending this is all sweetness and light: it's not. I wish that I could have made it easier for them. But I am happy that the overwhelming majority of them are now happy.
RESPONSE B: Even if they're in TT positions, that doesn't tell us of the quality of life for those people. How long did it take them to land that position? How much pay are they getting for it? Where did they have to move to for it and are they happy living there? Are they able to do other things like start a family and raise kids? How many responsibilities do they have in their position? etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Outside of obviously not dating your professor/student, what are some rules of an appropriate boundary with your professor/student?
RESPONSE A: Don't discuss one student's progress with another.
RESPONSE B: Outside of "obvious" ? tell that to Jennifer Doudna (just kidding) Different people have different lines of thought. I believe that the relationship needs to stay as professional as possible with respect given and received from both sides. Although the academic world is not business like, I believe it is best if the advisor/student relationship stay as business like as it can be. I have seen some advisors go to Beer fests or music events with their group. while that seems great at first, when the PI is interacting with their group in a settings like these, it is bound to happen that theyll like some students more than the others based on how they get along. This, unfortunately introduces unnecessary bias in the lab and results in a ripple effect that cannot be controlled.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Outside of obviously not dating your professor/student, what are some rules of an appropriate boundary with your professor/student?
RESPONSE A: Do not smoke weed with your students.
RESPONSE B: Outside of "obvious" ? tell that to Jennifer Doudna (just kidding) Different people have different lines of thought. I believe that the relationship needs to stay as professional as possible with respect given and received from both sides. Although the academic world is not business like, I believe it is best if the advisor/student relationship stay as business like as it can be. I have seen some advisors go to Beer fests or music events with their group. while that seems great at first, when the PI is interacting with their group in a settings like these, it is bound to happen that theyll like some students more than the others based on how they get along. This, unfortunately introduces unnecessary bias in the lab and results in a ripple effect that cannot be controlled.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Outside of obviously not dating your professor/student, what are some rules of an appropriate boundary with your professor/student?
RESPONSE A: Do not smoke weed with your students.
RESPONSE B: I personally think professors and students should not be friends, at least when the student is currently in the professor's class. Obviously there's the issue of bias and maybe conflict of interest in grading and evaluation, but also I believe an instructor's job is to teach, not to be a friend, kinda like how being a parent to a teenager should be. Sometimes being a good friend and being a good teacher don't align, and a professor or instructor's first and foremost duty is to teach. So no hanging out outside of the classroom, no personal emails, no exchanging personal phone numbers or personal social media accounts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Outside of obviously not dating your professor/student, what are some rules of an appropriate boundary with your professor/student?
RESPONSE A: Outside of "obvious" ? tell that to Jennifer Doudna (just kidding) Different people have different lines of thought. I believe that the relationship needs to stay as professional as possible with respect given and received from both sides. Although the academic world is not business like, I believe it is best if the advisor/student relationship stay as business like as it can be. I have seen some advisors go to Beer fests or music events with their group. while that seems great at first, when the PI is interacting with their group in a settings like these, it is bound to happen that theyll like some students more than the others based on how they get along. This, unfortunately introduces unnecessary bias in the lab and results in a ripple effect that cannot be controlled.
RESPONSE B: I hated when the professors would gossip about the students with other students.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Outside of obviously not dating your professor/student, what are some rules of an appropriate boundary with your professor/student?
RESPONSE A: I hated when the professors would gossip about the students with other students.
RESPONSE B: I personally think professors and students should not be friends, at least when the student is currently in the professor's class. Obviously there's the issue of bias and maybe conflict of interest in grading and evaluation, but also I believe an instructor's job is to teach, not to be a friend, kinda like how being a parent to a teenager should be. Sometimes being a good friend and being a good teacher don't align, and a professor or instructor's first and foremost duty is to teach. So no hanging out outside of the classroom, no personal emails, no exchanging personal phone numbers or personal social media accounts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How can I best prepare to start as an TT assistant professor in the fall? I finally secured a TT spot (and thank you to everyone here gave such great advice for interviewing l). It’s a growing R2, but the department I’m joining is exceptionally research oriented. I (and the tenure countdown) start in the fall. I’m teaching a few classes at my current school and am preparing for the move later in the summer. For those of us starting in the fall, what can we do to start off on the right foot? What other advice is there for those of starting?
RESPONSE A: One thing that I did early on was schedule a lunch with someone in the department who was already tenured and seemed to have a similar research style. We talked about the requirements for tenure and what I should do. We talked a bit about how he packaged himself when going up, and he sent along his materials. It helped me when thinking about how to pitch myself (and what kinds of things to pursue) as I moved forward.
RESPONSE B: Honestly, as a tenured prof who has moved twice for TT jobs, my suggestion is to focus on your own personal needs right now. Get organized, get moved, figure out all the stuff that comes with moving… new insurance, new docs, registration, housing, etc. it will get busy fast and your own peace of mind is most important.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would it be weird to email the author of a textbook about a part of a (mathematical) proof that neither my supervisors nor I understand? I am an MSc. student in Mathematics, currently doing a directed studies course under my thesis co-supervisors. I've been going through a chapter of a well-known textbook in the relevant (sub)-area, and there is a line in one of the proofs that I don't follow at all. I spent a long time playing around with the proof, but I didn't get anywhere. I also asked my co-supervisors and they didn't know either. One of them tried a few different ways and emailed me about it, but couldn't get it either - he thinks it might be a typo, but even if it is, he isn't sure how to show what he thinks it should say instead. It's really bothering me that I can't make sense of this line of the proof (and because I'm not clear on this part, certain parts that follow it don't make sense to me either). So I'm just wondering if it would be some sort of "faux-pas" to email the author and ask about a line from a proof in his textbook? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Absolutely contact them. Authors love hearing feedback from readers; it doesn't happen often enough imho.
RESPONSE B: Yeah, if it’s possibly a typo the author and the publisher are going to want to know. Email the author first, and if they don’t respond email the publisher.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would it be weird to email the author of a textbook about a part of a (mathematical) proof that neither my supervisors nor I understand? I am an MSc. student in Mathematics, currently doing a directed studies course under my thesis co-supervisors. I've been going through a chapter of a well-known textbook in the relevant (sub)-area, and there is a line in one of the proofs that I don't follow at all. I spent a long time playing around with the proof, but I didn't get anywhere. I also asked my co-supervisors and they didn't know either. One of them tried a few different ways and emailed me about it, but couldn't get it either - he thinks it might be a typo, but even if it is, he isn't sure how to show what he thinks it should say instead. It's really bothering me that I can't make sense of this line of the proof (and because I'm not clear on this part, certain parts that follow it don't make sense to me either). So I'm just wondering if it would be some sort of "faux-pas" to email the author and ask about a line from a proof in his textbook? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Have you tried checking the author’s personal website to see if an errata sheet for the book has been published? If not, I’d send an email asking for clarification and mentioning that everyone you’ve asked is also stumped. Authors want people to be able to understand their writing, and feedback like this is valuable if they plan to write an update.
RESPONSE B: Does it matter if its weird?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would it be weird to email the author of a textbook about a part of a (mathematical) proof that neither my supervisors nor I understand? I am an MSc. student in Mathematics, currently doing a directed studies course under my thesis co-supervisors. I've been going through a chapter of a well-known textbook in the relevant (sub)-area, and there is a line in one of the proofs that I don't follow at all. I spent a long time playing around with the proof, but I didn't get anywhere. I also asked my co-supervisors and they didn't know either. One of them tried a few different ways and emailed me about it, but couldn't get it either - he thinks it might be a typo, but even if it is, he isn't sure how to show what he thinks it should say instead. It's really bothering me that I can't make sense of this line of the proof (and because I'm not clear on this part, certain parts that follow it don't make sense to me either). So I'm just wondering if it would be some sort of "faux-pas" to email the author and ask about a line from a proof in his textbook? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Have you tried checking the author’s personal website to see if an errata sheet for the book has been published? If not, I’d send an email asking for clarification and mentioning that everyone you’ve asked is also stumped. Authors want people to be able to understand their writing, and feedback like this is valuable if they plan to write an update.
RESPONSE B: Why not? I would.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would it be weird to email the author of a textbook about a part of a (mathematical) proof that neither my supervisors nor I understand? I am an MSc. student in Mathematics, currently doing a directed studies course under my thesis co-supervisors. I've been going through a chapter of a well-known textbook in the relevant (sub)-area, and there is a line in one of the proofs that I don't follow at all. I spent a long time playing around with the proof, but I didn't get anywhere. I also asked my co-supervisors and they didn't know either. One of them tried a few different ways and emailed me about it, but couldn't get it either - he thinks it might be a typo, but even if it is, he isn't sure how to show what he thinks it should say instead. It's really bothering me that I can't make sense of this line of the proof (and because I'm not clear on this part, certain parts that follow it don't make sense to me either). So I'm just wondering if it would be some sort of "faux-pas" to email the author and ask about a line from a proof in his textbook? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: I'd recommend posting your question online to places like Math Stack Exchange (or possibly Math Overflow depending on the level of the material) and the math subreddit. There's nothing wrong with e-mailing the author, but you're probably more likely to get a useful answer from an online community. If you do post a question, I'd recommend including an image of the proof so that people have something to reference if they don't have a copy of the book handy.
RESPONSE B: Does it matter if its weird?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Would it be weird to email the author of a textbook about a part of a (mathematical) proof that neither my supervisors nor I understand? I am an MSc. student in Mathematics, currently doing a directed studies course under my thesis co-supervisors. I've been going through a chapter of a well-known textbook in the relevant (sub)-area, and there is a line in one of the proofs that I don't follow at all. I spent a long time playing around with the proof, but I didn't get anywhere. I also asked my co-supervisors and they didn't know either. One of them tried a few different ways and emailed me about it, but couldn't get it either - he thinks it might be a typo, but even if it is, he isn't sure how to show what he thinks it should say instead. It's really bothering me that I can't make sense of this line of the proof (and because I'm not clear on this part, certain parts that follow it don't make sense to me either). So I'm just wondering if it would be some sort of "faux-pas" to email the author and ask about a line from a proof in his textbook? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Why not? I would.
RESPONSE B: I'd recommend posting your question online to places like Math Stack Exchange (or possibly Math Overflow depending on the level of the material) and the math subreddit. There's nothing wrong with e-mailing the author, but you're probably more likely to get a useful answer from an online community. If you do post a question, I'd recommend including an image of the proof so that people have something to reference if they don't have a copy of the book handy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: For those of you on search committees, are you receiving more, less, or the same amount of applicants this year? I'm wondering whether COVID has created a large backlog and therefore more applicants per job, or if it has had the opposite effect where more PhDs have turned to industry, gov, k-12, etc.
RESPONSE A: We have had fewer applicants this year, surprisingly.
RESPONSE B: My department has several more candidates on the market this year since they allowed an additional year of funding due to Covid. So whereas we’d normally have 15-20 people looking for jobs, we have about 25 this year instead. Oddly enough it doesn’t seem like other similar-caliber departments have the same issue, so maybe it won’t be a problem to get everyone a job.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: For those of you on search committees, are you receiving more, less, or the same amount of applicants this year? I'm wondering whether COVID has created a large backlog and therefore more applicants per job, or if it has had the opposite effect where more PhDs have turned to industry, gov, k-12, etc.
RESPONSE A: Far, far, less applicants. We had a very successful search last year. There were around 25 applicants and, quite frankly, too many good ones. This year we only have eight, and not many that look promising.
RESPONSE B: Less
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: For those of you on search committees, are you receiving more, less, or the same amount of applicants this year? I'm wondering whether COVID has created a large backlog and therefore more applicants per job, or if it has had the opposite effect where more PhDs have turned to industry, gov, k-12, etc.
RESPONSE A: Far, far, less applicants. We had a very successful search last year. There were around 25 applicants and, quite frankly, too many good ones. This year we only have eight, and not many that look promising.
RESPONSE B: Same number of applications as last year, which were more than the year before, which were more than the year before...and onward.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: For those of you on search committees, are you receiving more, less, or the same amount of applicants this year? I'm wondering whether COVID has created a large backlog and therefore more applicants per job, or if it has had the opposite effect where more PhDs have turned to industry, gov, k-12, etc.
RESPONSE A: Less
RESPONSE B: Oh my god, it's like a desert out here. The last position we posted got *3* applicants- total. Our entire division received no work-study applicants. We just can't compete with industry or bigger schools when it comes to salary.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: For those of you on search committees, are you receiving more, less, or the same amount of applicants this year? I'm wondering whether COVID has created a large backlog and therefore more applicants per job, or if it has had the opposite effect where more PhDs have turned to industry, gov, k-12, etc.
RESPONSE A: Less applicants
RESPONSE B: Oh my god, it's like a desert out here. The last position we posted got *3* applicants- total. Our entire division received no work-study applicants. We just can't compete with industry or bigger schools when it comes to salary.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: TT position I’m interviewing for has a history of opening up very 2-3 years.. since 2012. Is that a red flag? Hi all, I’m interviewing for a tt position in a very small department (4 full time faculty, in a very specific field). When I Google this position - I see they’ve run the same posting every 2-3 years for the last 10 or so years. Would you consider this a red flag? Or indicative of something else going on? Or just normal...
RESPONSE A: For me not. It happens a lot that they just do no find what they really want. I have seen positions to remain open for several years before they actually found someone that would match what they really wanted. Some positions are pretty open in terms of scope and sometimes they just do not really know what they want until the meet the "right one".
RESPONSE B: Maybe! But maybe not! We are in that situation currently with one of our smaller departments: normally has 5 full time faculty members. One took an associate Dean position, so he is somewhat out of the 'game' now. One left due to spouses job moving across country. One was fired/resigned after some inappropriate spending on a grant surfaced. That is still unresolved, but the faculty member is gone none the less. Now, this week, another has announced they are leaving for a job that will promote them to full professor. None of this is 'our' fault per se, and from the outside it looks like a department in turmoil, but each of these events is entirely separate and un-related. They will now need to replace 2-3 faculty over the next cycle or two. ​ As others have said, I would just reach directly out to the former faculty members, should be easy enough to find out who they are. But, at the same time, remember there are two sides to every story, so don't let their opinions totally sway you, but you want to make sure you aren't walking into a snake pit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: TT position I’m interviewing for has a history of opening up very 2-3 years.. since 2012. Is that a red flag? Hi all, I’m interviewing for a tt position in a very small department (4 full time faculty, in a very specific field). When I Google this position - I see they’ve run the same posting every 2-3 years for the last 10 or so years. Would you consider this a red flag? Or indicative of something else going on? Or just normal...
RESPONSE A: Really really could depend. I applied for a position in a department that randomly had no one with a PhD (in my field a mix isn’t unusual but 0 PhDs is). Did some research and one Phd holder retired and one died suddenly. It might not be the same reason over and over. A combination of retirements, deaths, people leaving academia (generally not specifically that school), someone who individually didn’t fit with the culture not necessarily the culture myself. My UG had a brief period where my department had only one professor because of just a weird confluence of circumstances. I am currently applying and I always check recent news articles on the school. Was there a scandal and someone was forced to leave? Did someone suddenly skyrocket into fame and left for a think tank or R1 position or something? Really just bears more research 🤷♀️
RESPONSE B: What if every new hire has suddenly vanished on exactly the same day of their tenure and nobody ever found them (or put the story in the news)? Better not stay late to grade on March 3rd, a particularly moonless night, in your office that was constructed on an ancient burial ground…
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: TT position I’m interviewing for has a history of opening up very 2-3 years.. since 2012. Is that a red flag? Hi all, I’m interviewing for a tt position in a very small department (4 full time faculty, in a very specific field). When I Google this position - I see they’ve run the same posting every 2-3 years for the last 10 or so years. Would you consider this a red flag? Or indicative of something else going on? Or just normal...
RESPONSE A: My department is about to advertise a job for the third time in ten years. We are a small department that cannot offer the resources the position needs the way a larger department at a bigger university can. The last few hires have been fantastic but they reach a point where they outgrow us and move on. We probably should change up the position but doing so would require a pretty major overhaul of our entire curriculum.
RESPONSE B: What if every new hire has suddenly vanished on exactly the same day of their tenure and nobody ever found them (or put the story in the news)? Better not stay late to grade on March 3rd, a particularly moonless night, in your office that was constructed on an ancient burial ground…
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: TT position I’m interviewing for has a history of opening up very 2-3 years.. since 2012. Is that a red flag? Hi all, I’m interviewing for a tt position in a very small department (4 full time faculty, in a very specific field). When I Google this position - I see they’ve run the same posting every 2-3 years for the last 10 or so years. Would you consider this a red flag? Or indicative of something else going on? Or just normal...
RESPONSE A: What if every new hire has suddenly vanished on exactly the same day of their tenure and nobody ever found them (or put the story in the news)? Better not stay late to grade on March 3rd, a particularly moonless night, in your office that was constructed on an ancient burial ground…
RESPONSE B: Hard to say. Can you play detective and see who held the position before? (The wayback machine might work if they've listed them all on the faculty page for the department.) Then see if you can find out where those people landed-- are they still in academia? Did they move up to a more prestigious school? Down to a lesser one? etc. This sort of thing happens sometime, especially in fields that are niche and in demand: good candidates get poached by schools with deeper pockets or in more desirable areas. Or perhaps there was a string of what turned out to be poor hires, i.e. people who were "mentored out" before a negative third year review. Or maybe it was just luck, and all these people were really looking for jobs elsewhere, or had a two-body problem that couldn't be resolved. So this is what, the 4th round in a decade? That's enough to raise suspicion for me, but there are certainly reasons for this sort of thing to happen that would not suggest anything negative about the department. But that's obviously a long string of people leaving. If you get a chance in the interview process ask someone-- if not the chair, perhaps a junior member of the department. It's a reasonable question and it will be interesting to see what they have to say.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: TT position I’m interviewing for has a history of opening up very 2-3 years.. since 2012. Is that a red flag? Hi all, I’m interviewing for a tt position in a very small department (4 full time faculty, in a very specific field). When I Google this position - I see they’ve run the same posting every 2-3 years for the last 10 or so years. Would you consider this a red flag? Or indicative of something else going on? Or just normal...
RESPONSE A: I really like the following question to ask your interview panel: Overall, what do you think your college does well and in what areas do you think it could improve?
RESPONSE B: What if every new hire has suddenly vanished on exactly the same day of their tenure and nobody ever found them (or put the story in the news)? Better not stay late to grade on March 3rd, a particularly moonless night, in your office that was constructed on an ancient burial ground…
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I won't be reappointed. How do I land another TT position? Hello everyone, I could use some advice/guidance. FYI, full-time assistant professor in Year 3. I just received my department committee evaluation for my reappointment, and it appears (convincingly) that I won't be reappointed. At this point, I don't want to come back to this institution - it's a toxic, hostile work environment, and department politics are overwhelmingly negative. I'm wondering how to best set myself up for a future position with a different institution. I'm convinced that I should resign before I'm fired. But when? Is it a red flag to future employers (universities) if I resign in April 2022 right before my termination? Or should I resign asap? During winter break? I'm just looking to set myself up for better employment long-term, and am unsure of the best next steps. Guidance much appreciated.
RESPONSE A: It is difficult to give advice because we do not know the situation and why you will not be reappointed or even if you think this is fair or not. As you are unhappy in this institution, it is time to move on anyway. Whether you resign or quit, anticipate that everyone will know at least some basic details about what happened or at least that you were not reappointed. The academy is small. If you stay on, you at least get a paycheck through that time. It may also look better to apply from a position than from unemployment. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: We mostly likely will not know if you are fired. Heck, our HR will not let us ask why are you leaving a position and we have been explicitly told that we cannot hold being fired against a job candidate. But do not quit mid-year. That is harder to explain away. Finish your contract. Start applying for jobs now. It is a little late in the year, but depending on your discipline, it may not be too late.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would I have a hard time finding a tenure track position in computer science(machine learning in particular) due to my age if I finish my PhD at 38 in the United States? I have heard in machine learning, most people get their PhD at the age of 3032. So I would be at least 6 years late or even 10 years older than my peers. Would this put me at a serious disadvantage when I am looking for a tenure track position?
RESPONSE A: I think your scientific age, the years passed after PhD, is way more important than your actual age. Most universities seem prefer to hire candidates who are within a few years after their PhD. I don't think they would care about the age if you have competitive CV.
RESPONSE B: Using your age as a hiring factor is discriminatory. Only your publication record, credentials, and potential for teaching/funding are. If you have a good CV, you certainly have a shot at a TT position. Machine learning is in high demand in industry. Tenure track positions in ML compete for the same people, but with a fraction of the paying potential. Source: I've been in the hiring committee of my dept for several years.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would I have a hard time finding a tenure track position in computer science(machine learning in particular) due to my age if I finish my PhD at 38 in the United States? I have heard in machine learning, most people get their PhD at the age of 3032. So I would be at least 6 years late or even 10 years older than my peers. Would this put me at a serious disadvantage when I am looking for a tenure track position?
RESPONSE A: I think your scientific age, the years passed after PhD, is way more important than your actual age. Most universities seem prefer to hire candidates who are within a few years after their PhD. I don't think they would care about the age if you have competitive CV.
RESPONSE B: No, it would not be a serious disadvantage. Might some people consider your age, even though it is illegal? Yes. But it will probably be swamped by other factors, and some may even consider your relative maturity an advantage.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Would I have a hard time finding a tenure track position in computer science(machine learning in particular) due to my age if I finish my PhD at 38 in the United States? I have heard in machine learning, most people get their PhD at the age of 3032. So I would be at least 6 years late or even 10 years older than my peers. Would this put me at a serious disadvantage when I am looking for a tenure track position?
RESPONSE A: 38 isn’t old and no one will care. A PhD in CS is ask one of the few degrees that have a better time on the market. Besides CS depts schools of Ed hire CS people, as do schools of information. It all depends on your focus snd how productive our are. Moreover if that doesn’t work you can easily find jobs in the private sector that pay well.
RESPONSE B: No, it would not be a serious disadvantage. Might some people consider your age, even though it is illegal? Yes. But it will probably be swamped by other factors, and some may even consider your relative maturity an advantage.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: walk for hours a day just to commute, especially if I worked both jobs on the same day, in addition to class. I was also extremely sick and in a lot of pain for almost a month, for reasons I cannot provide medical documentation for excused absences. I feel terrible that it has even come to this, but this semester has been one of the hardest of my life, academically and personally. ​ TD;LR: I have missed around 75% of my classes this semester and I want to apologize to my professors in a way that they know I am disappointed in myself and truly sorry. I don't expect them to help me pass by giving extra credit or anything, it is just important to me to have a good relationship with my professors; I really do appreciate them even though I haven't shown it. *this is a throwaway account but this is a serious question*
RESPONSE A: I relate to this story so strongly. I, too, became homeless my second semester in college. Along with a lot of family issues, work, and school, I was way overloaded. Mentally and emotionally I crashed. It took some time, but I clearly recovered and succeeded in my goals. Don’t be ashamed of how you feel. Tackle one goal at a time and you’ll make it out on the other side and not regret anything. No one can predict life’s twists and turns and which cards we get out of the deal, but having a good support team helps overcome moments like these. I’m glad you are reaching out about this. Trust your heart and follow your gut. You’re a strong individual.
RESPONSE B: I would say you were homeless and working hard to get by, so you weren’t able to come to class, though you hoped to, and that was why you didn’t withdraw. (If that last part is true.) Leave out the sickness, car, commute, and inability to provide documentation. Homelessness is enough of an explanation, and no one is going to hold your absence against you. Edit: You could add that you hope to see them on campus next year and that you hope they had a good semester. There is no shame in any of this. Keep surviving, then thriving!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: to catch the bus + walk for hours a day just to commute, especially if I worked both jobs on the same day, in addition to class. I was also extremely sick and in a lot of pain for almost a month, for reasons I cannot provide medical documentation for excused absences. I feel terrible that it has even come to this, but this semester has been one of the hardest of my life, academically and personally. ​ TD;LR: I have missed around 75% of my classes this semester and I want to apologize to my professors in a way that they know I am disappointed in myself and truly sorry. I don't expect them to help me pass by giving extra credit or anything, it is just important to me to have a good relationship with my professors; I really do appreciate them even though I haven't shown it. *this is a throwaway account but this is a serious question*
RESPONSE A: I relate to this story so strongly. I, too, became homeless my second semester in college. Along with a lot of family issues, work, and school, I was way overloaded. Mentally and emotionally I crashed. It took some time, but I clearly recovered and succeeded in my goals. Don’t be ashamed of how you feel. Tackle one goal at a time and you’ll make it out on the other side and not regret anything. No one can predict life’s twists and turns and which cards we get out of the deal, but having a good support team helps overcome moments like these. I’m glad you are reaching out about this. Trust your heart and follow your gut. You’re a strong individual.
RESPONSE B: Every professor is going to be different, but FWIW my dad always says he doesn’t understand when students apologize to him. The students are the ones who have spent the money on an education they didn’t receive. He has to do less grading when students don’t turn things in. He says they should apologize to themselves instead of him. Now, your situation is a bit different then his freshman football players who are partying too much and their coach made them go apologize… but if you’re not looking for a resolution, a quick email may suffice.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: my grades and education *are* truly important to me and 2) I never wanted to disrespect my professors' or their time this way. I do not expect them to give me any makeup work, extra credit, or anything like that, but I want to go to their office hours and apologize directly because I want them to know that I am genuinely sorry. I may also have the same professors again when I have to retake classes, and I don't want them to have a bad taste in their mouth. There is no excuse for missing so many classes, but I wasn't just missing class because I didn't feel like going. Right at the beginning of the semester I became homeless, and I do not have any support here. I've been working two jobs; one being 40 minutes away from campus. My car broke down (a few times) during the semester so I had to catch the bus + walk for hours a day just to commute, especially if I worked both jobs on the same day, in addition to class. I was also extremely sick and in a lot of pain for almost a month, for reasons I cannot provide medical documentation for excused absences. I feel terrible that it has even come to this, but this semester has been one of the hardest of my life, academically and personally. ​ TD;LR: I have missed around 75% of my classes this semester and I want to apologize to my professors in a way that they know I am disappointed in myself and truly sorry. I don't expect them to help me pass by giving extra credit or anything, it is just important to me to have a good relationship with my professors; I really do appreciate them even though I haven't shown it. *this is a throwaway account but this is a serious question*
RESPONSE A: You have nothing to apologize for. Are you doing better now?
RESPONSE B: I'm kinda in the same situation and feel you. I don't have any answers related to your question, I just wanted to tell you that you're a strong person and I really respect you for this reason. This part of life might feel like shit but in the future this period is going to give you extra strength in the times of hardship. Please keep us updated.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . I may also have the same professors again when I have to retake classes, and I don't want them to have a bad taste in their mouth. There is no excuse for missing so many classes, but I wasn't just missing class because I didn't feel like going. Right at the beginning of the semester I became homeless, and I do not have any support here. I've been working two jobs; one being 40 minutes away from campus. My car broke down (a few times) during the semester so I had to catch the bus + walk for hours a day just to commute, especially if I worked both jobs on the same day, in addition to class. I was also extremely sick and in a lot of pain for almost a month, for reasons I cannot provide medical documentation for excused absences. I feel terrible that it has even come to this, but this semester has been one of the hardest of my life, academically and personally. ​ TD;LR: I have missed around 75% of my classes this semester and I want to apologize to my professors in a way that they know I am disappointed in myself and truly sorry. I don't expect them to help me pass by giving extra credit or anything, it is just important to me to have a good relationship with my professors; I really do appreciate them even though I haven't shown it. *this is a throwaway account but this is a serious question*
RESPONSE A: I'm kinda in the same situation and feel you. I don't have any answers related to your question, I just wanted to tell you that you're a strong person and I really respect you for this reason. This part of life might feel like shit but in the future this period is going to give you extra strength in the times of hardship. Please keep us updated.
RESPONSE B: First of all, you should schedule an appointment with the Dean of Students and explain your situation. They can help by providing free tutoring, scholarships and sometimes even helping you deal with your professors. You are also not the first student to drop a course and retake it. Professors usually don't really mind it. We know students are people, with lives, and sometimes complicated ones. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to tell a professor I don't want/need them on my committee? I'm working on forming my research topic for my MS studies before I write the proposal. Time is of the essence, and I know I'll be able to do it, but the problem is that there's a professor who agreed to be on my committee who I don't think I'll need the help of. She agreed to help with the last part of my analysis, but I've decided to drop that part for something else that will help me tell a more consistent story with my research. I haven't signed any forms yet, but I'm just a bit antsy about telling her about my change of plans. What sort of approach should I take? I can provide more details if necessary.
RESPONSE A: Why can't you keep her on the committee even if you don't use her help? I wouldn't burn bridges and would just incorporate her other feedback.
RESPONSE B: Just be straightforward. If anything, she'll probably be relieved. I'm sure she's happy to be on the committee, but every professor I know is incredibly busy, and having a commitment evaporate is a gift.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to tell a professor I don't want/need them on my committee? I'm working on forming my research topic for my MS studies before I write the proposal. Time is of the essence, and I know I'll be able to do it, but the problem is that there's a professor who agreed to be on my committee who I don't think I'll need the help of. She agreed to help with the last part of my analysis, but I've decided to drop that part for something else that will help me tell a more consistent story with my research. I haven't signed any forms yet, but I'm just a bit antsy about telling her about my change of plans. What sort of approach should I take? I can provide more details if necessary.
RESPONSE A: Why can't you keep her on the committee even if you don't use her help? I wouldn't burn bridges and would just incorporate her other feedback.
RESPONSE B: It happens. I completely agree with just_dumb_luck. Be honest and straightforward and use clear language when you inform her of the change in your plans. Also express gratitude for her willingness to invest her time in your project.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to tell a professor I don't want/need them on my committee? I'm working on forming my research topic for my MS studies before I write the proposal. Time is of the essence, and I know I'll be able to do it, but the problem is that there's a professor who agreed to be on my committee who I don't think I'll need the help of. She agreed to help with the last part of my analysis, but I've decided to drop that part for something else that will help me tell a more consistent story with my research. I haven't signed any forms yet, but I'm just a bit antsy about telling her about my change of plans. What sort of approach should I take? I can provide more details if necessary.
RESPONSE A: I am on the other end. A student dropped a data collection part which was not possible due to COVID. I actually nominated myself to be dropped but for some reason everyone kind of low-key freaked out. And now I am on it as a reader, which I found myself mildly underutilized, but am trying to get the best out of it.
RESPONSE B: I would think of it more as a thank you note/“rejection” – but remember, you’re not really rejecting anyone, just turning down an offer for help. >Dear Dr. Person, >Thank you so much for your offer to help me with the blah analysis portion of my thesis. After discussion with Dr. Advisor, we have decided to forgo that analysis. Because of this change, we will not need you to serve as a member of my thesis committee. However, I am very grateful for your offer, and appreciate the guidance you have given me. >Sincerely, >danifreedude Yes, it’s daunting, especially when it’s a professor, but consider learning to write these emails as important a skill as any research you do. One of the most useful classes I took in undergrad was a business writing course!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Any tips for young academics on how to make sure I'm not making arguments that are already well established in the field? I cannot know everything, I am a young academic in the humanities, I from time to time have some ideas that I think are crisp enough to stand on their own as decent contributions. However, I always overthink that I may not be the first person to say this, and even worse, it may not only have been said by another young academic elsewhere but it may be well established fact in the field. I never know how to make sure I'm not saying anything old, and I always find it interesting when people make big claims in their papers like "no one has done this before, so I'm doing this" - what are some tips to rule out these possibilities and get past my anxieties about saying something repetitive?
RESPONSE A: Just say it. Do your best effort to find it, then pitch it to other grad students first, then your advisors, then go from there to actually working on it. Someone will tell you. Then you tweak it.
RESPONSE B: Three things: 1.There are also different ways of making such an argument. Personally I would never ever say "no-one has done X before", because most likely, someone somewhere has. Instead I would say "most studies to date have done Y" or "the dominant focus in the field has been Y". 2. Related to the first point: when I review manuscripts it really bugs me if academics make overstated claims of novelty. Be precise about your novelty, but explain how your novel insights in a sub-sub-field are relevant to a much wider field. 3. Writing with senior professors has taught me they also overstate their novelty, are unaware of (especially recent) literature, and get scathing comments from reviewers in return :). To some extent it's part and parcel of being an academic.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do academics in STEM wish their colleagues in the humanities knew? Saw an interesting thread asking the inverse; curious to know what people think in this direction.
RESPONSE A: There's good reason that there are multi-author papers. Science just doesn't progress without large collaborations. Long gone are the days of some person coming up with their own theories of everything or running their own lab at home making groundbreaking experiments.
RESPONSE B: know some calculus ​ p.s. i read a post very long time ago that a psychology (?) paper reinvented newton's method in the paper....
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do academics in STEM wish their colleagues in the humanities knew? Saw an interesting thread asking the inverse; curious to know what people think in this direction.
RESPONSE A: There's good reason that there are multi-author papers. Science just doesn't progress without large collaborations. Long gone are the days of some person coming up with their own theories of everything or running their own lab at home making groundbreaking experiments.
RESPONSE B: It all classes are 3hours a week. We teach labs for experiential learning too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What do academics in STEM wish their colleagues in the humanities knew? Saw an interesting thread asking the inverse; curious to know what people think in this direction.
RESPONSE A: It all classes are 3hours a week. We teach labs for experiential learning too.
RESPONSE B: Not all engineers actively participate in science, but those of us with PhDs generally do. Those in the humanities who insist that they're scientists but we somehow aren't *reek* of insecurity. Edit: Also, I think a lot of the philosophical/political issues between engineering and the rest of the academy basically boils down to the fact that those of us in engineering actually see how the sausage is made. The humanities very often make "recommendations" on topics like climate change that range from logistically unworkable to physically impossible, and when the engineers point this out we're denigrated as shills for big oil for daring to speak against the academic zeitgeist.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do academics in STEM wish their colleagues in the humanities knew? Saw an interesting thread asking the inverse; curious to know what people think in this direction.
RESPONSE A: We too hate the admin department.
RESPONSE B: know some calculus ​ p.s. i read a post very long time ago that a psychology (?) paper reinvented newton's method in the paper....
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What do academics in STEM wish their colleagues in the humanities knew? Saw an interesting thread asking the inverse; curious to know what people think in this direction.
RESPONSE A: ITT people respond to things no real person has ever said
RESPONSE B: We too hate the admin department.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhDs in humanities/social sciences: how long did it take for you to find your first long-term job? By long-term job, I generally mean that temporary jobs don't count. For example, casually TAing before you graduate, and odd part-time/full-time jobs you take to keep yourself afloat, such as retail, catering or bartending jobs. But both academia and industry jobs count. If you're willing to, please also kindly tell what exactly is this job. I'll enter the last year of my PhD journey and start searching for jobs, so want to give myself a heads up about the reality. I hope that hearing about your experiences would help myself (and people like me who are also looking at this post) to keep a healthy mindset and a realistic expectation during the process. Thank you!
RESPONSE A: USA: Graduated 2016 Adjuncted 2016-2017 One-year postdoc 2017-2018 Unemployed 2018-2020 Postdoc 2020-2021 Current FT position (3 yr contract, renewable) 2021-present I'm also a trailing spouse, which limited my options at certain points (and probably helped a bit with my current job, though it wasn't a straight up spousal hire)
RESPONSE B: Social sciences here. I had multiple postdocs over a four-year period before I got a TT job.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhDs in humanities/social sciences: how long did it take for you to find your first long-term job? By long-term job, I generally mean that temporary jobs don't count. For example, casually TAing before you graduate, and odd part-time/full-time jobs you take to keep yourself afloat, such as retail, catering or bartending jobs. But both academia and industry jobs count. If you're willing to, please also kindly tell what exactly is this job. I'll enter the last year of my PhD journey and start searching for jobs, so want to give myself a heads up about the reality. I hope that hearing about your experiences would help myself (and people like me who are also looking at this post) to keep a healthy mindset and a realistic expectation during the process. Thank you!
RESPONSE A: After getting my PhD, I had 4 years of postdocs (one 1-year position that was at anther part of my PhD-granting institution, one 3-year position at a different place) and then I chanced into a TT position. Which for my field (History) is about the average length of postdocs for people (3-5) who do luck into TT positions (and of course, many do not). If I hadn't chanced into the TT position then I was planning to go into the think tank world; I wasn't interested in moving around and doing endless postdocs.
RESPONSE B: Social sciences here. I had multiple postdocs over a four-year period before I got a TT job.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhDs in humanities/social sciences: how long did it take for you to find your first long-term job? By long-term job, I generally mean that temporary jobs don't count. For example, casually TAing before you graduate, and odd part-time/full-time jobs you take to keep yourself afloat, such as retail, catering or bartending jobs. But both academia and industry jobs count. If you're willing to, please also kindly tell what exactly is this job. I'll enter the last year of my PhD journey and start searching for jobs, so want to give myself a heads up about the reality. I hope that hearing about your experiences would help myself (and people like me who are also looking at this post) to keep a healthy mindset and a realistic expectation during the process. Thank you!
RESPONSE A: After getting my PhD, I had 4 years of postdocs (one 1-year position that was at anther part of my PhD-granting institution, one 3-year position at a different place) and then I chanced into a TT position. Which for my field (History) is about the average length of postdocs for people (3-5) who do luck into TT positions (and of course, many do not). If I hadn't chanced into the TT position then I was planning to go into the think tank world; I wasn't interested in moving around and doing endless postdocs.
RESPONSE B: I was hired ABD to a TT in 2005. Very brief period of people getting jobs then.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhDs in humanities/social sciences: how long did it take for you to find your first long-term job? By long-term job, I generally mean that temporary jobs don't count. For example, casually TAing before you graduate, and odd part-time/full-time jobs you take to keep yourself afloat, such as retail, catering or bartending jobs. But both academia and industry jobs count. If you're willing to, please also kindly tell what exactly is this job. I'll enter the last year of my PhD journey and start searching for jobs, so want to give myself a heads up about the reality. I hope that hearing about your experiences would help myself (and people like me who are also looking at this post) to keep a healthy mindset and a realistic expectation during the process. Thank you!
RESPONSE A: After getting my PhD, I had 4 years of postdocs (one 1-year position that was at anther part of my PhD-granting institution, one 3-year position at a different place) and then I chanced into a TT position. Which for my field (History) is about the average length of postdocs for people (3-5) who do luck into TT positions (and of course, many do not). If I hadn't chanced into the TT position then I was planning to go into the think tank world; I wasn't interested in moving around and doing endless postdocs.
RESPONSE B: I had two one-semester-long visiting positions, then got a tenure track job. Technically the first of these positions was before I graduated, but it was after I finished my dissertation.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PhDs in humanities/social sciences: how long did it take for you to find your first long-term job? By long-term job, I generally mean that temporary jobs don't count. For example, casually TAing before you graduate, and odd part-time/full-time jobs you take to keep yourself afloat, such as retail, catering or bartending jobs. But both academia and industry jobs count. If you're willing to, please also kindly tell what exactly is this job. I'll enter the last year of my PhD journey and start searching for jobs, so want to give myself a heads up about the reality. I hope that hearing about your experiences would help myself (and people like me who are also looking at this post) to keep a healthy mindset and a realistic expectation during the process. Thank you!
RESPONSE A: After getting my PhD, I had 4 years of postdocs (one 1-year position that was at anther part of my PhD-granting institution, one 3-year position at a different place) and then I chanced into a TT position. Which for my field (History) is about the average length of postdocs for people (3-5) who do luck into TT positions (and of course, many do not). If I hadn't chanced into the TT position then I was planning to go into the think tank world; I wasn't interested in moving around and doing endless postdocs.
RESPONSE B: Still haven’t
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: [Humanities] I'm a first year master's student, and I've been asked to write a letter of recommendation for a professor who has been nominated to receive a graduate teaching award. I've never written a recommendation letter for anyone, let alone a professor! Any tips? Some background: I was contacted this evening by the department chair who asked me to write a letter for this professor. Two students have been chosen by the professor herself to write letters. The other student is a PhD student who is very close with her and they have known each other for years I believe. This is my first semester at this University, so I've only interacted with this professor for the last few months. I got along really well with this professor, and I just found out today I got an A+ in her course. She is super cool and a genuinely awesome professor. She even held the last class at her house and cooked us all dinner! I want to write a really good letter for her, but I'm not sure really how to go about it. Are there any tips on how to structure the letter? The instructions I've been given are "The letter itself should be no longer than one page and should reflect your experience of [professor] and your classroom experience." Any tips would be super appreciated. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Best tip for any letter of recommendation: SPECIFIC EXAMPLES. I read so many letters about how great someone is - great, great, great. Why are they great? What did they do? Maybe they give very specific and helpful feedback, or write clear lectures, or give clearly defined assignments relevant to the real world. Maybe there was a time you struggled and she did something specific that was supportive or helpful. Pick a couple of those things and describe the impact they had on students.
RESPONSE B: If you support this professor and think she deserves a teaching award then definitely speak to her about it (and verbalise you’re support!).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Writing a dissertation without any publications I have seen quite some posts here from people that submitted their phd thesis without any publications. Does this really occur that often? When I started my supervisor made it very clear that I would need 3/4 conference papers and 1/2 journal papers as first author for him to take my thesis into consideration (field is CS in Europe). Not saying you shouldn’t be allowed to graduate without publications but you would think at least parts of your thesis should be peer reviewed right? How many publications did you have before finishing?
RESPONSE A: As others have said, this is really really subject - an even research topic - specific. Someone working in an established methods framework may be able to get 2 or 3 full peer reviewed papers out (my current PhD student has done just that). If you're the one developing methods it may well be that there's nothing publishable until toward the end. And if the outcome is that the method isn't as good as you'd hoped even that might not be easy to get published. For a lot of (most?) subjects conference papers don't count as publications.
RESPONSE B: When I started (studied chemistry), my grad advisor expected us to have at one publication per year we were in school (preferably two). I also think my advisor wouldn’t pass me if I didn’t have any publications. I couldn’t even imagine trying to write a dissertation without publications (seems like it would be a lot of research that ended in dead ends).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Improving my writing. I'm a Masters student in computer engineering and haven't written any real essay since high school. How do I best go about improving and practicing my writing skills.
RESPONSE A: Go back to those high school assignments, and rewrite them in half of the words. Write a journal each night. Read good literature (helps your own vocabulary and sense of rhetoric)
RESPONSE B: Read. Also, I am sure there is a writing center at your university. I consider myself to be a competent writer, though I will usually go to the center at my university and have a paper reviewed.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I can't seem to write linearly. I'm wondering if anyone took any life-changing writing classes, practice in some way, etc etc, that made you a publishable writer? Any suggestions? I'm also in the Boston area which, surprisingly, only seems to have undergraduate writing courses that I can find for research purposes.
RESPONSE A: Most academic authors have their favorite book that changed their writing style – mine is *Style* by Joseph Williams. The book is probably not the resource you want if you want to be a grammar expert (it is not chock-full of rules), but if you want a practical guide that helps you *feel* what good writing is about, then it is very helpful. For those truly committed to the academic life, I cannot stress enough the importance of getting a professional copy-editor. I have worked with one for years now, and plan to do so throughout my career. He revises every original submission, every revision, and even my response documents. I learn so much from him and he understands my stranger writing proclivities and nudges me in the right direction every time. If you are in the social sciences or humanities, I would say a solid copy-editor, though not cheap, is an absolute essential. When top journals review papers that are borderline r&r/reject, you writing style alone can determine which side your manuscript will land on. Finally, it helps to remember that as junior researchers we are trying to master our domain, our methodology, and writing style all at the same time. Be patient! They won't all culminate together. Focus on your domain and methodology and let your writing development be a career-long process.
RESPONSE B: There's a really good audio lecture series from "the teaching company" called "building great sentences." It has commentary on different currents of academic thought regarding prose style and advocates a way of writing called "cumulative syntax" which I've found to be helpful. Much of it is aimed at stylistically dense fiction/non-fiction writing, e.g. writing in the style of Didion or DeLillo etc., but I definitely think it can be useful for organizing one's thoughts in academic papers as well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Why are Australian universities so high ranked? They may not be the highest ranked but globally, so many of them are in the world top 50. What's enabled them to do so well compared to other similar countries like Canada?
RESPONSE A: As someone who has seen a few UK departments and universities rise and fall in the rankings following better and worse treatment of staff, I would say that great pay and conditions for academic staff at Australian universities would have a significant impact (in my totally unscientific assessment).
RESPONSE B: What Canadian universities are you comparing it to and in what rankings? Seems to me that Canada has more high ranking institutions than Australia on THE and QS or at least around the same amount. Not that rankings are that important to begin with.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: ether you look at ARWU, QS or Times HE lists, or history, literature, philsophy, jurisprudence or any other subject, what would be considered elite and prestigious universities on the Continent, fair poorly when compared internationally on rankings. The Sorbonne and ENS (in France) or Bologna, Sapienza or Scuala Normale (in Italy) for example are highly revered institutions and attract the very best of French and Italian scholars, but recurve scores far below Oxbridge, or Ivy League schools in rankings. Are university rankings designed in such a way that favours US/UK academic practice, structure or education? Is there an English-speaking bias in rankings? Or are elite US and UK universities simply "better" institutions?
RESPONSE A: My experience of a French ‘Grande Ecole’ compared to a similar university in the uk was that the quality of facilities and teaching was far inferior. It was pretty shocking
RESPONSE B: I don't know about humanities, but in Physics I would make the blunt, controversial claim that France and Italy really aren't as important players in the research game as, for example, their neighboring Germany or Switzerland (ETH Zurich, for example, is a VERY respected school). Just look at things like scientific citations: https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?order=ci&ord=desc France has about as many scientific citations as Canada and yet Canada has HALF the population. So on a "per capita" basis, Canada's scientific output, by this rough measure, is almost twice that of France. Something that I believe strongly plays in to this state of affairs, based on admittedly anecodotal first and second-hand experience, is France's aggressive insistence on people being French-speaking. If you, for example, look at job postings of the CNRS effectively 90% of them are French-only: https://emploi.cnrs.fr/Offres.aspx Science is an international endeavour, and English is the international language of science. Limiting yourself to French speakers only dramatically limits your recruitment pool.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Why are some published work not followed up by more publications by authors? Hello. I will try to clarify my question, as I could not find a way to describe it properly within a title's length. I am starting a PhD in the fall and am currently doing a literature review of my topic, looking for where to start with my own research. I came across a handful of journal articles which presented interesting work, with lots of potential for future work, however they were not followed by any subsequent publications (that I could find by tracking papers citing the aforementioned work). So I was wondering, since there could be many reason for a researcher to stop working on a project, how does one know if the idea was a dead end or if the project was aborted for a different reason? I hope my question is clear and relevant, I am still discovering how academic research works and am not aware of how everything works in this world.
RESPONSE A: IME there's an opposite effect to consider - sometimes you just get the thing you were interested in right with one publication, with maybe multiple experiments that just worked out. I've had that, and also published sequences of papers that involved a slowly developing understanding on something, where the last paper or so (hopefully) got it right. The former case would only be a dead end if it didn't get picked up for whatever reason, but it wasn't that the first papers of the sequence were better than the sole "welp this is it" paper.
RESPONSE B: I’ve written multiple papers that have ended with something to the effect of “future work will include….” and then never followed up because funding didn’t get renewed, or the original results weren’t actually good enough to warrant further work when I have other, more promising projects.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Why are legendarily high failure rates acceptable in undergraduate organic chemistry courses across universities? I'm a university professor (not in Organic Chem) and I've always been irritated and perplexed by the low exam means and high failure rates for students in Organic Chem courses. This seems to be consistent among universities in the US and acceptable to the chemistry faculty. If my courses had these results I'd be asking myself:1) Am I wrong about what I'm successfully teaching these students, 2) Am I trying to cover too much material? Perhaps the course should be divided into 4 parts instead of two, 3) Is this subject too hard for an undergraduate to grasp. Personally, I see the legendary status of Orgo as a "weed out course" to be a shameful characteristic of chemistry curricula. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: organic wasn't bad at my uni. P chem was the one that killed me.
RESPONSE B: I think organic chemistry is one of the first classes that a really smart student will run into where they need to understand rather than memorize. They will run into me of these classes during their university career, but a lot of students will take organic in their first year, when they are still super confident and reliant on what worked in high school. So, the really smart students will manage, but it will drop out a lot of kids who don't realize how lost they really are until they have to apply their knowledge rather than just regurgitate it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I've always been irritated and perplexed by the low exam means and high failure rates for students in Organic Chem courses. This seems to be consistent among universities in the US and acceptable to the chemistry faculty. If my courses had these results I'd be asking myself:1) Am I wrong about what I'm successfully teaching these students, 2) Am I trying to cover too much material? Perhaps the course should be divided into 4 parts instead of two, 3) Is this subject too hard for an undergraduate to grasp. Personally, I see the legendary status of Orgo as a "weed out course" to be a shameful characteristic of chemistry curricula. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: > I see the legendary status of Orgo as a "weed out course" to be a shameful characteristic of chemistry curricula. It is shameful, and yet it has continued for generations. The same can be said for most chemistry courses actually, and I attribute it to poor teaching across the board, something that is perpetuated by graduate faculty who still feel teaching is a distraction and anyone worth their salt can do it without any training (or thought). Other disciplines have moved past this to greater and lesser degrees, but few fields tend to fetishize bad teaching as much or as boldly as chemistry. There is some innovation occurring in isolated pockets, notably some top liberal arts colleges, but until the entire field wakes up (and that includes ACS) nothing will really change. Meanwhile, we'll watch yet another generation of great students avoid o-chem or even drop natural science majors due to poor experiences (or just the poor reputation) of chemistry instruction. I can't even begin to count the dozens of Phi Beta Kappa graduates I've worked with who came to college as chem or pre-med majors, but went in other directions almost entirely due to bad experiences with chemistry. Get chemists past the ancient idea that "teaching" means "standing in front of people lecturing about content" and you'll be responsible for the greatest advance in science education since the computer. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: organic wasn't bad at my uni. P chem was the one that killed me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: a. Correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: organic wasn't bad at my uni. P chem was the one that killed me.
RESPONSE B: I'm an undergrad, but I've tutored organic chemistry for the past two years and have also spent a year helping grade organic exams. Organic chemistry is hard to a lot of students because you can't memorize. A large majority of students in ochem are biology majors who rely on their memorization abilities to get through bio and think that tactic will work in ochem as well. It simply doesn't. If you understand ochem, it's really not that difficult. It has no math, which is often something that people find hard in other branches of chemistry. It's almost entirely conceptual. Really, if you understand a few important concepts taught at the beginning of first semester, you can solve pretty much any problem thrown at you by the professor. Another problem students tend to have is that they don't know how to study for ochem. One of my friends, for example, tried to just go to class and read the book. She never did a single practice problem. She did ochem the wrong way. People often don't realize that doing the problems is pretty much the only way to make sure you know and understand ochem. About failure rates/low exam averages... Yeah, the average may be low, but there are still significant numbers of people scoring very well (usually ~85%+). I actually graded an ochem 2 exam a few days ago... The average was 50, but there were peaks in the distribution at 25, 50, and 75. That's not a typical distribution, but it's also not super uncommon. Also, in this case, a 50 ends up being a C, or maybe a low B. Average ochem GPAs at my university usually end up ranging from about 2.6-2.9. That's really not that bad, in my opinion. Plus, with the amount of premeds, it's good to have some weed out courses. I really wouldn't want some of my ochem classmates to be doctors...as bad as that may sound.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I want to apply for a postdoc in a higher rank university, but my current publication record is not looking good, and the application deadlines are approaching... I'm in the final year of my Ph.D., in a fairly good university, although not a top-tier one. I like to apply for a postdoc position in a higher-rank university, at least higher than my current one, but my field is really competitive (AI-related) and my publication record is definitely not outstanding. I have a few papers submitted to top-tier conferences and struggling to get accepted there. I also have some projects working-in-progress therefore it is hard to get them out before I submit my post-doc application. I know publication record is a critical factor in postdoc application, so I wonder if I should include my papers that are under review as part of my records (or even attach them in the application as writing samples), or explain the projects in the cv. Any advice will be really appreciated!
RESPONSE A: Things may be different in hard sciences, but potential/submitted articles etc don't count for much. Sure, put them in. But the way you phrase this, the best advice is to not spend too much time on this application. Best of luck.
RESPONSE B: don't overthink it, just apply and don't obsess about ranking
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it okay to inquire about possible open (postdoc) positions directly to the PI of some research group even if there are no openings listed on the webpage? Currently looking to apply for postdoc positions. Many research groups that I am interested in don't have any job openings listed on their webpages. I was curious whether it would be okay to directly mail the professors to inquire about possible job openings? Also, if yes, any tips? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Yes — this is exactly how I got my job.
RESPONSE B: There's nothing wrong with this at all! If there isn't already money set aside for a postdoc opening in the group, you can make yourself more attractive by bringing other funding with you. I would suggest doing some quick research and see if there are other funding opportunities that you could pursue (e.g. fellowships/grants/prizes, either national or specific to the institute) that could at least partially fund a position, and mention them in the email. This shows that you've taken some initiative to explore what options are out there to make a position work. This also makes you feel less like you're just meekly begging for a job, which is an uncomfortable position to be in, I know.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Professors and lecturers, how often do you see a student and know they are going to succeed in the field? And what makes them so great? Some of my lecturers (UK, ancient history/archaeology) said to me that once in a while they come across a student and know that they are teaching a genius, or someone who is destined for a career in academia (not me, lol). One of them is a senior academic in the field and has been working in it for 30/40 years, and he said there was a student who walked into the first class and blew his mind with his intelligence and ideas. Does this happen often, and how do you know?
RESPONSE A: Ugh, I hate this kind of attitude with a passion. I firmly believe that, assuming non-abusive work environment, if you’re moderately intelligent, have a really good work ethic, are persistent in the face of failure, and interested in the field enough not get bored of the grind, you can make it as a scientist at least to the postdoc level. After that a lot of the time luck takes over because of how competitive the market is, but that’s an external factor. This attitude of the “genius” chosen few is not only bullshit, but one of the reasons for the under-representation of women and minorities in research academia. I bet that the professors who tell you that invariably feel that those that share their backgrounds are the anointed ones. That’s how women and minorities don’t get equal access to mentorship. Genius doesn’t exist. And what we do, as researchers and academics, is absolutely important, but honestly not all that special.
RESPONSE B: Perhaps, I had a Student in a high level material engineering course not take complete notes and was a little distracted in some detailed demonstrations. But after getting to know him, he was a genius and it did come to him easy. However, I couldn’t say he’d be very successful in academia or engineering because both requires a level of social intelligence for great success.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How many rejections before you consider a manuscript a dead end? Do you have any rules of thumb for how long you're gonna keep working on getting your manuscript published before ditching it? I just had my first manuscript rejected by the editor from 2 journals in 2 months. My PI is taking it in stride, but I'd like to get an idea about how many shots I get to take before calling it a day. P.S. any insights in how to get your work published in the first couple of attempts are also welcome. :)
RESPONSE A: Listen to your PI. Two rejections is not a big deal.
RESPONSE B: It is entirely up to you to decide when you think it's no longer worth the effort. I am at 12 and counting for my book manuscript. Not giving up yet.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How many rejections before you consider a manuscript a dead end? Do you have any rules of thumb for how long you're gonna keep working on getting your manuscript published before ditching it? I just had my first manuscript rejected by the editor from 2 journals in 2 months. My PI is taking it in stride, but I'd like to get an idea about how many shots I get to take before calling it a day. P.S. any insights in how to get your work published in the first couple of attempts are also welcome. :)
RESPONSE A: Because reviewers tend to value incremental studies that fit existing molds, novel studies often struggle to find a home. Akerlof’s market for lemon, I believe was rejected ~10 times before getting published and eventually became the basis of his Nobel prize. West and Zimmerman’s seminal study on doing gender also couldn’t find a home so they had to publish in the 1st volume of gender and society as a last resort. It is one of the most cited studies today in the field. So it depends. You will know if your study is deserving of a place and if you have faith in its value, keep pushing.
RESPONSE B: Like everything, specify your field. I'm an author of ~30 papers, ~0 of which were reject, which is perfectly normal is astronomy, but not virology, say.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How many rejections before you consider a manuscript a dead end? Do you have any rules of thumb for how long you're gonna keep working on getting your manuscript published before ditching it? I just had my first manuscript rejected by the editor from 2 journals in 2 months. My PI is taking it in stride, but I'd like to get an idea about how many shots I get to take before calling it a day. P.S. any insights in how to get your work published in the first couple of attempts are also welcome. :)
RESPONSE A: Like everything, specify your field. I'm an author of ~30 papers, ~0 of which were reject, which is perfectly normal is astronomy, but not virology, say.
RESPONSE B: I have once had 5 rejection for a single paper. It ended up being published in a journal more prestigious than the first five, after some work of course.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do professors check emails during the summer months when school is over? Title!
RESPONSE A: Definitely, but whether they respond to you is a whole other story. Undergrads are low on the totem, so be persistent.
RESPONSE B: yes all professors do the exact same thing at the same time! there are global rules you have to adhere to when you become a professor! sort of like hippocrates oath but for academics
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do professors check emails during the summer months when school is over? Title!
RESPONSE A: yes all professors do the exact same thing at the same time! there are global rules you have to adhere to when you become a professor! sort of like hippocrates oath but for academics
RESPONSE B: Most professors see summer as the time when they can get all their work done because they're not teaching.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do professors check emails during the summer months when school is over? Title!
RESPONSE A: I check email throughout the year, but I have a hierarchy of response times: Provost: Immediate response Department chair, dean: Same business day Colleague: 24 hours Student in an active course: 24 hours Advising students: 24 hours Student in previous course: 48-72 hours Colleague who has pissed me off in recent memory but is not currently on P&T committee: Wait until second request
RESPONSE B: Probably. Although I do want to point out that many profs (in the US, idk intl) are on a 9 month contract. I say “many” but afaik this is the default contract that everyone I know has. This is just info to help manage expectations for what a prof might be willing and able to do over the summer. I know some that won’t do anything related to service or teaching over the summer bc it’s the only focused research time available.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do professors check emails during the summer months when school is over? Title!
RESPONSE A: Yes they do, but some try to also have lives so maybe not as often as during the semester. So, maybe only ten times a day? Jk. My longest email hiatus is a week.
RESPONSE B: I check email throughout the year, but I have a hierarchy of response times: Provost: Immediate response Department chair, dean: Same business day Colleague: 24 hours Student in an active course: 24 hours Advising students: 24 hours Student in previous course: 48-72 hours Colleague who has pissed me off in recent memory but is not currently on P&T committee: Wait until second request
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do professors check emails during the summer months when school is over? Title!
RESPONSE A: I check email throughout the year, but I have a hierarchy of response times: Provost: Immediate response Department chair, dean: Same business day Colleague: 24 hours Student in an active course: 24 hours Advising students: 24 hours Student in previous course: 48-72 hours Colleague who has pissed me off in recent memory but is not currently on P&T committee: Wait until second request
RESPONSE B: Yes we do. Replying to those emails is a different story.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How do you know if you're cut out for research/academia? Hello all, I just finished my first undergraduate research experience as a rising junior. I'm a bit overwhelmed by trying to answer the question if I'm really made to go into research and if I want to do a PhD. I liked my experience overall this summer, however I found out that what I thought I would like (demography) was actually not as appealing to me by the end of the program. Although I'm not sure if this feeling also came from the fact that I had basically no knowledge of quantitative methods before I started my research internship. I'm not planning on going straight to a PhD anyway after undergrad, if anything doing a masters abroad or working abroad for some time is my most immediate goal. But I was wondering if this is a common feeling among those who have pursued research and academia. Because of how competitive things are, I feel inclined to say that if I didn't absolutely love my research internship then I'm not cut out for this, but I was wondering what others on this sub would think or if they felt differently.
RESPONSE A: My answer would be the same as yours: you need to absolutely love (your) research, almost everything else can be learned.
RESPONSE B: I think research is a calling. A research career means putting up with a lot of BS, and at some point, it can get it you if research isn't what you *have to do*. If you can be happy doing something else, do something else. If you can't see yourself being happy without doing research, do research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do Job prospects look like in academia(Philosophy) if you would be happy taking a permanent lecturer position? I know that the market is cataclysmic for professor positions. If I am willing and happy to take lecturer positions at Community colleges, teaching focused state schools etc. Does the market look much better?
RESPONSE A: >Two-year colleges have been coping with declining enrollments since around 2010, when the Great Recession ended and the national unemployment rate began falling from about 10 percent to around 5 percent today. >But when researchers project demographic information to 2025, the declines become sharper. Prior to becoming a University Professor, I spent 8 years as a community college administrator. I've been an administrator at two different community colleges. Taught adjunct at three. My experience as that there was very, very little turn over among CC Faculty. And there was intense competition for open positions. For example, at my medium sized Florida CC, it wasn't unusual to get a thousand applications for an opening in English. What you plan to do is your decision. But with the trend toward fewer students and fewer resources, it may not be prudent to expect the next 20 years in CC environments to resemble the last 20.
RESPONSE B: Dismal.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How easy or difficult is it to switch jobs in Academia if you have a fallout with coworkers? Non-native English speaker here. Suppose you have a fallout with a coworker or several of them. In some large occupations like retail, you could easily switch jobs and get a fresh start. In fact that's what lots of people do when they find a toxic boss, coworkers or even if they don't fit in well with the people. Switching jobs often gets you a similar position with no loss in paygrade. In academia, how easy or difficult is it to get away from coworkers you have a fallout with without losing pay level and position?
RESPONSE A: Extremely difficult. There are a lot of people chasing a small number of jobs. Most people aren’t that able to secure another job, and as another poster said, it is a very small world, so issues of being a difficult co-worker will get around.
RESPONSE B: I mean, people move universities pretty frequently to move up. HOWEVER, the academic world is strong on collaboration so if you burn bridges it will not look good.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How easy or difficult is it to switch jobs in Academia if you have a fallout with coworkers? Non-native English speaker here. Suppose you have a fallout with a coworker or several of them. In some large occupations like retail, you could easily switch jobs and get a fresh start. In fact that's what lots of people do when they find a toxic boss, coworkers or even if they don't fit in well with the people. Switching jobs often gets you a similar position with no loss in paygrade. In academia, how easy or difficult is it to get away from coworkers you have a fallout with without losing pay level and position?
RESPONSE A: Extremely difficult. There are a lot of people chasing a small number of jobs. Most people aren’t that able to secure another job, and as another poster said, it is a very small world, so issues of being a difficult co-worker will get around.
RESPONSE B: I mean, depends on the job. If you're a contract worker, you can quit tomorrow. If you're TT, it's more difficult. That said, most academic fields are very small. Even if you move to another position, you'll likely still have to interact with the people you fell out with on a regular basis.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: and the slow progress on the paper, but I didn't say anything. Today, a different journal emailed me asking to confirm authorship. I'm *very* confused, and pretty annoyed. I don't know why two journals emailed me about the same thing; I'm annoyed I haven't even seen the final paper that's gone out to these journals; I don't know why nobody has communicated with me about these decisions such as journal choice (I've never heard of this journal, but at least its IF is fine). I feel like I should *really* reach out now. I don't want my annoyance to come across, so I'll probably write it tomorrow, but I don't know how to put forth basic questions such as the ones above. I'm not actually sure who to address it to, either--I get the feeling professor A has no idea about some of these as well, though I could be wrong. I've met the corresponding author (who probably submitted) in only one meeting, so I don't really have a relationship with him. How (and to who) do I write this email?
RESPONSE A: Well are you part of the core team of this paper as it has progressed until today, or are you just some alumni that helped with early work? If you're the latter one, then I wouldn't ask you about your comments for a submission strategy either. It is a decision by the first author and the corresponding author (typically the direct PI). You have to assess fairly your contribution to the manuscript as it is today. Ownership of the project belongs to the PI and her/his team.
RESPONSE B: If you are first author then it’s your work (at least in my field) and you’d have done the majority of writing and should be consulted about submissions. Only possible exception might be if you gave your advisor or the PI full control to handle it for you. Have you asked your current professor for guidance? I know he’s not on the paper but that might be a good thing. He (or she) could give you unbiased advice. But if you are first author you are well within your rights to follow the duck up. C
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: other co-authors, who didn't reply. After nudging the other co-authors for a while, they finally, after a year or two, re-submitted (this was a couple of weeks ago). I was a little annoyed at the lack of communication and the slow progress on the paper, but I didn't say anything. Today, a different journal emailed me asking to confirm authorship. I'm *very* confused, and pretty annoyed. I don't know why two journals emailed me about the same thing; I'm annoyed I haven't even seen the final paper that's gone out to these journals; I don't know why nobody has communicated with me about these decisions such as journal choice (I've never heard of this journal, but at least its IF is fine). I feel like I should *really* reach out now. I don't want my annoyance to come across, so I'll probably write it tomorrow, but I don't know how to put forth basic questions such as the ones above. I'm not actually sure who to address it to, either--I get the feeling professor A has no idea about some of these as well, though I could be wrong. I've met the corresponding author (who probably submitted) in only one meeting, so I don't really have a relationship with him. How (and to who) do I write this email?
RESPONSE A: I’m not sure how things are in your field, but in mine, journals do not allow simultaneous submissions. Unless your field is different, if you’re getting these emails from multiple different journals, you definitely should ask about that because that could get you into trouble.
RESPONSE B: Well are you part of the core team of this paper as it has progressed until today, or are you just some alumni that helped with early work? If you're the latter one, then I wouldn't ask you about your comments for a submission strategy either. It is a decision by the first author and the corresponding author (typically the direct PI). You have to assess fairly your contribution to the manuscript as it is today. Ownership of the project belongs to the PI and her/his team.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: a relationship with him. How (and to who) do I write this email?
RESPONSE A: If two weeks have passed since the first journal submission, it's very possible that it was editorially rejected within those two weeks and your co-authors resubmitted elsewhere. I wouldn't jump to the "double submission" accusation just yet. Verify with them the status at of the first submission, then the second.
RESPONSE B: It sounds like the publication is being handled pretty badly. Who to email, and what to ask, depends on how the group is organized. I would focus on the following points: >I don't know why two journals emailed me about the same thing If you suspect the co-author has submitted the manuscript to multiple journals, that might be an issue to address. Most journals require a statement that the manuscript hasn't been submitted to anywhere else, so this would be unethical. >I'm annoyed I haven't even seen the final paper that's gone out to these journals By most standards I've seen, being listed as an author means you've approved the draft being submitted, so you definitely should have been sent a copy and asked for explicit approval. For reference, I usually use these criteria as a rule of thumb. The specific criteria depend on the journal, but I've seen several reference this set. >I feel like I should really reach out now. I don't want my annoyance to come across, so I'll probably write it tomorrow, but I don't know how to put forth basic questions such as the ones above. I'm not actually sure who to address it to, either--I get the feeling professor A has no idea about some of these as well, though I could be wrong. I've met the corresponding author (who probably submitted) in only one meeting, so I don't really have a relationship with him. How (and to who) do I write this email? From your description I'm assuming the corresponding author is another student. I would raise the above issues with Prof A and/or the other co-author, in order to involve someone with more authority. If they agree that the situation isn't being handled properly, I would request that someone else act as corresponding author.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: in this situation? I can probably redo the substrate table that **2** did but it will add time - and we're on a timeline to get revisions done. For context, we're both in grad school and I'm senior to him.
RESPONSE A: >As I drafted the % contribution everyone made to this paper How was it planned to he? How did it actually work out? How did you phrase it? > outlined the fact that he would not be 2nd author until the PI said he will on promise that [2] will work on the revision What was the initial plan? And how did you phrase that? "you don't get to be second author unless you....." is going to annoy most people.
RESPONSE B: If the language you're using here and the email your PI sent is anything to go by it seems like this is largely down to a conflict with you in which your PI sees you as at fault. 2 can pull their data out and given how you seem to be behaving towards them it seems like your PI will hold you responsible. Redoing the data isn't going to fix the relationship with your PI who clearly can see you provoked this situation. For someone to decide to lose a second authorship and seemingly have the PI in agreement on the reasons why, is extraordinary. So I would say wind your neck in. Apologise to everyone concerned. Listen to what 2 has to say both about the paper and your behaviour if necessary and find a way forward that doesn't involve name calling, and be respectful and polite. Look up the CREDIT taxonomy to help you develop a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of author contribution. At the very least stop threatening not have them as second author when that's what was originally agreed. Using authorships to try and force people to do what you want is appalling behaviour. If their work already warrants second author that's what they should be. What you did is unethical and poor practice. Your PI should be having words. You come across very poorly in this post. I really encourage you to reflect on whether this is the kind of person you want to be in your professional life?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: fact that he would not be 2nd author until the PI said he will on promise that [**2**] will work on the revision, he is now crying about it and had emailed the boss. Subsequently, the PI emails me the following: "[**blockov12**] - this is going badly. [**2**] is now threatening to pull his data out of the paper - which is ridiculous. I will now have to have a meeting to assign each of you work. I told you this was not going to get the reaction you wanted and this is now causing me work. The point is to get a list of things done and have a reasonable agreement on how to get them done." My question, for my fellow peers and scientists/authors; 1. What can I do 2. What can my PI do? 3. Is he even allowed to pull his data out? it doesn't belong to him but to the PI (maybe university) 4. What do you generally think? 5. What you do in this situation? I can probably redo the substrate table that **2** did but it will add time - and we're on a timeline to get revisions done. For context, we're both in grad school and I'm senior to him.
RESPONSE A: The PI has told you what to do quite clearly. *I told you this was not going to get the reaction you wanted and this is now causing me work. The point is to get a list of things done and have a reasonable agreement on how to get them done* And by this part, it seems there are interpersonal issues you did not deal with correctly, which your PI specifically warned you about.
RESPONSE B: >As I drafted the % contribution everyone made to this paper How was it planned to he? How did it actually work out? How did you phrase it? > outlined the fact that he would not be 2nd author until the PI said he will on promise that [2] will work on the revision What was the initial plan? And how did you phrase that? "you don't get to be second author unless you....." is going to annoy most people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: [**2**] will work on the revision, he is now crying about it and had emailed the boss. Subsequently, the PI emails me the following: "[**blockov12**] - this is going badly. [**2**] is now threatening to pull his data out of the paper - which is ridiculous. I will now have to have a meeting to assign each of you work. I told you this was not going to get the reaction you wanted and this is now causing me work. The point is to get a list of things done and have a reasonable agreement on how to get them done." My question, for my fellow peers and scientists/authors; 1. What can I do 2. What can my PI do? 3. Is he even allowed to pull his data out? it doesn't belong to him but to the PI (maybe university) 4. What do you generally think? 5. What you do in this situation? I can probably redo the substrate table that **2** did but it will add time - and we're on a timeline to get revisions done. For context, we're both in grad school and I'm senior to him.
RESPONSE A: Is it just me, or is drafting a "% contribution" document kind of abnormal? I've never seen this in any lab I've worked in, and frankly, it seems a little insulting to calculate exactly how little or how much someone contributed to a manuscript. I don't know, I may be off, but that seems very odd. I understand the purpose but generally, determining the order of authorship for middle authors doesn't require that degree of effort and is usually pretty obvious.
RESPONSE B: >As I drafted the % contribution everyone made to this paper How was it planned to he? How did it actually work out? How did you phrase it? > outlined the fact that he would not be 2nd author until the PI said he will on promise that [2] will work on the revision What was the initial plan? And how did you phrase that? "you don't get to be second author unless you....." is going to annoy most people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: - which is ridiculous. I will now have to have a meeting to assign each of you work. I told you this was not going to get the reaction you wanted and this is now causing me work. The point is to get a list of things done and have a reasonable agreement on how to get them done." My question, for my fellow peers and scientists/authors; 1. What can I do 2. What can my PI do? 3. Is he even allowed to pull his data out? it doesn't belong to him but to the PI (maybe university) 4. What do you generally think? 5. What you do in this situation? I can probably redo the substrate table that **2** did but it will add time - and we're on a timeline to get revisions done. For context, we're both in grad school and I'm senior to him.
RESPONSE A: It looks like your ego caught up with you and you created a mess that might lead to you failing a revision deadline and potentially having an impactful paper rejected. What you need to understand is this: you are NOT in charge. You do not run the lab, you do not pay the workers, you do not fund the work. You need to swallow your ego and simply listen to your boss. This entire mess could have been avoided if you did that from the start. Beginning now, I would work on being more collegial and less vengeful because this type of approach to research will make you a pain to work with down the road.
RESPONSE B: It seems to me that, if this paper really is in the final stages (revise & resubmit), you might want to choose your battles carefully. Sure co-author 2 is being lazy, not pulling their weight, it's unfair, etc. But right now, it seems like trying to get them to actually do their part fully is impacting your relationship with the PI and your chances of getting an accepted publication for work you've already put so much into. You might want to just let this one go, do the work for the revisions, and get the paper out and NEVER collaborate on a manuscript with this person again. After all, the 1st authorship is going to be way more beneficial on your CV.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: wants to take his ball and go home. As I drafted the % contribution everyone made to this paper and outlined the fact that he would not be 2nd author until the PI said he will on promise that [**2**] will work on the revision, he is now crying about it and had emailed the boss. Subsequently, the PI emails me the following: "[**blockov12**] - this is going badly. [**2**] is now threatening to pull his data out of the paper - which is ridiculous. I will now have to have a meeting to assign each of you work. I told you this was not going to get the reaction you wanted and this is now causing me work. The point is to get a list of things done and have a reasonable agreement on how to get them done." My question, for my fellow peers and scientists/authors; 1. What can I do 2. What can my PI do? 3. Is he even allowed to pull his data out? it doesn't belong to him but to the PI (maybe university) 4. What do you generally think? 5. What you do in this situation? I can probably redo the substrate table that **2** did but it will add time - and we're on a timeline to get revisions done. For context, we're both in grad school and I'm senior to him.
RESPONSE A: It looks like your ego caught up with you and you created a mess that might lead to you failing a revision deadline and potentially having an impactful paper rejected. What you need to understand is this: you are NOT in charge. You do not run the lab, you do not pay the workers, you do not fund the work. You need to swallow your ego and simply listen to your boss. This entire mess could have been avoided if you did that from the start. Beginning now, I would work on being more collegial and less vengeful because this type of approach to research will make you a pain to work with down the road.
RESPONSE B: I never understood gatekeeping authorship for significant contributors of actual data to a paper, especially second authorship. Not worth the hassle.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I know this high school that's looking for a teacher. Naturally, my objectives are quite different from that, and I considered doing that job for a year because economy right now in 2022 is hitting pretty hard and might be a swift solution to the job-salary issue. People keep telling me I should do it and try to publish a few things in my free time, but honestly it sounds to me like condolences for not getting into the Post-doc path right away (for which I should definitely wait and look for post-doc positions; I'm still waiting for the results of a scholarship that I will most likely not win). My gut tells me that leaving the university-bubble even for a year might be academical suicide (at least my supervisor seems to see it that way, judging by the fact that no further interest in my career has been shown, and that "they" however have other people with less money-issues that hang around from several years). I still have stuff to do from my PhD time (some papers). I've tried to get some advice from every friend I have, and everyone seem to agree with the high school teaching thing. Being the first time I find myself in this strange situation, and since there are people here with a lot more experience than me or them, I hoped I might get some little advice on this. This sucks.
RESPONSE A: 2 things. 2 months is NOTHING. I had colleagues applying to hundreds of grants jobs. Now you will finally realise that a PhD is just a worker and nobody really cares what happens to you after you hand in the work you are meant to. Expendable and replaceable. The sooner people realise that the better
RESPONSE B: English person here. Sorry to hear this. I feel your pain. I agree that leaving the university system is (in general) academic suicide. And it's not as easy to go into the public schools as most people think, because the certification system in most states is pretty time-consuming. There are a few states where emergency teachers are getting exemptions, etc., but my guess is that you'll have to go back for a masters in education or some other kind of teaching certification to continue that job long-term, which you might not have interest in.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: and they pay really well. But I also hear from my colleagues and friends that I might as well stay a few more months and complete the PhD after trying harder, given how long I have been in the program. I would like to know from you these: 1. What are your views on my situation? 2. If I am not interested in academia any more, and only want to make my future in the industry, is having a PhD on my resume worth it? 3. How can I talk about an incomplete PhD on my resume? I am at an ABD stage. Would this impact future job prospects, or will my job experience help me out later on? 4. If you believe I need to stay on in the program, why would you think so? Your insights on this will be greatly appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Going through five years of PhD grind and not getting actual degree would be a real shame. Talk to some higher-ups about what you need to do to get this finished.
RESPONSE B: Don't quit, go to the chair and if you don't get a positive response go to the dean. I was in my 6th year when I was offered a job and was ready to leave. I worked with the chair and dean to specify what milestones needed to be met, how, and when. Due to the financial requirements of tuition, which is normally covered by TA or RA, I got the dean to cover it. I now put this on my resume as a prestigious Dean's Dissertation Fellowship. My job didn't require a PhD but the opportunities it has opened has been life changing. Sticking up for yourself will show others you are ready. The following year was hell, working 40 hours a week at a new job, working 20 hours a week at the university 60 miles away, and writing 4 papers that became my dissertation, but is a great story to tell during interviews. Also pursue options with your future employer. Maybe push your start date back 3 months and WFH 3 months of orientation which could give 6 months to knock out few key experiments, train colleagues to take over, and write a few chapters. A PhD is a degree in problem solving and looking at problems creatively. The past 5 years you've gained the skills, now put them to use! Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: around that subject/technique." I know I should have ideas about problems to solve but I always run into the "I don't know enough to know if this is worth researching." Do I sit down and spend weeks/months reading literature to figure out if it's worth researching? Is that my best course of action? My expertise isn't marketable.... is what I'm saying. I don't know where to go from here.
RESPONSE A: And I'm about to do my master in plasma physics/fusion energy. How exciting!
RESPONSE B: Go to Google scholar. Type in, at first, each of your “skills” you have. Example I bet is relevant: I’m sure there are standard codes you are quite proficient with; expertise is valued so that counts. If you doubt that, think like you’re an employed researcher of some sort, I.e. your competitors—Once I get up there in the echelons of academe, what? I’M going to spend two years learning the ins and outs of that code and all the ways it interfaces with the underlying theory it’s based on?? Hell no! I’ve got a damn job! I’d have to hire someone like you So you see: You. Are. An. Expert. Now apply this thinking to what ever equipment you know how to operate and/or maintain. Whatever analysis software you are familiar with? Coding languages? ...Get creative! K? Now type them into Google Scholar one at a time + [one] or [two] keywords that have something to do with energy generating systems that run tangentially or maybe obliquely to your device. If you get too many technically relevant results, start adding more of your “skills” in to weed through the chaff. If that’s not working get creative with other devices and processes that could conceivably require your skill. Study up on the theory underpinning your skills. Now *that’s* another skill. Expend your search parameters. Now start making connections between similar or perfectly dissimilar results. Keep doing that. If this or variations on this don’t yield you lines of legitimately interesting research, I don’t know what could.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: the techniques, and I'd be an expert to most people, but just because I know how to use a particular spectrometer doesn't mean I automatically know which problems I can apply it to.) I just feel so... lost. Like I've failed as a scientist. I didn't know any better when I started grad school that the TOPIC in which you did your PhD was important. I thought it was basically "You get PhD, you qualify for all jobs that require PhD." No, it's more like "You get PhD in a specific subject, you qualify for all jobs that are centered around that subject/technique." I know I should have ideas about problems to solve but I always run into the "I don't know enough to know if this is worth researching." Do I sit down and spend weeks/months reading literature to figure out if it's worth researching? Is that my best course of action? My expertise isn't marketable.... is what I'm saying. I don't know where to go from here.
RESPONSE A: And I'm about to do my master in plasma physics/fusion energy. How exciting!
RESPONSE B: I don’t think that’s failing at all. You seem very well aware of the situation. Also I don’t think your believe in the technology should distract you from the research of it. I would honestly bench that idea and go about attempting to apply for funding. If you can convince someone to find your research further then it’s valuable. Is there a possibility of a breakthrough? The thing about innovation is that you don’t know what to scaffold on. The computer, for example, has a caused a major revolution in innovation. I’m not suggesting you invent some like like a computer here, but rather, realise that for something like a computer to exist required a scaffold of research which predates it: your work will be used for something. Find out what that is and apply yourself toward it. I’d say you will never get away from your expertise within your life time. Maybe you could take a break for a little, but I’d suggest going for the funding route. Corporations may be interested in your energy knowledge? Industry labs? Commercial Innovation finds?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: anymore. They COULD BE useful for some very niche applications (manned space travel) but that's not really research worthy when we also have better options there (nuclear). Furthermore, no one wants to really fund it anymore. So what do I, someone who spent 5 + 2 (grad school + post doc) years of my life researching these devices, do? I can't start researching something ELSE because my expertise isn't in something else. I could use one of the few techniques I learned while researching these devices and apply that to another problem, but I'm not an expert in any other problem so why would anybody trust anything I write? Furthermore, I'm not an expert in any of those techniques. I just... used them. (I mean, I know a lot about the techniques, and I'd be an expert to most people, but just because I know how to use a particular spectrometer doesn't mean I automatically know which problems I can apply it to.) I just feel so... lost. Like I've failed as a scientist. I didn't know any better when I started grad school that the TOPIC in which you did your PhD was important. I thought it was basically "You get PhD, you qualify for all jobs that require PhD." No, it's more like "You get PhD in a specific subject, you qualify for all jobs that are centered around that subject/technique." I know I should have ideas about problems to solve but I always run into the "I don't know enough to know if this is worth researching." Do I sit down and spend weeks/months reading literature to figure out if it's worth researching? Is that my best course of action? My expertise isn't marketable.... is what I'm saying. I don't know where to go from here.
RESPONSE A: And I'm about to do my master in plasma physics/fusion energy. How exciting!
RESPONSE B: What is that device? Just curious about it. Have you considered collaborating with other researchers if you are changing your research direction. For example, you can generate a new idea and seek your collaborators help to start something new. I mean you can do a “fusion” of your expertise and their expertise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I'm not an expert in any other problem so why would anybody trust anything I write? Furthermore, I'm not an expert in any of those techniques. I just... used them. (I mean, I know a lot about the techniques, and I'd be an expert to most people, but just because I know how to use a particular spectrometer doesn't mean I automatically know which problems I can apply it to.) I just feel so... lost. Like I've failed as a scientist. I didn't know any better when I started grad school that the TOPIC in which you did your PhD was important. I thought it was basically "You get PhD, you qualify for all jobs that require PhD." No, it's more like "You get PhD in a specific subject, you qualify for all jobs that are centered around that subject/technique." I know I should have ideas about problems to solve but I always run into the "I don't know enough to know if this is worth researching." Do I sit down and spend weeks/months reading literature to figure out if it's worth researching? Is that my best course of action? My expertise isn't marketable.... is what I'm saying. I don't know where to go from here.
RESPONSE A: Just an idea for a plan b, but you could always take a step back and apply for jobs you'd normally just need maybe a masters degree and would be over qualified for to gather some experience in another area for maybe 2-3 years and then try again to get into that area in a higher position. Of course not ideal to take a step back but it could help to reevaluate some things and gather some useful experience with new things. Wishing you all the best! This really is frustrating but you did nothing wrong. I mean this could very well have gone the complete different direction
RESPONSE B: What you describe here is exactly why I decided against pursuing a PhD in microbial fuel cells when I was offered the opportunity. Despite that, skills gained during a PhD are transferable, as others have pointed out. Many academics have pointed this out to me, that the topic almost doesn't matter. I'm sure you'll be able to pivot!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Condescension in science, how do you deal with it? As a young trainee I struggle interacting with condescending PI’s and other trainees. It’s surprising how many people I interact with have this character trait. As a young trainee I struggle not letting it affect me. I know their behaviour (and my response) probably stems from imposter syndrome and insecurity, but that doesn’t stop it from making me feel shitty. What are some strategies that work to respond to this kind of behaviour in a professional but respectful way?
RESPONSE A: Work to outperform their expectations. Although you could professionally confront them about it, I think doing well is the best revenge, and will hopefully earn you their respect. Of course, if their behavior crosses the line there are other measures you should take, but if it's about your own confidence then it's important to build and believe in your own skillset. Best of luck!
RESPONSE B: Learn to distinguish between their condescension and your ego. Looking back to the days when i was a trainee, many of the times I thought someone was being condescending, they weren’t actually being condescending. It was my ego getting in the way. If you read the above and instantly thought, “Yeah, but that’s not the case for *me*”, it’s almost certainly the case for you.
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.