label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B | POST: What industry jobs have people moved into with a PhD in Literature? We’ve all seen the data about how hard it is for English PhDs to get TT/professorial jobs, so I’m curious to know what those with a PhD in literature have moved into. Maybe it’ll help those who are soon to graduate or who are considering entering a program. For example, a colleague of mine had a PhD in women’s literature and ended up becoming the director of a women’s center at a US university. Still in higher ed, I suppose, but not as a professor.
RESPONSE A: I can only think of a few: one is a tech writer for a software company (her PhD was in Brit lit, not tech writing, but she made the transition), one does something with solar panels (family business), and the other works in local government (from an internship while a PhD). A bunch actually did get TT jobs, but the others from my program/network are either in NTT jobs or non-teaching university staff positions. MFAs seem to have more options, actually.
RESPONSE B: I know someone who works in corporate philanthropy, someone who writes ad copy for a tech company, and someone who teaches at an elite high school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What industry jobs have people moved into with a PhD in Literature? We’ve all seen the data about how hard it is for English PhDs to get TT/professorial jobs, so I’m curious to know what those with a PhD in literature have moved into. Maybe it’ll help those who are soon to graduate or who are considering entering a program. For example, a colleague of mine had a PhD in women’s literature and ended up becoming the director of a women’s center at a US university. Still in higher ed, I suppose, but not as a professor.
RESPONSE A: I can only think of a few: one is a tech writer for a software company (her PhD was in Brit lit, not tech writing, but she made the transition), one does something with solar panels (family business), and the other works in local government (from an internship while a PhD). A bunch actually did get TT jobs, but the others from my program/network are either in NTT jobs or non-teaching university staff positions. MFAs seem to have more options, actually.
RESPONSE B: Editor for an academic press is one I can think of. Another started her own editing and manuscript preparation business.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What industry jobs have people moved into with a PhD in Literature? We’ve all seen the data about how hard it is for English PhDs to get TT/professorial jobs, so I’m curious to know what those with a PhD in literature have moved into. Maybe it’ll help those who are soon to graduate or who are considering entering a program. For example, a colleague of mine had a PhD in women’s literature and ended up becoming the director of a women’s center at a US university. Still in higher ed, I suppose, but not as a professor.
RESPONSE A: I'm a librarian, and the vast majority of my cohort came from English lit. You don't need a PhD to be a librarian usually, but plenty of academic librarian roles are now requiring one higher degree in the subject that you would be liaising in. Some institutions consider librarians faculty and offer tenure track.
RESPONSE B: I can only think of a few: one is a tech writer for a software company (her PhD was in Brit lit, not tech writing, but she made the transition), one does something with solar panels (family business), and the other works in local government (from an internship while a PhD). A bunch actually did get TT jobs, but the others from my program/network are either in NTT jobs or non-teaching university staff positions. MFAs seem to have more options, actually.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What industry jobs have people moved into with a PhD in Literature? We’ve all seen the data about how hard it is for English PhDs to get TT/professorial jobs, so I’m curious to know what those with a PhD in literature have moved into. Maybe it’ll help those who are soon to graduate or who are considering entering a program. For example, a colleague of mine had a PhD in women’s literature and ended up becoming the director of a women’s center at a US university. Still in higher ed, I suppose, but not as a professor.
RESPONSE A: I know a bunch of humanities PhDs in the following careers: - grant writing specialist - communication specialist at a local government agency (Canada) - learning specialists in corporate sector or instructional designers in higher ed - academic publishing (very niche) - higher education administration - private school teaching (mostly among modern language PHDs) - community engagement specialist for a small non-for-profit - one person who made the shift to consulting (Big 5) Nearly every person who did this used the last 1-2 year(s) of the program to pivot, explore career ideas, build a network and gain relevant experience. Good luck!
RESPONSE B: Not an academic but work in tech, some examples I've seen from people with PhD's in lit/English/rhetoric would be content strategist, UX writer, or technical writer for product documentation. Traditional paths would probably be in publishing or advertising (editor, copywriter, etc.).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What industry jobs have people moved into with a PhD in Literature? We’ve all seen the data about how hard it is for English PhDs to get TT/professorial jobs, so I’m curious to know what those with a PhD in literature have moved into. Maybe it’ll help those who are soon to graduate or who are considering entering a program. For example, a colleague of mine had a PhD in women’s literature and ended up becoming the director of a women’s center at a US university. Still in higher ed, I suppose, but not as a professor.
RESPONSE A: A cohort of mine got a really nice job at a private school. It’s still teaching but the school surprisingly paid much more than the academy with slightly better benefits
RESPONSE B: Not an academic but work in tech, some examples I've seen from people with PhD's in lit/English/rhetoric would be content strategist, UX writer, or technical writer for product documentation. Traditional paths would probably be in publishing or advertising (editor, copywriter, etc.).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: fully convince people that I’m genuine when I give compliments. “Working hard” or focus for me often looks different than it does for other people and because I still look 16, that’s a factor as well, especially with older women. Everyone who knows me says I “think and see the world very differently” but I still need to be able to navigate relationships even with the prickliest, most aggressive, and most insecure academics. What are your best tips, practices, and warnings for navigating socially in academia, especially as someone who might not read or show the same cues?
RESPONSE A: I'm also ND. Frankly, my approach to difficult people thus far has just been to avoid them wherever possible. Some difficult people generate amazing research, but in my personal opinion it's very rare that the collaborative benefits will be worth the pain of dealing with them. Regarding socializing overall, I use the same rules with academics that I do with everyone else, which are: (i) match their level of formality, sometimes go one notch more formal if we're meeting for the first time; (ii) be an active listener, ask specific questions about their interests; (iii) act so confident and comfortable they assume that any social mistakes you make are just fun personality quirks; (iv) make them laugh, unless they're serious by nature. One thing I definitely struggle with is knowing when I'm being lied to, either directly or by omission. Unfortunately, this does happen in academia somewhat regularly, although usually not by people who think of their behavior as lying. All I can say there is to try to think through other people's motivations before believing their advice, don't take optimism as fact, and ask direct clarifying questions when you feel something isn't lining up. I also agree with the advice to try and have hobbies and friends outside your department. It's healthy, it helps you keep a reasonable perspective of the work you're doing, and apparently it also correlates with long-term success. Hope this helps!
RESPONSE B: In what ways does focus and work look different for you? It may be helpful just to let people know those things up front with an honest conversation so they don’t make other assumptions
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: need to be able to navigate relationships even with the prickliest, most aggressive, and most insecure academics. What are your best tips, practices, and warnings for navigating socially in academia, especially as someone who might not read or show the same cues?
RESPONSE A: If you can, try and find a mentor who is also neurodivergent - there’s actually LOTS of us in academia - as a social scientist, I’d love to actually study how many adults in academia grew up with ASD, ADHD, learning disabilities, or mental illnesses, as I’d bet we would be overrepresented in this field compared to other professions. So much of academia rewards novel thinking, dedication, and niche expertise, so it can also be a place for the neurodivergent to thrive if they get the right support. My own mentor and I share similar neurodivergent traits and she has a child with a neurodivergent diagnosis, so I feel safe openly talking with her about strategies to adapt and overcome obstacles. Remember that it’s not a deficit - in academia, having a different way of thinking and approaching problems can be a major asset. As some others have mentioned, get a support network outside of your echo chamber too: see if you can make a friend or two in other disciplines, or even look in other spaces entirely that meet your interests and hobbies to build your social group. My best friends were my major support network outside of my program throughout my Ph.D., and I met them all in online tabletop! Some are also in academia, but many are in very different fields. 🙂
RESPONSE B: Eh, I think these issues (you being ND and people not thinking your compliments are genuine) may not be related. Imposter syndrome is rampant among academics, and the culture is a hierarchical one. Thus, two things are generally true. First, people tend not to believe good things about themselves because of imposter syndrome. Second, anyone higher up is used to being sucked up to by people down lower on the hierarchy, so they tend to treat compliments as sucking up rather than genuine. Maybe consider being kind and being yourself, but worrying less about trying to compliment folks.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: head. I’m not sure if i should quit now but i may regret this in the future. Need advice.
RESPONSE A: Hey, friend. Let me tell you a little bit of my journey. My mother decided when I was something around 13 years old, that my destiny was to save the world. She pushed me really hard into engineering, because in the city where I grew up, engineering was considered to be the career where people really make a difference. But, it turns out, my mother doesn’t really understand how the world beyond her own experience actually works. In the city I grew up in, and in the city where I earned my degree, engineers were plentiful, and it was very difficult to find a job, despite having a degree from a very prestigious engineering university. After ten years of struggling, I became a teacher. When I left industry, my mother said many times that she was no longer proud of me. I have come to peace with that. It is not important to me that my mother is proud of me, or of my work. It is only important that I am proud of myself.
RESPONSE B: I mean, if you are financially independent, it doesn't really matter what you families opinion is. In some fields you can combine work and grad school, and I some fields you can't. I know my uni is really opposed to any outside work while I'm doing grad school, even research work. If they are supporting you then they get to have their opinion and you need to find a way to work it out. It's tough trying to explain yourself when the other side has their mind made up though. I guess one question would be what field, and are you planning on a PhD? If their criticisms are valid, then take them into account, but don't plan you life around not disappointing your family. Also, how is 24 too old for a masters program? That's a pretty normal age, I'm 25 and a first year masters student. Lastly, if they really are that bad and don't take your interests into account, you might need to lay down some boundaries and enforce them. It's not easy or fun but it will make you relationship with you parents easier for you to navigate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: asap 4) Torture my mentality for not applying jobs that I don’t enjoy doing. 5) Brings up how I’m a huge disappointment to the to the family With all of this going inside my head. I’m not sure if i should quit now but i may regret this in the future. Need advice.
RESPONSE A: I would post this on other subs that can give you more relevant advice. This is a parent issue- nothing here is remotely a reason for you to drop out! It sounds like the issues your parents have in terms of relating to you in a healthy way are severe. It can take many years to really feel free of that kind of destructive, controlling influence, but you are an adult and your parents' opinions are simply the opinions of other people- people who, in this case, likely know less than you do about these decisions. I hope your situation with them improves (which might mean drastically reducing contact or cutting them out completely if they are going to be this toxic to your well-being). I also hope you do not consider their opinions or pressure to give you a good reason to drop out or alter your major life choices. Live the life you want to live, not the life someone else wants you to live. You only get one.
RESPONSE B: Hey, friend. Let me tell you a little bit of my journey. My mother decided when I was something around 13 years old, that my destiny was to save the world. She pushed me really hard into engineering, because in the city where I grew up, engineering was considered to be the career where people really make a difference. But, it turns out, my mother doesn’t really understand how the world beyond her own experience actually works. In the city I grew up in, and in the city where I earned my degree, engineers were plentiful, and it was very difficult to find a job, despite having a degree from a very prestigious engineering university. After ten years of struggling, I became a teacher. When I left industry, my mother said many times that she was no longer proud of me. I have come to peace with that. It is not important to me that my mother is proud of me, or of my work. It is only important that I am proud of myself.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: the following on a daily basis; 1) compares my life with my cousins who is now having a stable job plus doing a phd. 2) talk about how a master’s degree is a waste of time (for my country) 3) brings up my age is too old for this stuff and need to get job asap 4) Torture my mentality for not applying jobs that I don’t enjoy doing. 5) Brings up how I’m a huge disappointment to the to the family With all of this going inside my head. I’m not sure if i should quit now but i may regret this in the future. Need advice.
RESPONSE A: Hey, friend. Let me tell you a little bit of my journey. My mother decided when I was something around 13 years old, that my destiny was to save the world. She pushed me really hard into engineering, because in the city where I grew up, engineering was considered to be the career where people really make a difference. But, it turns out, my mother doesn’t really understand how the world beyond her own experience actually works. In the city I grew up in, and in the city where I earned my degree, engineers were plentiful, and it was very difficult to find a job, despite having a degree from a very prestigious engineering university. After ten years of struggling, I became a teacher. When I left industry, my mother said many times that she was no longer proud of me. I have come to peace with that. It is not important to me that my mother is proud of me, or of my work. It is only important that I am proud of myself.
RESPONSE B: I think you could focus on the "daily" issue and simply not interact with them as often. Tell them you'll respond to negative texts or emails once a week and that you'll be happy to text and email about positive things at any time. You should be able to shape the unhappy behaviors out of them pretty quickly. If they're paying your way, you might lose that. In that case, be prepared to fund your own degree. That might take working for a while or taking out loans. If they're paying your way then cutting free takes away the financial control they have.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: If I am presenting my dissertation at a conference but now am employed at another school, what should I put for my institution/affiliation? The current school where I work or the university where the research was conducted?
RESPONSE A: On your nametag: Where you are now. On your slides/poster: Both.
RESPONSE B: Where you work.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: If I am presenting my dissertation at a conference but now am employed at another school, what should I put for my institution/affiliation? The current school where I work or the university where the research was conducted?
RESPONSE A: You include all institutions where the work was done, particularly with respect to funding, resources and personnel. Was there *any* contribution from your new institution? You can't go wrong stating so.
RESPONSE B: Current school
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: In The United States' University System, What Portion Of Research Funding Comes From Private Sources, Compared To Public Sources? The title, basically. I spent some time looking into it, and was unable to find a satisfactory answer. I am not sure if the data for the answer to this question is not available, or if it exists, and is simply too obscure for me to find. Even if a source with this particular answer can't be found, I would appreciate links to any quality studies on interactions between the private sector and universities. For context, I am a layman simply trying to indulge his curiosity, and to improve my understanding of some of the economic factors at work in my country. Sorry, if this is the wrong place to ask.
RESPONSE A: https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201/u-s-r-d-performance-and-funding Note: This covers all research and development, not just research at universities Edit: Quote from the report “[f]ederal support, however, varies by sector. In 2017, federal funding supported half (51%) of all academic R&D performance”
RESPONSE B: Lol the exact data source you want is down for maintenance right now but it'll be here: https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvyherd/ For universities, federal is still above 50% but not by much. That said industry doesnt make up all of the remaining 50%--the second largest source of university funding for research is "Institutional" funding, a category for all internal money universities spend on research. Actual money from companies is closer to 7-8%, similar to the amount from foundations and non-profits.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it far that my PI expects the some students to work over the weekend/holidays when the some students basically get the same days off? About half of the research group are composed of religious shabbat-observing Jews. PI pesters the non-religious students and the foreign students to work over the weekends and is also somehow ok with the religious students to remain quiet over the same time period. Is this acceptable behavior?
RESPONSE A: Fair? Is it fair that those same people will need an extra year to finish their Ph.D.s because they aren't working on the weekends? Here's some advice from someone that has been in the academic game a long time: Stop worrying about other people, do your own work well, and make sure you are getting appropriate credit for the work you are doing. That's all that matters. Every minute you waste worrying about someone else's career is a minute you are not spending advancing your own.
RESPONSE B: Stop worrying about other people. Really no one should be forced to work over the weekends, but he certainly can't force observant religious students to work on Shabbat. No one should have to violate their religious beliefs in order to do their PhD.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it far that my PI expects the some students to work over the weekend/holidays when the some students basically get the same days off? About half of the research group are composed of religious shabbat-observing Jews. PI pesters the non-religious students and the foreign students to work over the weekends and is also somehow ok with the religious students to remain quiet over the same time period. Is this acceptable behavior?
RESPONSE A: Fair? Is it fair that those same people will need an extra year to finish their Ph.D.s because they aren't working on the weekends? Here's some advice from someone that has been in the academic game a long time: Stop worrying about other people, do your own work well, and make sure you are getting appropriate credit for the work you are doing. That's all that matters. Every minute you waste worrying about someone else's career is a minute you are not spending advancing your own.
RESPONSE B: I don't think any grad students should be required to work over the weekends. If it's a matter of lab experiments needing to be done on weekend days because of timing then you should be able to take other days off during the week. Everyone deserves time off. I worked very, very few weekends during my PhD and it definitely didn't cause me to take longer than my peers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Should I put my grad student union involvement on my CV? Basically the title. It's not huge or anything, just serving as a union rep for my department. Is this inappropriate to include in my CV, eg, under "Service" or "Community"?
RESPONSE A: Do you want to work in an environment when such a thing is a red flag? Then don’t even think of it. I put it always in the section of interpersonal skills and I’ll be happy if somebody rejects an application of mine for including it. We spend in our workplace more time than with our families, it should be a healthy environment where we should feel safe for what we think. Even more, when we talk about academic jobs.
RESPONSE B: Do you want to work somewhere that sees being involved in the union as a red flag? No, no you don't. It also is a talking point for good organizational and interpersonal skills.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Should I put my grad student union involvement on my CV? Basically the title. It's not huge or anything, just serving as a union rep for my department. Is this inappropriate to include in my CV, eg, under "Service" or "Community"?
RESPONSE A: nope, more likely to alienate reactionary faculty
RESPONSE B: I would include it for sure. Shows that you're engaged and get along with people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: are all very new to me. So, I come back here with a few questions on grad student recruitment: 1) How do you attract grad students to work with you as a new PI? This year is particularly tricky for me because I am not listed on the department's website and do not yet have a functioning lab. I see a few good applicants whose research interests overlap with mine, but they applied to work with other professors in the department. My future colleagues are okay with them working with me. In this case, do you have any suggestions on how I should reach out to the applicants and present myself as a potential alternative advisor? 2) I understand that students are still learning (so am I!) and may face challenges in their lives, and it is my job to support them and help them grow. However, I have also heard some bad stories from my colleagues about their students/trainees. (By "bad stories," I am not talking about regular difficulties but the more extreme cases, like academic dishonesty, toxic personality, and extreme procrastination/stubbornness that significantly delays project progress, which can be detrimental to a new lab.) So, in your experience, at the stage of reviewing applications/interviewing applicants, what are the ways to identify red flags/potentials of the student? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: When you do get a student I really recommend sitting down with them and agreeing a contract/charter on behaviours and commitments on both sides covering stuff like expected work hours (obviously nothing crazy but core hours of 10-4 is good, to avoid the guy who always wants to work unseen in the middle of the night), how often you'll meet, record keeping, training, open discussions on authorships, respectful mutual challenge etc. It can seem corny but being very explicit about your expectations and encouraging them to be open and transparent in return gets you off to a great start and it gives you something to point to if things aren't going quite right.
RESPONSE B: For putting yourself out there, I’d take every opportunity to put yourself in front of students: speak at retreats (even if not your department), give seminars, teach a grad course, etc. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: students? Hi r/AskAcademia, thank you for your great suggestions a few months ago when I got on the job market. Fast forward to today, I have already accepted a TT position and suddenly find myself on the other side of the table -- recruiting students, planning for independent grant applications, etc., which are all very new to me. So, I come back here with a few questions on grad student recruitment: 1) How do you attract grad students to work with you as a new PI? This year is particularly tricky for me because I am not listed on the department's website and do not yet have a functioning lab. I see a few good applicants whose research interests overlap with mine, but they applied to work with other professors in the department. My future colleagues are okay with them working with me. In this case, do you have any suggestions on how I should reach out to the applicants and present myself as a potential alternative advisor? 2) I understand that students are still learning (so am I!) and may face challenges in their lives, and it is my job to support them and help them grow. However, I have also heard some bad stories from my colleagues about their students/trainees. (By "bad stories," I am not talking about regular difficulties but the more extreme cases, like academic dishonesty, toxic personality, and extreme procrastination/stubbornness that significantly delays project progress, which can be detrimental to a new lab.) So, in your experience, at the stage of reviewing applications/interviewing applicants, what are the ways to identify red flags/potentials of the student? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: Not yet a professor, but from similar conversations with faculty: it can be a good idea to propose to co-supervise the student(s) with the professor they applied to work with. It can take the pressure off of you for being a first-time PI, and off of the students for having a first time PI.
RESPONSE B: For putting yourself out there, I’d take every opportunity to put yourself in front of students: speak at retreats (even if not your department), give seminars, teach a grad course, etc. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: the table -- recruiting students, planning for independent grant applications, etc., which are all very new to me. So, I come back here with a few questions on grad student recruitment: 1) How do you attract grad students to work with you as a new PI? This year is particularly tricky for me because I am not listed on the department's website and do not yet have a functioning lab. I see a few good applicants whose research interests overlap with mine, but they applied to work with other professors in the department. My future colleagues are okay with them working with me. In this case, do you have any suggestions on how I should reach out to the applicants and present myself as a potential alternative advisor? 2) I understand that students are still learning (so am I!) and may face challenges in their lives, and it is my job to support them and help them grow. However, I have also heard some bad stories from my colleagues about their students/trainees. (By "bad stories," I am not talking about regular difficulties but the more extreme cases, like academic dishonesty, toxic personality, and extreme procrastination/stubbornness that significantly delays project progress, which can be detrimental to a new lab.) So, in your experience, at the stage of reviewing applications/interviewing applicants, what are the ways to identify red flags/potentials of the student? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: Do you need to take a student right away? I waited until my second year, which gave me time to get myself oriented to the department and university before mentoring a student. Also gave me more time to establish myself and recruit students who actually wanted to work with me. With regard to the recruiting process, I like to do zoom interviews with prospective students to find out more about how they communicate and interact with me. I also have a good sense of my own advising style and what I expect of them, so I ask questions related to what I think are the most important qualities for someone to be successful working with me.
RESPONSE B: For putting yourself out there, I’d take every opportunity to put yourself in front of students: speak at retreats (even if not your department), give seminars, teach a grad course, etc. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Tips for new PI on recruiting grad students? Hi r/AskAcademia, thank you for your great suggestions a few months ago when I got on the job market. Fast forward to today, I have already accepted a TT position and suddenly find myself on the other side of the table -- recruiting students, planning for independent grant applications, etc., which are all very new to me. So, I come back here with a few questions on grad student recruitment: 1) How do you attract grad students to work with you as a new PI? This year is particularly tricky for me because I am not listed on the department's website and do not yet have a functioning lab. I see a few good applicants whose research interests overlap with mine, but they applied to work with other professors in the department. My future colleagues are okay with them working with me. In this case, do you have any suggestions on how I should reach out to the applicants and present myself as a potential alternative advisor? 2) I understand that students are still learning (so am I!) and may face challenges in their lives, and it is my job to support them and help them grow. However, I have also heard some bad stories from my colleagues about their students/trainees. (By "bad stories," I am not talking about regular difficulties but the more extreme cases, like academic dishonesty, toxic personality, and extreme procrastination/stubbornness that significantly delays project progress, which can be detrimental to a new lab.) So, in your experience, at the stage of reviewing applications/interviewing applicants, what are the ways to identify red flags/potentials of the student? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: You should absolutely implore your department to get you on their website as an incoming TT-professor. If you have an academic Twitter, make it widely known that you’re looking for motivated students.
RESPONSE B: For putting yourself out there, I’d take every opportunity to put yourself in front of students: speak at retreats (even if not your department), give seminars, teach a grad course, etc. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Tips for new PI on recruiting grad students? Hi r/AskAcademia, thank you for your great suggestions a few months ago when I got on the job market. Fast forward to today, I have already accepted a TT position and suddenly find myself on the other side of the table -- recruiting students, planning for independent grant applications, etc., which are all very new to me. So, I come back here with a few questions on grad student recruitment: 1) How do you attract grad students to work with you as a new PI? This year is particularly tricky for me because I am not listed on the department's website and do not yet have a functioning lab. I see a few good applicants whose research interests overlap with mine, but they applied to work with other professors in the department. My future colleagues are okay with them working with me. In this case, do you have any suggestions on how I should reach out to the applicants and present myself as a potential alternative advisor? 2) I understand that students are still learning (so am I!) and may face challenges in their lives, and it is my job to support them and help them grow. However, I have also heard some bad stories from my colleagues about their students/trainees. (By "bad stories," I am not talking about regular difficulties but the more extreme cases, like academic dishonesty, toxic personality, and extreme procrastination/stubbornness that significantly delays project progress, which can be detrimental to a new lab.) So, in your experience, at the stage of reviewing applications/interviewing applicants, what are the ways to identify red flags/potentials of the student? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: For putting yourself out there, I’d take every opportunity to put yourself in front of students: speak at retreats (even if not your department), give seminars, teach a grad course, etc. Good luck!
RESPONSE B: Teach an undergraduate final year course and keep on putting a plug for grad school and that you have vacancies. Identify motivated students. Supprt them and genuinely care about their success.. They will come.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: with debt and I have a path out, I should be okay". I'm looking to go for a Masters in International Trade, Eurasian studies, or something East Asia related. I'm from the US, and the advice I've generally been given by my undergraduate professors is to never go to China in an academic capacity. Better yet, never research modern (1949-) China. No matter how influential they become, no matter if they end up running the world, China is a country you shouldn't touch with a 10ft pole. Universities in Europe are better, by and large, even if the faculty is subpar or uses outdated information. Is this shoddy advice? For your own fields, what advice would you give to undergrads? Does going abroad make any difference whatsoever?
RESPONSE A: Did you mean “never research China” or “never research IN China” while earning a degree from a Chinese university? The context of your post seems to connote the latter.
RESPONSE B: Honestly? The advice is a little problematic. It's easy to ignore the heft of Chinese universities if you're in a stable settled career and mostly through it. For a young person, advising them to just blithely ignore entire areas of the world isn't probably as viable. Like it or not, if China becomes a major academic market, you might want to be open to taking a job there. Having been to Hong Kong, that's definitely one university which is pretty good. It's one thing to try and land something in Europe or somewhere more aligned with your politics but don't consciously set yourself up for failure in other markets unless this is something you consciously want to do. Also it's definitely dumb to be telling you to not study China AT ALL. If China is en-route to becoming a dominant world power, it'll not just be universities in China interested in teaching and studying Modern China. Any place with a decent degree of academic depth, and all of China's major partners and neighbours will likely have job opportunities for China experts. Don't study it if it doesn't interest you, but don't let someone else's sense of politics hamstring you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Profs and Grad students, why and why not would you recommend someone go abroad in your field for a Masters and/or PhD? I'm asking this from a political science perspective. My thoughts have always been "as long as it's not burying me with debt and I have a path out, I should be okay". I'm looking to go for a Masters in International Trade, Eurasian studies, or something East Asia related. I'm from the US, and the advice I've generally been given by my undergraduate professors is to never go to China in an academic capacity. Better yet, never research modern (1949-) China. No matter how influential they become, no matter if they end up running the world, China is a country you shouldn't touch with a 10ft pole. Universities in Europe are better, by and large, even if the faculty is subpar or uses outdated information. Is this shoddy advice? For your own fields, what advice would you give to undergrads? Does going abroad make any difference whatsoever?
RESPONSE A: Did you mean “never research China” or “never research IN China” while earning a degree from a Chinese university? The context of your post seems to connote the latter.
RESPONSE B: I would agree dont get a degree _from_ China. I did my first masters there and it is not worth it not only because the quality of the education will be worse but the degree will be nearly value-less. There are also likely to be classes you need to take as an international student that dont contribute to the degree and are strictly political. Was the case for me, anyway. As for dont get a degree _about_ China, Id have to disagree. I think thats unhelpful advice.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Profs and Grad students, why and why not would you recommend someone go abroad in your field for a Masters and/or PhD? I'm asking this from a political science perspective. My thoughts have always been "as long as it's not burying me with debt and I have a path out, I should be okay". I'm looking to go for a Masters in International Trade, Eurasian studies, or something East Asia related. I'm from the US, and the advice I've generally been given by my undergraduate professors is to never go to China in an academic capacity. Better yet, never research modern (1949-) China. No matter how influential they become, no matter if they end up running the world, China is a country you shouldn't touch with a 10ft pole. Universities in Europe are better, by and large, even if the faculty is subpar or uses outdated information. Is this shoddy advice? For your own fields, what advice would you give to undergrads? Does going abroad make any difference whatsoever?
RESPONSE A: I would agree dont get a degree _from_ China. I did my first masters there and it is not worth it not only because the quality of the education will be worse but the degree will be nearly value-less. There are also likely to be classes you need to take as an international student that dont contribute to the degree and are strictly political. Was the case for me, anyway. As for dont get a degree _about_ China, Id have to disagree. I think thats unhelpful advice.
RESPONSE B: I don’t know about Political Science, but I am an PhD student in Mathematics also in the U.S. From what I have heard in my field, many Chinese academic mathematicians are leaving China, but China is trying to change that. Notice the adjective “academic,” professors in China are under a lot of pressure to provide results and sometimes just can’t deliver. To avoid this, many immigrate to the U.S or Europe. However, lately, China has been introducing incentives for mathematics professors to either stay in China or to go back to China. This incentives include things like higher pay, and expedited tenure.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Grad students & post-doc scientists - what are your biggest regrets from undergrad? i.e., what are things you wish you had done that would've made your grad school life (and admission) a lot easier?
RESPONSE A: I wish I had worked harder to learn as much as possible even in courses that didn't interest me. Instead, I did the minimum amount of work required to get the grade I needed. I believed then that I knew what would be useful for me later in life, but it turns out I didn't. For instance, as a linguistics major, I didn't take calculus and linear algebra very seriously, which hurt me when I later ended up doing a PhD in computer science.
RESPONSE B: I regret not going abroad more often. I should have done ERASMUS and/or done a research semester somewhere else in Europe. And related to that, I should have learned either French or Spanish well. The programs were right there...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Grad students & post-doc scientists - what are your biggest regrets from undergrad? i.e., what are things you wish you had done that would've made your grad school life (and admission) a lot easier?
RESPONSE A: Learned scientific writing....better yet, learned how to edit my work better. I always turned in assignments and papers without any real final editing. More practice over time may have made writing easier, since I still struggle with it.
RESPONSE B: I wish I had worked harder to learn as much as possible even in courses that didn't interest me. Instead, I did the minimum amount of work required to get the grade I needed. I believed then that I knew what would be useful for me later in life, but it turns out I didn't. For instance, as a linguistics major, I didn't take calculus and linear algebra very seriously, which hurt me when I later ended up doing a PhD in computer science.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Grad students & post-doc scientists - what are your biggest regrets from undergrad? i.e., what are things you wish you had done that would've made your grad school life (and admission) a lot easier?
RESPONSE A: Does post-undergrad count? I really wish I had taken some time off between undergrad and grad school to travel or have a long term "normal" job. I did my undergrad, went straight into a 2 year MS, and then went straight into my PhD program. I've had some amazing opportunities during grad school that I wouldn't have had elsewhere and I am accomplishing a lot, but for my whole adult life I've struggled with varying levels of depression and anxiety, and it's gotten worse the past two years of my PhD than ever before. I still have another (estimated) 3 years left since a major part of my project has been to develop, bench test, and field deploy a new method, and data collection after all of that just takes a lot of time. I'm feeling quite weary at this point, and while I know I'll get through it, I feel like if I had taken a break either between either my undergrad and MS or MS and PhD, I'd be in a better mental place now.
RESPONSE B: I regret not going abroad more often. I should have done ERASMUS and/or done a research semester somewhere else in Europe. And related to that, I should have learned either French or Spanish well. The programs were right there...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Grad students & post-doc scientists - what are your biggest regrets from undergrad? i.e., what are things you wish you had done that would've made your grad school life (and admission) a lot easier?
RESPONSE A: Learned scientific writing....better yet, learned how to edit my work better. I always turned in assignments and papers without any real final editing. More practice over time may have made writing easier, since I still struggle with it.
RESPONSE B: Does post-undergrad count? I really wish I had taken some time off between undergrad and grad school to travel or have a long term "normal" job. I did my undergrad, went straight into a 2 year MS, and then went straight into my PhD program. I've had some amazing opportunities during grad school that I wouldn't have had elsewhere and I am accomplishing a lot, but for my whole adult life I've struggled with varying levels of depression and anxiety, and it's gotten worse the past two years of my PhD than ever before. I still have another (estimated) 3 years left since a major part of my project has been to develop, bench test, and field deploy a new method, and data collection after all of that just takes a lot of time. I'm feeling quite weary at this point, and while I know I'll get through it, I feel like if I had taken a break either between either my undergrad and MS or MS and PhD, I'd be in a better mental place now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Grad students & post-doc scientists - what are your biggest regrets from undergrad? i.e., what are things you wish you had done that would've made your grad school life (and admission) a lot easier?
RESPONSE A: Learned scientific writing....better yet, learned how to edit my work better. I always turned in assignments and papers without any real final editing. More practice over time may have made writing easier, since I still struggle with it.
RESPONSE B: Not doing more stuff that wasn't studying.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: A journal that we can pre-register during the data collection part? Hello, I am not sure whether this is the right place, but we are looking for a journal that we can pre-register our study during the data collection. Generally, journals indicate that it should be prior to data collection. However, I saw some (pre-registered) papers indicating ongoing data collection. Unfortunately, I don't remember which journal because it was very long time ago. By definition, there are also phrases like prior to data collection, or at least before the analysis. Our data collection part will take at least 5,6 months, but the thing is we have already started to collect data. Do you know journals that allow/accept applications while data collection is ongoing? Fields are: neuroscience, cognitive neuroscience, psychology, clinical studies, brain manipulation.
RESPONSE A: Do you want to simply pre-register your study or are you looking for registered reports? You can easily pre-register your protocol somewhere like OSF and then submit to any journal when it's done. Alternatively, here's a list of journals that accept registered reports.. Look under the "participating journals" tab then "journals that have adopted registered reports".
RESPONSE B: For those who are unfamiliar with the concept of pre registration
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: A journal that we can pre-register during the data collection part? Hello, I am not sure whether this is the right place, but we are looking for a journal that we can pre-register our study during the data collection. Generally, journals indicate that it should be prior to data collection. However, I saw some (pre-registered) papers indicating ongoing data collection. Unfortunately, I don't remember which journal because it was very long time ago. By definition, there are also phrases like prior to data collection, or at least before the analysis. Our data collection part will take at least 5,6 months, but the thing is we have already started to collect data. Do you know journals that allow/accept applications while data collection is ongoing? Fields are: neuroscience, cognitive neuroscience, psychology, clinical studies, brain manipulation.
RESPONSE A: Some pre-registration templates (e.g. the asPredicted form, the OSF form) allow for you to say that the data are pre-existing or that data collection is underway. I've seen/reviewed articles published through a standard route say their analysis is pre-registered and link to one of those templates. I don't know of any journals that allow that through their standard registered reports pathway. Some journals (e.g. Royal Society Open Science, Scientific Reports) allow registered reports to contain secondary analysis of existing data, but it's usually not your own, and you have to establish that you didn't have access to it at the time of pre-registration. I don't think pre-registering an analysis plan while data collection is underway is pointless, but it doesn't really work with the journal registered report format. If reviewers had an issue with the rationale or design of the study, you wouldn't be able to change it.
RESPONSE B: I don't know if you're in the UK but UKRI have just launched a platform called octopus that allows you to publish different sections of papers as you go along through the study and allow for peer review. It's not exactly pre-registration but you can post the methodology, get peer review and then link the results to the methodology paper, all version controlled.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , and whose university affiliation is hanging by a thread as is. He engaged in a amorous relationship with me that became abusive, that I now realize was manipulative and abusive the entire time. They’ve shown me that they will continue to abuse their power and be predatory to other young women, so I guess I feel like I should file a report in the hopes that they can’t be in that position of power anymore. He is not currently in a position of power over me, but I am nervous that he still has access to campus and will start applying to faculty jobs elsewhere. I don’t know if it will be worth it- if other universities will check for title IX violations when they hire. If it will be worth reliving it all in a report, or dealing with backlash from the faculty member as he has threatened my career. I expect to be judged by some as the vindictive grad student, but I just don’t want him to be able to hurt anyone else.
RESPONSE A: A young rock star scholar at my old university had a Title IX complaint filed by two women who he supervised and had romantic relationships with. Upon the advise of his counsel he chose to quit before the process was completed. He got picked up by another university quickly but they knew the story and told him to not doing anything sketchy at his new job. He, of course, went back to sleeping with grad students and got let go. He once again landed on his feet but from what I know he stopped his philandering, got married, and settled down. You should file the complaint. He might recover from the incident but he'll have to do it someplace else.
RESPONSE B: I didn't report a Title IX violation from my director supervisor because I didn't think I could handle the process. He went on to do the same thing at other schools, so I regret it to this day. It's not my duty to protect every woman he comes in contact with, but I still feel like I failed them. Do what YOU think is best for your situation. Don't let anyone tell you you'd don't have a valid complaint. You do! I'm sorry this happened to you, OP.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: campus and will start applying to faculty jobs elsewhere. I don’t know if it will be worth it- if other universities will check for title IX violations when they hire. If it will be worth reliving it all in a report, or dealing with backlash from the faculty member as he has threatened my career. I expect to be judged by some as the vindictive grad student, but I just don’t want him to be able to hurt anyone else.
RESPONSE A: I’ve reported and regretted it. To actually be a violation there are many boxes that need to be checked. It has to be persistent, persuasive, and interfere with your ability to do your job. Usually one of those items isn’t 100% true and the individual is found not guilty and you will be left dealing with a lot of mental health issues and gossip in the department. There is also a fine line in title IX offices with harassment and general relationship conflicts. If you are in a consensual relationship, the line becomes even more blurred. The hardest part for me was that the person who the complaint is filed against, gets to counter act, and will submit a bunch of negative information about you, which hurts and feels like victim blaming :(. Every text message, email, picture, etc will be in the folder of the lawyers and it can feel very invasive. At the end of the day you can decide what you want to do, it seems no matter what people are left with regret, which is very sad.
RESPONSE B: I’m so sorry this happened to you! It feels awful to have someone abuse their authority like that and you are probably just now processing and rebuilding so make sure that you are taking care of yourself and showing yourself the kindness and empathy you probably would feel towards another of his victims. As others have said, you will have to do what’s right for you. Does your school have a policy against faculty getting involved with students? Many schools have begun adopting those. If so, you might be able to initiate something directly as a report about violation of that rule. I wish I knew more but perhaps you can have an informational meeting w title ix person to see what the process would be if you went forward w a complaint.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: some as the vindictive grad student, but I just don’t want him to be able to hurt anyone else.
RESPONSE A: It is not against the rules for a faculty member to engage in a romantic relationship with a student (in general but also pertains to research supervisor/major professor), but this requires the faculty member to file a conflict of interest disclosure to the University. This is then evaluated, typically by the chair of the department and the dean, and an action plan is developed to take steps that remove conflicts of interest. You often see these filed for outside business activity, e.g. a faculty member serving as a member of the board of directors of a company. Your faculty member most likely did not file the proper paperwork, so the University will most likely screw him over for failure to disclose conflicts rather than specifics of Title IX. It's borderline impossible to win "failure to disclose" cases for faculty if the facts are not in their favor. In terms of reporting, you can tell faculty that you filed your report not out of spite against the faculty member but as a required disclosure with the University, and it's not your fault if he failed to follow disclosure policies.
RESPONSE B: I’ve reported and regretted it. To actually be a violation there are many boxes that need to be checked. It has to be persistent, persuasive, and interfere with your ability to do your job. Usually one of those items isn’t 100% true and the individual is found not guilty and you will be left dealing with a lot of mental health issues and gossip in the department. There is also a fine line in title IX offices with harassment and general relationship conflicts. If you are in a consensual relationship, the line becomes even more blurred. The hardest part for me was that the person who the complaint is filed against, gets to counter act, and will submit a bunch of negative information about you, which hurts and feels like victim blaming :(. Every text message, email, picture, etc will be in the folder of the lawyers and it can feel very invasive. At the end of the day you can decide what you want to do, it seems no matter what people are left with regret, which is very sad.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: abusive the entire time. They’ve shown me that they will continue to abuse their power and be predatory to other young women, so I guess I feel like I should file a report in the hopes that they can’t be in that position of power anymore. He is not currently in a position of power over me, but I am nervous that he still has access to campus and will start applying to faculty jobs elsewhere. I don’t know if it will be worth it- if other universities will check for title IX violations when they hire. If it will be worth reliving it all in a report, or dealing with backlash from the faculty member as he has threatened my career. I expect to be judged by some as the vindictive grad student, but I just don’t want him to be able to hurt anyone else.
RESPONSE A: I’ve reported and regretted it. To actually be a violation there are many boxes that need to be checked. It has to be persistent, persuasive, and interfere with your ability to do your job. Usually one of those items isn’t 100% true and the individual is found not guilty and you will be left dealing with a lot of mental health issues and gossip in the department. There is also a fine line in title IX offices with harassment and general relationship conflicts. If you are in a consensual relationship, the line becomes even more blurred. The hardest part for me was that the person who the complaint is filed against, gets to counter act, and will submit a bunch of negative information about you, which hurts and feels like victim blaming :(. Every text message, email, picture, etc will be in the folder of the lawyers and it can feel very invasive. At the end of the day you can decide what you want to do, it seems no matter what people are left with regret, which is very sad.
RESPONSE B: These may be worth reading. Wishing you luck. No personal experience alas. http://projects.chronicle.com/titleix/ https://www.chronicle.com/article/is-a-fair-title-ix-system-possible https://www.insidehighered.com/editorial-tags/title-ix
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: guidelines, but they seem to think I will not give them Ds and Fs. A few of them are giving me the "Hey, I have to work; I'm not a rich white person, so cut me a break" argument. (Others have kids and are working full-time and are not complaining at all.) They come in late, they have missed 9/10 classes (4 is the max), and they complete major assignments halfway. I've taught for a long time. I've taught students just like these. And there have been bad classes before, but this group (whom I really like, actually) is just not working. I think they want me to award them Bs. I'm an adjunct and in a precarious position... but I can't be passing these students on. Right? Right?
RESPONSE A: I'm a non-traditional student (read: I had a five year gap between high school and university) and sometimes run into this type of person. They work full-time, they have families, responsibilities, obligations. But they also decided to enroll in college. The onus is on them to pass. It's not on you to feel guilty about their situation and lower your standards in order to enable them to slide by without putting in any work. It really, *really* irks me when my peers complain about the rigor of the class or the amount of work or the fact that after two absences most professors dock you a full letter grade. If you can't meet on Thursday nights, don't sign up for classes that meet Thursday nights. If you don't think you can manage the workload, don't be surprised if you don't earn a passing grade. Have some respect for yourself, your academic standards, and perhaps most importantly: have respect for the students who *are* showing up, busting their asses while juggling jobs and families, and still turning in quality work. **TL;DR: Fail those who deserve to fail. Passing them is a slap in the face to students who actually work hard despite having other commitments.**
RESPONSE B: Most of the responses in this thread make me fear deeply for the integrity of higher education.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: just like these. And there have been bad classes before, but this group (whom I really like, actually) is just not working. I think they want me to award them Bs. I'm an adjunct and in a precarious position... but I can't be passing these students on. Right? Right?
RESPONSE A: I'm an adjunct at a community college too and I had a particularly bad class this semester too -- probably at least 1/3 will fail for not completing assignments. I don't where you teach, but at least here I feel like the bad winter weather hurt student morale somewhat. They probably don't want you to award them Bs, they just don't fully understand (or accept?) the work/responsibility required of them in the class. They may eventually learn but it might take a few failed classes first. Your department members and boss are certainly aware of this contingent of community college students.
RESPONSE B: I'm a non-traditional student (read: I had a five year gap between high school and university) and sometimes run into this type of person. They work full-time, they have families, responsibilities, obligations. But they also decided to enroll in college. The onus is on them to pass. It's not on you to feel guilty about their situation and lower your standards in order to enable them to slide by without putting in any work. It really, *really* irks me when my peers complain about the rigor of the class or the amount of work or the fact that after two absences most professors dock you a full letter grade. If you can't meet on Thursday nights, don't sign up for classes that meet Thursday nights. If you don't think you can manage the workload, don't be surprised if you don't earn a passing grade. Have some respect for yourself, your academic standards, and perhaps most importantly: have respect for the students who *are* showing up, busting their asses while juggling jobs and families, and still turning in quality work. **TL;DR: Fail those who deserve to fail. Passing them is a slap in the face to students who actually work hard despite having other commitments.**
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: guidelines, but they seem to think I will not give them Ds and Fs. A few of them are giving me the "Hey, I have to work; I'm not a rich white person, so cut me a break" argument. (Others have kids and are working full-time and are not complaining at all.) They come in late, they have missed 9/10 classes (4 is the max), and they complete major assignments halfway. I've taught for a long time. I've taught students just like these. And there have been bad classes before, but this group (whom I really like, actually) is just not working. I think they want me to award them Bs. I'm an adjunct and in a precarious position... but I can't be passing these students on. Right? Right?
RESPONSE A: I'm a non-traditional student (read: I had a five year gap between high school and university) and sometimes run into this type of person. They work full-time, they have families, responsibilities, obligations. But they also decided to enroll in college. The onus is on them to pass. It's not on you to feel guilty about their situation and lower your standards in order to enable them to slide by without putting in any work. It really, *really* irks me when my peers complain about the rigor of the class or the amount of work or the fact that after two absences most professors dock you a full letter grade. If you can't meet on Thursday nights, don't sign up for classes that meet Thursday nights. If you don't think you can manage the workload, don't be surprised if you don't earn a passing grade. Have some respect for yourself, your academic standards, and perhaps most importantly: have respect for the students who *are* showing up, busting their asses while juggling jobs and families, and still turning in quality work. **TL;DR: Fail those who deserve to fail. Passing them is a slap in the face to students who actually work hard despite having other commitments.**
RESPONSE B: Do you really get paid enough to have principles? You know what you need to do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Half of my community college students have stopped attending regularly and working.... My syllabus has very clear guidelines, but they seem to think I will not give them Ds and Fs. A few of them are giving me the "Hey, I have to work; I'm not a rich white person, so cut me a break" argument. (Others have kids and are working full-time and are not complaining at all.) They come in late, they have missed 9/10 classes (4 is the max), and they complete major assignments halfway. I've taught for a long time. I've taught students just like these. And there have been bad classes before, but this group (whom I really like, actually) is just not working. I think they want me to award them Bs. I'm an adjunct and in a precarious position... but I can't be passing these students on. Right? Right?
RESPONSE A: Most of the responses in this thread make me fear deeply for the integrity of higher education.
RESPONSE B: Do you really get paid enough to have principles? You know what you need to do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Half of my community college students have stopped attending regularly and working.... My syllabus has very clear guidelines, but they seem to think I will not give them Ds and Fs. A few of them are giving me the "Hey, I have to work; I'm not a rich white person, so cut me a break" argument. (Others have kids and are working full-time and are not complaining at all.) They come in late, they have missed 9/10 classes (4 is the max), and they complete major assignments halfway. I've taught for a long time. I've taught students just like these. And there have been bad classes before, but this group (whom I really like, actually) is just not working. I think they want me to award them Bs. I'm an adjunct and in a precarious position... but I can't be passing these students on. Right? Right?
RESPONSE A: Ask your department chair. As a chair, I'd much prefer our adjuncts consult me on department standards than go at it alone-- in this case I could either tell you "Yes, fail them all, we have standards to uphold!" or "God no, we must pass everyone so we can keep generating credit hours toward the degree." You can't know which direction will fit with the department's culture, practices, and expectations without asking someone with the authority to tell you officially. That said, I would have recommended they withdraw as soon as they reached the point where it was not possible to pass-- excessive absences or a grade that couldn't possibly be pulled up to D level with the remaining assignments.
RESPONSE B: Do you really get paid enough to have principles? You know what you need to do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Why are professors websites/lab websites so... ugly? 99% of the ones I've seen look like they're vestiges of 90s web design. Is it just because most researchers are older and don't know what they're doing/don't care? It's not an issue or anything, it's just a trend I notice that I find kind of funny.
RESPONSE A: No, see I get why profs have ugly websites. If you've ever worked with one, they are busy as hell and they have better things to do. What I genuinely cannot figure out, though is why so many university websites are an absolute nightmare to use. And no, I'm not speaking about looking nice or modern, I'm saying they are atrocious to navigate and their search functionality is complete crap. It's so bad that you'll do better for example to type in "[university name] phd program [subject/field]" into google to find the respective program page than to actually go to the university's website and try to navigate or search from there. That's legitimately horrible web design.
RESPONSE B: A lot will value functionality over design, and are judged for the content on those pages, not how many colours the content is surrounded by. Many of those pages, or at least the base design behind them, really were made in the 90s or early 00s. The effort required to overhaul those pages to something prettier simply isn't worth it since no one really cares. Now that I think about it, some of the pages I use most often are the ones that are the ugliest, but I don't notice because I'm there for the content. Plus, complicated graphics/animations and large costs to load aren't a good idea for easy access. In many ways Reddit itself is not a "pretty" site, yet you probably don't even notice anymore. It's simple because the thing you need to pay attention to is the content. These people aren't trained to be graphic designers and they aren't going to waste time hiring one either.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: older and don't know what they're doing/don't care? It's not an issue or anything, it's just a trend I notice that I find kind of funny.
RESPONSE A: Most of the website's are maintained by grad students. It's possible login credentials were lost, or whoever is taking care of it now doesn't want to worry about breaking HTML from 1997.
RESPONSE B: Because they were typically made as quickly as possible by the professor or one of their research group members, when they became a professor or when their institution offered them web hosting and urged them that they should have a website (the latter in developed countries indeed usually happened in the 1990s or early 2000s). And no-one has had the time and motivation for large updates and redesign ever since. In many groups, especially if they aren't in some computational field, also no-one has the skill to do something more advanced. Some institutions also don't get round to increasing available hosting space and traffic, so making a larger, more modern website would necessitate a different domain and hosting solution and/or even more skill. Anyway, do you think it really matters? My advisor would try to get someone make a new, better website (we have a student who claimed to know how to) if he had evidence that it would benefit him, e.g. attract more/better graduate students and other prospective members for his research group. This is the current situation. Made in 2009 when he started his job. I still think it is cute, not ugly. It is clear and efficient, it opens well across various devices and browsers. I think it just needs more content, more tabs - things such as photos and descriptions of the lab space and instruments, maybe the content of the class he teaches, maybe his full CV, maybe more information about each member and their research (though this is tricky because we often have visiting/rotation students for just a few months, and the research interests of most of us who are there for years are diverse and ever-evolving)... Our graduate school has a brand new professionally-designed website and I honestly consider it less pretty and less convenient to use (both than their old website and than my advisor's website).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: a day after the final, she sends out an email saying the Canvas grades were calculated wrong. As in the weights of each assignment were not entered in correctly by her in correspondence with her syllabus. I went to look and my overall grade dropped from an 82 to a 77, giving me a C in the class. I emailed her, like most of the class did in this situation, and told her I didn’t think it was fair because no student is going to calculate their grades by hand from the weights on the syllabus when we have Canvas that does all of that for us, and it was very misleading that Canvas had been wrong (thanks to her) the entire semester. And if I knew what grades in the final would land me in what overall letter grade, I would have planned my studying accordingly. She responded by telling me I should look at the weights from the syllabus and I would see the grades are now correct, which I wasn’t disputing in the first place. I’ve long moved on and managed a 3.0 gpa so I’m not really worried about it or anything. What is your guys’ opinion on this ordeal? How much is my fault vs how much is her fault? Any responses are appreciated.
RESPONSE A: > I emailed her, like most of the class did in this situation, and told her I didn’t think it was fair because no student is going to calculate their grades by hand from the weights on the syllabus when we have Canvas that does all of that for us This is where you lost my sympathy. "It's not fair!" is not a valid excuse when grades were calculated by the policy set in the syllabus at the end of the day. It actually was fair if the grading policy set out in the syllabus was followed to assign final grades. General life lesson -- do yourself a favor and never use the phrase "it's not fair" ever again. Even if it's really not actually fair, whining about it will not earn you any sympathy points.
RESPONSE B: I agree that it isn't fair that students won't calculate their grades on their own despite being given the assessment guidelines on the first day of class, especially students who are not completely new to college in their fist semester.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do you guys think about tattoos in academia? I’m a current life science graduate student and anyone who works in a lab knows that the dress codes are typically very casual. I’m a big fan of tattoos and I currently have two that are always covered by my street clothes, I’m not sure anyone other than close my friends in my program I even know that I have any ink. Recently I’ve had a desire to get a medium sized piece on my forearm but I do worry a little about what my superiors and colleagues will think of it. Given the placement and that I wear a t-shirt more days than not in the lab, the tattoo I want will be quite visible to everyone. Do you guys think a tattoo like this would hurt my career in academia and/or industry after I graduate? What are your thoughts about tattoos in academia generally? Any feedback is appreciated.
RESPONSE A: This has been discussed at length here many times, check out some of these older threads on tattoos in academia.
RESPONSE B: I have two large tattoos. Each covers the palm side of my entire forearm. My PI thought they were both cool. Especially the one that is science related. Everyone has always done nothing but give me compliments. I wear button downs where I roll the sleeves up almost every day. That being said I always wear long sleeves for conferences and talks/posters. That way there is no room for potential distraction because of my ink. I also wouldnt want anyone to ever prejudge me because of it, although I haven't had that experience. Additionally, 4 out of 6 of my programs class has tattoos. The year under us has about 50 percent tattoos as well. As long as you arent getting face/neck, sexually explicit or political statement pieces I wouldnt worry too much about it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: codes are typically very casual. I’m a big fan of tattoos and I currently have two that are always covered by my street clothes, I’m not sure anyone other than close my friends in my program I even know that I have any ink. Recently I’ve had a desire to get a medium sized piece on my forearm but I do worry a little about what my superiors and colleagues will think of it. Given the placement and that I wear a t-shirt more days than not in the lab, the tattoo I want will be quite visible to everyone. Do you guys think a tattoo like this would hurt my career in academia and/or industry after I graduate? What are your thoughts about tattoos in academia generally? Any feedback is appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I have full sleeves, both feet and most of one leg. Some shirts show the ones on my chest. Small one on my hand. Never once have I felt like it hindered me professionally or academically. I believe that you always let your work speak for itself, if someone did turn me down for a job based on my ink, **good**, probably not a place I want to work anyway. That being said, as a courtesy I do tend to wear long-sleeve shirts. If nothing else it prevents having to talk about your tattoos everytime someone comes in ("OMG what does this mean? I have a butterfly on my hip for my grandma!"). I got almost all of mine in my early 20's and now that I am in my 30's there are only so many times you can have colleagues tell you about the ink they ALMOST got. Of all of the environments I have been in (worked in 6 countries in a variety of industries) academia has been the most nonchalant about ink. I just today got my offer letter to start working in a professional environment (gov office) though, and my tattoos were visible during both interviews it required (with two different groups of interviewers). Only time it has ever been an issue is when police and customs people have asked if I did time...
RESPONSE B: This has been discussed at length here many times, check out some of these older threads on tattoos in academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do you guys think about tattoos in academia? I’m a current life science graduate student and anyone who works in a lab knows that the dress codes are typically very casual. I’m a big fan of tattoos and I currently have two that are always covered by my street clothes, I’m not sure anyone other than close my friends in my program I even know that I have any ink. Recently I’ve had a desire to get a medium sized piece on my forearm but I do worry a little about what my superiors and colleagues will think of it. Given the placement and that I wear a t-shirt more days than not in the lab, the tattoo I want will be quite visible to everyone. Do you guys think a tattoo like this would hurt my career in academia and/or industry after I graduate? What are your thoughts about tattoos in academia generally? Any feedback is appreciated.
RESPONSE A: This has been discussed at length here many times, check out some of these older threads on tattoos in academia.
RESPONSE B: My dean pointed at my forearm last week and said, ‘New ink?’ Nope, I’ve had it since before I interviewed for the job two years ago. Any formal situations like job interviews, you would be wearing sleeves anyway. Unless you are somewhere super conservative no one will care.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What do you guys think about tattoos in academia? I’m a current life science graduate student and anyone who works in a lab knows that the dress codes are typically very casual. I’m a big fan of tattoos and I currently have two that are always covered by my street clothes, I’m not sure anyone other than close my friends in my program I even know that I have any ink. Recently I’ve had a desire to get a medium sized piece on my forearm but I do worry a little about what my superiors and colleagues will think of it. Given the placement and that I wear a t-shirt more days than not in the lab, the tattoo I want will be quite visible to everyone. Do you guys think a tattoo like this would hurt my career in academia and/or industry after I graduate? What are your thoughts about tattoos in academia generally? Any feedback is appreciated.
RESPONSE A: This has been discussed at length here many times, check out some of these older threads on tattoos in academia.
RESPONSE B: I seriously don’t think anyone cares in academia. I’ve met so many people with piercings, rainbow hair colours or tattoos. Definitely seen these people presenting as key notes at large conferences. I’m based in U.K/Europe
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What do you guys think about tattoos in academia? I’m a current life science graduate student and anyone who works in a lab knows that the dress codes are typically very casual. I’m a big fan of tattoos and I currently have two that are always covered by my street clothes, I’m not sure anyone other than close my friends in my program I even know that I have any ink. Recently I’ve had a desire to get a medium sized piece on my forearm but I do worry a little about what my superiors and colleagues will think of it. Given the placement and that I wear a t-shirt more days than not in the lab, the tattoo I want will be quite visible to everyone. Do you guys think a tattoo like this would hurt my career in academia and/or industry after I graduate? What are your thoughts about tattoos in academia generally? Any feedback is appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Except for the occasional weirdo, nobody will care. They might nor might not like the tattoo specifically if you ask them, but except for that minority of weirdos, they wouldn't hold it against you.
RESPONSE B: This has been discussed at length here many times, check out some of these older threads on tattoos in academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What does academia think about the 'is social science a science' debate? My professor brought this up many times in my psci methods course today (I am a sociology/criminology major). He said, "Don't call natural science hard science. social science is much more difficult in terms of research and methodology than natural science." I am curious as to what others think about this standpoint
RESPONSE A: Hard science generally means there are absolute answers that don't really depend on environmental context or perception. Social sciences are not hard in this sense because they always depend on cultural context. This makes them very hard (AKA difficult) to interpret and generalize about. But your professor seems to either be playing with the meanings of this word to make a point or is just a blowhard.
RESPONSE B: Seems like they might have some bias there.....
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What does academia think about the 'is social science a science' debate? My professor brought this up many times in my psci methods course today (I am a sociology/criminology major). He said, "Don't call natural science hard science. social science is much more difficult in terms of research and methodology than natural science." I am curious as to what others think about this standpoint
RESPONSE A: When I was a psychology undergrad, everyone wanted to debate this basically to put down the value of psychology. It came up all the time. Now 20 years later when I’m a psychology researcher, everyone wants me to help them be better scientists in this difficult field. Physicians, tech people, pharma, etc. - they all want a piece of psychology because none of their goals are achievable if people don’t cooperate. This feels like a juvenile debate brought to you by people who have to stake their claim on a space and fail to recognize an enormous amount of benefit comes out of cross disciplinary work and we all need each other.
RESPONSE B: To me the main difference is that the supposed "hard sciences" deal in lawful causality much of the time, whereas "soft" sciences deal in probabilistic causality. I don't really think that "hard/soft" is a particularly useful set of descriptives.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What does academia think about the 'is social science a science' debate? My professor brought this up many times in my psci methods course today (I am a sociology/criminology major). He said, "Don't call natural science hard science. social science is much more difficult in terms of research and methodology than natural science." I am curious as to what others think about this standpoint
RESPONSE A: Sociology is as much a science as psychology. Genetics used to be in the same boat until we figured out what to measure and how, so IMHO those "soft sciences" are just in earlier stages of development. Diminishment of theories/fields simply because they lack evidence at the time would preclude us from ever learning anything new; however, the theories also need to be falsifiable to permit learning with the collection of evidence.
RESPONSE B: When I was a psychology undergrad, everyone wanted to debate this basically to put down the value of psychology. It came up all the time. Now 20 years later when I’m a psychology researcher, everyone wants me to help them be better scientists in this difficult field. Physicians, tech people, pharma, etc. - they all want a piece of psychology because none of their goals are achievable if people don’t cooperate. This feels like a juvenile debate brought to you by people who have to stake their claim on a space and fail to recognize an enormous amount of benefit comes out of cross disciplinary work and we all need each other.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What does academia think about the 'is social science a science' debate? My professor brought this up many times in my psci methods course today (I am a sociology/criminology major). He said, "Don't call natural science hard science. social science is much more difficult in terms of research and methodology than natural science." I am curious as to what others think about this standpoint
RESPONSE A: Difficulty != the hardness of a science, I would actually venture the opposite! “Hardness” isn’t a value judgement it’s a how concrete/measurable is the experimentation/results.
RESPONSE B: When I was a psychology undergrad, everyone wanted to debate this basically to put down the value of psychology. It came up all the time. Now 20 years later when I’m a psychology researcher, everyone wants me to help them be better scientists in this difficult field. Physicians, tech people, pharma, etc. - they all want a piece of psychology because none of their goals are achievable if people don’t cooperate. This feels like a juvenile debate brought to you by people who have to stake their claim on a space and fail to recognize an enormous amount of benefit comes out of cross disciplinary work and we all need each other.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What does academia think about the 'is social science a science' debate? My professor brought this up many times in my psci methods course today (I am a sociology/criminology major). He said, "Don't call natural science hard science. social science is much more difficult in terms of research and methodology than natural science." I am curious as to what others think about this standpoint
RESPONSE A: Natural science OR social science, huh? *laughs in biological anthropology* 😅
RESPONSE B: Difficulty != the hardness of a science, I would actually venture the opposite! “Hardness” isn’t a value judgement it’s a how concrete/measurable is the experimentation/results.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Academics of Reddit, what’s your peer review horror story? I’m in the middle of a crazy review process at one of the top journals in my field. It’s clear one of the reviewers hasn’t read the paper over the course of two reviews. Most recently s/he commented, “It would be nice if they could provide a general theorem rather than only specific examples.” Our paper has a section titled “A General Theorem” and another titled “Specific Examples”. Feels great to know this person’s whims could have a big impact on my career!
RESPONSE A: I only have the normal stories of reviewers and editors taking 6 months to review my paper then asking for a bunch of edits and new measurements with a 6 week turnaround right when I was defending my PhD.
RESPONSE B: Paper got rejected even though 3 out of 4 reviewers recommended publication without additional experiments/major changes. Rejection was because 1 reviewer said, and I quote, "These data from human clinical samples are irrelevant considering small animal models have been used for similar experiments". The whole point of the paper was that the animal model results did not correspond to human data 🤦♂️
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Academics of Reddit, what’s your peer review horror story? I’m in the middle of a crazy review process at one of the top journals in my field. It’s clear one of the reviewers hasn’t read the paper over the course of two reviews. Most recently s/he commented, “It would be nice if they could provide a general theorem rather than only specific examples.” Our paper has a section titled “A General Theorem” and another titled “Specific Examples”. Feels great to know this person’s whims could have a big impact on my career!
RESPONSE A: I only have the normal stories of reviewers and editors taking 6 months to review my paper then asking for a bunch of edits and new measurements with a 6 week turnaround right when I was defending my PhD.
RESPONSE B: Reviewer 2.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Academics of Reddit, what’s your peer review horror story? I’m in the middle of a crazy review process at one of the top journals in my field. It’s clear one of the reviewers hasn’t read the paper over the course of two reviews. Most recently s/he commented, “It would be nice if they could provide a general theorem rather than only specific examples.” Our paper has a section titled “A General Theorem” and another titled “Specific Examples”. Feels great to know this person’s whims could have a big impact on my career!
RESPONSE A: The first paper I published, the reviewer kept harping that I was misunderstanding/misreading a key theory that we framed the analysis around. I was certain we were correct in our interpretation. This went back-and-forth for 3 rounds of review and almost 2 years. In the final, 4th review, the reviewer quoted the theory they claimed we were misinterpreting. Well, my co-author who read everything this theorist ever wrote noticed that the quoted theory from the reviewer CONTAINED A TYPO. So we checked the original text, and yup, there's a typo in the edition he quoted that would change the entire meaning of the theory. We informed the reviewer of the typo, and the publisher of the book with the error. The paper was finally published, 2.5 years after it was submitted.
RESPONSE B: Reviewer makes a claim in one comment, suggests citing a paper in another comment (we suspect they're one of the authors), we use a direct quote from the suggested paper to refute his first claim.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Academics of Reddit, what’s your peer review horror story? I’m in the middle of a crazy review process at one of the top journals in my field. It’s clear one of the reviewers hasn’t read the paper over the course of two reviews. Most recently s/he commented, “It would be nice if they could provide a general theorem rather than only specific examples.” Our paper has a section titled “A General Theorem” and another titled “Specific Examples”. Feels great to know this person’s whims could have a big impact on my career!
RESPONSE A: I only have the normal stories of reviewers and editors taking 6 months to review my paper then asking for a bunch of edits and new measurements with a 6 week turnaround right when I was defending my PhD.
RESPONSE B: The first paper I published, the reviewer kept harping that I was misunderstanding/misreading a key theory that we framed the analysis around. I was certain we were correct in our interpretation. This went back-and-forth for 3 rounds of review and almost 2 years. In the final, 4th review, the reviewer quoted the theory they claimed we were misinterpreting. Well, my co-author who read everything this theorist ever wrote noticed that the quoted theory from the reviewer CONTAINED A TYPO. So we checked the original text, and yup, there's a typo in the edition he quoted that would change the entire meaning of the theory. We informed the reviewer of the typo, and the publisher of the book with the error. The paper was finally published, 2.5 years after it was submitted.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Academics of Reddit, what’s your peer review horror story? I’m in the middle of a crazy review process at one of the top journals in my field. It’s clear one of the reviewers hasn’t read the paper over the course of two reviews. Most recently s/he commented, “It would be nice if they could provide a general theorem rather than only specific examples.” Our paper has a section titled “A General Theorem” and another titled “Specific Examples”. Feels great to know this person’s whims could have a big impact on my career!
RESPONSE A: "I cannot tell if this is an experimental or a theoretical paper", given as a reason for rejection. The paper was both, as the specific (experimental) method requires a ton of number grinding for data analysis and it's hardly ever used on its own. Also, "they employ methods x, y, and z and I find fault with all of them", without specifying what's the issue. The first comment was just idiotic, the second a classical "unworkable comment" that leaves me speculating. I haven't touched the paper since it was rejected, that's how much of a nightmare it was.
RESPONSE B: The first paper I published, the reviewer kept harping that I was misunderstanding/misreading a key theory that we framed the analysis around. I was certain we were correct in our interpretation. This went back-and-forth for 3 rounds of review and almost 2 years. In the final, 4th review, the reviewer quoted the theory they claimed we were misinterpreting. Well, my co-author who read everything this theorist ever wrote noticed that the quoted theory from the reviewer CONTAINED A TYPO. So we checked the original text, and yup, there's a typo in the edition he quoted that would change the entire meaning of the theory. We informed the reviewer of the typo, and the publisher of the book with the error. The paper was finally published, 2.5 years after it was submitted.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . I hear a mix of things from my colleagues. Some say that it’s not really much different, others tell me that moving out of the US system would be intellectually isolating, a catastrophe, etc, etc. Looking for some objectivity. I’m primarily interested in hearing from faculty, but would appreciate all perspectives.
RESPONSE A: There are plenty of productive scientists in Canada, as I'm sure you know. So certainly this isn't a catastrophic change for everyone. I don't think there are many things that are universally one way in the USA and universally a different way in Canada. The only things that spring to mind are pretty obvious - e.g. main grant sources (NSF to NSERC, ONR to (nothing), etc.); physical distance to other universities; etc. You should definitely pay attention to this, especially if you need a lot of money for your research - that can be harder to scrape together here (no personal experience on this one). Other changes are pretty institution-specific. Near the top, Canadian universities don't have as much money - this means lower salary, less funding for seminars and travel, etc. But this comparison doesn't hold for all Canadian universities and all American ones; you should just ask. Qualitatively, the big changes seem to be (i) NSF and NSERC fund in very different ways, and (ii) Canadian universities are physically more isolated, so you will need to figure out a way to interact with people.
RESPONSE B: I’m tenure-track in the US, but I’m from Canada. I’m desperately trying to get back to Canada. To me, the hit in quality of life (healthcare, gun violence, extreme political divide, militarism, cost of living)* are just not worth it. I never felt at an intellectual disadvantage in Canada, but there are simply fewer jobs. *To be clear, in my two years here I have been directly impacted by every one of these; I’m not just being preachy. I am the first one to recognize that Canada has its own problems (as does any country) and I’m not a nationalist by any means, but the US is sure pushing me back home.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: ’m strongly considering. I would like to hear experiences about the transition between systems, pluses and minuses. I hear a mix of things from my colleagues. Some say that it’s not really much different, others tell me that moving out of the US system would be intellectually isolating, a catastrophe, etc, etc. Looking for some objectivity. I’m primarily interested in hearing from faculty, but would appreciate all perspectives.
RESPONSE A: There isn't a lot of differences between career paths in the two countires, they're much more similar than say the US and the UK or Australia. The biggest difference is in funding. There aren't huge NFS R01s in Canada. Many of the major grants are collaborative, so you'll need to have good networks with collegues in other provinces in order to check boxes for regional distribution. This can be a good or bad thing depending on the nature of your research and your ability to fit your own work into broader schemes. But no reason to say that you'll be cut off from your international connections. At least in the Before Times there weren't any barriers to conferences besides the usual budget constraints.
RESPONSE B: I'm American but did my post-doc in Canada. One perk I found as an early career scientist was the the smaller research community made it easier to break into the orbits of the big names. I knew the people at the top of the field who happened to be in Canada (they were top of the field internationally) and I don't think that same personal connection would've happened with the much larger research community in the states. If you do anything medical/health, I've found the Canadian system of healthcare makes it much easier than the US, but that might vary by area. I like on a social level that students don't go broke to attend a Canadian university. Canadians seem to have better work life balance. Downside- most big meetings are still outside Canada, and the Canadian dollar can suck. Same for publishing costs. Just one thing to think about too- the US will continue to tax you forever as long as you are a citizen. This was incredibly annoying, even though as a postdoc I was under the amount I owed to the US.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: etc. have all been trying to encourage me to use my leave time to get projects done with them). When do I get to be a parent first and an academic second, if not during my designated leave? How can I say no without burning bridges or missing out on future opportunities? Or is this just how it goes in this field?
RESPONSE A: A conversation about boundaries is definitely in order....if you’re on leave, you’re on leave. You’re not answerable to the university/department/your PI. Period. Your PI wants your availability? You don’t have any, you’re on leave. A polite but firm email saying that while you appreciate being kept in the loop (ie copied on important emails, especially if meeting notes are shared electronically), you’re on leave and won’t be answering emails etc. I assume there was a plan put in place for who would take over your responsibilities while you were gone - remind everyone involved who they should be asking instead of you. That being said, if you WANT to attend, say, a major planning-out-the-semester meeting, or perhaps an informal department-chat virtual-coffee-hour type thing, feel free - but be VERY clear that you’re there out of the generosity of your heart, wanting to be a team player, keeping in touch with your beloved colleagues, etc. and NOT because you have to be.
RESPONSE B: This is something you should probably just confront head on with your PI. A short email to establish expectations may be an uncomfortable one, but seems necessary. The high achieving women I know had a different mentality than yours and it may be what your PI is expecting. They exploited their maternity leave time to get rid of their department responsibilities in order to collect a paycheck and devote all their non-child rearing time to publishing. One of them spaced her four kids out so that she could keep this up for four years, without ever appearing in the university to teach or do service. By the end she had her dissertation and another book done. If that's not you, that's fine, but wouldn't hurt to clarify that you don't plan to use the maternity leave to get ahead on things.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Working during maternity leave in academia: What's normal? I'm a post doc who just started maternity leave. I haven't given birth yet, but we're entitled to a period of leave pre-birth at my university (USA, R1). So far, my PI has treated this period almost identically to working from home. For example, when I didn't reply quickly to an email to schedule a meeting, she texted me asking me to give my availability and made it pretty clear that she expected me to attend (virtually, due to the pandemic). I love my career and don't want to appear to be lazy, a bad team player, etc. I also don't want to "miss out" on major opportunities by being too rigid with my boundaries. However, I notice I'm feeling resentful that what feels like a pretty short and precious period of leave is actually just WFH (but still burns my PTO, etc.). Normally, I would attribute this to just my PI, but it seems to be universal (my other project sponsor, my grad student mentor, etc. have all been trying to encourage me to use my leave time to get projects done with them). When do I get to be a parent first and an academic second, if not during my designated leave? How can I say no without burning bridges or missing out on future opportunities? Or is this just how it goes in this field?
RESPONSE A: Your maternity time should be for you and not work, however as mentioned there are power dynamics and pressure to work. Do you have someone to talk to about this, maybe in your dept or on committee? I think there is definitely a view that maternity leave is a wfh “opportunity”. There is also some evidence that male scholars use paternity leave to increase publishing: ny times article
RESPONSE B: I am a postdoc who recently took maternity leave. My advisor (also a woman) treated it like I was completely unavailable. She would occasionally email to check in but was pretty adamant about me taking the time to parent and recover.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: expected me to attend (virtually, due to the pandemic). I love my career and don't want to appear to be lazy, a bad team player, etc. I also don't want to "miss out" on major opportunities by being too rigid with my boundaries. However, I notice I'm feeling resentful that what feels like a pretty short and precious period of leave is actually just WFH (but still burns my PTO, etc.). Normally, I would attribute this to just my PI, but it seems to be universal (my other project sponsor, my grad student mentor, etc. have all been trying to encourage me to use my leave time to get projects done with them). When do I get to be a parent first and an academic second, if not during my designated leave? How can I say no without burning bridges or missing out on future opportunities? Or is this just how it goes in this field?
RESPONSE A: Unfortunately academia is relentless. PIs see that behavior all the time (parents-to-be working up until the baby is out, then returning to work 7 days postpartum), so they assume this is normal. The sad truth is that if you do not burn the midnight oil, it is very difficult to get a job/tenure. The majority of the people that claim they "coasted" are likely lying to seem talented and geniuses. I have kids (one pre tenure track, one during) and it was not easy. But you have to do what works for you. If not taking the time off will make you depressed and resentful, discuss your expectations with your PI, and tell them you need X amount of time trully off to plan the arrival of the baby and organize life so that the transition to motherhood is easier. Keep in mind that to get a reference letter from them that will help you get a job that will be a step up afterwards, you will need to be very productive regardless of family situation.
RESPONSE B: I am a postdoc who recently took maternity leave. My advisor (also a woman) treated it like I was completely unavailable. She would occasionally email to check in but was pretty adamant about me taking the time to parent and recover.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: PI has treated this period almost identically to working from home. For example, when I didn't reply quickly to an email to schedule a meeting, she texted me asking me to give my availability and made it pretty clear that she expected me to attend (virtually, due to the pandemic). I love my career and don't want to appear to be lazy, a bad team player, etc. I also don't want to "miss out" on major opportunities by being too rigid with my boundaries. However, I notice I'm feeling resentful that what feels like a pretty short and precious period of leave is actually just WFH (but still burns my PTO, etc.). Normally, I would attribute this to just my PI, but it seems to be universal (my other project sponsor, my grad student mentor, etc. have all been trying to encourage me to use my leave time to get projects done with them). When do I get to be a parent first and an academic second, if not during my designated leave? How can I say no without burning bridges or missing out on future opportunities? Or is this just how it goes in this field?
RESPONSE A: I am a postdoc who recently took maternity leave. My advisor (also a woman) treated it like I was completely unavailable. She would occasionally email to check in but was pretty adamant about me taking the time to parent and recover.
RESPONSE B: This is something you should probably just confront head on with your PI. A short email to establish expectations may be an uncomfortable one, but seems necessary. The high achieving women I know had a different mentality than yours and it may be what your PI is expecting. They exploited their maternity leave time to get rid of their department responsibilities in order to collect a paycheck and devote all their non-child rearing time to publishing. One of them spaced her four kids out so that she could keep this up for four years, without ever appearing in the university to teach or do service. By the end she had her dissertation and another book done. If that's not you, that's fine, but wouldn't hurt to clarify that you don't plan to use the maternity leave to get ahead on things.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: how it goes in this field?
RESPONSE A: Here's mine; I tend to consider it rather generous, tbh. I think my paperwork specifically calls it an alternative assignment, not maternity leave. I get no classes for spring semester, 6 wks 100% off for vaginal birth, 8 wks for section. After that, I still keep up with professional development, research, a lighter service load, and a teaching project in lieu of actually teaching. In practice, this looks like 1-2 mtgs a month, designing a new course, submitting 1-2 abstracts, and listening to some higher ed podcasts (if I go by what the last 3 mat leaves have looked like). For anyone wondering, FMLA doesn't necessarily apply if you have a 9 month contract. I would carefully push back, if I were you. At a minimum, any contact means no PTO applied that day. Dig out the forms and faculty handbook. You want to apply the rules closely, for both your and your PI's sake.
RESPONSE B: I am tenure track at a large public uni and will be taking my full 12 weeks (maybe longer) and expect to be no contact with my work. There is literally nothing that can’t be solved without me. If I died, my department would not grind to a halt - they would figure it the fuck out. But this is a privilege I have because that’s what the last person who was on maternity leave in my department did, so she set the precedent and my department had to put things in place (ie: they hired a part time temp person to do some of her work and redistributed some of her work temporarily so there were specific people in charge of the parts of her job that needed a contact person). I also feel a moral obligation to do this because I feel like if every person did then it would become the norm and be easier for people with less power (ie: other untenured folks or people not in TT positions). My husband feels the same way about his Very Important But Non Academic Job. Because he will be taking a full leave with no contact, he hopes it’s easier for other people to do the same.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: not entirely invested in this particular institution. My post-doc appointment is supposed to last for two years...and only a month after I've started, I'm already being rushed to apply for a faculty position. If I had the choice, I don't want to plant my roots where I currently am because I would prefer to be at another university in another location. Despite this, I can appreciate the offer to move into the tenure-track professoriate....but it all feels rushed, and it doesn't feel like I'm able to do what I came here to. I'm tempted to decline the offer (as it sounds increasingly likely that they will make one to me). I'm not sure what political consequences this may have - declining a tenure track offer and continuing my post-doc into my second year. But being here as faculty is not really what I want or where I want to be. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: If they requested you to apply they want you and appreciate what you do. They seem to think if you apply you could be rewarded for your hard work you've done. But if you don't want it just say you don't. Say you prefer to remain a student and take your chances later with another institution. All universities will undermine your research with extra work. That's normal. Honestly, no course I teach fits my research interests, I wouldn't want that anyhow. My research is my research, courses are courses, I like the separation. So I teach well, then switch my brain to my work. In my world, a job in the hand is worth two in the netherworld. Sure you can turn it down, but it could be years of adjunct work, no tenure track, etc, depending on your field. But it's your life, take your time, try to get lucky, there are a few TT jobs out there sooner or later you can apply to, again depending on your field. And even if you do apply here, your lack of enthusiasm and interest might shine through and they wouldn't hire you anyhow. ​
RESPONSE B: I would take it so as to put more valuable lines on my CV. This is going to look good when you get out of there.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: tenure track offer and continuing my post-doc into my second year. But being here as faculty is not really what I want or where I want to be. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: If they requested you to apply they want you and appreciate what you do. They seem to think if you apply you could be rewarded for your hard work you've done. But if you don't want it just say you don't. Say you prefer to remain a student and take your chances later with another institution. All universities will undermine your research with extra work. That's normal. Honestly, no course I teach fits my research interests, I wouldn't want that anyhow. My research is my research, courses are courses, I like the separation. So I teach well, then switch my brain to my work. In my world, a job in the hand is worth two in the netherworld. Sure you can turn it down, but it could be years of adjunct work, no tenure track, etc, depending on your field. But it's your life, take your time, try to get lucky, there are a few TT jobs out there sooner or later you can apply to, again depending on your field. And even if you do apply here, your lack of enthusiasm and interest might shine through and they wouldn't hire you anyhow. ​
RESPONSE B: It sounds like your real question is how to not make this awkward as you finish your appointment. I'm a post doc too and in my third year, so I really can't relate to the cup overflowing problem that you have. Perhaps the other applications you put in will come to fruition and you can take another offer sidestepping the whole issue. Otherwise if they offer you the position and you turn it down just to continue your postdoc, it's gonna be weird. You may have to have that honest conversation with the chair. ​ Is your chair your direct supervisor? I'm not sure how a chair has access to a postdoc to add work to your plate. I only interact with my mentor and other faculty that we collaborate with. May I ask what field are you in? I am very curious about your situation because it is so different from my own.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: m set to teach). This post-doc appointment is beginning to feel less like I am here to publish and conduct research, and gain teaching experience, and is feeling more like I'm already a faculty member on all fronts except my official title. If I'm honest, I'm not entirely invested in this particular institution. My post-doc appointment is supposed to last for two years...and only a month after I've started, I'm already being rushed to apply for a faculty position. If I had the choice, I don't want to plant my roots where I currently am because I would prefer to be at another university in another location. Despite this, I can appreciate the offer to move into the tenure-track professoriate....but it all feels rushed, and it doesn't feel like I'm able to do what I came here to. I'm tempted to decline the offer (as it sounds increasingly likely that they will make one to me). I'm not sure what political consequences this may have - declining a tenure track offer and continuing my post-doc into my second year. But being here as faculty is not really what I want or where I want to be. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: I would take it so as to put more valuable lines on my CV. This is going to look good when you get out of there.
RESPONSE B: It sounds like your real question is how to not make this awkward as you finish your appointment. I'm a post doc too and in my third year, so I really can't relate to the cup overflowing problem that you have. Perhaps the other applications you put in will come to fruition and you can take another offer sidestepping the whole issue. Otherwise if they offer you the position and you turn it down just to continue your postdoc, it's gonna be weird. You may have to have that honest conversation with the chair. ​ Is your chair your direct supervisor? I'm not sure how a chair has access to a postdoc to add work to your plate. I only interact with my mentor and other faculty that we collaborate with. May I ask what field are you in? I am very curious about your situation because it is so different from my own.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: , I'm already being rushed to apply for a faculty position. If I had the choice, I don't want to plant my roots where I currently am because I would prefer to be at another university in another location. Despite this, I can appreciate the offer to move into the tenure-track professoriate....but it all feels rushed, and it doesn't feel like I'm able to do what I came here to. I'm tempted to decline the offer (as it sounds increasingly likely that they will make one to me). I'm not sure what political consequences this may have - declining a tenure track offer and continuing my post-doc into my second year. But being here as faculty is not really what I want or where I want to be. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: What is this, a humblebrag? Is your speciality so in demand that you can turn down jobs with the full expectation that you'll get more? Serious question, because the only people I know in that boat are physicians who make more practicing than teaching.
RESPONSE B: I'm not sure why you feel like accepting this job means you are there permanently (i.e. "planting roots"), but that certainly does not need to be the case. I am not sure what it is like in other fields (I am in the social sciences in the US), but tenure track professors search for and change jobs all the time. So you have 2 choices: 1) turn down the offer, finish your post-doc, and hope you can find a tenure track job elsewhere before you have to leave the university; or 2) take the tenure track job, finish the work you wanted to accomplish while there, then go on the job search again. Option 1, you run the risk of not getting a tenure track job later and go into adjunct hell (or be forced to leave academia altogether). Option 2, you still run the risk of not getting a tenure track job at another university, but hey, you are still employed for another year in your current tenure track job and can try again next year. This gives you some job security. The best advice I can give is that if you get offered a tenure track job, you take it. Full stop. ​ ​
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: offer and continuing my post-doc into my second year. But being here as faculty is not really what I want or where I want to be. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: I'm not sure why you feel like accepting this job means you are there permanently (i.e. "planting roots"), but that certainly does not need to be the case. I am not sure what it is like in other fields (I am in the social sciences in the US), but tenure track professors search for and change jobs all the time. So you have 2 choices: 1) turn down the offer, finish your post-doc, and hope you can find a tenure track job elsewhere before you have to leave the university; or 2) take the tenure track job, finish the work you wanted to accomplish while there, then go on the job search again. Option 1, you run the risk of not getting a tenure track job later and go into adjunct hell (or be forced to leave academia altogether). Option 2, you still run the risk of not getting a tenure track job at another university, but hey, you are still employed for another year in your current tenure track job and can try again next year. This gives you some job security. The best advice I can give is that if you get offered a tenure track job, you take it. Full stop. ​ ​
RESPONSE B: It sounds like your real question is how to not make this awkward as you finish your appointment. I'm a post doc too and in my third year, so I really can't relate to the cup overflowing problem that you have. Perhaps the other applications you put in will come to fruition and you can take another offer sidestepping the whole issue. Otherwise if they offer you the position and you turn it down just to continue your postdoc, it's gonna be weird. You may have to have that honest conversation with the chair. ​ Is your chair your direct supervisor? I'm not sure how a chair has access to a postdoc to add work to your plate. I only interact with my mentor and other faculty that we collaborate with. May I ask what field are you in? I am very curious about your situation because it is so different from my own.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does having patents increase my chances of getting into university? I am 19 years old and currently go to community college as a biochemistry major and my GPA is 3.4. My goal is to get into a UC like UCLA. I am also interested in applying to Pepperdine and USC. I was wondering if having a patent would increase my chances of being admitted? I have 4 scientific patents filed on electrostimulation therapy and a body stretching apparatus (used for medical purposes) as well as one on nano particles (this patent was huge so they split it into two patents). FYI: my patents are all granted
RESPONSE A: Consider participating in the Transfer Alliance Program, which gives you priority (nearly guaranteed) admission to UCLA. It’s an honors program and should be offered at the community college you’re attending so long as you live in California. Typically most community colleges will have this feature and you can get priority admission to the UC of your choice once you finish the requirements. Here’s a link to UCLA’s description.
RESPONSE B: I think you’re just bragging. It’s obvious you will get in. No need to act stupid about it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does having patents increase my chances of getting into university? I am 19 years old and currently go to community college as a biochemistry major and my GPA is 3.4. My goal is to get into a UC like UCLA. I am also interested in applying to Pepperdine and USC. I was wondering if having a patent would increase my chances of being admitted? I have 4 scientific patents filed on electrostimulation therapy and a body stretching apparatus (used for medical purposes) as well as one on nano particles (this patent was huge so they split it into two patents). FYI: my patents are all granted
RESPONSE A: If you have patents whilst you’re still at CC, you’re pretty much a strong applicant! I’d also advise you to apply to schools (if you’re interested) such as Stanford, Ivies, etc.
RESPONSE B: I think you’re just bragging. It’s obvious you will get in. No need to act stupid about it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does having patents increase my chances of getting into university? I am 19 years old and currently go to community college as a biochemistry major and my GPA is 3.4. My goal is to get into a UC like UCLA. I am also interested in applying to Pepperdine and USC. I was wondering if having a patent would increase my chances of being admitted? I have 4 scientific patents filed on electrostimulation therapy and a body stretching apparatus (used for medical purposes) as well as one on nano particles (this patent was huge so they split it into two patents). FYI: my patents are all granted
RESPONSE A: Consider participating in the Transfer Alliance Program, which gives you priority (nearly guaranteed) admission to UCLA. It’s an honors program and should be offered at the community college you’re attending so long as you live in California. Typically most community colleges will have this feature and you can get priority admission to the UC of your choice once you finish the requirements. Here’s a link to UCLA’s description.
RESPONSE B: Wow, humblebragging at its best.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does having patents increase my chances of getting into university? I am 19 years old and currently go to community college as a biochemistry major and my GPA is 3.4. My goal is to get into a UC like UCLA. I am also interested in applying to Pepperdine and USC. I was wondering if having a patent would increase my chances of being admitted? I have 4 scientific patents filed on electrostimulation therapy and a body stretching apparatus (used for medical purposes) as well as one on nano particles (this patent was huge so they split it into two patents). FYI: my patents are all granted
RESPONSE A: If you have patents whilst you’re still at CC, you’re pretty much a strong applicant! I’d also advise you to apply to schools (if you’re interested) such as Stanford, Ivies, etc.
RESPONSE B: Wow, humblebragging at its best.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does having patents increase my chances of getting into university? I am 19 years old and currently go to community college as a biochemistry major and my GPA is 3.4. My goal is to get into a UC like UCLA. I am also interested in applying to Pepperdine and USC. I was wondering if having a patent would increase my chances of being admitted? I have 4 scientific patents filed on electrostimulation therapy and a body stretching apparatus (used for medical purposes) as well as one on nano particles (this patent was huge so they split it into two patents). FYI: my patents are all granted
RESPONSE A: If you have patents whilst you’re still at CC, you’re pretty much a strong applicant! I’d also advise you to apply to schools (if you’re interested) such as Stanford, Ivies, etc.
RESPONSE B: You are in CC with a decent GPA. That's enough to nearly guarantee admittance to a state school. Apply for scholarships, but be careful. If I read that you have 4 patents on an application, I'd be incredibly suspicious. It takes years for a patent to be granted. You submitted four patents for devices that require hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment to develop... as a teenager? It is more likely you did a gig in a productive lab one summer, and your name was tacked onto what came out of that lab. Reviewers know how these things work, and will want to see exactly what your contributions were, and what skills/experience you gained. If you can't communicate that, then don't count on your patents carrying you very far. If you did *earn* those patents, why the hell are you sitting in a CC wondering if you will get in to state schools?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it normal to fail classes in university? Excuse me if the flair is wrong. Seemed like correct one. Basically the title. In highschool and before if you failed a classes it was like your life was over but now in university it's like: "What classes have you failed?" Presuming that you would. Like it's expected. Is it a regular occurrence to fail one or a couple classes?
RESPONSE A: Was A student in high school.... didn’t get a single A for my first year in college. It’s a different ball game
RESPONSE B: Almost failed out of high school, was Magna Cum Laude in college. In my friend group, failing a college course was unheard of, but I have no idea on a larger scale. Keep in mind, you're likely paying essentially thousands of dollars per course in college, so failing and having to retake has a notable monetary cost... Which gets really bad if you have to take another semester to graduate. Life happens if course. If you fail because you're struggling with something severe like mental health problems, that isn't surprising to me. If you fail because you parties too late and slept through an exam, that seems more avoidable and I'd definitely try to balance social activities with passing classes. Edit: As noted in the comment reply below, this is based on the cost in the USA. Probably costs much less in most countries.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it normal to fail classes in university? Excuse me if the flair is wrong. Seemed like correct one. Basically the title. In highschool and before if you failed a classes it was like your life was over but now in university it's like: "What classes have you failed?" Presuming that you would. Like it's expected. Is it a regular occurrence to fail one or a couple classes?
RESPONSE A: I don't want to normalize this is the sense that you should be failing classes and there's no consequences if you do. You shouldn't fail classes, and the consequences of failing for your GPA, financials and ability to finish on time can be dire. But in the sense of do more people fail classes in college, imo yes. College isn't designed for everyone to be able to succeed in it and there is less of an imperative to pass everyone.
RESPONSE B: Was A student in high school.... didn’t get a single A for my first year in college. It’s a different ball game
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it normal to fail classes in university? Excuse me if the flair is wrong. Seemed like correct one. Basically the title. In highschool and before if you failed a classes it was like your life was over but now in university it's like: "What classes have you failed?" Presuming that you would. Like it's expected. Is it a regular occurrence to fail one or a couple classes?
RESPONSE A: I don't want to normalize this is the sense that you should be failing classes and there's no consequences if you do. You shouldn't fail classes, and the consequences of failing for your GPA, financials and ability to finish on time can be dire. But in the sense of do more people fail classes in college, imo yes. College isn't designed for everyone to be able to succeed in it and there is less of an imperative to pass everyone.
RESPONSE B: Failing before university is seen as terrible since to be fair it's a basic knowledge level for all while uni is clearly for certain people with certain skills so failing a lot can mean you are in the wrong program. Plus the curriculum is made so that you pass classes every year to get to the next (or get summer classes/ retake it during the year) with a very strict progression. In university the level is higher plus you have option to retake a class without messing up your whole progress more easily . You also have such a big variety of students with all crazy life and reslonsabilities who can do some but not a classes so everything is more flexible. Uni professors also don't care if you fail whereas before teachers know how much it can mean not to achieve basic knowledge diploma so they will more easily adjust a little thing here and there to help you/ plus they will meet you all year long is you fail and try to get you tutors or help while uni it's take the exams and then if you fail too many we'll see about ways to help or find yourself other options.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it normal to fail classes in university? Excuse me if the flair is wrong. Seemed like correct one. Basically the title. In highschool and before if you failed a classes it was like your life was over but now in university it's like: "What classes have you failed?" Presuming that you would. Like it's expected. Is it a regular occurrence to fail one or a couple classes?
RESPONSE A: I consistently topped my class throughout my school life. College was a different experience altogether. I always felt inferior in comparison to all the bright kids, still do, and the courses were much much difficult. And unfortunately, some professors take pride in their classes being too difficult to pass by introducing negative marking in exams or too stringent evaluation. I almost failed Math and Physics (got D) for the first two semesters of college, I think I only managed to just pass because the professors were sympathetic and adopted relative grading. Once I was in my third semester, we had to choose the courses we wanted, so it got much easier after that, and I've been doing better now, but it can still be challenging sometimes. So yes, it's completely normal to fail one or two classes. But just remember to give your best and not slack off.
RESPONSE B: I don't want to normalize this is the sense that you should be failing classes and there's no consequences if you do. You shouldn't fail classes, and the consequences of failing for your GPA, financials and ability to finish on time can be dire. But in the sense of do more people fail classes in college, imo yes. College isn't designed for everyone to be able to succeed in it and there is less of an imperative to pass everyone.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it normal to fail classes in university? Excuse me if the flair is wrong. Seemed like correct one. Basically the title. In highschool and before if you failed a classes it was like your life was over but now in university it's like: "What classes have you failed?" Presuming that you would. Like it's expected. Is it a regular occurrence to fail one or a couple classes?
RESPONSE A: Yeah it is. Its normal for having at least a few people either drop out, repeat the year or switch courses in my major every year. Its not an end of the world thing like we may have been taught but I think in university, students actually think "Okay, I failed, do I wanna try again or change to another course" and evaluate if the path they're on is correct instead of having a full blown freaking out session. And university is hard, the courses are tough, unless you're a natural at the major or you are paying your way through, there will be moments where you fail or barely pass.
RESPONSE B: Was A student in high school.... didn’t get a single A for my first year in college. It’s a different ball game
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it rude to ask for a LoR in person? So i've gotten some advice to send my professor an email in regard to writing an LoR for me, as doing it in person can be too up front. It just seems a bit weird as its a professor I am currently taking a class with and might seem dismissive since I could also just ask him face to face in office hours. Which is better?
RESPONSE A: You should ask for all your letters in person.
RESPONSE B: Email is fine, so you can attach your CV and cover letter. Face to face is fine since you're seeing them regularly. If you were to ask me in person and I agreed, I would immediately ask you to send me an email with your CV and cover letter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Is it rude to ask for a LoR in person? So i've gotten some advice to send my professor an email in regard to writing an LoR for me, as doing it in person can be too up front. It just seems a bit weird as its a professor I am currently taking a class with and might seem dismissive since I could also just ask him face to face in office hours. Which is better?
RESPONSE A: I always recommend asking in-person, if possible, and then following up that day with the information they’d need to write you a strong LOR (your SOP, CV, deadlines for each program you’re applying to, and information about how they’ll submit — either through a link generated by the university or sending them directly to a particular university email address).
RESPONSE B: Either way is perfectly fine. If you ask in person, you will want to follow up with an email. Asking in person has the advantage that you can guage the enthusiasm of your prof in real time. Anything less than an immediate, cheery "of course, I'd be happy to!" means you should probably look around for someone else.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it rude to ask for a LoR in person? So i've gotten some advice to send my professor an email in regard to writing an LoR for me, as doing it in person can be too up front. It just seems a bit weird as its a professor I am currently taking a class with and might seem dismissive since I could also just ask him face to face in office hours. Which is better?
RESPONSE A: Either way is perfectly fine. If you ask in person, you will want to follow up with an email. Asking in person has the advantage that you can guage the enthusiasm of your prof in real time. Anything less than an immediate, cheery "of course, I'd be happy to!" means you should probably look around for someone else.
RESPONSE B: You should ask for all your letters in person.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Is it rude to ask for a LoR in person? So i've gotten some advice to send my professor an email in regard to writing an LoR for me, as doing it in person can be too up front. It just seems a bit weird as its a professor I am currently taking a class with and might seem dismissive since I could also just ask him face to face in office hours. Which is better?
RESPONSE A: No. I’ve asked for LORs in person. Some say it can be advantageous and more professional or something. In my experience, they’ve immediately told me yes they will write one and told me to send them an email summarizing the information of what I’m applying to, dates, attach CV, etc. So maybe it’s appreciated to ask in person, but in my experience people in person will immediately tell me to email them anyway. I think just because people like having written details to refer back to and a concise, complete email can provide this. However, I’ve also gotten strong letters to competitive programs by asking over email. Really, if the relationship is strong and the letter will be strong to begin with, then no one cares if you shoot an email or stop them in person. The relationship is what matters most.
RESPONSE B: In general, any request in a professional setting is best done face to face (I include zooms if that's your general medium for meeting). Ask and then follow up with an email recapping what was agreed and providing any necessary info - CV, transcript, lor requirements if something particular is specified and anything the professor has asked for. Basically make the activation barrier as low as possible.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: t remember the details, and then when I admit so, she would say "Well wasn't this covered in CourseA (which was not taught by her)?" And some other times when she mentions something like CoAuthorA & CoAuthorB 2005 ("A" being her frequent co-author and person close to her in real life) I just don't even know which paper she was referring to. Sure the papers are relevant, but how much of your advisors research are you expected to be familiar with? and on a side note, do people usually mention their own paper by their last name and year?
RESPONSE A: OP are you me? This is cringy, lol. I've had one advisor who was pleasantly surprised that \[I already have a hard copy of one of his (highly relevant) paper(that he sent me about a month ago during the holidays before the time we met) and have skimmed through it and know the terms defined in that paper\]. And I've had one advisor whose only publication was being on the editorial board of a dictionary. And I've had one advisor who kind of assumed I should have known all of their work. And I am physically incapable of lying so I just say I haven't read it carefully when I haven't. Not sure if this is the correct strategy. About the mentioning their own paper by their last name and year thing. I know three people who do that all the time, and two who just say "my 2018 paper" or "my <conference\_name> paper". I'm interested to know what other people do.
RESPONSE B: I think this will be highly discipline and research specific. My research is to develop new technologies. I absolutely have to master the content of all related papers from the lab this started in. They are all printed out in a 3 ring binder, to create an informal textbook on the thing I do research on. I now tell will ask my students things like "Did you apply the constraints defined in my 2012 PNAS paper?" and fully expect them to know what I'm referring to. With that said, not all research is so linear and dependent. It is weird they refer to their own paper with their last name and not the journal though...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How much of your advisor's (previous) publications do they expect you to have read? Curious. During my meetings with my advisor she would often ask me, "Have you read LastName 2001?" LastName being her last name, and year is random but within the past 20 years. I sometimes know what the paper was about but don't remember the details, and then when I admit so, she would say "Well wasn't this covered in CourseA (which was not taught by her)?" And some other times when she mentions something like CoAuthorA & CoAuthorB 2005 ("A" being her frequent co-author and person close to her in real life) I just don't even know which paper she was referring to. Sure the papers are relevant, but how much of your advisors research are you expected to be familiar with? and on a side note, do people usually mention their own paper by their last name and year?
RESPONSE A: I think this will be highly discipline and research specific. My research is to develop new technologies. I absolutely have to master the content of all related papers from the lab this started in. They are all printed out in a 3 ring binder, to create an informal textbook on the thing I do research on. I now tell will ask my students things like "Did you apply the constraints defined in my 2012 PNAS paper?" and fully expect them to know what I'm referring to. With that said, not all research is so linear and dependent. It is weird they refer to their own paper with their last name and not the journal though...
RESPONSE B: Mine only suggests their papers if something in it will be relevant to my work. I don't see any reason to suggest them more often.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How much of your advisor's (previous) publications do they expect you to have read? Curious. During my meetings with my advisor she would often ask me, "Have you read LastName 2001?" LastName being her last name, and year is random but within the past 20 years. I sometimes know what the paper was about but don't remember the details, and then when I admit so, she would say "Well wasn't this covered in CourseA (which was not taught by her)?" And some other times when she mentions something like CoAuthorA & CoAuthorB 2005 ("A" being her frequent co-author and person close to her in real life) I just don't even know which paper she was referring to. Sure the papers are relevant, but how much of your advisors research are you expected to be familiar with? and on a side note, do people usually mention their own paper by their last name and year?
RESPONSE A: I was expected to know all of my PI's past work during my PhD. Some of it was more relevant than others, so I was expected to know those better (know the details of the relevant papers and the gist of the less relevant ones) and was asked about them in comps and my defense. Your post doesn't say where you are in your career, but I would say that as a beginning graduate student, my PI would ask me about them to indicate that I should read them, but as I advanced he expected me to know them.
RESPONSE B: I think this will be highly discipline and research specific. My research is to develop new technologies. I absolutely have to master the content of all related papers from the lab this started in. They are all printed out in a 3 ring binder, to create an informal textbook on the thing I do research on. I now tell will ask my students things like "Did you apply the constraints defined in my 2012 PNAS paper?" and fully expect them to know what I'm referring to. With that said, not all research is so linear and dependent. It is weird they refer to their own paper with their last name and not the journal though...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How much of your advisor's (previous) publications do they expect you to have read? Curious. During my meetings with my advisor she would often ask me, "Have you read LastName 2001?" LastName being her last name, and year is random but within the past 20 years. I sometimes know what the paper was about but don't remember the details, and then when I admit so, she would say "Well wasn't this covered in CourseA (which was not taught by her)?" And some other times when she mentions something like CoAuthorA & CoAuthorB 2005 ("A" being her frequent co-author and person close to her in real life) I just don't even know which paper she was referring to. Sure the papers are relevant, but how much of your advisors research are you expected to be familiar with? and on a side note, do people usually mention their own paper by their last name and year?
RESPONSE A: I read all my advisor's recent papers (last 5 years) before joining her lab. Do I remember anything about those papers? Nope. Except the one that I routinely cite.
RESPONSE B: I was expected to know all of my PI's past work during my PhD. Some of it was more relevant than others, so I was expected to know those better (know the details of the relevant papers and the gist of the less relevant ones) and was asked about them in comps and my defense. Your post doesn't say where you are in your career, but I would say that as a beginning graduate student, my PI would ask me about them to indicate that I should read them, but as I advanced he expected me to know them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone just picked up and left research/academia? Just getting out of research altogether, not just academia. Has anyone changed career paths while on a tenure track?
RESPONSE A: tons of people have. There's a facebook group called "The professor is out" for people leaving academia. I wish they had a subreddit, for better anonymity.
RESPONSE B: I packed up shop and left at the end of last year. Planned it out, found a position before handing in notice and never looked back. No more marking, no more late nights preparing for class, no more journal editing or reviews, no more grant writing. I have weekends and evenings back and can really enjoy time with my family. I threw away 12 years of hard work and a tenured position. One of the best decisions I’ve ever made.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Has anyone just picked up and left research/academia? Just getting out of research altogether, not just academia. Has anyone changed career paths while on a tenure track?
RESPONSE A: Working on it. Planning to move to an industry position. It's easier in some science/engineering fields.
RESPONSE B: I was a PhD candidate studying cognitive neuroscience. Before that I was a lab tech for several years with over a dozen pubs. I left grad school after 3 years and became a police officer. It was the right move for me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I'm defending my dissertation in about 3 weeks. Do you have any advice to prepare?
RESPONSE A: Practice your talk, reread your paper, and most of all, RELAX. Get plenty of sleep. Expect the computer to not work right and take extra time to warm up. Anticipate being challenged on how you present your stats, and being grilled on methods you didn’t use, as well as on details that are only tangential to your research. Congratulations!
RESPONSE B: This isn’t exactly mindblowing advice... but read your document, as you sent it to your committee, cover to cover. You’ll find typos. You’ll find gaps in logic where you took out a section from three months ago and forgot you referenced it later and now it doesn’t flow. This reminds you of all the stuff you did/thought, refreshes you on the literature you once knew so well when you wrote it but now your mind is on the finish line, and helps you pull together the narrative. Also, think about who your committee is - is there someone who is going to poke at your model? What kind of questions could they have, and how can you answer them? Is someone else invested in the theory, what kind of questions might they have? If you did a proposal defense you might have a decent idea about this, but you might also talk to your chair about what s/he sees as likely questions. Once you know the questions, write out answers. (I had the opportunity to use a couple of my prepared answers and it made me feel soooo confident, and also totally took that prof by surprise, which was satisfying in its own way)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I'm defending my dissertation in about 3 weeks. Do you have any advice to prepare?
RESPONSE A: You can't know everything, but you can know everything you're going to say. Give multiple full length practice talks to time by yourself. Then one week before your defense give a practice talk in front of some fellow students or other people who know your field. You can incorporate their feedback from your practice talk and at that point you could give the talk in your sleep so it's much less stressful.
RESPONSE B: Practice your talk, reread your paper, and most of all, RELAX. Get plenty of sleep. Expect the computer to not work right and take extra time to warm up. Anticipate being challenged on how you present your stats, and being grilled on methods you didn’t use, as well as on details that are only tangential to your research. Congratulations!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Dealing with imposter syndrome. I'm in the final 6 month haul of my PhD in sociology. Which means constant writing and editing. I'm currently struggling with a very strong bout of imposter syndrome. I would love to hear any tips, tricks, or advance from others who have suffered through a similar situation. For context: I'm female, from a working class background, have very weak family ties, and I am a first generation university student.
RESPONSE A: Don't have a good solution. These days its not too bad for me, but for a long time I did feel like I was "faking it". Eventually you realize that you know more about some things than your peers and you start feeling useful. Maybe this anecdote might help give some perspective: http://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/160603396711/hi-i-read-that-youve-dealt-with-with-impostor
RESPONSE B: Have a growth mindset. You're not SUPPOSED to be good at this yet. You can't compare yourself to others in your stage of career because everyone is running a different race. I'm kayaking with tiny paddles while that guy next to me is horse-back riding (that jerk!). You can't compare yourself to established scientists because they started the race years before you, and the course has changed considerably since then. It's Friday, show yourself the compassion you deserve.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Are there famous computer scientist, mathematician or physicist who started their PhD over 30? It seems most of the famous computer scientists, mathematicians or physicists started their PhDs before 30...
RESPONSE A: Here is such a list https://mathoverflow.net/questions/3591/mathematicians-who-were-late-learners-list
RESPONSE B: You often need the degree to be working in the field. Outside of a specific subset of industry positions, until you're working in the field, you're not really developing your "paper trail of excellence" and name in the field for your own work. The volume of knowledge and the 'structures' that exist in academia require time. You need a strong start with publications, need to get grants, and need to transform that into more publications/grants/a company or something else. There are plenty of people with strong early starts with NSF Career grants that you'll never have heard of. Then you need to get R01s and tenure, and your highest impact work might not be until after that. Even after that work is done, it takes another decade or two for other people to cite your work and build on it, which is when you get 'famous.' There's a big lag time between when the science is discovered and when it has time to propagate, spin up entirely new fields of research, and gain widespread recognition and use. As a specific example, the 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics was for work developing blue LEDs, but the work was published two decades earlier, built on a previous decade+ worth of work from those individuals, not to mention additional decades across multiple research groups that were investigating that and related questions. Neil Degrasse Tyson didn't get his PhD until 33, but that brings up that some of the "most famous" scientists are those in the field of science communication, not necessarily for specific discoveries. Same deal for plenty of mathematicians and physicists and computer scientists. Adobe and Google were both companies started by people who got their PhDs.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: [Undergrad] Allowed acquaintance to base her homework off mine, got accused of plagiarism. **Background:** I'm a 3rd year computer science student in Canada, taking a Theory of Computation course. I've been accused of plagiarism. **What happened:** A month ago we had an assignment due into which I put a lot of effort. After I had finished, an acquaintance of mine asked me for help at the last minute before the due date, so we went to the library and she looked over my copy, and asked me questions from time to time. I never looked at her answers, but she acted as though she changed hers sufficiently. This is the kind of class where answers end up pretty diverse, so the TA grading the assignment realised all of her answers were similar to mine and accused us both of plagiarism. No formal action has been taken yet. **Now:** On the recommendation of my friend, I plan on going to the school law clinic to get advice, but I'd also like yours. How can I get out of this mess without a notice of plagiarism on my permanent record? If at all possible, how can I not receive a zero on this assignment that I worked so hard on? Thanks in advance for any responses!
RESPONSE A: So, based on the details in the post, it sounds like your classmate is guilty of plagiarism (passing off someone else's work as their own), but you're guilty of _academic dishonesty_ (of which plagiarism is one form), since you facilitated your classmate's plagiarism/dishonest submission of work.
RESPONSE B: Sorry you're in that situation. As you've guessed, it is possible that you can still be found complicit in some way. If it's just an assignment, you're unlikely to have something on your record, more likely you'll get a reduced grade. It also depends on the size of the class, but having an honest discussion with the professor could also be helpful. I am generally sympathetic to students, particularly if both students have the same story (ie: if your friend admits to copying your work).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Who should get complimentary copies of my book? After 7 years, my first book is coming out in a month. It’s a history book based on my dissertation. I get 10 complimentary copies and I’m wondering what’s considered proper for gifting. I’ll probably give copies to my dissertation committee members and my chair and boss at my current school (as a thank your for finding my research travel). Who else should I show my professional gratitude to? (All my friends and family said they’ll buy it to help me “make money” off it...)
RESPONSE A: I don't have a good answer to this question, but I'd love to read it if you're willing to PM me the info!
RESPONSE B: Send one to a professor from your undergraduate days and thank them for helping to get you on the track.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Who should get complimentary copies of my book? After 7 years, my first book is coming out in a month. It’s a history book based on my dissertation. I get 10 complimentary copies and I’m wondering what’s considered proper for gifting. I’ll probably give copies to my dissertation committee members and my chair and boss at my current school (as a thank your for finding my research travel). Who else should I show my professional gratitude to? (All my friends and family said they’ll buy it to help me “make money” off it...)
RESPONSE A: Give a copy or two to the library
RESPONSE B: Send one to a professor from your undergraduate days and thank them for helping to get you on the track.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Who should get complimentary copies of my book? After 7 years, my first book is coming out in a month. It’s a history book based on my dissertation. I get 10 complimentary copies and I’m wondering what’s considered proper for gifting. I’ll probably give copies to my dissertation committee members and my chair and boss at my current school (as a thank your for finding my research travel). Who else should I show my professional gratitude to? (All my friends and family said they’ll buy it to help me “make money” off it...)
RESPONSE A: Sounds like you did it just right. But yes, keep at least a couple copies for yourself.
RESPONSE B: Send one to a professor from your undergraduate days and thank them for helping to get you on the track.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Who should get complimentary copies of my book? After 7 years, my first book is coming out in a month. It’s a history book based on my dissertation. I get 10 complimentary copies and I’m wondering what’s considered proper for gifting. I’ll probably give copies to my dissertation committee members and my chair and boss at my current school (as a thank your for finding my research travel). Who else should I show my professional gratitude to? (All my friends and family said they’ll buy it to help me “make money” off it...)
RESPONSE A: I negotiated for 20 copies of my first book and still ended up needing more copies. I gave them to immediate family, my diss committee (since it was a revision of the diss), a couple of mentors, two archives where I did most of the work, my hometown Carnegie library, a couple of friends, and some people with whom I stayed for a few weeks at a time on extended research trips. I think this is all pretty personal in the end, since it generally rests on where you think the obligation to recognize support/contributions might extend. Ultimately I needed a few more and found I could get them cheaper on Amazon than with the author's discount from my publisher...but of course then I wouldn't get that sweet, sweet $.85 per copy in royalties.
RESPONSE B: I don't have a good answer to this question, but I'd love to read it if you're willing to PM me the info!
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.