label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B
|
POST: Who has no/little interest in their research? And if you don't, do you pretend you do?
RESPONSE A: I think interest can change quickly depending on perspective and utilitarian context. It's often a balance between 'what I am doing' and 'how I am doing it' that is important.
RESPONSE B: I realised I'm passionate about science just not in science. I enjoyed the work I was doing, liked experiments, enjoyed the hands-on nature of the work, liked the topic well enough (certainly didn't have anything else that interested me more) but there was no burning question. I left academia and got a job on that fringe between science and society and eventually wound up back at an RI getting the best of both worlds (although no lab work).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: of the political environment in my department, there are faculty members who are on the opposing side of my advisor. I didn’t know politics in academia can be this bad until I entered one. I thought about switching numerous times, just because her presence is so intimidating to me for some reason. The way she talks can be “short” sometimes, and whenever I share my interaction with her with other students, they often think I am not being treated properly. I personally haven’t felt like I was being mistreated until others started pointing it out to me. I don’t know if I’m seeing her with rose-colored glasses because of all the opportunity that comes by working with her. The only other faculty I will be interested in working with is my advisor’s worst enemy. How do I know? She made it clear to me on day 1, that if I were to ever work with the other faculty, I will not be working with her anymore. I am afraid to change advisors as I don’t want to lose the opportunities. But it’s taking such a huge psychological toll on me. How would you all go about this situation?
RESPONSE A: It’s hard to really know what is happening here but many busy people are “short” when they speak. They didn’t become a top professor by spending the day chitchatting. That in itself doesn’t seem a problem but it’s impossible for us to know the real picture.
RESPONSE B: I have a very similar situation happening in my master's, where my advisor causes me so much anxiety it's hard to function. After two years of it I have also begun to take "as needed" meds after almost every interaction and now go to therapy (I wasn't even an extremely anxious person prior to this). My program is only two years and wraps up this summer so I will stick it out, but I would advise from personal experience that it's not worth it. The psychological toll multiple years of constant anxiety takes on your brain is terrifying and not worth it. I'm kind of afraid I'll never go back to normal after this. I'm sorry I don't know much about the logistics of switching, but you could try talking to your school's administration first to see how difficult it would be?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ’s worst enemy. How do I know? She made it clear to me on day 1, that if I were to ever work with the other faculty, I will not be working with her anymore. I am afraid to change advisors as I don’t want to lose the opportunities. But it’s taking such a huge psychological toll on me. How would you all go about this situation?
RESPONSE A: I think you need to step back from this situation and ask yourself are you intimidated because of you or her? Some people are naturally intimidating without intending to be so and that can often bring out the worst in other people. You say you didn't feel mistreated by her until other people said something. It's possible they are pointing something real out or it's possible their own insecurities are speaking. I work with an extremely high ranking academic who is very introverted and has a habit of long silences while he thinks through his answers. It's absolutely incredible how negatively some people perceive him. I've come to the conclusion they are deeply uncomfortable with the silences and their insecurities attribute malevolent motives to his behaviour when he's simply just thinking. Do you get intimidated easily? Has she ever said anything inappropriate or acted inappropriately? When you meet with her does she respond to what you're saying in an appropriate way? Do you come out of meetings wondering why you were so worried? It may be you never have a comfortable relationship, but that's ok, you don't need to be friends with everyone you work with. Do you think you can have a productive relationship with her? Will you get the support (both academic and pastoral) that you need?
RESPONSE B: OP, we at least need to know how far along you are in your program. Also, have you identified any potential new advisors? Do they have funding to support you? Is there a way to talk with them about openings in their lab without your current advisor knowing? I also think your description downplays the severity here. From your post it sounds like your advisor is just being "curt", but it has to be more if other students say you're being mistreated. It's hard to give advice on whether you should switch without more detail.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: . But it’s taking such a huge psychological toll on me. How would you all go about this situation?
RESPONSE A: I have a very similar situation happening in my master's, where my advisor causes me so much anxiety it's hard to function. After two years of it I have also begun to take "as needed" meds after almost every interaction and now go to therapy (I wasn't even an extremely anxious person prior to this). My program is only two years and wraps up this summer so I will stick it out, but I would advise from personal experience that it's not worth it. The psychological toll multiple years of constant anxiety takes on your brain is terrifying and not worth it. I'm kind of afraid I'll never go back to normal after this. I'm sorry I don't know much about the logistics of switching, but you could try talking to your school's administration first to see how difficult it would be?
RESPONSE B: I think you need to step back from this situation and ask yourself are you intimidated because of you or her? Some people are naturally intimidating without intending to be so and that can often bring out the worst in other people. You say you didn't feel mistreated by her until other people said something. It's possible they are pointing something real out or it's possible their own insecurities are speaking. I work with an extremely high ranking academic who is very introverted and has a habit of long silences while he thinks through his answers. It's absolutely incredible how negatively some people perceive him. I've come to the conclusion they are deeply uncomfortable with the silences and their insecurities attribute malevolent motives to his behaviour when he's simply just thinking. Do you get intimidated easily? Has she ever said anything inappropriate or acted inappropriately? When you meet with her does she respond to what you're saying in an appropriate way? Do you come out of meetings wondering why you were so worried? It may be you never have a comfortable relationship, but that's ok, you don't need to be friends with everyone you work with. Do you think you can have a productive relationship with her? Will you get the support (both academic and pastoral) that you need?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: situation?
RESPONSE A: This is tricky. Academia is highly political, as you are learning. Professors with power know who they are and can sometimes wield it in an egoistic manner. That said, we are also burdened professionals with too few hours in the day. Being short is often a byproduct of that. Have you met with her to discuss your overall development plan? Do you communicate with her regularly? You've said you're in a STEM field, but that encompasses a lot of disciplines. So, I'm uncertain what protocol is within your area, but it seems reasonable to expect some level of mentorship. You mentioned that you didn't feel mistreated until others pointed out that you may be. Can the stress and anxiety you experience be related to normal doctoral pressures? There's a reason for high attrition rates among PhD students. I recommend you speak to a professional prior to making big decisions.
RESPONSE B: I think you need to step back from this situation and ask yourself are you intimidated because of you or her? Some people are naturally intimidating without intending to be so and that can often bring out the worst in other people. You say you didn't feel mistreated by her until other people said something. It's possible they are pointing something real out or it's possible their own insecurities are speaking. I work with an extremely high ranking academic who is very introverted and has a habit of long silences while he thinks through his answers. It's absolutely incredible how negatively some people perceive him. I've come to the conclusion they are deeply uncomfortable with the silences and their insecurities attribute malevolent motives to his behaviour when he's simply just thinking. Do you get intimidated easily? Has she ever said anything inappropriate or acted inappropriately? When you meet with her does she respond to what you're saying in an appropriate way? Do you come out of meetings wondering why you were so worried? It may be you never have a comfortable relationship, but that's ok, you don't need to be friends with everyone you work with. Do you think you can have a productive relationship with her? Will you get the support (both academic and pastoral) that you need?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I personally haven’t felt like I was being mistreated until others started pointing it out to me. I don’t know if I’m seeing her with rose-colored glasses because of all the opportunity that comes by working with her. The only other faculty I will be interested in working with is my advisor’s worst enemy. How do I know? She made it clear to me on day 1, that if I were to ever work with the other faculty, I will not be working with her anymore. I am afraid to change advisors as I don’t want to lose the opportunities. But it’s taking such a huge psychological toll on me. How would you all go about this situation?
RESPONSE A: I have a very similar situation happening in my master's, where my advisor causes me so much anxiety it's hard to function. After two years of it I have also begun to take "as needed" meds after almost every interaction and now go to therapy (I wasn't even an extremely anxious person prior to this). My program is only two years and wraps up this summer so I will stick it out, but I would advise from personal experience that it's not worth it. The psychological toll multiple years of constant anxiety takes on your brain is terrifying and not worth it. I'm kind of afraid I'll never go back to normal after this. I'm sorry I don't know much about the logistics of switching, but you could try talking to your school's administration first to see how difficult it would be?
RESPONSE B: If nothing is wrong and there is no conflict, why are you creating one? I find students very often hang on an advisors every word and get far too invested emotionally. In all likelihood your advisor is extremely busy and just doesn’t have the time to engage with you emotionally in the way you would like, and they are almost certainly not thinking about you outside of work. It’s work- just do your job and what is asked of you and everything will be fine! With people like this- if you perform well and don’t cause problems they will generally think you are great. My favorite students are the ones who don’t need much from me other than the actual advising- experimental design, writing, interpretation of results and stats, and writing manuscripts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: ’t belong there. True, I got accepted into the program and my grades are fine, but everything else just feels wrong. For example, I almost never have anything to say in my seminars. It’s not only that I’m timid, but I genuinely just do not have any thoughts or theories regarding our readings. Not only this, but I often don’t even fully understand our readings, and finishing these hundreds of pages of readings a week has me literally in tears every night. I have no motivation to do the work, I don’t love to read anymore, and I can’t help but feel like the least intelligent and the least well-read of any of my classmates. I absolutely agonize over coming up with topics for long seminar papers. I miss being excited about reading and learning. I miss not crying every night from stress and dread of going to class the next day and all the homework I’ll have to do. I’m basically only doing this to improve my chance at earning a not-pitiful living after I graduate. Am I just burned out, or am I genuinely an imposter? Any advice?
RESPONSE A: An advanced humanities degree is not a reliable way to increase earning potential. You are not an imposter. I would suggest not forcing yourself to do something you don't love. No shame or harm in trying something out and deciding it's not for you. It's not a knock against you or your abilities
RESPONSE B: I felt exactly like this during my first year as a grad student, my first year as a postdoc, and now my first year as a tenure track faculty. Even if I am an imposter, which I probably am, I’m a damn good one to make it this far. But seriously, I spent my first year in classes with international students who were mathematics Olympiad winners - the best in their countries- that had earned masters degrees and already knew the material, and I had never taken a grad class. Even if you think you are behind now, you have something unique to offer and academia would be a worse place if only the fastest sharpest people were in it. Quality research is produced by all kinds of people, the common threads being perseverance and enthusiasm.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do I have imposter syndrome or am I an actual imposter? I’m in my first year of an English graduate program, and I can’t help but feel like I don’t belong there. True, I got accepted into the program and my grades are fine, but everything else just feels wrong. For example, I almost never have anything to say in my seminars. It’s not only that I’m timid, but I genuinely just do not have any thoughts or theories regarding our readings. Not only this, but I often don’t even fully understand our readings, and finishing these hundreds of pages of readings a week has me literally in tears every night. I have no motivation to do the work, I don’t love to read anymore, and I can’t help but feel like the least intelligent and the least well-read of any of my classmates. I absolutely agonize over coming up with topics for long seminar papers. I miss being excited about reading and learning. I miss not crying every night from stress and dread of going to class the next day and all the homework I’ll have to do. I’m basically only doing this to improve my chance at earning a not-pitiful living after I graduate. Am I just burned out, or am I genuinely an imposter? Any advice?
RESPONSE A: Some of what you describe sounds normal to me, especially in the first year, and especially if you are being assigned critical/literary theory. It takes time to get used to that style of writing and the kinds of terminology that gets used. I distinctly remember feeling like the least intelligent in the class when I was first starting. I'm not sure if this is any consolation but I want to say hang in there, you are probably doing fine, but also don't feel like you can't walk away if it's truly making you miserable.
RESPONSE B: You are only in your first year so it's perfectly okay to quit if you are feeling so helpless, I would have advised differently if you were near the end of the program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: have no motivation to do the work, I don’t love to read anymore, and I can’t help but feel like the least intelligent and the least well-read of any of my classmates. I absolutely agonize over coming up with topics for long seminar papers. I miss being excited about reading and learning. I miss not crying every night from stress and dread of going to class the next day and all the homework I’ll have to do. I’m basically only doing this to improve my chance at earning a not-pitiful living after I graduate. Am I just burned out, or am I genuinely an imposter? Any advice?
RESPONSE A: I felt exactly that way in the first semester of my PhD: even after putting in 15+ hours a week, I couldn't read, much less master, all the papers for a single seminar. But looking back, I couldn't have changed anything I did because I simply didn't know what I was doing. It took years for me to "read" papers efficiently (hint, you can't understand everything in one read), to find the patterns and make the connections between the concepts I was learning (and to do so in a non-awkward way). I was very frustrated back then that many others around me seemed to be able to do so. Fast-forward to today, I can't say that all the other PhDs from my cohort are better than me. I don't think most of them have a stronger grasp of many things today compared to me. So the academic track (PhD + early career) is a marathon and it didn't make a difference how quickly you sprang out the door, as much as how consistently you keep at it. Many of the early starters burned out, and many plateaued as life and age caught up to them. Do I wish I could have been more mature and "intelligent" and amazing in the beginning of my PhD? Yes, sure. But I eventually found my own way and found my own footing. We all do.
RESPONSE B: You are only in your first year so it's perfectly okay to quit if you are feeling so helpless, I would have advised differently if you were near the end of the program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: not only that I’m timid, but I genuinely just do not have any thoughts or theories regarding our readings. Not only this, but I often don’t even fully understand our readings, and finishing these hundreds of pages of readings a week has me literally in tears every night. I have no motivation to do the work, I don’t love to read anymore, and I can’t help but feel like the least intelligent and the least well-read of any of my classmates. I absolutely agonize over coming up with topics for long seminar papers. I miss being excited about reading and learning. I miss not crying every night from stress and dread of going to class the next day and all the homework I’ll have to do. I’m basically only doing this to improve my chance at earning a not-pitiful living after I graduate. Am I just burned out, or am I genuinely an imposter? Any advice?
RESPONSE A: Unfortunately, I think that feeling that way is pretty normal. Just keep pushing through and **try to be kind to yourself.** Some of this, I think is attributed to the way they teach graduate courses. I had some awful professors, who didn't know how to lead a discussion and 1 or 2 advanced graduate students would just take over discussing their pet theories. It might be helpful to go to office hours and discuss the materials one on one with the professor, focusing on some things you don't quite get. I did this and sometimes it was very helpful (other times, not so much, but you never know until you try). Grad school is hard because everyone who is in the program was probably the top of their class; everyone is good - but so are you. The likelihood is that there are other people in the class who might feel the same way, but are too embarrassed to say anything. Good luck! [edit: oh, just forgot to say that if you are only doing the degree for $$, it wont garner you much extra if any. So if that is the only thing driving you save yourself some heartache]
RESPONSE B: You are only in your first year so it's perfectly okay to quit if you are feeling so helpless, I would have advised differently if you were near the end of the program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do I stay or do I go? I am a student in a PhD program for clinical psychology. Although I like the work I do, I hate the program. It's been miserable and has had real world effects on my mental and physical health. I have probably 2.5 years left including this one. How do you know when enough is enough or when you can take a little more?
RESPONSE A: If you follow this subreddit, you see similar feelings expressed quite often. None of us can really judge what's going on. Grad school is a grind. After the PhD is conferred, it's still a grind. This may not be the right path for you. Or it might be the right path and you're just feeling the grind that everyone does. For myself, I do remember feeling the grind, and obvious strains on my relationships, but overall I loved it. And had a couple dark nights where I thought about throwing in the towel. How many dark nights = too much to bear?
RESPONSE B: I think in general its better to finish. The question is what is exactly your problem? Is it burnout? Where do you work? If its europe and you have a civilized contract you can get paid health leave. Maybe its a good idea to chat with a psychologist if you feel you have work related health problems before making a decision.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it ethical for me to visit a student at their dorm? I work as an academic advisor at a community college. My supervisor sent me a text message earlier this afternoon giving me a student's name, ID number, and dorm room number telling me that the student has been struggling hardcore. Apparently the student has not been attending any of his classes or turning in any of his work. The student is also one of my students in my seminar class. Well, it seems like other professors have contacted the student via phone/e-mail, and now administration wants me going to this student's dorm in-person to check in on them. My supervisor has told me the student is known to lie about what's going on in his life. Is it really ethical for me to go to the student's dorm and try to convince them to come to class? I'm not sure I have the proper training to negotiate with students who may be in distress or having problems, to the point where the student is lying to his other professors. Is there a "professional" way to decline what my supervisor is asking me to do, or at least mention that I don't think I am the right person to try and convince the student?
RESPONSE A: It honestly seems insane that anyone other than the student's assigned RA would even be allowed to do this let alone encouraged to. I would strongly encourage you to contact someone other than your supervisor before even considering going through with it.
RESPONSE B: I'd suggest bringing a student or other professor the struggling student is familiar with along when you visit them. That will protect you and hopefully make it less awkward.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it ethical for me to visit a student at their dorm? I work as an academic advisor at a community college. My supervisor sent me a text message earlier this afternoon giving me a student's name, ID number, and dorm room number telling me that the student has been struggling hardcore. Apparently the student has not been attending any of his classes or turning in any of his work. The student is also one of my students in my seminar class. Well, it seems like other professors have contacted the student via phone/e-mail, and now administration wants me going to this student's dorm in-person to check in on them. My supervisor has told me the student is known to lie about what's going on in his life. Is it really ethical for me to go to the student's dorm and try to convince them to come to class? I'm not sure I have the proper training to negotiate with students who may be in distress or having problems, to the point where the student is lying to his other professors. Is there a "professional" way to decline what my supervisor is asking me to do, or at least mention that I don't think I am the right person to try and convince the student?
RESPONSE A: It honestly seems insane that anyone other than the student's assigned RA would even be allowed to do this let alone encouraged to. I would strongly encourage you to contact someone other than your supervisor before even considering going through with it.
RESPONSE B: I wouldn't do it. You should definitely meet with the student, but in your office. If whatever is going on prevents an office meeting, then that is above your pay grade. That needs to come from the Dean of Students office or something similar.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What to do after you have too much research funding? Suppose you got enough grants to cover your summer salary and salary for your staff. Then you got enough grants to buy out of teaching. And then you are asked to co-write another proposal. Or five other proposals. If some of them hit - you will have more work, but your salary will stay exactly the same. Maybe you will get more results, publish more papers - maybe. But maybe less - because you will have too much to manage. You would have more responsibilities with the same salary. How do you decide when to stop seeking additional funding? How do you look at it in a broader sense? Field of research - engineering, country - USA, title - Full Professor.
RESPONSE A: You have too much funding what period of time? It sounds like you have the funding for this year, but you have full funding for yourself and staff for the next 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? What's your runway? I usually think of funding as a long-term thing. The more funding I have and can stretch out, the fewer grants I need to apply for in the future. PS: the other comments suggesting to hire more staff don't seem right to me. More people does not necessarily produce better research. In fact, once all the important work is being done by the best people you can hire, you're only going to be hiring less good people to do less important work. Don't fall in that trap.
RESPONSE B: As noted I would look to take on more people, or look for a less fortunate or junior faculty member who might appreciate being taken under the funding wing. It also means I can throw a bit more technology on my projects - for example in my field buy a synthetic gene instead of cloning it, or get antibodies to a whole pathway instead of selected proteins in that pathway. Yes, it is more work, yes it is not for more salary - but I get to tackle more questions, which is the reason I went into science in the first place.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What to do after you have too much research funding? Suppose you got enough grants to cover your summer salary and salary for your staff. Then you got enough grants to buy out of teaching. And then you are asked to co-write another proposal. Or five other proposals. If some of them hit - you will have more work, but your salary will stay exactly the same. Maybe you will get more results, publish more papers - maybe. But maybe less - because you will have too much to manage. You would have more responsibilities with the same salary. How do you decide when to stop seeking additional funding? How do you look at it in a broader sense? Field of research - engineering, country - USA, title - Full Professor.
RESPONSE A: I'm confused about the question. I met with my PO and had my summer salary rebudgeted. Is this not an option? Can you rebudget to another line?
RESPONSE B: As noted I would look to take on more people, or look for a less fortunate or junior faculty member who might appreciate being taken under the funding wing. It also means I can throw a bit more technology on my projects - for example in my field buy a synthetic gene instead of cloning it, or get antibodies to a whole pathway instead of selected proteins in that pathway. Yes, it is more work, yes it is not for more salary - but I get to tackle more questions, which is the reason I went into science in the first place.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What to do after you have too much research funding? Suppose you got enough grants to cover your summer salary and salary for your staff. Then you got enough grants to buy out of teaching. And then you are asked to co-write another proposal. Or five other proposals. If some of them hit - you will have more work, but your salary will stay exactly the same. Maybe you will get more results, publish more papers - maybe. But maybe less - because you will have too much to manage. You would have more responsibilities with the same salary. How do you decide when to stop seeking additional funding? How do you look at it in a broader sense? Field of research - engineering, country - USA, title - Full Professor.
RESPONSE A: As noted I would look to take on more people, or look for a less fortunate or junior faculty member who might appreciate being taken under the funding wing. It also means I can throw a bit more technology on my projects - for example in my field buy a synthetic gene instead of cloning it, or get antibodies to a whole pathway instead of selected proteins in that pathway. Yes, it is more work, yes it is not for more salary - but I get to tackle more questions, which is the reason I went into science in the first place.
RESPONSE B: I have seen some very successful research faculty reduce their efforts on individual projects down repeatedly just so they can justify being PI on more projects bringing in more total $$$ to the university. At the point their bigger challenge is convincing the sponsors that they will devote enough effort to serve as PI, rather than trying to just cover full time salaries. Maybe they are just high achievers, or maybe this helps them justify higher negotiated salaries (which can be way over the base salary at a given rank/step).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What to do after you have too much research funding? Suppose you got enough grants to cover your summer salary and salary for your staff. Then you got enough grants to buy out of teaching. And then you are asked to co-write another proposal. Or five other proposals. If some of them hit - you will have more work, but your salary will stay exactly the same. Maybe you will get more results, publish more papers - maybe. But maybe less - because you will have too much to manage. You would have more responsibilities with the same salary. How do you decide when to stop seeking additional funding? How do you look at it in a broader sense? Field of research - engineering, country - USA, title - Full Professor.
RESPONSE A: Argue for another course release? Some of the folks in one of the departments I was in were funded at 99%. They’d teach one course every other year or so.
RESPONSE B: Hmm if you are a full professor, why are you asking such trivial questions? and on Reddit... You should know that already.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What to do after you have too much research funding? Suppose you got enough grants to cover your summer salary and salary for your staff. Then you got enough grants to buy out of teaching. And then you are asked to co-write another proposal. Or five other proposals. If some of them hit - you will have more work, but your salary will stay exactly the same. Maybe you will get more results, publish more papers - maybe. But maybe less - because you will have too much to manage. You would have more responsibilities with the same salary. How do you decide when to stop seeking additional funding? How do you look at it in a broader sense? Field of research - engineering, country - USA, title - Full Professor.
RESPONSE A: Argue for another course release? Some of the folks in one of the departments I was in were funded at 99%. They’d teach one course every other year or so.
RESPONSE B: Hire a staff scientist or recruit an AP to help manage part of the lab. You are going to be a prize winner one day. You'll need them when you are off giving ted talks and advising the president
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do if you fail at research after a PhD? What happens if you are a post-doc and start leading a new project, and you fail to get any result and it's your fault? If you get kicked out of university/research facility, and so you have no good references for getting another research position, is there anything you could do at this point?
RESPONSE A: Usually postdocs at least in the US are fixed term contracts so it’s unlikely you’ll be fired just not given another contract at the end, unless you were to do something egregious. If you can’t get a good LOR from your postdoc supervisor you always have your PI from your PhD. It may be difficult to get another postdoc or AP position so it may be necessary to work in industry, whatever that means for your specific discipline.
RESPONSE B: Is this a thought experiment or something that happened in real life? I'm asking because a lot more information is needed to give useful advice. It's rare that the lack of results is solely the researcher's fault. And anyway, in my field, a postdoc is usually involved in multiple projects, so it's not like they're just working on this one thing. Their PI can then evaluate their performance across all other projects and write the letter of reference, even if their primary project fails.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do if you fail at research after a PhD? What happens if you are a post-doc and start leading a new project, and you fail to get any result and it's your fault? If you get kicked out of university/research facility, and so you have no good references for getting another research position, is there anything you could do at this point?
RESPONSE A: Usually postdocs at least in the US are fixed term contracts so it’s unlikely you’ll be fired just not given another contract at the end, unless you were to do something egregious. If you can’t get a good LOR from your postdoc supervisor you always have your PI from your PhD. It may be difficult to get another postdoc or AP position so it may be necessary to work in industry, whatever that means for your specific discipline.
RESPONSE B: Go get any number of jobs that pay a lot better?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do if you fail at research after a PhD? What happens if you are a post-doc and start leading a new project, and you fail to get any result and it's your fault? If you get kicked out of university/research facility, and so you have no good references for getting another research position, is there anything you could do at this point?
RESPONSE A: Usually you will have references--the references that got you your postdoc project. There may be some explaining to do as to why you didn't get a reference from your postdoc advisor, but it's not a kiss of death, especially if your previous references are good. Many people are aware of some of these poor mentor-mentee matches that occur. You can switch postdocs. You can also go into careers that require a PhD but are not research track like patent law, marketing, science communication, outreach, editorial work etc.
RESPONSE B: Go get any number of jobs that pay a lot better?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do if you fail at research after a PhD? What happens if you are a post-doc and start leading a new project, and you fail to get any result and it's your fault? If you get kicked out of university/research facility, and so you have no good references for getting another research position, is there anything you could do at this point?
RESPONSE A: Usually postdocs at least in the US are fixed term contracts so it’s unlikely you’ll be fired just not given another contract at the end, unless you were to do something egregious. If you can’t get a good LOR from your postdoc supervisor you always have your PI from your PhD. It may be difficult to get another postdoc or AP position so it may be necessary to work in industry, whatever that means for your specific discipline.
RESPONSE B: Likely the same result as if you were successful: you go into industry.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do if you fail at research after a PhD? What happens if you are a post-doc and start leading a new project, and you fail to get any result and it's your fault? If you get kicked out of university/research facility, and so you have no good references for getting another research position, is there anything you could do at this point?
RESPONSE A: Usually you will have references--the references that got you your postdoc project. There may be some explaining to do as to why you didn't get a reference from your postdoc advisor, but it's not a kiss of death, especially if your previous references are good. Many people are aware of some of these poor mentor-mentee matches that occur. You can switch postdocs. You can also go into careers that require a PhD but are not research track like patent law, marketing, science communication, outreach, editorial work etc.
RESPONSE B: Likely the same result as if you were successful: you go into industry.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: and B) I still don’t want to lose credit for work I have done, especially since my ultimate goal is to pursue a PhD and hopefully get into academia. What would the protocol be regarding this in future job applications etc once there’s a mismatch between my legal name and that on these publications?
RESPONSE A: I strongly agree with the ORCID suggestion as well as the bolding of your name on your CV. In my field's citation style (APA), initials are used for first and middle names anyways, so you don't have to put your full deadname on your CV. E.g., if you changed your first and middle name but not last: Doe, J. M. & **Smith, J. D.** (2023). The impacts of time. *Journal of Time, 1*(2), 30-50. Atkins, T. T., Schmoe, J. R., **Smith, L. L.**, & Harry, T. D. (2022). Time is stupid. *Journal of Stupid Things, 4*(25), 99-101. No explanation needed. If you change both your first and last name, you could include a little note at the bottom stating, "Publications before 2023 were published under a different name." Probably not necessary as long as you are clear about who you are in the list but also fine to include, if desired. If that is still uncomfortable, I think it would be fine to do something like this: Doe, J. M. & **Smith, J. D.** (2023). The impacts of time. *Journal of Time, 1*(2), 30-50. Atkins, T. T., Schmoe, J. R., **Smith, J. D.** ^1, & Harry, T. D. (2022). Time is stupid. *Journal of Stupid Things, 4*(25), 99-101. ^1 Published under a different name.
RESPONSE B: On the CV write “formerly Other Name”. This is what many women do when they change their name from marriage or divorce. It’s also what many trans professors do after they transition. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: my name for a while I think and B) I still don’t want to lose credit for work I have done, especially since my ultimate goal is to pursue a PhD and hopefully get into academia. What would the protocol be regarding this in future job applications etc once there’s a mismatch between my legal name and that on these publications?
RESPONSE A: I strongly agree with the ORCID suggestion as well as the bolding of your name on your CV. In my field's citation style (APA), initials are used for first and middle names anyways, so you don't have to put your full deadname on your CV. E.g., if you changed your first and middle name but not last: Doe, J. M. & **Smith, J. D.** (2023). The impacts of time. *Journal of Time, 1*(2), 30-50. Atkins, T. T., Schmoe, J. R., **Smith, L. L.**, & Harry, T. D. (2022). Time is stupid. *Journal of Stupid Things, 4*(25), 99-101. No explanation needed. If you change both your first and last name, you could include a little note at the bottom stating, "Publications before 2023 were published under a different name." Probably not necessary as long as you are clear about who you are in the list but also fine to include, if desired. If that is still uncomfortable, I think it would be fine to do something like this: Doe, J. M. & **Smith, J. D.** (2023). The impacts of time. *Journal of Time, 1*(2), 30-50. Atkins, T. T., Schmoe, J. R., **Smith, J. D.** ^1, & Harry, T. D. (2022). Time is stupid. *Journal of Stupid Things, 4*(25), 99-101. ^1 Published under a different name.
RESPONSE B: ORCID IDs are made for exactly this purpose. People change their names all the time, so systems exist to make cross referencing these kinds of things easy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ’m just ready to be finished. I’ve realized that I don’t honestly care about the PhD and I’d rather just work an industry job. I actually tried to quit about a year ago, but my advisor gave me some things to consider, so I postponed my decision. A year later, I’m still feeling pretty much the same and my research has hardly progressed since last year. I know that I want to quit, the hardest part for me is the impact it will have on my advisor and my research group. I’m on an externally funded project and my absence will definitely leave a hole. My plan would be to finish out the semester and in that time write out processes and help train other students to be able to fill my role as best as possible, but I still fear the response of my advisor. I have a good relationship with him, but he is also pretty quick to get pissed off. Any advice or thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Tl;dr: I want to quit my PhD, but I feel bad about the repercussions that will have on my advisor and colleagues. But I know that I don’t want to finish this degree.
RESPONSE A: I feel like you if you do not need that PhD for the work you want to do, and you gave this a year since you first wanted to quit, you know what you should do here. While it will leave a hole for now, your spot that you dislike is likely someone else's dream spot. Your advisor needs to be looking for that person to put there while you move onto the next stage of your life.
RESPONSE B: Definitely give way more notice than 2 weeks, like I'm talking 2 months at least. But my advice is, do not stay where you are not happy. Did this for too long in my PhD program and it was the best decision I've made to quit. I stayed the summer after I earned the masters and another month until my new position started. Talk with your research PI, just be honest and let the cards land where they fall. You'll know what to say when the time comes. Best of luck! And go make that money, trust me, it's better than when you're on that grad student stipend pay!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: to quit about a year ago, but my advisor gave me some things to consider, so I postponed my decision. A year later, I’m still feeling pretty much the same and my research has hardly progressed since last year. I know that I want to quit, the hardest part for me is the impact it will have on my advisor and my research group. I’m on an externally funded project and my absence will definitely leave a hole. My plan would be to finish out the semester and in that time write out processes and help train other students to be able to fill my role as best as possible, but I still fear the response of my advisor. I have a good relationship with him, but he is also pretty quick to get pissed off. Any advice or thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Tl;dr: I want to quit my PhD, but I feel bad about the repercussions that will have on my advisor and colleagues. But I know that I don’t want to finish this degree.
RESPONSE A: Definitely give way more notice than 2 weeks, like I'm talking 2 months at least. But my advice is, do not stay where you are not happy. Did this for too long in my PhD program and it was the best decision I've made to quit. I stayed the summer after I earned the masters and another month until my new position started. Talk with your research PI, just be honest and let the cards land where they fall. You'll know what to say when the time comes. Best of luck! And go make that money, trust me, it's better than when you're on that grad student stipend pay!
RESPONSE B: I think two questions I have is: how long is left? And what is the problem? Like are you actively suffering every day and are suffering mental health wise? Or is it just a boring job you're ok with but don't really like? Because if it's the latter, and there's not too long left, if might be worth just grinding it out. Only you can know the right path and quitting might be the right thing. However having a PhD will be an asset for your whole career so if you can get it then it's worth it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting my 4th and last yeah of the PhD, wanting to quit Hi all I am currently a PhD researcher at a European university (29F) in microbiology, with little to no supervision. Since I am part of a bigger project and some end evaluations by the organization providing funding is coming up, my PI has been pushing me to finish an enormous amount of work. I have no motivation, am in the lab every day, but stuff just is not working and I cannot get the guidance I need to help me figure it out. From the start I was not happy in the PhD, but pushed through thinking the whole pandemic had caused much of the issues. Now really I am wondering if this is worth it, and I have been really considering just quitting. I am a very stubborn person though and am afraid what impact this will have on future jobs. I am not planning on ever returning to academia, but will a failed PhD impact job search? I would appreciate some advice Thank you for reading/helping!
RESPONSE A: I had a similar experience, but it made me angry and the anger gave me the motivation to finish in spite of their failure to provide feedback or guidance before they themselves were under pressure. I suppose it was a way of showing them that their eleventh hour criticisms were just projections of their own shortcomings. It's not always possible, but for me finding that anger and redirecting it to motivation for accomplishing my goal was sweet revenge
RESPONSE B: You only have a year left. Just finish it. You probably started the program to get a degree, not to have fun. Your job prospects with a PhD will be much better. I am sure you will be able to find a job if you drop out, but you will have to be very creative in explaining to employers why you dropped out. If someone is willing to throw out years of their life, I would not expect them to be a dedicated employee where they can leave at any time without any repercussions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: tenure-track position and a relationship? I have been following the academic path in a textbook fashion. After a successful PhD, I embarked on a successful Postdoc and now was offered a Tenure Track position abroad. During my Postdoc, I have met my present girlfriend. We are together for 2 years 8 months. In the city I am staying there are no further prospects of obtaining a tenure-track position, other than continuing as a Postdoc. My girlfriend explicitly told me about her reluctance on the prospect of leaving, and wanting to stay in this city (at the heart of Europe, for the matter). I would like to draw from your collective experiences - with any advice or comments being appreciated: for those of you who had to choose between a relationship or an academic career, how was the decision made? What were the main points you factored in? And, most importantly, do you regret the ending decision? TL;DR: I have a TT job, but gf won't move abroad. This means staying in academia or leaving it. For those who had the same problem, how did you evaluate such a conundrum?
RESPONSE A: I followed my now husband to a city where I knew opportunities would be rare. I got lucky at the beginning and landed a great postdoc position. Now, I'm struggling to find a good fit but luckily I can afford to wait. I'm very happy with how things turned out, but I knew what I was getting myself into and didn't feel like a compromise to me. Just sharing my experience, hopefully it helps.
RESPONSE B: I wouldn't give up my career for a girlfriend. I might give it up for a wife, but I would hope that anyone I would marry wouldn't ask me to do that. But your girlfriend could perhaps say the same thing about you asking her to move to some random city just because you happened to land a faculty job there. Perhaps you can make a deal: move for a while and see how it goes, with the promise that you will move back to Europe together in X years if she is miserable there. Of course, she can always move sooner if she wants to, but it might mean the end of the relationship.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Tenure track job search frustration I am really burnout with the tenure track job search in USA. Applied to 100+ job, got 11 first round call and 4 second round interviews (all through zoom). I don't know why I am not able to convert any interview to a success. I really want a job at this moment to support my family. Presently working as post-doc in a reputed lab. I am really tired balancing my research and job search. Also due to covid travel restrictions last year, I couldn't travel to visit my family. I am an international student, I don't have the luxury to travel anytime I wish. Additionally, after my PhD last year I moved to mid-west where I don't have many friends here and lab is running practically online. I am really tired and stressed out. One of the things I observed that during interviews sometimes I speak fast or not able to put all the thoughts into word. I know I am capable of a TT job, but I dont know where I am going wrong. I have relevant research expertise and teaching experience. I cant sugarcoat or say the perfect answer to some of the questions but I always showed that I am interested and motivated in helping students with their teaching and research. Any tips, motivation, or suggestions is welcome.
RESPONSE A: two Lessons I’ve learned the hard way: theres always someone with a higher degree pedigree, and more publications, than me. Whenever I’ve interviewed for other positions, and look who was hired over me, this is the case every time. the job that I have now was a matter of being the best candidate at the right time. unfortunately, you don’t know when that will be. It only takes one time to be the right time, so keep trying and hang in there. We all know how you feel.
RESPONSE B: While unfortunately not the most meritocratic, I think “networking” helps a lot in practice. Ideally this would be something one works on throughout one’s career (I try to impress this upon my grad students). One suggestion would be to work your network connections more if you’re not already. Good luck! It’s a jungle out there…
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: PhD supervisor drama, is it even my responsibility? My PhD my supervisor has previously approved me an internship at an external lab. However, when I started my stay at the guest lab, he put little to no time in supervising and coordinating the internship project. Considering the situation, I carried on my own and worked on an existing project from the guest lab. Now that I am almost done wrapping up the internship work with a manuscript, my supervisor is stating that he should be a corresponding author and that I've cut him out off the project, regardless of my multiple previous failed attempts to even set a meeting with him during my stay. He's been saying that I put him in an awkward situation regarding his contribution to the work... As a PhD student, is it my responsibility to manage my supervisor's involvement or the other way around? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Agreed with others here, stay political. Do what you need to keep the relationship positive, graduate and move on to some place better. Hopefully your advisor will at least help you in the writing process. This is a bigger problem with academia. Academia generates a lot of PhD graduates that can go on to do great research in industry and government. It’s the ones that stay behind in academia that often never quite develop good interpersonal skills or project managers skills bc they are never exposed to a more professional environment.
RESPONSE B: why wouldn't the PI at the lab you're visiting be corresponding instead? they provided the facilities and equipment...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: PhD supervisor drama, is it even my responsibility? My PhD my supervisor has previously approved me an internship at an external lab. However, when I started my stay at the guest lab, he put little to no time in supervising and coordinating the internship project. Considering the situation, I carried on my own and worked on an existing project from the guest lab. Now that I am almost done wrapping up the internship work with a manuscript, my supervisor is stating that he should be a corresponding author and that I've cut him out off the project, regardless of my multiple previous failed attempts to even set a meeting with him during my stay. He's been saying that I put him in an awkward situation regarding his contribution to the work... As a PhD student, is it my responsibility to manage my supervisor's involvement or the other way around? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: It’s not your project. It’s the other lab’s. They should coordinate authorship. Not sure how you would decide that. Sounds like your PI is wanting credit for nothing and only wants their name on the MS. A typical problem in self-driven academia. Do what you can to try to include them I guess, for your benefit to get out of there asap.
RESPONSE B: why wouldn't the PI at the lab you're visiting be corresponding instead? they provided the facilities and equipment...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PhD supervisor drama, is it even my responsibility? My PhD my supervisor has previously approved me an internship at an external lab. However, when I started my stay at the guest lab, he put little to no time in supervising and coordinating the internship project. Considering the situation, I carried on my own and worked on an existing project from the guest lab. Now that I am almost done wrapping up the internship work with a manuscript, my supervisor is stating that he should be a corresponding author and that I've cut him out off the project, regardless of my multiple previous failed attempts to even set a meeting with him during my stay. He's been saying that I put him in an awkward situation regarding his contribution to the work... As a PhD student, is it my responsibility to manage my supervisor's involvement or the other way around? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: why wouldn't the PI at the lab you're visiting be corresponding instead? they provided the facilities and equipment...
RESPONSE B: You should communicate and keep your supervisor updated occasionally, which you have, but anything beyond that is really on him. But it shouldn't be your responsibility to argue about involvement or authorship, that should be up to the PI or other group leader of the internship project. Tell one PI (whichever you feel more comfortable with asking) to contact the other. Depending on the field, your PhD supervisor being a corresponding author might be normal, but that's between the two of them and it shouldn't make a difference to you if he is or isn't.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: through the week. That’s why I’ve been thinking more and more about going the teaching route, whether it be at a community college or AP/dual enrollment teacher at a charter high school (where discipline problems are hopefully minimal). If my end goal is to be a teacher or community college professor, Is it worth being miserable for 5+ years to get the PhD or will my job prospects be identical with a masters? I know job openings for community colleges are scarce (mostly adjunct slots) so would having a PhD actually give you a leg up if there’s so few full-time jobs to begin with? I know it’s purely speculative, but I’m struggling with how to justify staying for the PhD if job prospects for lecturer gigs are pretty awful. I just don’t know if the PhD will open up that many more doors to teaching opportunities. Thanks for any thoughts you have on the matter! TL;DR: I want to teach at a community college or elite high school and I’m not sure whether it’s worth staying for the PhD if I’m miserable. Thanks for any thoughts you have on the matter!
RESPONSE A: Where I live, it is very hard to get a full-time job at a community college. With rare exceptions they only hire part-timers, who teach most of their classes. I'm told it's actually against state law to have so many part-time instructors but the law is not enforced. Hiring is also largely out of the hands of the department; even if they like you they may not be able to hire you full-time. They might hire one full-time professor per decade, who also has to tick off a bunch of other boxes... So I'm saying that you should make sure that this is actually an attainable goal. Near me it's not.
RESPONSE B: It will be a struggle to get a job even after getting PhD. If your primary motivation is to get a job then get a job now. If you are eligible to teach in community college with your degrees according to the laws in your country, then it would be best decision to leave and get a job. 5 years is not a small amount of time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What would you do if you saw something odd in a student's notes? I was recently rewriting notes and decided to test my art skills and draw a female nude on my notebook. I found that the nude looked disgustingly caricature-esque and decided to go back to writing my notes. In a hilarious, yet not so hilarious instance, I went to my professor to ask for help and the page where I drew the nude was opened to for a moment as I scrambled through my notes. I believe he saw it and I am incredible embarrassed. I did not acknowledge it because I am very awkward and I would have just made it more uncomfortable than it was. What would you do if you saw something like this in a student's notes?
RESPONSE A: Man, if you knew the stuff my students would talk about during the break... I wouldn't worry about it.
RESPONSE B: When I was a TA for a genetics lab the prof pulled me aside to show me the backside of a student's turned in assignment. It read like some sort of religious zealotry and/or a curse. We were confused and thought it was odd, but didn't elevate it any further as investigation worthy. On a more humorous note, when grading BIO101 exams, on a question related to incomplete dominance of an allele affecting the weight of mice, they drew a bar graph of genotype vs weight with the bars represented as mice of increasing size and fatness. I got a laugh out of that one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What would you do if you saw something odd in a student's notes? I was recently rewriting notes and decided to test my art skills and draw a female nude on my notebook. I found that the nude looked disgustingly caricature-esque and decided to go back to writing my notes. In a hilarious, yet not so hilarious instance, I went to my professor to ask for help and the page where I drew the nude was opened to for a moment as I scrambled through my notes. I believe he saw it and I am incredible embarrassed. I did not acknowledge it because I am very awkward and I would have just made it more uncomfortable than it was. What would you do if you saw something like this in a student's notes?
RESPONSE A: When I was a TA for a genetics lab the prof pulled me aside to show me the backside of a student's turned in assignment. It read like some sort of religious zealotry and/or a curse. We were confused and thought it was odd, but didn't elevate it any further as investigation worthy. On a more humorous note, when grading BIO101 exams, on a question related to incomplete dominance of an allele affecting the weight of mice, they drew a bar graph of genotype vs weight with the bars represented as mice of increasing size and fatness. I got a laugh out of that one.
RESPONSE B: I suspect I'd forget about it pretty quickly. There are way, way worse things in life than non-harmful sketches in a notebook.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What would you do if you saw something odd in a student's notes? I was recently rewriting notes and decided to test my art skills and draw a female nude on my notebook. I found that the nude looked disgustingly caricature-esque and decided to go back to writing my notes. In a hilarious, yet not so hilarious instance, I went to my professor to ask for help and the page where I drew the nude was opened to for a moment as I scrambled through my notes. I believe he saw it and I am incredible embarrassed. I did not acknowledge it because I am very awkward and I would have just made it more uncomfortable than it was. What would you do if you saw something like this in a student's notes?
RESPONSE A: Sign you up for an art class with a nude model?
RESPONSE B: Irrelevant. The only doodle that might concern me as a one off would have to do with violence towards named individuals. That kind of thing stops being ok in high school, so a college student murdering/raping/harassing a classmate/teacher/political figure in effigy is at best a sign of relative immaturity (in my opinion, some certainly disagree). I am far more concerned about your overall train of thought, what you spend your time focusing on, and if you are a closet nutjob or all around bad scientists (unconscionably biased.) A doodle doesn't tell me any of that. Doodle of a naked person, totally don't (have time to) care. Notebook with a doodle on several pages, care a bit, will certainly give a talking to about professional courtesy and sexual harassment. Notebook with nothing but doodles of naked people, care a lot, like why the fuck are you even here??! Focus! That said, if you write word salad on a page, or have periodic nonsense lines mid essay, I will most probably pull you aside and inquire about you with others.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What would you do if you saw something odd in a student's notes? I was recently rewriting notes and decided to test my art skills and draw a female nude on my notebook. I found that the nude looked disgustingly caricature-esque and decided to go back to writing my notes. In a hilarious, yet not so hilarious instance, I went to my professor to ask for help and the page where I drew the nude was opened to for a moment as I scrambled through my notes. I believe he saw it and I am incredible embarrassed. I did not acknowledge it because I am very awkward and I would have just made it more uncomfortable than it was. What would you do if you saw something like this in a student's notes?
RESPONSE A: Sign you up for an art class with a nude model?
RESPONSE B: I knew who would be grading my final essay in college and I made sure to include a drawing of a Streetshark for good measure.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: To the Professors here : What would be the best way for a student to approach you, if the primary goal is to network well with you, and make sure you utter their name to a prospective employer when time presents itself? So I'd be starting with my Masters this upcoming fall in KEDGE, France. I've come to understand that in France, networking with professors is an efficient way to get them to recommend your name to visiting/known employers. What should I do as a Masters student, i.e as a 22 y/o, to network with professors without seeming overly childish or sycophant. But I also wish to do something in return for my professors as a way of showing my gratitude in advance as I pursue my course. Obviously, everything while being within the ethical framework. :p ;) I mean, I know the question isn't too precise but anything would help! Whatever you could throw at me. Thanks a ton in advance!
RESPONSE A: All of the answers so far are good - the main point being that "Thank you so much professor for answering my question in class!!!!" doesn't work. What I would add is that there may be opportunities in your subject that would allow you to connect with the professor in a legitimate way, with a focus on the subject matter. We're all suckers for students who genuinely appreciate our expertise.
RESPONSE B: If their body of work is similar to the work you will be doing for your thesis, you could consider adding them to your thesis committee so that you get to know them on a much deeper level through that interaction.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How bad is it to go to grad school at the same place you did your undergrad? I'm a 3rd-year undergrad doing a BS in computer science, and I'm pretty certain that I want to go on to grad school. I've heard that it's generally frowned upon to go to grad school at the same place that you did your undergrad, but I really like the department and the city, and I would like to stay here. The department consistently ranks in the top 10-15 computer science programs, and has some pretty good faculty in the field that I want to specialize in (bioinformatics.) I'm not sure if I would be able to get into higher ranking programs or not, but I think I would have a decent shot. I've also heard of grad students visiting other schools for a semester or two to get experience in other institutions. Could this be an alternative to going to a different school? Any thoughts? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: It doesn't have to be a bad thing, but it looks better on scholarships/CVs that you moved around, and saw different ways of doing things. Its all about exposure and experience. I think moving is better, but not that staying is bad. Many people continue in the same place, and the difference can depend on your field and your goals.
RESPONSE B: I have never really heard reasons why doing graduate school in the same undergrad is detrimental at all... It's generally harder to get into the same graduate school if you haven't worked in someone's lab that is offering you a PhD position since everyone on the admission's board knows each other and the criteria will be raised. I see no problem in going to the same school if you enjoy your current lab work or have a great project planned, especially if your school is in the top 10. Visiting schools doesn't really strike me as a great alternative to going to a different school because I feel it doesn't look good unless that school is a.) very prestigious and b.) has a lab that focuses on the same area of research your PhD will be based on. It will also most likely delay the time it takes to get your PhD.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Did anyone who struggled through undergrad go on to get a PhD? By the time I graduate next spring, I’ll have been working on my BA for 8 years. Between mental health issues and changing schools/majors a handful of times, my undergrad experience has been really rough. But I’ve finally found what I love (literary theory and criticism), and I have a professor who’s pushing me to continue in my field. She’s gotten it into my head that I could even go on for a PhD, and I really want to believe I could manage that, but my track record is obviously less than stellar, so I’m worried that it would be a waste of time or that I’d fail miserably. Has anyone else who struggled with school stuck it out in academia? Why and how did you do it? Was it worth it?
RESPONSE A: I struggled with mental health while an undergrad. I was "lucky" in that I had my break down in the first semester of my third year. I took a semester off, found what I was passionate about at a community college while I took it easy, and continued my Bachelors with a renewed passion after that. I was able to turn my 2.0-ish GPA into a 3.0 by the time I graduated (a semester late; not too bad). I then got a Masters and am almost finished with my PhD. It was a struggle for sure, and my family didn't agree with me taking a semester off, but I don't think I would be anywhere close to where I am now if I hadn't.
RESPONSE B: I think one thing to keep in mind is that graduate school typically exacerbates any existing mental health issues. This doesn't mean don't go for it-- many people in grad school have mental health issues and still succeed. However, I do think it's something to think deeply about, and perhaps set up a safety net for if you do decide to pursue it. A PhD isn't worth seriously sacrificing your mental health.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you come up with research ideas as an undergrad? I am currently an undergrad student in my sophomore year. I recently approached one of my professors, and when he asked me what I wanted to do in the future, I told him I'd like to be part of the Academia and eventually become a professor. He encouraged me to do so, and has even accepted to help me by taking me into his team and help me do research about things I like, so that in the future, I can pursue a Master's or PhD a little more easily. (This is outside the US, and having some research experience does greatly help). As such, he has given me a to-do list of things I have to get training on, such as coding, 3D printing, laser cutting, research papers to read, among many others. I have already started them, but one of the items on the list was coming up with ideas for research. Although I have read published papers, I find them to be extremely concise, and narrowed. He told me he would help me narrow it down, but I still find it pretty puzzling. I am studying electrical engineering, but I am also interested in using skills from there to help the environment, especially water. Maybe, find a short or long term solution for water pollution, or sanitizing water, among others. As such, I come here to ask for advice. How should I start looking for a topic to begin research?
RESPONSE A: Well, I had great success in finding interesting topics by looking for something I was already interested in in Encyclopedias and Bibliographys. However I come from social sciences and it could be different in engineering.
RESPONSE B: What do you love? Start there? Do love anything yet? Read everything on the topic until you do
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Should I email my professor introducing myself for an online class? I'm currently stationed in California, and my school is in Florida, so I have to take online classes after having dropped out for 2 years. Before, I never really introduced myself, I'd just show up to office hours if I needed help. I was just wondering if it's necessary to email them before the semester starts with questions. Is that okay? in an online setting? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Online teacher here. **1. You can email your professor, but that doesn't mean he's going to reply** (or even read your email) if you send it during any kind of break, holiday or vacation. I would wait until the break ends, maybe one day in advance? When your professor starts checking his work email account. No one likes to be disrupted on vacation (or weekends). After the beginning of the semester, your professor will be happy to assist you. **2. If your professor thinks the group will need some material prior to the class, he will send it.**
RESPONSE B: Wait until break is over.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Should I email my professor introducing myself for an online class? I'm currently stationed in California, and my school is in Florida, so I have to take online classes after having dropped out for 2 years. Before, I never really introduced myself, I'd just show up to office hours if I needed help. I was just wondering if it's necessary to email them before the semester starts with questions. Is that okay? in an online setting? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Your professor is likely to have an introductory assignment that should cover things like the syllabus and communication channels. If you would like to be more proactive, more power to you. But, it may not be necessary.
RESPONSE B: Online teacher here. **1. You can email your professor, but that doesn't mean he's going to reply** (or even read your email) if you send it during any kind of break, holiday or vacation. I would wait until the break ends, maybe one day in advance? When your professor starts checking his work email account. No one likes to be disrupted on vacation (or weekends). After the beginning of the semester, your professor will be happy to assist you. **2. If your professor thinks the group will need some material prior to the class, he will send it.**
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I may not finish my PhD in time I have been unofficially offered a really sweet non-tenure-track lecturer position that starts in the fall quarter. I am planning to file my dissertation this summer but there is a chance that I may need an extra two months or so. What is likely to happen if I miss the summer deadline? Should I let the hiring department know? How often does this happen?
RESPONSE A: Can you just quit life for a season and finish it? Otherwise, though, would it hurt to talk to this hiring department and explain your situation? See what they say? It's possible they are reasonable/nice people.
RESPONSE B: Is a PhD required for the lecturer position?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I may not finish my PhD in time I have been unofficially offered a really sweet non-tenure-track lecturer position that starts in the fall quarter. I am planning to file my dissertation this summer but there is a chance that I may need an extra two months or so. What is likely to happen if I miss the summer deadline? Should I let the hiring department know? How often does this happen?
RESPONSE A: Is a PhD required for the lecturer position?
RESPONSE B: Make sure that you at least have it submitted. Often it takes time to review and then the corrections take another few months, but most departments accept that. Try your hardest, work your butt off and get it done by the end of summer. You can do it!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: NSF Graduate Research Fellowship offers came out today. How many of you had/have this support and do you think it influenced your career at all?
RESPONSE A: I have one; got it last year. My lab gets some funding from industry, and we also have some projects tailored toward those funding us. The one major impact its had on me (so far) is that its given me some confidence to break away from a project that has industrial funding - which my boss wanted me on - to one that does not. As for my career... only time will tell.
RESPONSE B: I need to get off this site. I read this as Not Safe For Graduate Research...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you have a personal website? How is it branded and what do you put on it? I currently do have a personal website but it's more positioned towards my creative works but I think it's time I should have a more 'biographical' site of sorts. Unfortunately, I have an extremely common name and unless I change my name, there's no way I can find a good domain for it. I even just tried search [name]phd.com and some guy in China owns it. I also am not sure what I should put on it right now, since I'm not done with my PhD yet. How do you position your personal site? I don't think there's a rule against it so share your link, if you don't mind.
RESPONSE A: I do a lot of outreach work in my spare time, and people find black holes really interesting so it's a popular topic. So my website has the usual CV, publications, etc but there are also a few sections dedicated more to sharing my work for people who can't just take a class or sit in on a talk. Whenever I give a background talk to a lay audience, the slides and a rough transcript go up on the site. As do posters, once the paper is submitted. Also lots of simulations. Edit: and luckily I am probably the only person in the world with my name, so everything is up for grabs in terms of websites and usernames!
RESPONSE B: My personal website is what I would expect people to see first. Both academic and industry audiences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do you have a personal website? How is it branded and what do you put on it? I currently do have a personal website but it's more positioned towards my creative works but I think it's time I should have a more 'biographical' site of sorts. Unfortunately, I have an extremely common name and unless I change my name, there's no way I can find a good domain for it. I even just tried search [name]phd.com and some guy in China owns it. I also am not sure what I should put on it right now, since I'm not done with my PhD yet. How do you position your personal site? I don't think there's a rule against it so share your link, if you don't mind.
RESPONSE A: Mine is under my name, has sections for news, research, teaching and a CV. Research section also features my lab/students and their work.
RESPONSE B: I do a lot of outreach work in my spare time, and people find black holes really interesting so it's a popular topic. So my website has the usual CV, publications, etc but there are also a few sections dedicated more to sharing my work for people who can't just take a class or sit in on a talk. Whenever I give a background talk to a lay audience, the slides and a rough transcript go up on the site. As do posters, once the paper is submitted. Also lots of simulations. Edit: and luckily I am probably the only person in the world with my name, so everything is up for grabs in terms of websites and usernames!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you have a personal website? How is it branded and what do you put on it? I currently do have a personal website but it's more positioned towards my creative works but I think it's time I should have a more 'biographical' site of sorts. Unfortunately, I have an extremely common name and unless I change my name, there's no way I can find a good domain for it. I even just tried search [name]phd.com and some guy in China owns it. I also am not sure what I should put on it right now, since I'm not done with my PhD yet. How do you position your personal site? I don't think there's a rule against it so share your link, if you don't mind.
RESPONSE A: I do a lot of outreach work in my spare time, and people find black holes really interesting so it's a popular topic. So my website has the usual CV, publications, etc but there are also a few sections dedicated more to sharing my work for people who can't just take a class or sit in on a talk. Whenever I give a background talk to a lay audience, the slides and a rough transcript go up on the site. As do posters, once the paper is submitted. Also lots of simulations. Edit: and luckily I am probably the only person in the world with my name, so everything is up for grabs in terms of websites and usernames!
RESPONSE B: it's a must. cv. research description, links to papers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do you have a personal website? How is it branded and what do you put on it? I currently do have a personal website but it's more positioned towards my creative works but I think it's time I should have a more 'biographical' site of sorts. Unfortunately, I have an extremely common name and unless I change my name, there's no way I can find a good domain for it. I even just tried search [name]phd.com and some guy in China owns it. I also am not sure what I should put on it right now, since I'm not done with my PhD yet. How do you position your personal site? I don't think there's a rule against it so share your link, if you don't mind.
RESPONSE A: it's a must. cv. research description, links to papers.
RESPONSE B: My personal website is what I would expect people to see first. Both academic and industry audiences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you have a personal website? How is it branded and what do you put on it? I currently do have a personal website but it's more positioned towards my creative works but I think it's time I should have a more 'biographical' site of sorts. Unfortunately, I have an extremely common name and unless I change my name, there's no way I can find a good domain for it. I even just tried search [name]phd.com and some guy in China owns it. I also am not sure what I should put on it right now, since I'm not done with my PhD yet. How do you position your personal site? I don't think there's a rule against it so share your link, if you don't mind.
RESPONSE A: Mine is under my name, has sections for news, research, teaching and a CV. Research section also features my lab/students and their work.
RESPONSE B: it's a must. cv. research description, links to papers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are legitimate reasons for students to use their personal, rather than university, email accounts? I'm affiliated with two universities, one British and one American. Both mandate students to email from their university email accounts. Some students don't. When I emailed them to ask why, one student replied >Sorry for the inconvenience. I prefer to use my personal, rather than university, email account because of personal issues. I have no interest or plan in emailing back to ferret out what this student's "personal issues" are. I'm just asking this at large and out of curiosity. What rightful reasons could prevent a student from using a university email, but not a @gmail.com? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: I can't imagine a personal issue warranting the avoidance of using (what is in effect) professional communication means for professional matters. Let's face it, in a few years this excuse won't fly when this student is in the workplace. My best guess is that they just don't know how to sync up two email accounts to a single mail application, so they're just using their personal one and trying to fob you off with "personal issues" so that you don't probe further. If I were in your position, I would reply with something like: > While this might be your preference, university regulations require you to use your university email account. If you have a need for accommodations on this issue, I suggest you contact (whichever office at your institution handles accommodations) to arrange them. And if I was being a hard-ass I'd add a "Without such accommodations I will only respond to correspondence sent via your university email, as per regulations". Now, if someone else can think of a valid reason for this I'll probably feel bad for taking such a hard line, but it really seems nonsensical to me. ------------------------------------------------ You might want to try asking this at r/college or r/UniUK to get more undergrad opinions though.
RESPONSE B: Some universities do not keep a student’s email active after they graduate. A personal email address maintains continuity.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are legitimate reasons for students to use their personal, rather than university, email accounts? I'm affiliated with two universities, one British and one American. Both mandate students to email from their university email accounts. Some students don't. When I emailed them to ask why, one student replied >Sorry for the inconvenience. I prefer to use my personal, rather than university, email account because of personal issues. I have no interest or plan in emailing back to ferret out what this student's "personal issues" are. I'm just asking this at large and out of curiosity. What rightful reasons could prevent a student from using a university email, but not a @gmail.com? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Some universities do have a IP provision in the user agreements that give them claim to anything in your university email/share drives. I knew a few artists and business people who used their personal email to prevent mixing for that reason. On a practical level it's something no university is truly going to enforce. If they do it means you hit it big (congratulations on being a billionaire), I'm sure a nasty gram from a lawyer or a relatively small donation will get them to back down. So this is a really stupid reason to be so paranoid. All that said in industry it's smart to not mix personal and professional emails which is something that people in university tend to do. So maybe this is a poor attempt at being "professional". Since emailing your professor about homework is definitely the proper venue for your university email to be used.
RESPONSE B: Some universities do not keep a student’s email active after they graduate. A personal email address maintains continuity.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are legitimate reasons for students to use their personal, rather than university, email accounts? I'm affiliated with two universities, one British and one American. Both mandate students to email from their university email accounts. Some students don't. When I emailed them to ask why, one student replied >Sorry for the inconvenience. I prefer to use my personal, rather than university, email account because of personal issues. I have no interest or plan in emailing back to ferret out what this student's "personal issues" are. I'm just asking this at large and out of curiosity. What rightful reasons could prevent a student from using a university email, but not a @gmail.com? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Some universities do not keep a student’s email active after they graduate. A personal email address maintains continuity.
RESPONSE B: Honestly I think it's because they haven't entered the professional environment and they've been using their personal account for everything to date and don't want to change. Once they hit work and discover they absolutely cannot use personal email accounts (and hopefully won't want to) they'll get used to running two email accounts. Or they'll just use their work account for everything until they discover how embarrassing that can be if your employer has cause to look at your emails.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: rather than university, email accounts? I'm affiliated with two universities, one British and one American. Both mandate students to email from their university email accounts. Some students don't. When I emailed them to ask why, one student replied >Sorry for the inconvenience. I prefer to use my personal, rather than university, email account because of personal issues. I have no interest or plan in emailing back to ferret out what this student's "personal issues" are. I'm just asking this at large and out of curiosity. What rightful reasons could prevent a student from using a university email, but not a @gmail.com? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Another thing might be name preference. If a university requires use of a legal name (which may be a dead name), but students prefer to use a different name, that could be a reason.
RESPONSE B: I can't imagine a personal issue warranting the avoidance of using (what is in effect) professional communication means for professional matters. Let's face it, in a few years this excuse won't fly when this student is in the workplace. My best guess is that they just don't know how to sync up two email accounts to a single mail application, so they're just using their personal one and trying to fob you off with "personal issues" so that you don't probe further. If I were in your position, I would reply with something like: > While this might be your preference, university regulations require you to use your university email account. If you have a need for accommodations on this issue, I suggest you contact (whichever office at your institution handles accommodations) to arrange them. And if I was being a hard-ass I'd add a "Without such accommodations I will only respond to correspondence sent via your university email, as per regulations". Now, if someone else can think of a valid reason for this I'll probably feel bad for taking such a hard line, but it really seems nonsensical to me. ------------------------------------------------ You might want to try asking this at r/college or r/UniUK to get more undergrad opinions though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: straight out of undergrad and I barely knew what I was getting into. I learned about prelims, dissertation, rotations, etc. at my orientation for this program. The reason I chose PhD during my undergrad was because I was a bio major who dropped Pre-med. I did not know what else I could pursue without disappointing my family. I saw PhD as the most obvious answer at the time because I would have had an "easy-in" because of my PI at the time (he is a well-known professor in his area of research). When I was writing my essays for the four schools I applied to, I faked my reasonings as to why I wanted this degree. I just took what I heard from others and put it into my essays. I even remember going to my professor's office nearly in tears because I never felt the "passion" for science that he always talked about. I thought that I could just ride this wave until I got in and maybe figure it out from there. Well, I got to school and met my wonderful cohort. They are the brightest individuals I have ever met. I am so grateful for them, but I realized how passionate they are about the science they are doing. Each conversation I have with them makes me think of why I am even here. Are these reasons valid? Am I making the right choice to drop out? I know it is not a matter of under/poor performance because my grades and lab work have been fine. I am just extremely unhappy and feel like I am not pursuing this degree for myself.
RESPONSE A: Very clear-sighted of you! If you're feeling now like you should drop it, absolutely do it. No shame, I'm proud of you, but do it if you feel that strongly. The first year is the most fun, and it turns to a grind after that. It can be an enjoyable grind, but you have to want to be there to survive it. Take your mental health and flee!
RESPONSE B: Yeah, don't do it. PhDs are hard enough when they are what you want to do. If you have serious doubts now it's not going to get easier. Only thing is what are your chances of doing consultancy straight out of a degree? I'd test the waters a little first before quitting.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: what I was getting into. I learned about prelims, dissertation, rotations, etc. at my orientation for this program. The reason I chose PhD during my undergrad was because I was a bio major who dropped Pre-med. I did not know what else I could pursue without disappointing my family. I saw PhD as the most obvious answer at the time because I would have had an "easy-in" because of my PI at the time (he is a well-known professor in his area of research). When I was writing my essays for the four schools I applied to, I faked my reasonings as to why I wanted this degree. I just took what I heard from others and put it into my essays. I even remember going to my professor's office nearly in tears because I never felt the "passion" for science that he always talked about. I thought that I could just ride this wave until I got in and maybe figure it out from there. Well, I got to school and met my wonderful cohort. They are the brightest individuals I have ever met. I am so grateful for them, but I realized how passionate they are about the science they are doing. Each conversation I have with them makes me think of why I am even here. Are these reasons valid? Am I making the right choice to drop out? I know it is not a matter of under/poor performance because my grades and lab work have been fine. I am just extremely unhappy and feel like I am not pursuing this degree for myself.
RESPONSE A: Yeah, don't do it. PhDs are hard enough when they are what you want to do. If you have serious doubts now it's not going to get easier. Only thing is what are your chances of doing consultancy straight out of a degree? I'd test the waters a little first before quitting.
RESPONSE B: Absolutely. These are all excellent reasons to go and see if you can find your passion elsewhere, and earn a proper salary while you do. I suspect if you stay you will become increasingly unhappy, and life's too short. As soon as you are earning money make sure you start contributing to a retirement account. My biggest regret from doing my PhD is starting that so far behind my peers. Compound interest really rewards those who start saving earlier. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: . at my orientation for this program. The reason I chose PhD during my undergrad was because I was a bio major who dropped Pre-med. I did not know what else I could pursue without disappointing my family. I saw PhD as the most obvious answer at the time because I would have had an "easy-in" because of my PI at the time (he is a well-known professor in his area of research). When I was writing my essays for the four schools I applied to, I faked my reasonings as to why I wanted this degree. I just took what I heard from others and put it into my essays. I even remember going to my professor's office nearly in tears because I never felt the "passion" for science that he always talked about. I thought that I could just ride this wave until I got in and maybe figure it out from there. Well, I got to school and met my wonderful cohort. They are the brightest individuals I have ever met. I am so grateful for them, but I realized how passionate they are about the science they are doing. Each conversation I have with them makes me think of why I am even here. Are these reasons valid? Am I making the right choice to drop out? I know it is not a matter of under/poor performance because my grades and lab work have been fine. I am just extremely unhappy and feel like I am not pursuing this degree for myself.
RESPONSE A: Very clear-sighted of you! If you're feeling now like you should drop it, absolutely do it. No shame, I'm proud of you, but do it if you feel that strongly. The first year is the most fun, and it turns to a grind after that. It can be an enjoyable grind, but you have to want to be there to survive it. Take your mental health and flee!
RESPONSE B: Absolutely. These are all excellent reasons to go and see if you can find your passion elsewhere, and earn a proper salary while you do. I suspect if you stay you will become increasingly unhappy, and life's too short. As soon as you are earning money make sure you start contributing to a retirement account. My biggest regret from doing my PhD is starting that so far behind my peers. Compound interest really rewards those who start saving earlier. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: the impression that that will give me enough status to do important career-development things like participate on graduate committees and apply for external grants -- in other words, not be a dead weight but actually help drive the project forward. I'm curious about how adjunct status is awarded and what it normally involves at a Canadian university. I would be surprised if it's something that can be given out like a sticker to any Jane or Joe Collaborator, but the details available are extremely vague. Thanks in advance.
RESPONSE A: I've never heard the word adjunct used in reference to Canadian academia. Of course, our universities also have short-term contract faculty, in BC the categories for contract faculty are: "sessional" (very short term - ie one course at a time) and "limited term" (typically 8-months of a full course load). Having said all of that, your premise is confusing me, perhaps because I'm not in your area. As far as I know you can do credible research without holding any academic position, and you would not be "dead weight" on the project - as long as you are working hard and contributing, I'm sure your collaborators will be happy to have your help.
RESPONSE B: Yes, adjunct appointment is a thing and it's actually quite common. For example, a quick Google search shows that the Universities of Calgary, Toronto, and BC all offer "Adjunct Appointments". See more information here and here and here. In short, adjunct faculty appointments are granted to people who are primarily working outside a university but have some special professional skill or learning of value. I know, and work with, many adjunct faculty in ecology. They typically work for the government or as consultants, but are involved in research with university labs, even so far as to lecture and be on students' committees. It's a great way to maintain your standing as a professional in the industry, but also stay involved in academic research. And it's very different from being a "Sessional"; I'm a sessional lecturer and my responsibilities are limited to contract teaching on a semester-to-semester basis, and don't include any kind of official supervisory duties.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: locating for. Ideally, I'd like to end up with a permanent position at a good teaching college, rather than at a big research university. With that in mind, how do I decide which positions will help me get there?
RESPONSE A: This varies by institution and there is no standard for the US as a whole. Generally speaking though, these are the conventions: * **adjunct:** short term (<3 yrs) and often only 1-2 courses * **adjunct assistant prof**: usually full time, term (1-3 years) * **lecturer:** generally a part time instructor lacking the terminal degree (i.e. ABD), can be long term in some institutions (esp. in fine arts where people have other careers on the side) * **visting lecturer**: temporary instructor lacking terminal degree * **instructor**: generally the same as lecturer * **visiting assistant professor**: similar to adjunct assistant professor, temporary position * **assistant professor**: first step on the tenure track for ranked faculty These lines have become blurred at many institutions, especially those that keep adjuncts around forever, as tenure has eroded. There are also things like "adjunct associate professor" in some places, used for senior scholars who work elsewhere but are teaching a course or two; these include things like practicing lawyers who teach courses like real estate law once a year and are given rank due to their long experience (higher rank equals higher compensation). It's also true that every school makes up its own categories for everything below assistant. I worked at multiple schools teaching anything from one course for a single semester to a full time, two year appointment, all under the title "adjunct instructor" while ABD. I also taught single courses as a Visiting Instructor and Adjunct Assistant Professor during that time. Basically anything below assistant professor is temporary and hold little chance of becoming permanent.
RESPONSE B: <-grad student, take that in heed Imo: Lecturer/Visiting Lecturer/Adjunct are all the same thing to me. Someone hired to teach and probably contingent. Assistant: depends on what follows. Assistant Professors are entry level tenure track positions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Lecturer, visiting lecturer, adjunct, assistant, what does it all mean? Can someone please explain to all the different titles to me. I am recently graduated, have more teaching experience than most freshly minted PhDs, and am having a hard time figuring out which jobs are worth applying for or relocating for. Ideally, I'd like to end up with a permanent position at a good teaching college, rather than at a big research university. With that in mind, how do I decide which positions will help me get there?
RESPONSE A: The lower and more temporary the position, the higher level university I would aim for. It will be much be more difficult to go from a temporary CC position to a permanent position at a teaching college, compared to moving from temporary position at a highly regarded school to a permanent position at a school with similar or lesser status. Also in my experience VAP positions are more like postdocs and are likely to have better status and salary compared to adjunct. Neither visiting or adjunct positions are likely to lead to a permanent position in the same place, so be prepared to move again.
RESPONSE B: <-grad student, take that in heed Imo: Lecturer/Visiting Lecturer/Adjunct are all the same thing to me. Someone hired to teach and probably contingent. Assistant: depends on what follows. Assistant Professors are entry level tenure track positions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it appropriate to get gifts for your PI and grad mentors? I am a graduating senior and worked in a lab for 4 years. I'd like to buy a watch for the PI, fancy pen set and soap bar for the two graduate students that mentored me along with handwritten thank you notes All the gifts are 25 or under.
RESPONSE A: In my university a staff has to declare a gift if it's value exceeds $100AUD. I try to gift well below that, and only when formal arrangements end.
RESPONSE B: I think I would do something a little less personal, and perhaps less expensive. Same gifts for everyone, imo. Do not get your PI a watch. My summer research mentee gifted me and our PI a tiny succulent and a thank you card at the end of the summer, and that was the perfect scale of gift. I would have been uncomfortable with more, but I love my little desk plant. You can’t ever go wrong with chocolates or a $5 coffee shop gift card.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it appropriate to get gifts for your PI and grad mentors? I am a graduating senior and worked in a lab for 4 years. I'd like to buy a watch for the PI, fancy pen set and soap bar for the two graduate students that mentored me along with handwritten thank you notes All the gifts are 25 or under.
RESPONSE A: Don’t go nuts. Anything over about $50 they’d probably have to report to admin. Keep it simpler. As a prof, I’d much rather get a heartfelt letter than an expensive gift.
RESPONSE B: In my university a staff has to declare a gift if it's value exceeds $100AUD. I try to gift well below that, and only when formal arrangements end.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it appropriate to get gifts for your PI and grad mentors? I am a graduating senior and worked in a lab for 4 years. I'd like to buy a watch for the PI, fancy pen set and soap bar for the two graduate students that mentored me along with handwritten thank you notes All the gifts are 25 or under.
RESPONSE A: The soap is an odd gift unless you really know that someone is into fancy soaps.
RESPONSE B: In my university a staff has to declare a gift if it's value exceeds $100AUD. I try to gift well below that, and only when formal arrangements end.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it appropriate to get gifts for your PI and grad mentors? I am a graduating senior and worked in a lab for 4 years. I'd like to buy a watch for the PI, fancy pen set and soap bar for the two graduate students that mentored me along with handwritten thank you notes All the gifts are 25 or under.
RESPONSE A: Don't do this. Small gifts (eg mug) are fine anything more is inappropriate and also may be in breach of your university's policies on recieving gifts. Also buying soap is kind of the gift that women constantly get given while men get good shit like wine. I can't recommend ever giving soap or toiletries as a workplace gift. Give them a thank you card with a note and small gift like a mug, lower end wine (not $100) or chocolates and ideally give everyone a roughly equal gift. I know the grad students are lower and did less but there's nothing like someone massively signalling the importance they put on hierarchy with money. Your boss earns a lot more than the grad students. Gifting up is always problematic, it's even more problematic when you then get the lower staff something very small. Please just don't do what you're proposing, it's a recipe for a lot of awkwardness and some hurt feelings.
RESPONSE B: In my university a staff has to declare a gift if it's value exceeds $100AUD. I try to gift well below that, and only when formal arrangements end.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can there be any consequences for using inappropriate nickname during "competition" during lecture? During the lecture, lecturer had a 20-min competition for us to refresh our knowledge of the semester so far. We had to log-in to a web-app, use ref.code and choose a random nickname. I chose my nickname to be "RollingWeed", i got into leaderboard top 2 or top 3 i think, and on-screen monitor was showing top 10 people after each round. The lecturer was pissed that there as this nickname, when everyone esle's was pretty normal nickname or something " Mathias B.". She said she'll figure out who had this nickname and there will be consequences for that person. I am just thinking that there is nothing i did wrong, i mean yes, if i could go back in time i would use normal nickname, its just that its my nickname everywhere and i did not think twice before making it during the lecture..
RESPONSE A: I think your nickname is hilarious, but perhaps even funnier that you didn't think about this scenario happening before you used it in a formal setting...
RESPONSE B: Much ado about nothing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Can there be any consequences for using inappropriate nickname during "competition" during lecture? During the lecture, lecturer had a 20-min competition for us to refresh our knowledge of the semester so far. We had to log-in to a web-app, use ref.code and choose a random nickname. I chose my nickname to be "RollingWeed", i got into leaderboard top 2 or top 3 i think, and on-screen monitor was showing top 10 people after each round. The lecturer was pissed that there as this nickname, when everyone esle's was pretty normal nickname or something " Mathias B.". She said she'll figure out who had this nickname and there will be consequences for that person. I am just thinking that there is nothing i did wrong, i mean yes, if i could go back in time i would use normal nickname, its just that its my nickname everywhere and i did not think twice before making it during the lecture..
RESPONSE A: I would say yes, there can be consequences because your lecturer found it inappropriate. If she expects a more professional environment then you should respect it. It seems like it was just a lapse in judgment on your part. I would say the right thing is to tell her it was you, apologize, and explain that you realized it was poor decision. But... also I don't think she can realistically figure out it was you unless part of that login had something that could identify you. It's up to you if you want to confess. I almost expect that the consequence would be points off an upcoming grade.
RESPONSE B: I think your nickname is hilarious, but perhaps even funnier that you didn't think about this scenario happening before you used it in a formal setting...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: consequences for using inappropriate nickname during "competition" during lecture? During the lecture, lecturer had a 20-min competition for us to refresh our knowledge of the semester so far. We had to log-in to a web-app, use ref.code and choose a random nickname. I chose my nickname to be "RollingWeed", i got into leaderboard top 2 or top 3 i think, and on-screen monitor was showing top 10 people after each round. The lecturer was pissed that there as this nickname, when everyone esle's was pretty normal nickname or something " Mathias B.". She said she'll figure out who had this nickname and there will be consequences for that person. I am just thinking that there is nothing i did wrong, i mean yes, if i could go back in time i would use normal nickname, its just that its my nickname everywhere and i did not think twice before making it during the lecture..
RESPONSE A: I think your nickname is hilarious, but perhaps even funnier that you didn't think about this scenario happening before you used it in a formal setting...
RESPONSE B: It depends on your school's policies. She could probably unilaterally give you a zero for the assignment or for the day's attendance and I doubt you'd find a dean willing to overturn it. She also might be able to submit a report to your program/dean for disorderly conduct, and the "consequence" would probably be a stern talking to with a senior faculty member about the need to be professional in academic settings. Theoretically, drug references could violate a student code of conduct/morality clause and jeopardize your standing at the university if you're at a super conservative/religious school, but that would be extreme/unlikely. The biggest consequence is that you have killed your ability to use this person as a reference in the future. And if professors in your department are the type to agree with her that this was a gross display of immaturity, it could harm your reputation among other faculty as well. Or maybe no one will care. It's impossible for us to know.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Can there be any consequences for using inappropriate nickname during "competition" during lecture? During the lecture, lecturer had a 20-min competition for us to refresh our knowledge of the semester so far. We had to log-in to a web-app, use ref.code and choose a random nickname. I chose my nickname to be "RollingWeed", i got into leaderboard top 2 or top 3 i think, and on-screen monitor was showing top 10 people after each round. The lecturer was pissed that there as this nickname, when everyone esle's was pretty normal nickname or something " Mathias B.". She said she'll figure out who had this nickname and there will be consequences for that person. I am just thinking that there is nothing i did wrong, i mean yes, if i could go back in time i would use normal nickname, its just that its my nickname everywhere and i did not think twice before making it during the lecture..
RESPONSE A: I would say yes, there can be consequences because your lecturer found it inappropriate. If she expects a more professional environment then you should respect it. It seems like it was just a lapse in judgment on your part. I would say the right thing is to tell her it was you, apologize, and explain that you realized it was poor decision. But... also I don't think she can realistically figure out it was you unless part of that login had something that could identify you. It's up to you if you want to confess. I almost expect that the consequence would be points off an upcoming grade.
RESPONSE B: Just say you’re super concerned about invasive tumble weeds, and you just want to raise awareness?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Can there be any consequences for using inappropriate nickname during "competition" during lecture? During the lecture, lecturer had a 20-min competition for us to refresh our knowledge of the semester so far. We had to log-in to a web-app, use ref.code and choose a random nickname. I chose my nickname to be "RollingWeed", i got into leaderboard top 2 or top 3 i think, and on-screen monitor was showing top 10 people after each round. The lecturer was pissed that there as this nickname, when everyone esle's was pretty normal nickname or something " Mathias B.". She said she'll figure out who had this nickname and there will be consequences for that person. I am just thinking that there is nothing i did wrong, i mean yes, if i could go back in time i would use normal nickname, its just that its my nickname everywhere and i did not think twice before making it during the lecture..
RESPONSE A: It depends on your school's policies. She could probably unilaterally give you a zero for the assignment or for the day's attendance and I doubt you'd find a dean willing to overturn it. She also might be able to submit a report to your program/dean for disorderly conduct, and the "consequence" would probably be a stern talking to with a senior faculty member about the need to be professional in academic settings. Theoretically, drug references could violate a student code of conduct/morality clause and jeopardize your standing at the university if you're at a super conservative/religious school, but that would be extreme/unlikely. The biggest consequence is that you have killed your ability to use this person as a reference in the future. And if professors in your department are the type to agree with her that this was a gross display of immaturity, it could harm your reputation among other faculty as well. Or maybe no one will care. It's impossible for us to know.
RESPONSE B: Just say you’re super concerned about invasive tumble weeds, and you just want to raise awareness?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: have and the curve can admittedly help me, but this guy is choosing to stand on the heads of people around him to make sure he doesn't drown. It also waters down the meaning of my grade that I worked hard for - it's less impressive to say "I got an A in XYZ" when the person right next to you can say it even though they didn't work for it. I know that he is looking at trying for the same place I am for internships which also makes me upset because they'd think we performed equally well in this course when he didn't do a tenth of the work I did. I don't want to be a jerk and immediately throw him under the bus by dropping his name to the prof./administration but I also don't think approaching him directly would resolve anything because I think he'd keep doing it regardless. What should I do?
RESPONSE A: You are not doing anything wrong by telling them a student is cheating. They would not tolerate any plagiarism, so why is this any different.
RESPONSE B: People that are saying the cheater's actions will eventually catch up to them aren't living in the real world. People who are good at cheating don't get caught, and when they do get caught, they somehow figure out how to spin it into a win for themselves. I had a student I was a TA for who I caught cheating severely. So did a few other TAs. We tried to get the disciplinary board involved, school didn't want to do it (looks bad when your grad students get caught cheating), so they asked him to leave. He did, and wound up getting admitted to a higher ranked subfield in our program. Last I had checked he made it through classes there and was working his degree. Given his attitude and reaction after being caught, I would never trust his research results aren't faked. A few people I knew in undergrad I had suspicions of cheating and got positive confirmation later on. Most of them made it through very high ranked PhD programs and are, so far at least, doing very well in high paying careers. Look at plenty of people in our highest offices. Karma doesn't exist.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: About to submit a paper, but only have negative feelings, normal? Hi r/AskAcademia, I am a final year PhD students and about to submit two papers. I know so much work has gone into them. However, like an iceberg, the work I'm presenting is only a small aspect of all the total work I put into it. Nevertheless, I look at the final product and it feels like it could be so much better, but I don't have any more time. I'm going to submit the papers anyway, but I don't exactly feel proud of the work. Just proud that I did it. Is this a common feeling?
RESPONSE A: Week ago submitted my 8th paper. Had the same feelings. But at some point you need just to stop and send it.
RESPONSE B: Just published a first-author paper and at the time of submission, I couldn't feel any more embarrassed about it. I would literally have reoccurring nightmares about publishing it because I knew it inside and out, weak points and all. However, I started getting citations and positive feedback from colleagues including two of the scientists I respect most in my field. I still think the paper could've been so much better but at least now I'm content with what I accomplished. Sometimes we're our own worst critics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: About to submit a paper, but only have negative feelings, normal? Hi r/AskAcademia, I am a final year PhD students and about to submit two papers. I know so much work has gone into them. However, like an iceberg, the work I'm presenting is only a small aspect of all the total work I put into it. Nevertheless, I look at the final product and it feels like it could be so much better, but I don't have any more time. I'm going to submit the papers anyway, but I don't exactly feel proud of the work. Just proud that I did it. Is this a common feeling?
RESPONSE A: Just published a first-author paper and at the time of submission, I couldn't feel any more embarrassed about it. I would literally have reoccurring nightmares about publishing it because I knew it inside and out, weak points and all. However, I started getting citations and positive feedback from colleagues including two of the scientists I respect most in my field. I still think the paper could've been so much better but at least now I'm content with what I accomplished. Sometimes we're our own worst critics.
RESPONSE B: I have 53 papers in print with a 54th in review and 3 more in advanced prep stages and I feel this way about EVERY SINGLE ONE of them. Published is better than perfect. You’ll feel prouder over time as people cite it and you can make works that build on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: About to submit a paper, but only have negative feelings, normal? Hi r/AskAcademia, I am a final year PhD students and about to submit two papers. I know so much work has gone into them. However, like an iceberg, the work I'm presenting is only a small aspect of all the total work I put into it. Nevertheless, I look at the final product and it feels like it could be so much better, but I don't have any more time. I'm going to submit the papers anyway, but I don't exactly feel proud of the work. Just proud that I did it. Is this a common feeling?
RESPONSE A: Just published a first-author paper and at the time of submission, I couldn't feel any more embarrassed about it. I would literally have reoccurring nightmares about publishing it because I knew it inside and out, weak points and all. However, I started getting citations and positive feedback from colleagues including two of the scientists I respect most in my field. I still think the paper could've been so much better but at least now I'm content with what I accomplished. Sometimes we're our own worst critics.
RESPONSE B: That is normal. Trust yourself.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: About to submit a paper, but only have negative feelings, normal? Hi r/AskAcademia, I am a final year PhD students and about to submit two papers. I know so much work has gone into them. However, like an iceberg, the work I'm presenting is only a small aspect of all the total work I put into it. Nevertheless, I look at the final product and it feels like it could be so much better, but I don't have any more time. I'm going to submit the papers anyway, but I don't exactly feel proud of the work. Just proud that I did it. Is this a common feeling?
RESPONSE A: This is how I know to submit
RESPONSE B: Just published a first-author paper and at the time of submission, I couldn't feel any more embarrassed about it. I would literally have reoccurring nightmares about publishing it because I knew it inside and out, weak points and all. However, I started getting citations and positive feedback from colleagues including two of the scientists I respect most in my field. I still think the paper could've been so much better but at least now I'm content with what I accomplished. Sometimes we're our own worst critics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: About to submit a paper, but only have negative feelings, normal? Hi r/AskAcademia, I am a final year PhD students and about to submit two papers. I know so much work has gone into them. However, like an iceberg, the work I'm presenting is only a small aspect of all the total work I put into it. Nevertheless, I look at the final product and it feels like it could be so much better, but I don't have any more time. I'm going to submit the papers anyway, but I don't exactly feel proud of the work. Just proud that I did it. Is this a common feeling?
RESPONSE A: Week ago submitted my 8th paper. Had the same feelings. But at some point you need just to stop and send it.
RESPONSE B: You don't submit papers when you're proud of them. If you wait for that, you'll never submit nothing. Rather, you submit papers when you're no longer ashamed of them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Papers to write, but I hate writing papers. Does anyone have any recommendations for overcoming my procrastination on writing journal articles? I'm a decently published author at this point (mid-career), but I'm terribly slow at the process. I have about a dozen papers/manuscripts in my backlog that I think I could finish. Papers just take forever for me to write. I understand the process, but every time I have an opportunity to work on them, I just find something else to do. I could use some advice beyond "make an outline and just fill it in" or "start with the figures and tables, and then do the materials and methods section"... how did you overcome scientific writer's block?
RESPONSE A: I am not a proficient author by any means but I had the worst problems with being slow at writing and having writer's block for most of my short academic life. I eventually overcame it though, and what solved it for me is a piece of advice I heard from TV show writer Dan Harmon, which I will try to paraphrase from memory: "Try to prove to yourself how bad of a writer you are. Your issue is that you are trying to prove that you are a good writer, which you want to be, and which you will be, by writing more. But it's slowing you down, it's not helping you right now, because the only way to get better at writing, is by writing more. If you set out with the goal to prove yourself how much of a shitty writer you can be, you will write more, and eventually become a good writer. It's cheating, it's like putting dog shit in your gas tank, it's not supposed to work, but it's good advice."
RESPONSE B: Does your institution have a writing coach?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: keep her as my advisor I’m worried she won’t write me a positive letter, and if I switch advisors I’m worried that the other advisor won’t have a chance to write a letter for me. I’ve been in contact with the department chair and the grad student coordinator and they told me that there really isn’t a good option going forward. So I’m not sure what to do. This relationship has caused me a ton of stress and prevents me from sleeping and has actually caused me to have physical illness in my interactions with her. I’ve tried to do everything I can think of to maintain a positive relationship with her but she seems unwilling to do so. She has also, in the past, been prevented from having graduate students for over 20 years. There was apparently an issue with her and a graduate student and they decided in favor of the student. I’m her first graduate student since then. I’m just not sure she understands how to be an advisor. As it stands it’s been over a year since she’s read any of my work on my dissertation. It’s really disappointing because I think she’s absolutely brilliant and she’s an amazing writer. But her interactions with me have just made graduate school much harder. TL;DR: My advisor told me to drop out, recommended me drugs, regularly insults me and refuses to let me have a co-advisor. And I need a letter for 6th year funding next week.
RESPONSE A: Yooo just switch advisors and gtfo of there. If that other person (the potential new co-advisor) will take you on full time as your advisor, run, do not walk, into that opportunity. Never deal with your old advisor ever again if possible, and don't even have her on your committee if you can swing it. The grievances you speak of with your current advisor range from completely negligible to absolutely abusive, which suggests to me that there are probably many other things that have happened that you didn't have the time to write about here. You gotta get out of there.
RESPONSE B: So, did you know you wrote 1315 words? Do that daily and finish the PhD and get outta there!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: was completely willing to work with her despite all of the insults she hurls at me. But the way she responded to my e-mail with even more insults finally made me decide that I want to switch advisors because I don’t think I can ever have a positive relationship with her after all of this. But the problem is I’m applying for 6th year funding and I need a letter from my advisor. If I keep her as my advisor I’m worried she won’t write me a positive letter, and if I switch advisors I’m worried that the other advisor won’t have a chance to write a letter for me. I’ve been in contact with the department chair and the grad student coordinator and they told me that there really isn’t a good option going forward. So I’m not sure what to do. This relationship has caused me a ton of stress and prevents me from sleeping and has actually caused me to have physical illness in my interactions with her. I’ve tried to do everything I can think of to maintain a positive relationship with her but she seems unwilling to do so. She has also, in the past, been prevented from having graduate students for over 20 years. There was apparently an issue with her and a graduate student and they decided in favor of the student. I’m her first graduate student since then. I’m just not sure she understands how to be an advisor. As it stands it’s been over a year since she’s read any of my work on my dissertation. It’s really disappointing because I think she’s absolutely brilliant and she’s an amazing writer. But her interactions with me have just made graduate school much harder. TL;DR: My advisor told me to drop out, recommended me drugs, regularly insults me and refuses to let me have a co-advisor. And I need a letter for 6th year funding next week.
RESPONSE A: So, did you know you wrote 1315 words? Do that daily and finish the PhD and get outta there!
RESPONSE B: Why haven't you switched? I'm a little confused: you keep saying you're willing to have her as your advisor, you should just switch!!! This is bananas.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: the way she responded to my e-mail with even more insults finally made me decide that I want to switch advisors because I don’t think I can ever have a positive relationship with her after all of this. But the problem is I’m applying for 6th year funding and I need a letter from my advisor. If I keep her as my advisor I’m worried she won’t write me a positive letter, and if I switch advisors I’m worried that the other advisor won’t have a chance to write a letter for me. I’ve been in contact with the department chair and the grad student coordinator and they told me that there really isn’t a good option going forward. So I’m not sure what to do. This relationship has caused me a ton of stress and prevents me from sleeping and has actually caused me to have physical illness in my interactions with her. I’ve tried to do everything I can think of to maintain a positive relationship with her but she seems unwilling to do so. She has also, in the past, been prevented from having graduate students for over 20 years. There was apparently an issue with her and a graduate student and they decided in favor of the student. I’m her first graduate student since then. I’m just not sure she understands how to be an advisor. As it stands it’s been over a year since she’s read any of my work on my dissertation. It’s really disappointing because I think she’s absolutely brilliant and she’s an amazing writer. But her interactions with me have just made graduate school much harder. TL;DR: My advisor told me to drop out, recommended me drugs, regularly insults me and refuses to let me have a co-advisor. And I need a letter for 6th year funding next week.
RESPONSE A: Switch advisors. Document the abuse. Get that PhD. Then put it out there so others in the field know to never, ever let her advise their students. And so other students know about this. This is abuse.
RESPONSE B: She sounds like a high conflict person. Supposing you were able to get the letter you need to retain your funding -- then would you be able to switch advisors without any penalty?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: of this. But the problem is I’m applying for 6th year funding and I need a letter from my advisor. If I keep her as my advisor I’m worried she won’t write me a positive letter, and if I switch advisors I’m worried that the other advisor won’t have a chance to write a letter for me. I’ve been in contact with the department chair and the grad student coordinator and they told me that there really isn’t a good option going forward. So I’m not sure what to do. This relationship has caused me a ton of stress and prevents me from sleeping and has actually caused me to have physical illness in my interactions with her. I’ve tried to do everything I can think of to maintain a positive relationship with her but she seems unwilling to do so. She has also, in the past, been prevented from having graduate students for over 20 years. There was apparently an issue with her and a graduate student and they decided in favor of the student. I’m her first graduate student since then. I’m just not sure she understands how to be an advisor. As it stands it’s been over a year since she’s read any of my work on my dissertation. It’s really disappointing because I think she’s absolutely brilliant and she’s an amazing writer. But her interactions with me have just made graduate school much harder. TL;DR: My advisor told me to drop out, recommended me drugs, regularly insults me and refuses to let me have a co-advisor. And I need a letter for 6th year funding next week.
RESPONSE A: She sounds like a high conflict person. Supposing you were able to get the letter you need to retain your funding -- then would you be able to switch advisors without any penalty?
RESPONSE B: This disgusts me. All I can think of is that she has some issue with you stemming from some personality defect of her own. You need to get away from her somehow. You need SO MUCH more support--from other faculty, from other graduate students. Can you find allies anywhere? Graduate school is set up in an absolutely insane way that one person could have so much power and there's nothing you can do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: For people who've left academia, how did you know you were done? Maybe I'm kidding myself because I'm afraid I'm not going to get tenure, but this is pretty draining, and impostor syndrome or no, I'm growing ever more convinced that I'm just not as good at professoring as I thought I would be. Why did YOU [or colleagues] decide to be done with the "life of the mind?"
RESPONSE A: Haven't left, yet, but seriously considering it. In graduate school at some point I decided to focus on an academic career. We moved to another country for a nice postdoc, but my wife wasn't happy not being able to work. So once the seed of leaving started to sprout, I began to look at my situation more critically. I am comparing my research situation now with the work I did as a software developer previously. Sure the problems are now of my own choosing and "deeper" on some level, but it's incredibly isolating. I feel that I value the daily teamwork that I had in software over the freedom of academia. Then I consider salary and other lifestyle issues, combined with the fact that I really want a specific type of academic job in one of a few geographic areas. I feel my career is lining up to make that a possibility, but actually pulling it off is still a huge uncertainty. Then I think about the salary again!
RESPONSE B: When a department gets filled with industrial managers who somehow managed to jump straight to professorship with no publication history, research experience (bsc in engineering), nor teaching experience. My biggest concern is how the peer review process was bypassed like that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: For people who've left academia, how did you know you were done? Maybe I'm kidding myself because I'm afraid I'm not going to get tenure, but this is pretty draining, and impostor syndrome or no, I'm growing ever more convinced that I'm just not as good at professoring as I thought I would be. Why did YOU [or colleagues] decide to be done with the "life of the mind?"
RESPONSE A: When a department gets filled with industrial managers who somehow managed to jump straight to professorship with no publication history, research experience (bsc in engineering), nor teaching experience. My biggest concern is how the peer review process was bypassed like that.
RESPONSE B: I was planning to continue a career in academia after my PhD is completed, but now I think I would really rather go into the private sector, or do work at a hospital or something. Academia seems to be more about the politics, and less about scientific discovery. All the PI's at my school spend 99% of their time in their office writing grant proposals. When they do take the time to help the lab work, it is always just for the people who are ready to publish and need those last few figures. I have been on my own for my project for the last two years because I just keep running into issues that the PI won't take the time to help me with. Now I am pretty much left on my own to figure it out. I thought academia was about knowledge and discovery. More and more I see it is just about money and recognition. I would rather focus my life's work on something meaningful.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: freaking out a bit. I'm ABD with a reasonable number of publications, and I got my first phone interview request for a TT job. I haven't done a phone interview since applying for my PhD. Does anyone have any advice?
RESPONSE A: I've conducted dozens of phone interviews for TT, lecturer, temporary, and (currently) dean positions. They have all been at a mid-sized, regional, state school with a heavy undergraduate focus. First, know the department. Well, first make sure you actually address the questions that are asked and not what you wish had been asked. Then, know the department. What is their curriculum and how is it different from other places you've been? Which classes would you feel comfortable jumping into right away and which would you be least excited about teaching? Take a look at recent initiatives in the department, college, or university, and pay attention to opportunities these might provide. Have a sense of where you might fit in their environment. When you are answering questions, have a notepad nearby. After the question is asked, spend a few seconds (not more than 5 or so, but that's a long time) to jot down key ideas you want to address. It's better to collect your thoughts in silence than it is to use filler words. The paper will help you stay organized. By a large margin, the most successful candidates have been those who show they prepared for \_this\_ interview, and not just interviews in general. Your paper application was sufficient to get you this far. They believe you are qualified. (This is really important to remember.) What they glean from the phone interview is how effectively you communicate. Finally have solid questions prepared. Good ones we have been asked include "What is the environment like for interdisciplinary research? Do channels currently exist between this department and others or would they need to be established?" and "What sort of input are students (undergraduate or graduate as appropriate) providing with respect to the search, and if there is some, what do they hope to see in the successful candidate?"
RESPONSE B: Don't ramble when responding - be direct. Have legitimate questions/answers about the department that show you've done some background research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: First time on the TT market, and got a phone interview request. I'm freaking out a bit. I'm ABD with a reasonable number of publications, and I got my first phone interview request for a TT job. I haven't done a phone interview since applying for my PhD. Does anyone have any advice?
RESPONSE A: A practical issue: phone interviews are usually done with the committee (3-5 people) sitting around a speakerphone. Because of the nature of these devices, the microphone automatically cuts out when the other party is talking. As a result, it will sound from your end like there are an awful lot of awkward pauses after you finish speaking. You won’t get the “mm-hmm, yeah” feedback that you normally get when talking to someone else. Don’t misinterpret this as boredom or negative feedback... likely the committee is just keeping quiet to make sure they don’t cut you off. It can be nerve-wracking as an interviewee but don’t let it trip you up! Other than that, I’ll echo what others have said... be confident, do your research and talk about what you can uniquely bring to the department. When they give you a chance to ask questions, ask what challenges the department is facing. Don’t try to solve the problem for them on the phone, but if possible talk about experience you’ve had dealing with similar problems elsewhere. If you got a phone interview, it means they’re excited about you and want to learn more. You’ve got this! EDIT: spotted typos the next morning. Not sorry, academics gonna academ....
RESPONSE B: Don't ramble when responding - be direct. Have legitimate questions/answers about the department that show you've done some background research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: College and Board is replacing our department chair position with 'department coordinator' Any insight here, have it happen or overheard from another University? I'm deeply troubled and was told they are not doing it to save money but rather to facilitate synergy between all the related areas.
RESPONSE A: In an educational context, resource allocation is a political act. I would view any administrative efforts attempting to spin a budget cut as 'facilitating synergy' as pathetic...
RESPONSE B: "Facilitating synergy" is a pretty clear sign. Probably not to save money directly, but rather to consolidate decision-making power in administration instead of faculty.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I have a gut feeling some departments have an innate dislike of others. Am I crazy? Some of this feeling might stem from office politics or personal preferences for each other but I noticed a cold shoulder when telling people I studied economics. A lot of my economics profs are conservative in political preference and the humanities profs tend to be more liberal but that's a limited sample of maybe 20 people and I've never bothered to explicitly ask; although, one prof with a giant Obama poster and another with a Palin one was a bit of a giveaway. Regardless, I felt some judgment passed on me because of the department. *** Are some disciplines simply not fans of others? Or am I trying to apply tribal psychology where it simply doesn't exist?
RESPONSE A: no-one likes economists, except maybe business medicine looks down on psychology psychology looks down on sociology sociology hates everyone (i.e. the system) science doesn't think much of ag sci no-one knows what to make of classics. or philosophy this is all total fact
RESPONSE B: In my experience, yes. I don't know exactly how universal this experience is, so of course, take this with a grain of salt, but I've found there's a surprising amount of contention between History departments and other history-related fields ie. Classics, Medieval Studies, Art History, and my own, Celtic Studies.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I have a gut feeling some departments have an innate dislike of others. Am I crazy? Some of this feeling might stem from office politics or personal preferences for each other but I noticed a cold shoulder when telling people I studied economics. A lot of my economics profs are conservative in political preference and the humanities profs tend to be more liberal but that's a limited sample of maybe 20 people and I've never bothered to explicitly ask; although, one prof with a giant Obama poster and another with a Palin one was a bit of a giveaway. Regardless, I felt some judgment passed on me because of the department. *** Are some disciplines simply not fans of others? Or am I trying to apply tribal psychology where it simply doesn't exist?
RESPONSE A: no-one likes economists, except maybe business medicine looks down on psychology psychology looks down on sociology sociology hates everyone (i.e. the system) science doesn't think much of ag sci no-one knows what to make of classics. or philosophy this is all total fact
RESPONSE B: I get this sense as well. I’m a PhD economist in a TT position and I know a strange amount of my colleagues have a weird perception of economics as being strictly about efficiency. They have a misconception about economics not caring about people. I definitely feel pigeon-holed as someone who can’t have reasonable opinions because I studied economics. Of course, that’s just some of my non-economist colleagues and I generally find those people aren’t particularly knowledgeable outside of their very narrow field. I will push back on the conservative political beliefs a little. While you are right, there are more conservatives in economics relative to other fields, the field is very diverse. In my department we are about half progressive, a quarter conservative and a quarter libertarian. At my PhD institution (a large state school) it was easily 3/4 progressive at least.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I have a gut feeling some departments have an innate dislike of others. Am I crazy? Some of this feeling might stem from office politics or personal preferences for each other but I noticed a cold shoulder when telling people I studied economics. A lot of my economics profs are conservative in political preference and the humanities profs tend to be more liberal but that's a limited sample of maybe 20 people and I've never bothered to explicitly ask; although, one prof with a giant Obama poster and another with a Palin one was a bit of a giveaway. Regardless, I felt some judgment passed on me because of the department. *** Are some disciplines simply not fans of others? Or am I trying to apply tribal psychology where it simply doesn't exist?
RESPONSE A: Yeah I felt like the school of government at my last uni was a bit separate from the other schools all under the department of business lol. I think there has always been some tensions between sociologists and economists that is quite real and there is a joke I've heard at every uni I've been to about there being a rivalry between physicists and engineers, which is real but actually very friendly unlike with the social scientists.
RESPONSE B: no-one likes economists, except maybe business medicine looks down on psychology psychology looks down on sociology sociology hates everyone (i.e. the system) science doesn't think much of ag sci no-one knows what to make of classics. or philosophy this is all total fact
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: because of the department. *** Are some disciplines simply not fans of others? Or am I trying to apply tribal psychology where it simply doesn't exist?
RESPONSE A: A lot of people do not like economics departments or economists, that is true. There is the general feeling that economists use flawed reasoning/assumptions to support socially conservative arguments (in part because many do- like there is a Gary Becker book he won a noble prize for, where he argues ideal marriage has women as housewives, since women are naturally better at housework so things are more efficient that way). Since most academics are liberal, they are not a fan of that. In particular my discipline has a strong dislike for economists...not only dislike but like a looking down upon, like that they all reduce everything to money and rational acting, and they fail to account for all the other things we know impact behavior. I think the feeling is mutual and a lot of economists think sociologists are liberals who use non-scientific methods to argue for identity politics or whatever (this is true of some sociologists to be fair, but not the majority). That being said, I'm in part an economic sociologist (among other subfields) and a lot of my favorite profs in grad school were trained as economists, not sociologists. :)
RESPONSE B: I get this sense as well. I’m a PhD economist in a TT position and I know a strange amount of my colleagues have a weird perception of economics as being strictly about efficiency. They have a misconception about economics not caring about people. I definitely feel pigeon-holed as someone who can’t have reasonable opinions because I studied economics. Of course, that’s just some of my non-economist colleagues and I generally find those people aren’t particularly knowledgeable outside of their very narrow field. I will push back on the conservative political beliefs a little. While you are right, there are more conservatives in economics relative to other fields, the field is very diverse. In my department we are about half progressive, a quarter conservative and a quarter libertarian. At my PhD institution (a large state school) it was easily 3/4 progressive at least.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: a cold shoulder when telling people I studied economics. A lot of my economics profs are conservative in political preference and the humanities profs tend to be more liberal but that's a limited sample of maybe 20 people and I've never bothered to explicitly ask; although, one prof with a giant Obama poster and another with a Palin one was a bit of a giveaway. Regardless, I felt some judgment passed on me because of the department. *** Are some disciplines simply not fans of others? Or am I trying to apply tribal psychology where it simply doesn't exist?
RESPONSE A: A lot of people do not like economics departments or economists, that is true. There is the general feeling that economists use flawed reasoning/assumptions to support socially conservative arguments (in part because many do- like there is a Gary Becker book he won a noble prize for, where he argues ideal marriage has women as housewives, since women are naturally better at housework so things are more efficient that way). Since most academics are liberal, they are not a fan of that. In particular my discipline has a strong dislike for economists...not only dislike but like a looking down upon, like that they all reduce everything to money and rational acting, and they fail to account for all the other things we know impact behavior. I think the feeling is mutual and a lot of economists think sociologists are liberals who use non-scientific methods to argue for identity politics or whatever (this is true of some sociologists to be fair, but not the majority). That being said, I'm in part an economic sociologist (among other subfields) and a lot of my favorite profs in grad school were trained as economists, not sociologists. :)
RESPONSE B: Yeah I felt like the school of government at my last uni was a bit separate from the other schools all under the department of business lol. I think there has always been some tensions between sociologists and economists that is quite real and there is a joke I've heard at every uni I've been to about there being a rivalry between physicists and engineers, which is real but actually very friendly unlike with the social scientists.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do P.I.s unilaterally control data their graduate students collected? This question is from a new development from a previous post. I decided to lean forward and plow through the issues I was having with my P.I., but I'm now in a place where department administration is making decisions on my and the school's behalf. Quick update is that I finished my first chapter and sent it to my P.I. to review 2.5 weeks ago. They have not returned any edits or given any feedback at all. They haven't even given me an opinion about whether it is good or not. They also decided they wouldn't meet with me for 2 weeks straight. I am now scrambling to finish my second chapter with little to no guidance, and what conversations I do have usually are about things that needed to be discussed weeks ago. My department administration and other faculty members would like to move me out of the lab, but they are concerned about who retains control of my thesis data. My current P.I. could prohibit me from using everything I've done in the last 3 years for my thesis, despite them not collecting a single datum. I, along with a field crew and some federal agency employees, collected all the data. My summer salaries were funded through my P.I.s discretionary funds and a grant they co-authored with a collaborator at a federal agency. If they do prohibit my use of the data, I essentially have no path to graduate on time. I am currently trying to figure out with my department and ombuds office who controls that data and if my current P.I. can restrict my access, but while I wait for answers, I figured I'd for general advice and experience here. Any thoughts or feedback welcome.
RESPONSE A: >My summer salaries were funded through my P.I.s discretionary funds and a grant they co-authored with a collaborator at a federal agency. This right here means that the PI is the one who controls the data. You were paid to collect that data for them.
RESPONSE B: 5th year PhD student. My data is my own but my advisor/chair has senior author rights on all pubs that come out of it
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do P.I.s unilaterally control data their graduate students collected? This question is from a new development from a previous post. I decided to lean forward and plow through the issues I was having with my P.I., but I'm now in a place where department administration is making decisions on my and the school's behalf. Quick update is that I finished my first chapter and sent it to my P.I. to review 2.5 weeks ago. They have not returned any edits or given any feedback at all. They haven't even given me an opinion about whether it is good or not. They also decided they wouldn't meet with me for 2 weeks straight. I am now scrambling to finish my second chapter with little to no guidance, and what conversations I do have usually are about things that needed to be discussed weeks ago. My department administration and other faculty members would like to move me out of the lab, but they are concerned about who retains control of my thesis data. My current P.I. could prohibit me from using everything I've done in the last 3 years for my thesis, despite them not collecting a single datum. I, along with a field crew and some federal agency employees, collected all the data. My summer salaries were funded through my P.I.s discretionary funds and a grant they co-authored with a collaborator at a federal agency. If they do prohibit my use of the data, I essentially have no path to graduate on time. I am currently trying to figure out with my department and ombuds office who controls that data and if my current P.I. can restrict my access, but while I wait for answers, I figured I'd for general advice and experience here. Any thoughts or feedback welcome.
RESPONSE A: 5th year PhD student. My data is my own but my advisor/chair has senior author rights on all pubs that come out of it
RESPONSE B: This is difficult. As the PI paid for this project through their discretionary funds and grant funding, they do have the right to the data and it should not be used without them. Two weeks is not a very long time to expect comments back on a document. Are you sure they are trying to stop your work?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Including "rough life" information in reference letters - yes or no? I'm at a mid-sized teaching university in an undergrad only department, so there are students who I get to know quite well (especially when they do research with me). I usually include "character" or "goal" examples in reference letters that come from my less formal interactions ("Student routinely drops by with questions about news articles or papers he has read." "Student is well known in the department, even to faculty who have never taught her in class.") I do not share examples that would not be directly observable, both so I have evidence for my statements and to avoid including details the student may not want shared (so I wouldn't use "Student has maintained the goal of becoming a science writer despite her parents wanting her to go to medical school.") I've run into a couple examples which make me question this rule of thumb - students who have dealt with substantial hardship with maturity and professionalism, qualities which I do consider "referenceable." I don't want to hurt a student's chances by appearing to play the sob story card, so I'm conflicted about whether or not to include these examples. ("Student is financially independent and works every night and weekend to support herself." "Student had to change plans for research this semester because his mother died and he is caring for younger siblings.") How do you deal with this type of info in a reference? Ask the student if it is ok to share? Leave it out altogether? Tie the quality to a different example?
RESPONSE A: I would add using those hints as examples of strong character traits. “[Student] is highly motivated and committed to overcoming any obstacles she may face. I have been particularly impressed by her resolve and ability to redirect her research following the death of her mother, despite the sudden unexpected stress of grieving while having to care for younger siblings.”
RESPONSE B: Exactly what the person above me says, don’t make it sound like an excuse (which you didn’t). You have to own it, which I’m sure you will! Good luck with everything!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: research this semester because his mother died and he is caring for younger siblings.") How do you deal with this type of info in a reference? Ask the student if it is ok to share? Leave it out altogether? Tie the quality to a different example?
RESPONSE A: From my experience on the admissions decisions side, this information is incredibly helpful, as long as it is done appropriately and tactfully. For example, a bad semester or year that significantly impacts GPA could sink an application, but this is regularly overlooked when there is a clear explanation from an outside source that the GPA dip was reasonable and not indicative of overall performance. On a slightly different note, one trait that is positively linked to individual performance but is hard to quantify is “grit”, which can be revealed from such stories. Depending on the person evaluating, if two otherwise similar applications are in hand, but one involved overcoming a major life challenge, it may be favored. So, I include this kind of information in my reference letters. One guideline - don’t lead with the sob story. First explain all of the ways the student is great and appropriate for a position as you normally would, and then explain that their performance and successes are all the more impressive given a story of their personal challenge. Tell the situation in a positive light rather than focusing on the negative aspects - make it about strength, flexibility, responsibility, overcoming and rising to challenges, and/or rebounding after a tough period. Depending on the situation, you may want to chat with the student about including personal stories. Regarding issues like the student working full time or similar I’m a bit open. I’m more careful about revealing too many family details or anything personal (health or otherwise), but you can get the idea across in fairly vague terms including the severity of the situation (e.g., “death of someone close to her”, “serious family health issues”, “new and significant family responsibilities”). Someone looking at an application should trust the letter writer and understand confidentiality.
RESPONSE B: Exactly what the person above me says, don’t make it sound like an excuse (which you didn’t). You have to own it, which I’m sure you will! Good luck with everything!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: choice, not first, so there's perhaps some bitterness still (although I do love the project and feel very positive about things overall!), and I spent my last month in Ukraine, so it just feels bizarre to now have to think about my doctorate after everything that I got to live and witness there. What would be your tips and advice as to how to try and establish rapport with my supervisors at first (we don't know each other well yet), or how to deal with the initial stress and feelings of being overwhelmed by inductions, meetings, introductions, etc.? Any advice that some of you might deem 'universal' or anything to look out for? My PhD is with integrated study, so I will be part of a larger cohort, and I will have my individual research project in addition to some taught courses. Thus far, I have always been an excellent student and I do tend to work long hours and take my work to heart (I love my field of work, clinical neuroscience, and in general, I always felt like a PhD is something that I wanted to do). Still, I worry that I don't really know what I'm getting into, that there's no guarantee that my supervisors will be reasonable and supportive, that I will feel anxious and I won't be able to balance work and free time. I would really, really appreciate any thoughts. Thanks in advance! :)
RESPONSE A: >Still, I worry that I don't really know what I'm getting into, that there's no guarantee that my supervisors will be reasonable and supportive, that I will feel anxious and I won't be able to balance work and free time. Not sure if this helps, but if you had decided to instead pursue a career with your Masters Degree, you would have exactly the same worries about the job, your supervisor(s), and your work/life balance. So if you have to confront these concerns either way, you might as well do it while pursuing a PhD.
RESPONSE B: Am in the same boat and I think the best advice I received was that the PhD is what you make it in that you have the power to determine your work life balance, and to maximally enjoy the program, it’s important to have hobbies and social time too :)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Starting a PhD in less than 2 weeks: thoughts and worries I am starting my PhD in about 2 weeks time and I feel it's only now starting to hit me. I had a few months after finishing my Master's, to process and adjust, but I have the feeling I'm only starting to realize what I'm embarking on now. I got the PhD that was my second best choice, not first, so there's perhaps some bitterness still (although I do love the project and feel very positive about things overall!), and I spent my last month in Ukraine, so it just feels bizarre to now have to think about my doctorate after everything that I got to live and witness there. What would be your tips and advice as to how to try and establish rapport with my supervisors at first (we don't know each other well yet), or how to deal with the initial stress and feelings of being overwhelmed by inductions, meetings, introductions, etc.? Any advice that some of you might deem 'universal' or anything to look out for? My PhD is with integrated study, so I will be part of a larger cohort, and I will have my individual research project in addition to some taught courses. Thus far, I have always been an excellent student and I do tend to work long hours and take my work to heart (I love my field of work, clinical neuroscience, and in general, I always felt like a PhD is something that I wanted to do). Still, I worry that I don't really know what I'm getting into, that there's no guarantee that my supervisors will be reasonable and supportive, that I will feel anxious and I won't be able to balance work and free time. I would really, really appreciate any thoughts. Thanks in advance! :)
RESPONSE A: Set some healthy boundaries. Don't be afraid to take a vacation/mental health day when you need it. Don't be afraid to go home after an 8 hour day.
RESPONSE B: My biggest advice is that regardless of your boss/advisor, you have to set your goals and do your best to meet them. I would also stress setting goals as far as conducting research and/or writing not nessicarily quality of results.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: overall!), and I spent my last month in Ukraine, so it just feels bizarre to now have to think about my doctorate after everything that I got to live and witness there. What would be your tips and advice as to how to try and establish rapport with my supervisors at first (we don't know each other well yet), or how to deal with the initial stress and feelings of being overwhelmed by inductions, meetings, introductions, etc.? Any advice that some of you might deem 'universal' or anything to look out for? My PhD is with integrated study, so I will be part of a larger cohort, and I will have my individual research project in addition to some taught courses. Thus far, I have always been an excellent student and I do tend to work long hours and take my work to heart (I love my field of work, clinical neuroscience, and in general, I always felt like a PhD is something that I wanted to do). Still, I worry that I don't really know what I'm getting into, that there's no guarantee that my supervisors will be reasonable and supportive, that I will feel anxious and I won't be able to balance work and free time. I would really, really appreciate any thoughts. Thanks in advance! :)
RESPONSE A: As someone nearing the end of my PhD, my advice at the beginning is READ. Read every damn thing you can on your subject. Make a reading list, save the PDFs and organise them into appropriate folders. Use EndNote or Zotero to help. Whatever writing you do in your first two years, be prepared to rewrite it later. At the moment I'm editing my thesis and much of it is rewriting everything I did two years ago because it was so horribly written. Your writing and analytical skills are going to skyrocket during your PhD to the point that you're going to cringe when you read the stuff you used to be proud of. ​ Best of luck!
RESPONSE B: My biggest advice is that regardless of your boss/advisor, you have to set your goals and do your best to meet them. I would also stress setting goals as far as conducting research and/or writing not nessicarily quality of results.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'm only starting to realize what I'm embarking on now. I got the PhD that was my second best choice, not first, so there's perhaps some bitterness still (although I do love the project and feel very positive about things overall!), and I spent my last month in Ukraine, so it just feels bizarre to now have to think about my doctorate after everything that I got to live and witness there. What would be your tips and advice as to how to try and establish rapport with my supervisors at first (we don't know each other well yet), or how to deal with the initial stress and feelings of being overwhelmed by inductions, meetings, introductions, etc.? Any advice that some of you might deem 'universal' or anything to look out for? My PhD is with integrated study, so I will be part of a larger cohort, and I will have my individual research project in addition to some taught courses. Thus far, I have always been an excellent student and I do tend to work long hours and take my work to heart (I love my field of work, clinical neuroscience, and in general, I always felt like a PhD is something that I wanted to do). Still, I worry that I don't really know what I'm getting into, that there's no guarantee that my supervisors will be reasonable and supportive, that I will feel anxious and I won't be able to balance work and free time. I would really, really appreciate any thoughts. Thanks in advance! :)
RESPONSE A: As someone nearing the end of my PhD, my advice at the beginning is READ. Read every damn thing you can on your subject. Make a reading list, save the PDFs and organise them into appropriate folders. Use EndNote or Zotero to help. Whatever writing you do in your first two years, be prepared to rewrite it later. At the moment I'm editing my thesis and much of it is rewriting everything I did two years ago because it was so horribly written. Your writing and analytical skills are going to skyrocket during your PhD to the point that you're going to cringe when you read the stuff you used to be proud of. ​ Best of luck!
RESPONSE B: Run
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.