label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B
|
POST: Addressing Professors By First Name If a professor signs their emails with just their first name when replying to you, is that an invitation to address them by their first name or should you keep calling them Dr. Lastname? Particularly in emails, where you open with “Hi Dr. Lastname,” or “Hi Firstname,”. I’ve done both and thus have probably offended half of my professors...
RESPONSE A: In the UK first name is standard. Elsewhere is often different.
RESPONSE B: I'm in the US, and I sign my emails with my first name because I want all of my students to call me by my first name. I don't mind the following (no preference): Dear Firstname, Dear Professor Lastname, or Dear Dr. Lastname. I absolutely LOATHE the following, and I will correct you if you do it: Dear Ms. Lastname, Dear Mrs. Lastname. In other words, informality is fine, but please don't give me a demotion. I worked hard for that PhD.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Addressing Professors By First Name If a professor signs their emails with just their first name when replying to you, is that an invitation to address them by their first name or should you keep calling them Dr. Lastname? Particularly in emails, where you open with “Hi Dr. Lastname,” or “Hi Firstname,”. I’ve done both and thus have probably offended half of my professors...
RESPONSE A: Just ask "How do you prefer to be addressed?" Convention varies a lot by campus, department, and individual. On my campus \*most\* faculty are on a first name basis with students, but there are exceptions. I've always been a first\-name person, and I find it mildly annoying when students continue to call me "Dr. Albino" when I have asked them multiple times to use my first name. Email is even more casual, but if you haven't asked or been told to use first names, it's fine to use "Hi Professor" as a salutation. Some of mine do both, "Hi Professor Albino," while other just use my first name. The key, in any case, is to ask. Then there will be no confusion.
RESPONSE B: It feels really weird to sign your name "Professor Yourname." At least I find it weird. Professor is a title other people call you (out of respect, etc.), so calling yourself it in an e-mail feels... odd. But I would 100% always use Dr. Lastname or Professor Lastname unless explicitly invited to do otherwise. When I sign my name with my first name, that doesn't give you an invitation to use it if you're a subordinate. Is that a little power game, signing with a name you can't use? Probably. But this is just the tip of the iceberg for academic power games. :-) You can never really go wrong in assuming too much formality (cue the "I'm sorry for offending you with my excessive respect" meme), but you can definitely go wrong in assuming too little. Aim to err on the former, not the latter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Addressing Professors By First Name If a professor signs their emails with just their first name when replying to you, is that an invitation to address them by their first name or should you keep calling them Dr. Lastname? Particularly in emails, where you open with “Hi Dr. Lastname,” or “Hi Firstname,”. I’ve done both and thus have probably offended half of my professors...
RESPONSE A: Just ask "How do you prefer to be addressed?" Convention varies a lot by campus, department, and individual. On my campus \*most\* faculty are on a first name basis with students, but there are exceptions. I've always been a first\-name person, and I find it mildly annoying when students continue to call me "Dr. Albino" when I have asked them multiple times to use my first name. Email is even more casual, but if you haven't asked or been told to use first names, it's fine to use "Hi Professor" as a salutation. Some of mine do both, "Hi Professor Albino," while other just use my first name. The key, in any case, is to ask. Then there will be no confusion.
RESPONSE B: I sign with my first name and tell students it’s fine to call me by my first name, but they usually don’t feel comfortable with that level of informality (especially as I get older - in my late 20s and early 30s it was never an issue). My wife however wants to be called Dr. or Prof. [lastname] or just Dr/Prof T. They seem to use her 1st name, or call her M(r)s. Lastname or M(r)s. T far more often though. I’ve heard similar from other female colleagues. Generally the professor makes it clear in class or with their signature in emails. If they sign Mary or Tom, it’s okay to use those names generally. A lot of students still won’t though, and that’s perfectly fine. But if you’re going to go the more formal route, go the whole way and add their proper title.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Addressing Professors By First Name If a professor signs their emails with just their first name when replying to you, is that an invitation to address them by their first name or should you keep calling them Dr. Lastname? Particularly in emails, where you open with “Hi Dr. Lastname,” or “Hi Firstname,”. I’ve done both and thus have probably offended half of my professors...
RESPONSE A: Call them Dr. soandso until they tell you to call them Firstname, preferably in person immediately after you have called them Dr. soandso.
RESPONSE B: It feels really weird to sign your name "Professor Yourname." At least I find it weird. Professor is a title other people call you (out of respect, etc.), so calling yourself it in an e-mail feels... odd. But I would 100% always use Dr. Lastname or Professor Lastname unless explicitly invited to do otherwise. When I sign my name with my first name, that doesn't give you an invitation to use it if you're a subordinate. Is that a little power game, signing with a name you can't use? Probably. But this is just the tip of the iceberg for academic power games. :-) You can never really go wrong in assuming too much formality (cue the "I'm sorry for offending you with my excessive respect" meme), but you can definitely go wrong in assuming too little. Aim to err on the former, not the latter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are you doing your research to make something better or to improve your station in life? Or maybe a mixture of the two?
RESPONSE A: Mainly because I am curious. Over time, I find myself less and less curious though...
RESPONSE B: It sarted as the former, then it shifted to the latter and now I'm wondering why the hell I keep doing this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: For those of you with a PhD, what's on your business card? Are you Dr NAME, or NAME, PhD? I am a relatively recent PhD graduate and work for a not for profit research institute in the public health sector in Australia. On my business card I currently put my PhD as a post-nominal (i.e. NAME, PhD) instead of as an honorific (i.e. Dr NAME). I was recently approached by our head of communications asking to explain/justify why I chose not to put the Dr title on my business card or email signature. My reasons are a bit vague but include elements of not wanting to be mistaken for a clinician (as I do work in the health sector) and not wanting to sound pretentious. I should note that I do put Dr NAME when I am writing about myself (like in my bio for talks), just not in my email signature or on my business card. His question got me thinking about what the norm is for PhD holders out there, especially those without additional honorifics like 'Professor'. So my question to all of you PhD holders is what do you refer to yourself as on your business card/email signature?
RESPONSE A: On a business card I've never seen anyone do anything other than: >Name, PhD >Job Title >Organization >Contact info That way it's not ambiguous as to what your degree is, plus people sometimes have additional certifications/affiliations/degrees beyond their PhD. However if I'm writing about myself in a biosketch or some sort of official paperwork for work I always refer to myself as "Dr. Lastname"
RESPONSE B: Weird they want you to justify it lol. You can call yourself whatever you want.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: For those of you with a PhD, what's on your business card? Are you Dr NAME, or NAME, PhD? I am a relatively recent PhD graduate and work for a not for profit research institute in the public health sector in Australia. On my business card I currently put my PhD as a post-nominal (i.e. NAME, PhD) instead of as an honorific (i.e. Dr NAME). I was recently approached by our head of communications asking to explain/justify why I chose not to put the Dr title on my business card or email signature. My reasons are a bit vague but include elements of not wanting to be mistaken for a clinician (as I do work in the health sector) and not wanting to sound pretentious. I should note that I do put Dr NAME when I am writing about myself (like in my bio for talks), just not in my email signature or on my business card. His question got me thinking about what the norm is for PhD holders out there, especially those without additional honorifics like 'Professor'. So my question to all of you PhD holders is what do you refer to yourself as on your business card/email signature?
RESPONSE A: On a business card I've never seen anyone do anything other than: >Name, PhD >Job Title >Organization >Contact info That way it's not ambiguous as to what your degree is, plus people sometimes have additional certifications/affiliations/degrees beyond their PhD. However if I'm writing about myself in a biosketch or some sort of official paperwork for work I always refer to myself as "Dr. Lastname"
RESPONSE B: Name, JD, PhD
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: -mail of my undergraduate thesis PI (a professor whose lab I worked in last school year). I only learned of this earlier today, when I logged onto the portal to try and close my account. I became concerned that the professor had received a reference letter request. To test this, I input my own email in the reference letter field to see if reference requests are sent even if the full application form is not submitted. As it turns out, the reference requests ARE sent, so this professor did receive a reference letter request from me. This professor knows that I am already in medical school. I feel it is inappropriate and unprofessional that he received an unexpected reference letter request for a Caribbean medical school when I am already in medical school. I would like to ensure he does not waste time needlessly writing a letter, and apologize for the mishap. How should I reach out to my professor? Should I e-mail him just explaining the situation and apologizing? Should I get my classmate to e-mail him with me CC'd? Or some other course of action? **TL;DR:** I am a medical student. A classmate inadvertently sent a reference letter request on my behalf to my undergraduate thesis PI, asking for a reference to a Caribbean medical school. This PI knows that I am already enrolled in medical school. How should I reach out to the PI and explain this situation?
RESPONSE A: I wouldn’t cc your friend. No need to give this careless person more access to your life and personal correspondence. Just email your prof and be honest and apologetic. You should also rethink your friendship with this person. It terrifies me that this person is in medical school and feels that taking your personal computer from you and filling out an official document in your name is a funny joke. I hope his “jokes” don’t extend into medical documentation.
RESPONSE B: It was definitely asshole-ish for the other student to send the recommendation. But if I was the professor who received the letter and then heard your explanation, I would laugh about the whole thing. Are there really professors out there who would become offended or upset about this? If so, what is wrong with these people?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Asking professor for homework/exam materials? I am a non-student watching university lectures online. All the lectures are available to the public on YouTube, however there are no practice questions/exams I can use to test my proficiency. Would it be appropriate to email the professor and ask for some homework or exams to work through? Are there any other ways I can find test materials?
RESPONSE A: Professor here. If they are posting the lectures on you tube and you don’t need a password to view them (listed as public) then I think it definitely can’t hurt to ask. I have actually been considering doing this due to the lack of knowledge of my specialty in the general public. I would definitely share materials.
RESPONSE B: It is unlikely that you will get this material from profs. Also, depending on what you are studying, it will be difficult for you to assess your knowledge with anything that isn't multiple choice or fill-in.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Asking professor for homework/exam materials? I am a non-student watching university lectures online. All the lectures are available to the public on YouTube, however there are no practice questions/exams I can use to test my proficiency. Would it be appropriate to email the professor and ask for some homework or exams to work through? Are there any other ways I can find test materials?
RESPONSE A: Really difficult to say without knowing what the course is. But I'd think googling whatever the common name of the course would be (eg "intro to whatever" or "seminar is bla") plus "exam" or "assessment" will get you there. Or just "200 level sociology exam" or something. Emailing the professor is doubtful to work I'd think. Or find the cheapest textbook that relates to that class (doesn't have to be what they use) and do the work in it. And good for you being proactive in your education. I'm sure some folks will be salty at your question - it's like you asked a group of barbers how to cut your own hair - but that's partially because lots of people in academia do a lot of stuff essentially for free. When covid hit and suddenly all the lectures are getting recorded, I certainly saw some future where universities just reuse old class recordings to save on faculty costs.
RESPONSE B: Professor here. If they are posting the lectures on you tube and you don’t need a password to view them (listed as public) then I think it definitely can’t hurt to ask. I have actually been considering doing this due to the lack of knowledge of my specialty in the general public. I would definitely share materials.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Asking professor for homework/exam materials? I am a non-student watching university lectures online. All the lectures are available to the public on YouTube, however there are no practice questions/exams I can use to test my proficiency. Would it be appropriate to email the professor and ask for some homework or exams to work through? Are there any other ways I can find test materials?
RESPONSE A: Try finding a MOOC like through Coursera to do it for free with tests etc
RESPONSE B: Professor here. If they are posting the lectures on you tube and you don’t need a password to view them (listed as public) then I think it definitely can’t hurt to ask. I have actually been considering doing this due to the lack of knowledge of my specialty in the general public. I would definitely share materials.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Asking professor for homework/exam materials? I am a non-student watching university lectures online. All the lectures are available to the public on YouTube, however there are no practice questions/exams I can use to test my proficiency. Would it be appropriate to email the professor and ask for some homework or exams to work through? Are there any other ways I can find test materials?
RESPONSE A: I honestly would say to email, though. You are absolutely not going to lose anything for trying. It is unlikely, but depending on the kind of person the lecturer is, they may suggest a workbook or textbook. I would not give away university exams, I am honestly not sure if I would be legally allowed to, but I am always excited when people show an interest in self-study, so I would try to help to a point, if it's not a moment when I am absolutely crushed by the course workload. ​ (do not ask me for materials, though. I'm in the humanities)
RESPONSE B: It is unlikely that you will get this material from profs. Also, depending on what you are studying, it will be difficult for you to assess your knowledge with anything that isn't multiple choice or fill-in.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Asking professor for homework/exam materials? I am a non-student watching university lectures online. All the lectures are available to the public on YouTube, however there are no practice questions/exams I can use to test my proficiency. Would it be appropriate to email the professor and ask for some homework or exams to work through? Are there any other ways I can find test materials?
RESPONSE A: Really difficult to say without knowing what the course is. But I'd think googling whatever the common name of the course would be (eg "intro to whatever" or "seminar is bla") plus "exam" or "assessment" will get you there. Or just "200 level sociology exam" or something. Emailing the professor is doubtful to work I'd think. Or find the cheapest textbook that relates to that class (doesn't have to be what they use) and do the work in it. And good for you being proactive in your education. I'm sure some folks will be salty at your question - it's like you asked a group of barbers how to cut your own hair - but that's partially because lots of people in academia do a lot of stuff essentially for free. When covid hit and suddenly all the lectures are getting recorded, I certainly saw some future where universities just reuse old class recordings to save on faculty costs.
RESPONSE B: Professor here. If it’s public, usually they may have a study guide they can send you or the ppt. Never hurts to ask. I’d be flattered you found me on YT in liked the content
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I am thinking about getting my undergraduate work published in a journal. Should I list my advisor as a co-author? What are some issues I should discuss with them regarding my intention to publish? Hi Academics of AskAcademia. I wrote my undergraduate thesis on a historical topic. Apparently I did a decent job, and one researcher suggested that I look into turning the thesis into a publishable article. My undergraduate advisor and I had a very good relationship. Although my thesis topic was in a different subfield from the professor's, the (obviously) intelligent questions the professors put forward to me and their feedback shaped the final thesis. That said, the primary sources that I worked with were obtained through my own effort. So, I'm just wondering, what is the common way of doing this? Is the professor a co-author or would an acknowledgment of their mentoring (if the work is actually accepted by a journal) more appropriate? Am I even asking the right questions?
RESPONSE A: I think it would be appropriate to have your advisor listed as a coauthor, as the previous commenter mentioned. Another facet is that you are not known in the literature, so having a more well known name (i.e. Someone who has published before) can also help in getting it published and being used by other academics.
RESPONSE B: In most cases like what you're talking about (in the humanities), there's no reason to include your advisor as a co-author unless he / she: a) provided funding for the research b) your research was part of a larger, funded project that your advisor was managing c) he / she provided significant help with the writing / analysis or major proofreading If you were a STEM student, and your research was conducted under your advisor's guidance using his / her lab and resources, then yes, you'd want to include your advisor as a co-author. I would say an acknowledgement would be appropriate unless one of the above matches your situation.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I am thinking about getting my undergraduate work published in a journal. Should I list my advisor as a co-author? What are some issues I should discuss with them regarding my intention to publish? Hi Academics of AskAcademia. I wrote my undergraduate thesis on a historical topic. Apparently I did a decent job, and one researcher suggested that I look into turning the thesis into a publishable article. My undergraduate advisor and I had a very good relationship. Although my thesis topic was in a different subfield from the professor's, the (obviously) intelligent questions the professors put forward to me and their feedback shaped the final thesis. That said, the primary sources that I worked with were obtained through my own effort. So, I'm just wondering, what is the common way of doing this? Is the professor a co-author or would an acknowledgment of their mentoring (if the work is actually accepted by a journal) more appropriate? Am I even asking the right questions?
RESPONSE A: There isn't really one way of doing this. Ask your advisor if he wants to be coauthor. His opinion will both be more relevant than that of internet strangers, and it will help you learn something about your field.
RESPONSE B: I think it would be appropriate to have your advisor listed as a coauthor, as the previous commenter mentioned. Another facet is that you are not known in the literature, so having a more well known name (i.e. Someone who has published before) can also help in getting it published and being used by other academics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How does grad school affect your romantic life? Have you found it hard to either meet new people or maintain a healthy romantic relationship with someone in grad school? If you are successful at either, how do you juggle it with your heavy work load?
RESPONSE A: Met a man in my third lab rotation. We've been together 7 years, married 2. I, like /u/zorch-it, treated my PhD more like a job. My husband functions better in the morning, so it worked out that we usually got evenings for each other.
RESPONSE B: I got married in grad school. It set me back a semester from the competing time commitments.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How does field affect salary? Do universities pay professors or certain fields more than others. For example, since computer science is such a lucrative field outside of academia, would computer science professors get paid more than a professor of another field?
RESPONSE A: This depends on the school. I teach at a school where the faculty have voted as a group to have even salary across the board- pay is determined only by years of service and rank, not by field at all. I interviewed at several other places where this was the case as well. It means the pay in my field is a bit lower than I'd otherwise get, but the pay for a lot of colleagues is higher, and the equality is important to me.
RESPONSE B: Yup. Law professors too. Biology profs may not get more pay, but teach far less owing to competition in hiring from medical schools where those lucky SOBs don't be teaching much.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How does field affect salary? Do universities pay professors or certain fields more than others. For example, since computer science is such a lucrative field outside of academia, would computer science professors get paid more than a professor of another field?
RESPONSE A: At my school it’s “just a bit” but don’t forget the consulting opportunities. I have a friend who’s specialty is cyber-security who earns about $150,000 a year “on the side”. She is amazing though so it is a combination of the field, the specific abilities, and personality.
RESPONSE B: This depends on the school. I teach at a school where the faculty have voted as a group to have even salary across the board- pay is determined only by years of service and rank, not by field at all. I interviewed at several other places where this was the case as well. It means the pay in my field is a bit lower than I'd otherwise get, but the pay for a lot of colleagues is higher, and the equality is important to me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How does field affect salary? Do universities pay professors or certain fields more than others. For example, since computer science is such a lucrative field outside of academia, would computer science professors get paid more than a professor of another field?
RESPONSE A: Pick your favorite state university, and type in "salary 2017 University X". Salary information is publicly available, so you can browse the salary levels yourself!
RESPONSE B: At my school it’s “just a bit” but don’t forget the consulting opportunities. I have a friend who’s specialty is cyber-security who earns about $150,000 a year “on the side”. She is amazing though so it is a combination of the field, the specific abilities, and personality.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How does field affect salary? Do universities pay professors or certain fields more than others. For example, since computer science is such a lucrative field outside of academia, would computer science professors get paid more than a professor of another field?
RESPONSE A: At my school it’s “just a bit” but don’t forget the consulting opportunities. I have a friend who’s specialty is cyber-security who earns about $150,000 a year “on the side”. She is amazing though so it is a combination of the field, the specific abilities, and personality.
RESPONSE B: "Professional" fields like law, business, engineering, and medicine tend to have higher salaries. The reasons vary, but they often have to do with two things: 1) there's a lot of money involved in these fields, and professors (at least at research schools) are expected to bring in lots of grant money 2) there are a lot of private sector jobs in these fields that pay a **lot**, and higher salaries help entice people to stay in academia This is true in the US at least, I'm under the impression that things are different in other countries.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How does field affect salary? Do universities pay professors or certain fields more than others. For example, since computer science is such a lucrative field outside of academia, would computer science professors get paid more than a professor of another field?
RESPONSE A: At my university (big R1), there are three tiers which have elevated salaries above the standard university-wide faculty salary scale. The highest tier on a money/salary basis includes law, business, and medical school faculty, who make far more than everyone else. The 2nd highest tier includes computer science, computer engineering, and life sciences (non-medical), who make a good bit above standard scale. The 3rd highest tier is engineering (all types except computer engineering), which is where I am. We make slightly above the standard faculty salary scale. All other disciplines are on the same standard university-wide salary scale. Relative to the engineering tier, its like this: an engineering prof who just made tenure would be making what new nontenured faculty in the 2nd tier start at. An engineering prof who makes full professor will be making what new nontenured faculty in the 1st tier start at. Engineering faculty start at about ~20% higher than the standard salary scale.
RESPONSE B: Here are some national data (pdf). Nationally, starting pay is highest for business, law, engineering, and computer science. Starting pay is lowest for literature, history, theology, and fine arts. I just did a quick scan so I might have missed something.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: When or how did you decide what to do after your PhD (stay in academia, industry job, conpletely change direction)? I have about three years left in my program (consumer psych at a business school) and while I enjoy the flexibility and intellectual challenge, I find my motivation and drive to do research decline to the point that I am reconsidering whether I want to keep doing research at a uni in a tenure track position. I have no intention to quit, but I need to be smart about my future (e.g. industry doesnt care about publications as much as academia does, which would mean a shift in effort). When did you decide to stay in academia or get out as soon as you graduated, and how did you come to this conclusion?
RESPONSE A: I finished my PhD (in the UK) last Feb and am about to start a post-doc (in the USA) in a couple of weeks so my experience is fairly limited :) Personally, I've always enjoyed working in academia so I've never really felt the desire to leave it. For me, I find research great fun and really rewarding, and the academic setting offers a ton of personal freedom to conduct that research the way I want to do it. It's a stressful and shitty job sometimes, and obviously the pay / job security isn't going to be great for a long while, but for me that's never really been a motivation. As long the job stays interesting, diverse and (mostly) fun, I'll probably stick with academia.
RESPONSE B: You talk to a bunch of people and you'll find someone that makes you think to yourself, "I want that job eventually." Then, you point in that direction.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you take notes and keep track of information? I'm a late-stage PhD student in engineering. Recently, I was struck by how difficult it is for me to keep track of all the facts and information I need to do my research effectively, especially when I think about writing my dissertation. I constantly have to reread papers to recall whether I thought it was a good reference and what the important parts were, despite having taken notes about it (that I subsequently can never seem to find). Either that, or I have to re-review several papers to find the piece of information I was looking for. It breaks my workflow when I have to go looking for information that I should be able to remember or find easily, and I'm sick of it. I need a system, so I'm looking for advice. What works for you? What's effective? What have you tried, successfully or unsuccessfully? I like physically writing things, so I keep a lab notebook, but finding information again after writing it is difficult, and it's impossible to reorganize. I'm considering a notecard system, which could be unwieldy, but effective. I like Evernote for the nested notebooks and the ability to search globally, but I worry about being dependent on one program. I use and like Jabref for organizing references, but it doesn't have the kind of note-taking capability I need. Any suggestions? How do you take and organize notes?
RESPONSE A: Another happy Zotero user here. You might also find this interesting: https://zettelkasten.de/ I use it with both handwritten and typed notes. I use Joplin instead of Evernote, it's very similar but all my notes are synchronised through my own Dropbox account instead of through the Evernote service and I carry an A5 leather binder everywhere that I take handwritten notes in, often then scanned or typed up. (I am a big fan of Japanese 20 hole binders so my notes are all movable to the correct sections as needed.).
RESPONSE B: Get 8+ hours of sleep everynight
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep track of conferences? There are literally thousands of conferences going on across the world spanning a variety of fields. How do you keep track of them all or even the ones in your field?
RESPONSE A: My advisor.
RESPONSE B: There's a librarian at the national research council in Canada who keeps a list of all the astronomy conferences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep track of conferences? There are literally thousands of conferences going on across the world spanning a variety of fields. How do you keep track of them all or even the ones in your field?
RESPONSE A: I get them from emails (from our department and various students who are on the listservs of other universities), Facebook, Twitter, and try to put them on our department's shared Google Calendar so they can be in one place.
RESPONSE B: There's a librarian at the national research council in Canada who keeps a list of all the astronomy conferences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'd like to do a PhD but I don't feel I know enough.... Hi. I've done an MSc. I really enjoyed it. It was for fun, and I'm bored now, so I'd like to do more. I'm in UK, looking at sites in UK, and EU. A lot of the PhD titles listed look interesting but I don't feel like I know enough. My gf, who has a doctorate keeps saying that that's the point - I'll have to learn new stuff. Can anyone advise? And what can I do to help myself? I enjoy researching, but I prefer doing courses/lectures at a physical university. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: if you do not feel a burning sensation simultaneously in your brain and in your colon about how you simply NEED to understand something about the world, and you have a pretty good idea of what that something is (not HOW to understand it) a PhD, especially in 2018, is probably the wrong choice. A phd is not something you do to cure boredom.
RESPONSE B: Nobody knows enough. Part of PhD is realizing that nobody knows. I once asked my professor about something theoretical in nature. He said he did not know, and told me to look for papers. I looked for papers, read them, found nothing, and told him there was no answer in the papers. Then I realized that this is my research topic.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'd like to do a PhD but I don't feel I know enough.... Hi. I've done an MSc. I really enjoyed it. It was for fun, and I'm bored now, so I'd like to do more. I'm in UK, looking at sites in UK, and EU. A lot of the PhD titles listed look interesting but I don't feel like I know enough. My gf, who has a doctorate keeps saying that that's the point - I'll have to learn new stuff. Can anyone advise? And what can I do to help myself? I enjoy researching, but I prefer doing courses/lectures at a physical university. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I have found that as I progressed through my PhD, I discovered more and more stuff that I did not know enough about.
RESPONSE B: Nobody knows enough. Part of PhD is realizing that nobody knows. I once asked my professor about something theoretical in nature. He said he did not know, and told me to look for papers. I looked for papers, read them, found nothing, and told him there was no answer in the papers. Then I realized that this is my research topic.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'd like to do a PhD but I don't feel I know enough.... Hi. I've done an MSc. I really enjoyed it. It was for fun, and I'm bored now, so I'd like to do more. I'm in UK, looking at sites in UK, and EU. A lot of the PhD titles listed look interesting but I don't feel like I know enough. My gf, who has a doctorate keeps saying that that's the point - I'll have to learn new stuff. Can anyone advise? And what can I do to help myself? I enjoy researching, but I prefer doing courses/lectures at a physical university. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Nobody knows enough. Part of PhD is realizing that nobody knows. I once asked my professor about something theoretical in nature. He said he did not know, and told me to look for papers. I looked for papers, read them, found nothing, and told him there was no answer in the papers. Then I realized that this is my research topic.
RESPONSE B: If you feel like you don't know enough now, doing a PhD will make you feel like you know nothing. It's the most terrifying yet the most exciting thing at the same time, and ngl the terrifying part sometimes makes me very miserable and unmotivated. A PhD is definitely not something to pursue out of boredom. Do it only if you have the curiosity to do so.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'd like to do a PhD but I don't feel I know enough.... Hi. I've done an MSc. I really enjoyed it. It was for fun, and I'm bored now, so I'd like to do more. I'm in UK, looking at sites in UK, and EU. A lot of the PhD titles listed look interesting but I don't feel like I know enough. My gf, who has a doctorate keeps saying that that's the point - I'll have to learn new stuff. Can anyone advise? And what can I do to help myself? I enjoy researching, but I prefer doing courses/lectures at a physical university. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Nobody knows enough. Part of PhD is realizing that nobody knows. I once asked my professor about something theoretical in nature. He said he did not know, and told me to look for papers. I looked for papers, read them, found nothing, and told him there was no answer in the papers. Then I realized that this is my research topic.
RESPONSE B: Nobody does. If you want to do a PhD and you know what you want to do with it, i.e. you are not just doing it out of boredom but have an actual plan for a career in mind, then go ahead and apply. Nobody starts a PhD program feeling they totally know everything.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'd like to do a PhD but I don't feel I know enough.... Hi. I've done an MSc. I really enjoyed it. It was for fun, and I'm bored now, so I'd like to do more. I'm in UK, looking at sites in UK, and EU. A lot of the PhD titles listed look interesting but I don't feel like I know enough. My gf, who has a doctorate keeps saying that that's the point - I'll have to learn new stuff. Can anyone advise? And what can I do to help myself? I enjoy researching, but I prefer doing courses/lectures at a physical university. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: if you do not feel a burning sensation simultaneously in your brain and in your colon about how you simply NEED to understand something about the world, and you have a pretty good idea of what that something is (not HOW to understand it) a PhD, especially in 2018, is probably the wrong choice. A phd is not something you do to cure boredom.
RESPONSE B: Nobody does. If you want to do a PhD and you know what you want to do with it, i.e. you are not just doing it out of boredom but have an actual plan for a career in mind, then go ahead and apply. Nobody starts a PhD program feeling they totally know everything.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Does it matter which institution/university you do a postdoc? About to graduate (STEM) and I am fortunate to have several postdoc offers, all academic labs. From a subject matter perspective, one of them interests me less than the rest, but is at a world-renown/tier 1 university. I would therefore like to hear from folks who are on faculty search committees and/or involved in recruiting candidates: all else equal, how much does it benefit me to have a "Harvard" or a "Stanford" on my resume, relative to a less widely-known university where I might do research that more closely aligns with my intellectual goals?
RESPONSE A: Depends on your career goals. Do you want a faculty position after? If so, that “Harvard” or “MIT” on your resume will matter. If you’re looking at industry, less so. I had two post doc offers. One from a tier one institute and one from a tier two. I chose the latter because the members of the tier one lab seemed miserable. I ended up just where I wanted to be afterwards.
RESPONSE B: Yes, it definitely matters if you're interested in staying within academia. Just a few top universities produce most of the next generation of faculty [1-3]. [1] http://rescuingbiomedicalresearch.org/blog/bias-distribution-k99-awards-faculty-hires/ [2] https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/622886v1.full [3] https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/1/e1400005
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: the fall, so either of those opportunities would go a long way. ​ I am not too familiar with the types of negotiations made in academia, so I am hoping to get some insight on whether this is a reasonable course of action. Any input would be so greatly appreciated as I am kind of floundering at the moment. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: Don't be a SCAB. Apply for a different, funded position. Also you don't need to negotiate for a letter of recommendation or authorship, that stuff is already assumed.
RESPONSE B: I might get downvoted for this but I could see this being a good opportunity, depending on a lot of things. If you legitimately have no other paid opportunities in your field and can afford not to work without it burning a hole in your savings, then why tf not? I found a lab that I loved that couldn’t fund me. I couldn’t afford to work for free so I dropped to four days a week at my non-science job, and volunteered at the lab once a week. Once they got funding, the lab hired me full time and now I’m in a PhD program. A lot of that was luck, I found a great lab that valued my work. But I think it speaks to the value of unpaid work in the science field. What matters is the work you do, not the money you get paid. And yes, in actuality, if you’re going to work you should really get paid. But that’s not always how life works and if you’re privileged enough to be ok with that, use it. In general with this kind of position I think you need to decide exactly what you want out of it and talk to the PI about it. Keep in mind, the skills you learn are almost as valuable as the papers you have. There’s a pretty big likelihood that you just wouldn’t be able to get what you want out of this lab as just a volunteer. And you should keep looking for paid jobs. As for the PI, they might think it’s a bit crazy that you’re willing to work for free, but if they’re good people they’ll roll with it. Good luck 👍 go science
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: field during my current gap year. Besides this, I have limited opportunities to get my foot in the door and am willing to work without pay/ as an intern. Since I don't know how the professor will react to this request, I was wondering if it would be out of place to negotiate by suggesting that I offer my work in exchange for a future letter of recommendation and/or some form of authorship on whatever paper is produced from this work. I am planning to apply to Ph.D. programs in the fall, so either of those opportunities would go a long way. ​ I am not too familiar with the types of negotiations made in academia, so I am hoping to get some insight on whether this is a reasonable course of action. Any input would be so greatly appreciated as I am kind of floundering at the moment. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: This could be a good option or not for you, depending on a number of factors. A few things I'd recommend you consider before you sign up to do this: If you're doing this to fill out your c.v., what are the odds that this work will actually turn into publications that will be submitted (much less accepted) by the time you apply to graduate schools? Even so, unless your contribution merits co-authorship, recognize that it's not appropriate or ethical for you to be listed as a co-author. So will your expected contribution actually merit that? What other skills will you pick up from the experience? Washing glassware wouldn't be worth much whereas if you were to learn to run and analyze numerical simulations on high performance computing machines, it could be of considerable value to you as a professional apart from any publications/reference letters. Will the faculty member's letter be effective? Does the professor have high standing and is he/she willing to write you a strong reference letter? Has he/she been successful at placing students in top programs in the past? What connections does the mentor have that might provide you an angle into a good graduate program?
RESPONSE B: Don't be a SCAB. Apply for a different, funded position. Also you don't need to negotiate for a letter of recommendation or authorship, that stuff is already assumed.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How can I improve my academic writing skills? How can I improve my academic writing skills? Any tips from academics who have published in the social sciences would be greatly appreciated.
RESPONSE A: As you read (a lot, as others have noted), pay attention to the rhetorical features of the texts. * What kind of language is common? Vocabulary, phrasing, etc. * How do authors seem to develop their arguments? Not only in terms of the data/sources they draw on (and how they do so), but also how they articulate the reasoning they use to establish and elaborate on their claims. * How do authors situate their work in relation to the work of others in the field? * When your expectations of certain conventions are not met in some way, what do the authors breaking from those conventions do to make the unexpected approach effective (if at all)? Then, when you turn to practicing writing (which you should also do a lot, as others have noted), try and attend to these concerns so that you can see just how much you've picked up regarding the genres and disciplinary writing styles you've familiarized yourself with.
RESPONSE B: Make some friends in the humanities. Seriously - I have a friend who was majoring in physics but fell in love with East Asian religion so she did a double major. She's the best writer in my cohort.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How can I improve my academic writing skills? How can I improve my academic writing skills? Any tips from academics who have published in the social sciences would be greatly appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Read, read, then write a bunch. Write with a plan, but without too much regard to grammar. Then, when you revise, follow Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace... helped a bunch for me.
RESPONSE B: As you read (a lot, as others have noted), pay attention to the rhetorical features of the texts. * What kind of language is common? Vocabulary, phrasing, etc. * How do authors seem to develop their arguments? Not only in terms of the data/sources they draw on (and how they do so), but also how they articulate the reasoning they use to establish and elaborate on their claims. * How do authors situate their work in relation to the work of others in the field? * When your expectations of certain conventions are not met in some way, what do the authors breaking from those conventions do to make the unexpected approach effective (if at all)? Then, when you turn to practicing writing (which you should also do a lot, as others have noted), try and attend to these concerns so that you can see just how much you've picked up regarding the genres and disciplinary writing styles you've familiarized yourself with.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How can I improve my academic writing skills? How can I improve my academic writing skills? Any tips from academics who have published in the social sciences would be greatly appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Make some friends in the humanities. Seriously - I have a friend who was majoring in physics but fell in love with East Asian religion so she did a double major. She's the best writer in my cohort.
RESPONSE B: Read, read, then write a bunch. Write with a plan, but without too much regard to grammar. Then, when you revise, follow Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace... helped a bunch for me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to explain a poor relationship with an advisor in the job market? Hi everyone, I will be graduating and entering the job market soon. One question I haven't resolved yet is how to explain the poor relationship I have with my PhD advisor. This isn't just a "we didn't get along" relationship, but a "had to get the department chair and graduate school to bat for me" kind of relationship. I probably won't be asking for a recommendation letter, so how can I explain this to interviewers? Is it alright to lay out the gory facts (succinctly) and let them decide?
RESPONSE A: I’ve read so many things on here from people in similar situations and the above is so true, stay positive and let them look like the negative Nancy. When I have hired people I always go by my overall feeling of the person. I know there are those negative people out there and many managers are aware of it too! Good luck and I hope you get a great offer!
RESPONSE B: Can you ask your department chair for a letter? They might be able to get the message across without you having to say negative things about your advisor (which is absolutely risky- the committee won’t know if you’re the problem or the advisor is if it’s coming from you).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How did academics do literature review before the internet? My first thought was libraries, but that still sounds crazy
RESPONSE A: There's a great book by Umberto Eco about how to be successful in grad school - he wrote it for his own graduate students because he was tired of giving them the same talk every time a new cohort started. He describes going to the library, going through the catalog and writing down the bibliographical reference for the texts he wanted on individual note cards. Then he'd go find all the texts, take his notes on the note-cards and then keep them in an ever-increasing collection in his office. ​ So - yeah, as everyone else said. Libraries. And note-card collections.
RESPONSE B: Libraries, interlibrary loan, word of mouth, textbooks/monographs. Ever go back and look at papers from the 70s and 80s? There's a reason they were publishing with fewer than 15 citations (hell, fewer than 10 isn't uncommon in some old biology papers), and there's a reason most cite 20, 30, 40+ now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How did academics do literature review before the internet? My first thought was libraries, but that still sounds crazy
RESPONSE A: There's a great book by Umberto Eco about how to be successful in grad school - he wrote it for his own graduate students because he was tired of giving them the same talk every time a new cohort started. He describes going to the library, going through the catalog and writing down the bibliographical reference for the texts he wanted on individual note cards. Then he'd go find all the texts, take his notes on the note-cards and then keep them in an ever-increasing collection in his office. ​ So - yeah, as everyone else said. Libraries. And note-card collections.
RESPONSE B: Yep, libraries. Journal indexes and abstracts were published and they'd use these to find relevant articles. It would have been somewhat simpler in a way, as there weren't quite as many sources to check through. I remember using a paper journal index when I did my undergrad degree in the early 90s. Some of these indexes are still available, but they're online now, e.g. Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How did academics do literature review before the internet? My first thought was libraries, but that still sounds crazy
RESPONSE A: There's a great book by Umberto Eco about how to be successful in grad school - he wrote it for his own graduate students because he was tired of giving them the same talk every time a new cohort started. He describes going to the library, going through the catalog and writing down the bibliographical reference for the texts he wanted on individual note cards. Then he'd go find all the texts, take his notes on the note-cards and then keep them in an ever-increasing collection in his office. ​ So - yeah, as everyone else said. Libraries. And note-card collections.
RESPONSE B: Yes. Once upon a time in the not-so-distant past, all those libraries were actually used to store bound pieces of paper that some people refer to as “books” and “journals”. You would find what you wanted using a collection of wooden drawers called a “card catalog”, and many libraries sorted these books with the Dewey Decimal System, or the Library of Congress System. This persisted until the late 1990s, when a white knight named Sir Google slayed the dragon that resided in the back of the Card Catalog Dungeon. This provided the space for Sir Starbucks to move in, turning those old musty libraries into the social nerve centers of college campuses they are today.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How did academics do literature review before the internet? My first thought was libraries, but that still sounds crazy
RESPONSE A: There were also subject area bibliographies that were just bound collections of references organized by topic. Find a couple of those, copy down every entry that seems relevant, request missing ones via loan.
RESPONSE B: I had note cards, with notes about the articles. And file cabinets full of actual paper articles. I cross referenced by copying the first page and noting where the article was filed. You had to go to the library also and read the journals and tables of contents in your field regularly, and chase down references in the papers you already had.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How did academics do literature review before the internet? My first thought was libraries, but that still sounds crazy
RESPONSE A: Yes. Once upon a time in the not-so-distant past, all those libraries were actually used to store bound pieces of paper that some people refer to as “books” and “journals”. You would find what you wanted using a collection of wooden drawers called a “card catalog”, and many libraries sorted these books with the Dewey Decimal System, or the Library of Congress System. This persisted until the late 1990s, when a white knight named Sir Google slayed the dragon that resided in the back of the Card Catalog Dungeon. This provided the space for Sir Starbucks to move in, turning those old musty libraries into the social nerve centers of college campuses they are today.
RESPONSE B: I had note cards, with notes about the articles. And file cabinets full of actual paper articles. I cross referenced by copying the first page and noting where the article was filed. You had to go to the library also and read the journals and tables of contents in your field regularly, and chase down references in the papers you already had.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: subject of interest. I'm wondering what the procedure was prior to the advent of the internet; was it going through physical copies of journals and hoping you'd find something relevant?
RESPONSE A: I started grad school in the mid 1980s. There were huge paper volumes in the library, one for each year. At the back were key subject terms. I'm an experimental psychologist, so things like "learning, rat" or "attention--spatial." After each term would be numbers. Each number sent you to the front of the volume, which was compendium of numbered abstracts. So you'd go read the abstract and then decide whether it was worth locating the actual article. Naturally, also useful was what you do today--look at the articles cited by whatever article you're reading now. It did take a LONG time to find stuff, but one thing that helped a little was there were fewer journals. At least as important as searchable databases was being able to download pdfs. Before the mid-90s everything was paper. So if you saw an article you wanted you had to photocopy it, by hand. (Or you could send a postcard to the author and ask for a reprint. When people published an article, they usually bought copies of it from the journal to send on request as a courtesy.) Everyone had big file cabinets full of photocopied articles. This meant that "keeping up with the literature" took a fair bit of time just as a secretarial task. It also made people more likely to keep personal subscriptions to key journals, and you'd keep old issues in your office, so that if you needed an article, you might no have to go to the library and photocopy it. And when someone retired, it was a big deal to get \*their\* personal collection of journal back issues.
RESPONSE B: Librarians had the difficult job of cataloging everything in the library. I think books and journals came with keywords on them for this purpose. The library kept a cabinet with hundreds of index cards organized by topics where you could see what journals or books they had on the topic. There was a standard organization system. I never used this in academia, but this is what I had until middle school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How long did literature reviews take before the internet? Nowadays you browse research databases and use keywords to find the papers relevant to your subject of interest. I'm wondering what the procedure was prior to the advent of the internet; was it going through physical copies of journals and hoping you'd find something relevant?
RESPONSE A: In the humanities, pillaging the bibliographies of monographs remains a tried-and-true research technique. And yes, reading the tables of contents of every new edition of the relevant journals in your field was a regular practice.
RESPONSE B: Librarians had the difficult job of cataloging everything in the library. I think books and journals came with keywords on them for this purpose. The library kept a cabinet with hundreds of index cards organized by topics where you could see what journals or books they had on the topic. There was a standard organization system. I never used this in academia, but this is what I had until middle school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you organize a huge amount of literature review without getting overwhelmed? Hey again, everyone! If you check my post history, you’ll see that I posted here a few months ago after my advisor passed away. I had no idea what to expect when I first posted here and was blown away by the response. I wanted to start off by touching on this because, as much as is possible with words on a forum, I want to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for the immense outpouring of kindness, compassion, advice, support, and community I received. I’m happy to tell you all that the transition has gone very smoothly, all things considered! My actual inquiry involves boiling down a mountain of literature review. For some insight, I have my bachelor’s in applied math with a minor in physics, but I am pursuing my PhD in atmospheric science without ever having taken a geoscience course during undergrad. That said, there was a huge knowledge gap and I’ve done *a lot* of reading. My list in Excel has over 130 articles/papers/etc I’ve read, and I’m generally struggling with organizing this effort. I’ve outlined some of them to pull out what’s important, but outlining 130 is a gargantuan task. There has to be a better way, and I’m hoping that something you all recommend will help me to get past what started as an organization problem and has become an enormous executive functioning hurdle.
RESPONSE A: Try dedoose or Evernote. You can tag articles with ideas keywords etc.
RESPONSE B: I organize my literature with a citation manager, but I summarize each paper in a Word Doc (some would call this an annotated bibliography). The summary includes: Title, Authors, my written summary, references in the paper that I need to look up. The other references are then color-coded as to whether or not I have them in my citation manager and if I have already summarized the paper. The great thing about the document is that I can re-read a paper, notice something new, and just add it into my summary. It was an excellent resource when I was writing proposals
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you organize a huge amount of literature review without getting overwhelmed? Hey again, everyone! If you check my post history, you’ll see that I posted here a few months ago after my advisor passed away. I had no idea what to expect when I first posted here and was blown away by the response. I wanted to start off by touching on this because, as much as is possible with words on a forum, I want to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for the immense outpouring of kindness, compassion, advice, support, and community I received. I’m happy to tell you all that the transition has gone very smoothly, all things considered! My actual inquiry involves boiling down a mountain of literature review. For some insight, I have my bachelor’s in applied math with a minor in physics, but I am pursuing my PhD in atmospheric science without ever having taken a geoscience course during undergrad. That said, there was a huge knowledge gap and I’ve done *a lot* of reading. My list in Excel has over 130 articles/papers/etc I’ve read, and I’m generally struggling with organizing this effort. I’ve outlined some of them to pull out what’s important, but outlining 130 is a gargantuan task. There has to be a better way, and I’m hoping that something you all recommend will help me to get past what started as an organization problem and has become an enormous executive functioning hurdle.
RESPONSE A: Tbh I've never managed to complete a lit review without feeling overwhelmed at some point. Right now I'm trying Paperpile and summaries (generally author, title, what the task was, what their results are).
RESPONSE B: I use Zotero, and also write an annotated bibliography. Whenever I read an article, I list citation information, a link if possible, and write a few sentences or so summarizing the article and it’s relevance to whatever I’m working on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: passed away. I had no idea what to expect when I first posted here and was blown away by the response. I wanted to start off by touching on this because, as much as is possible with words on a forum, I want to thank you all from the bottom of my heart for the immense outpouring of kindness, compassion, advice, support, and community I received. I’m happy to tell you all that the transition has gone very smoothly, all things considered! My actual inquiry involves boiling down a mountain of literature review. For some insight, I have my bachelor’s in applied math with a minor in physics, but I am pursuing my PhD in atmospheric science without ever having taken a geoscience course during undergrad. That said, there was a huge knowledge gap and I’ve done *a lot* of reading. My list in Excel has over 130 articles/papers/etc I’ve read, and I’m generally struggling with organizing this effort. I’ve outlined some of them to pull out what’s important, but outlining 130 is a gargantuan task. There has to be a better way, and I’m hoping that something you all recommend will help me to get past what started as an organization problem and has become an enormous executive functioning hurdle.
RESPONSE A: Tbh I've never managed to complete a lit review without feeling overwhelmed at some point. Right now I'm trying Paperpile and summaries (generally author, title, what the task was, what their results are).
RESPONSE B: I generally use mendeley (your University email may allow you to use it) as you can highlight and comment on pdfs, sort papers into folders, and search them all in a desktop app. It has a word pluggin to cite and organize your bibliography for you. It also has a long list of referencing styles to choose from. And a (usually alright) chrome pluggin that can save papers to your account Had some issues with it in the last year with duplicates and iffy referencing so would suggest an additional proof read. I've also heard Zotoro (spelling?) is good and my University's library swears by EndNote. Good luck with the lit review!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: some at my former institute who I still keep in touch with, and they were also surprised and recommended that I don’t longer in the same group and it’s the right time to think about moving on. One of the PIs told me it’s not an uncommon situation and that sometimes people apply without a reference letter from their PI. I feel like this might be my only option if I don’t want my career track to be decided my PI, but it makes me deeply uncomfortable to do this. On one hand I would be missing out on opportunities (some fellowships eligibility depends on the length of time after finishing the phd) and would have to stay in a lab for longer than I want to (and country, I am ready to leave), on the other hand it would look bad if I apply without a reference letter from my PI, and if my PI might find out and it would damage our relationship. I would love to hear if anyone had this experience and what they did, if it’s bad practice to apply without a reference from your PI (especially if it’s just that they don’t want you to leave yet!), it it might hurt my chances in the long run.
RESPONSE A: *Never* get a letter of recommendation from someone who is not happy and eager to write it for you. It is unusual for your PI to not write, but it happens. A friend of mine was sexually harassed by his doctoral advisor and never used him to write letters and he is now tenured. Ideally there would be a way for you to clarify this earlier on, but at the interview stage, you could half jokingly play it off that your PI didn't write because he doesn't want to lose you.
RESPONSE B: You are right in the sense you need to move on. I was in a similar situation two years ago. I love my former lab and still collaborate with them, but they wanted me to stay as a postdoc for more time while doing all the work of a TT position. They even tried to raise my salary to keep me around, but the university refused due to some internal policies. At the end, they understood I needed to go and helped me out throughout the whole process.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Fly me cross country for a one hour faculty interview? I applied for a full-time "Professor of Practice" (non tenure track) job at an Ivy... They offered to fly me out for an interview... Department Chair says they want me to give a 30 minute presentation to faculty and take questions from faculty for 30 minutes... To clarify, I asked if there would be anything else for me to do - meet individually with faculty, talk to students, etc... Nope, she said, just the one-hour interview... Question: Is this normal?... I have a sneaking suspicion that I am being flown out so they can say they interviewed X number of candidates... But I'm new to this game, so... Thanks for feedback...
RESPONSE A: As a dissenting opinion, this does sound weird to me. No campus tour? No meeting with a dean or chair? No lunch or dinner? That seems...odd. As someone who's interviewed for and held two similar positions, one at a nearly-Ivy institution...this doesn't seem normal to me. It could be a disciplinary difference, or any number of non- nefarious things. But from my perspective, it does seem unusual.
RESPONSE B: I was flown from the UK to Australia to give a 45 minute paper and 45 minute teaching demo as part of a job interview - it is entirely possible. Granted, at that point I believe (but have never had confirmed) that I was the only candidate being considered - but my point is that if they could fly me to Australia and back, (plus 3 nights' hotel etc) then they can probably fly you across a few states for a single talk
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: relocating. He's learned more about the job since he first applied, and the more he has learned, the more he wants to work for this school. I hope his enthusiasm for this specific school came through in his interview (but of course I wasn't there to observe). I'll post another update whenever we hear back from the school. I just hope that he didn't put his chances at risk by mentioning me. If any of you have any additional thoughts about this, I would be happy to hear them. Thanks again for your input earlier!
RESPONSE A: Ok, my opinion is that you and your husband did exactly the right thing and that - even if he doesn't get the job - you really shouldn't dwell on this moment as the sticking point. That's my quick take. I'll elaborate by saying that in most situations it would be either illegal or unethical to talk at length about your personal family situation and how that factors into your job. This said, my institution, like many institutions, view hires as precious opportunities. We'd prefer not to hire people who are using our institution as a stepping stone to go to Harvard, but whatever. Does this mean you shouldn't hire the hot shot star because you think they might leave? That seems defeatist and like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Taken from another perspective, however, suggesting that you and your happy family are THRILLED to relocate to your region because (LITERALLY FILL IN ANY LEGITIMATE SOUNDING REASON) and our minds will be put at ease. Saying you appreciate the school's mission is the right answer because it suggests that you care about this specific opportunity, not just opportunities in general. Deans usually have antenna for that.
RESPONSE B: Hiring committees are often ask about certain topics, and work hard not to show any emotion when certain topics are mentioned, significant others often being one of these topics. Sure they could ask about significant others, but if the candidate began talking pregnancy, or age, or something, then they'd regret asking. So they usually work hard to appear as nondescript as possible if the candidate brings something up. The interview sounds fine. All you can do is wait and hope. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: re looking here because I will complete my MLIS program this summer, and there are almost 5x as many libraries in this city than there are where we currently live.) My husband initially answered by describing how he first learned of this college (one of the campus presidents spoke at a conference he attended), and he was impressed by the school's mission. He said one of the deans on the committee leaned back in her chair and said, "that's the right answer." My husband then went on to add, "we are also excited to relocate to this area because my wife is completing her program and there are many opportunities for her here." He said the faces of the committee members after that remark were inscrutable. The interview progressed after that, and he feels confident in his answers. It has been four days since the interview, and we know academic job searches are notoriously slow, but we've been torturing ourselves since then. Part of me wishes he had not mentioned me at all, but I'm also hoping that maybe they'll see that we are serious about relocating. He's learned more about the job since he first applied, and the more he has learned, the more he wants to work for this school. I hope his enthusiasm for this specific school came through in his interview (but of course I wasn't there to observe). I'll post another update whenever we hear back from the school. I just hope that he didn't put his chances at risk by mentioning me. If any of you have any additional thoughts about this, I would be happy to hear them. Thanks again for your input earlier!
RESPONSE A: Sounds like Ike a great answer to me. Also almost exactly how I answered that question in my interview. Worked for me.
RESPONSE B: Academic wife - the waiting is brutal but my husband "scored points" with several search committees by talking about different perks available in the city - he had one committee tell him the reason most of their hires left was because the spouse didn't adjust. Asking pointed questions or expressing specific interest shows you've done your research on a place you would (ideally, especially in the eyes of the search committee) be spending the next 30+ years.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you deal with the 'paper not cool enough' rejections? I'm finishing my first year as postdoc and I've been trying for almost 2 years to get my second paper (about cancer signaling) from the phd accepted somewhere. I am extremely frustrated. It is a follow up from a previous shared paper that published really well, probably because we used a lot of novel crispr methods right in time of the crispr hype. The follow up paper however is not 'breakthrough enough', 'doesn't get a high enough priority score' or 'isn't relevant enough' for the editors to even do a revision, although the various reviewer's comments we got are doable and the editors said the data is convincing. How do you deal with this? How do you make your research ''cool'' if there's no hype for the topic? Is it really possible to convince the editors about how interesting the data is just by wording things differently? TL;DR: basically my paper keeps getting rejected without chance for revision because the topic is not hot enough at the moment. Is there something I could do?
RESPONSE A: Make the changes and resubmit there or somewhere else. My personal approach to rejection is similar to how the NTSB investigates plane crashes: every failure is the result of pilot error and their job is to figure out how it could have been avoided so that future pilots can avoid the problem. If I said something three times and the reviewers still didn't get it, next time I say it four times. If they said that my paper wasn't enough of a breakthrough, then next time I make sure to explain exactly why it is a breakthrough in the abstract, introduction, body of the paper, and conclusion. Rejections are inevitable and perseverance is key.
RESPONSE B: You do what the reviewers ask and you re-submit
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you deal with the 'paper not cool enough' rejections? I'm finishing my first year as postdoc and I've been trying for almost 2 years to get my second paper (about cancer signaling) from the phd accepted somewhere. I am extremely frustrated. It is a follow up from a previous shared paper that published really well, probably because we used a lot of novel crispr methods right in time of the crispr hype. The follow up paper however is not 'breakthrough enough', 'doesn't get a high enough priority score' or 'isn't relevant enough' for the editors to even do a revision, although the various reviewer's comments we got are doable and the editors said the data is convincing. How do you deal with this? How do you make your research ''cool'' if there's no hype for the topic? Is it really possible to convince the editors about how interesting the data is just by wording things differently? TL;DR: basically my paper keeps getting rejected without chance for revision because the topic is not hot enough at the moment. Is there something I could do?
RESPONSE A: Key question: where are you submitting? Given that you've got a paper that belongs there, getting into the top 3-5 journals in any field is often a matter of author reputation & connections, and luck with reviewers. With the "breakthrough" factor, it's roughly equivalent to "how many doors does this **immediately** open?" How many things can people do (including but not limited to testing hypotheses) that they couldn't do before reading this? How does the current paper fare compared to the old one based on that? Aim at the next lower tier - journals that are widely read & cited but where publishing in them isn't considered a huge gold star on your c.v. If your finding is solid and relevant to your field, you shouldn't have any major problems.
RESPONSE B: You do what the reviewers ask and you re-submit
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you deal with the 'paper not cool enough' rejections? I'm finishing my first year as postdoc and I've been trying for almost 2 years to get my second paper (about cancer signaling) from the phd accepted somewhere. I am extremely frustrated. It is a follow up from a previous shared paper that published really well, probably because we used a lot of novel crispr methods right in time of the crispr hype. The follow up paper however is not 'breakthrough enough', 'doesn't get a high enough priority score' or 'isn't relevant enough' for the editors to even do a revision, although the various reviewer's comments we got are doable and the editors said the data is convincing. How do you deal with this? How do you make your research ''cool'' if there's no hype for the topic? Is it really possible to convince the editors about how interesting the data is just by wording things differently? TL;DR: basically my paper keeps getting rejected without chance for revision because the topic is not hot enough at the moment. Is there something I could do?
RESPONSE A: Scientific Reports. This is the journal that worries about scientific integrity rather than novelty. I've come across many researchers and institutions that are against SciRep, however, I think SciRep is driving a big change. Why do we have to do something novel? Why does everything need to be a breakthrough? I agree that there are really bad papers in SciRep. I also know that there are really good papers in there.
RESPONSE B: You do what the reviewers ask and you re-submit
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Advice for aspiring professor I'm 19 year old and I want to be a professor. Any tips?
RESPONSE A: Keep in mind that in most fields, the chances of becoming a professor after your PhD are about the same as the chances of becoming a pro athlete after being a college athlete.
RESPONSE B: Have a backup plan, and ask yourself if you're okay relocating multiple times throughout your career.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Advice for aspiring professor I'm 19 year old and I want to be a professor. Any tips?
RESPONSE A: Have a backup plan, and ask yourself if you're okay relocating multiple times throughout your career.
RESPONSE B: Have a good back-up plan or two! Even if you make it, the extramural research funding situation is really awful these days, at least in USA.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Advice for aspiring professor I'm 19 year old and I want to be a professor. Any tips?
RESPONSE A: If you are enrolled in a high-prestige, extremely rigorous program now, are one of the best in your cohort there, take advantage of every research opportunity that comes your way and never screw the pooch in that arena, you'll go into grad school with the best chances possible of becoming a professor. Those chances are extremely bad. Have a backup plan. Better yet, have three or five.
RESPONSE B: Why do to want to be a professor? What about the job speaks to you? Research? Teaching? Something else?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Advice for aspiring professor I'm 19 year old and I want to be a professor. Any tips?
RESPONSE A: If you are enrolled in a high-prestige, extremely rigorous program now, are one of the best in your cohort there, take advantage of every research opportunity that comes your way and never screw the pooch in that arena, you'll go into grad school with the best chances possible of becoming a professor. Those chances are extremely bad. Have a backup plan. Better yet, have three or five.
RESPONSE B: Keep in mind that in most fields, the chances of becoming a professor after your PhD are about the same as the chances of becoming a pro athlete after being a college athlete.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Advice for aspiring professor I'm 19 year old and I want to be a professor. Any tips?
RESPONSE A: If you are enrolled in a high-prestige, extremely rigorous program now, are one of the best in your cohort there, take advantage of every research opportunity that comes your way and never screw the pooch in that arena, you'll go into grad school with the best chances possible of becoming a professor. Those chances are extremely bad. Have a backup plan. Better yet, have three or five.
RESPONSE B: Have a good back-up plan or two! Even if you make it, the extramural research funding situation is really awful these days, at least in USA.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: took it together. I immediately emailed them and informed them that they were caught. Haven't gotten a response yet. I've never met my department head, but I can talk to the full prof who hired me. He hasn't been giving me much guidance, though, and I'd kind of like to have a better idea of what I want to do before I talk to him. The syllabus talks about the potential penalties for academic dishonesty, but doesn't specifically state that you can't take exams together. I always thought it went without saying that you just don't do that. I'd hate like heck to have to flunk these kids - they were good students. I'm just so angry at them for putting me in this position. Any advice for a poor adjunct? TL/DR: two students took today's online exam together. What do I do?
RESPONSE A: I agree with sepiaelegans. I don't think it was a blatant disregard. Try not to take anything your students do personally.
RESPONSE B: I would not have emailed the students that they were "caught." I would have asked them individually to come to my office because there was a problem with their exam. Then you can ask the student point blank if they worked with someone else. Before that, though, I would have contacted the technical support for my course software and had them investigate the IP addresses to see what information that gives. If they were both in the college computer lab at the same time, that is more evidence. On the other hand, if they were both on random ISPs likely from home, that is less evidence. I have been vary cautious about people having the same wrong answers. While I have caught cheaters this way, I have also discovered some reasons behind this. I have seen exact same wrong answers from in-class exams from people sitting on different sides of the room. Once I found out that my TA had told people a wrong answer during the review session (verified from TA). Sometimes study partners learn it wrong together. This is why I am suggesting you investigate this more before saying someone is "caught." Quite frankly, if I got that email from my prof, I probably would not reply either.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: multiple choice or matching item. They obviously took it together. I immediately emailed them and informed them that they were caught. Haven't gotten a response yet. I've never met my department head, but I can talk to the full prof who hired me. He hasn't been giving me much guidance, though, and I'd kind of like to have a better idea of what I want to do before I talk to him. The syllabus talks about the potential penalties for academic dishonesty, but doesn't specifically state that you can't take exams together. I always thought it went without saying that you just don't do that. I'd hate like heck to have to flunk these kids - they were good students. I'm just so angry at them for putting me in this position. Any advice for a poor adjunct? TL/DR: two students took today's online exam together. What do I do?
RESPONSE A: I would not have emailed the students that they were "caught." I would have asked them individually to come to my office because there was a problem with their exam. Then you can ask the student point blank if they worked with someone else. Before that, though, I would have contacted the technical support for my course software and had them investigate the IP addresses to see what information that gives. If they were both in the college computer lab at the same time, that is more evidence. On the other hand, if they were both on random ISPs likely from home, that is less evidence. I have been vary cautious about people having the same wrong answers. While I have caught cheaters this way, I have also discovered some reasons behind this. I have seen exact same wrong answers from in-class exams from people sitting on different sides of the room. Once I found out that my TA had told people a wrong answer during the review session (verified from TA). Sometimes study partners learn it wrong together. This is why I am suggesting you investigate this more before saying someone is "caught." Quite frankly, if I got that email from my prof, I probably would not reply either.
RESPONSE B: Is there an Office of Academic Dishonesty or anyone in the higher administration that deals with these sorts of cases specifically?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: been giving me much guidance, though, and I'd kind of like to have a better idea of what I want to do before I talk to him. The syllabus talks about the potential penalties for academic dishonesty, but doesn't specifically state that you can't take exams together. I always thought it went without saying that you just don't do that. I'd hate like heck to have to flunk these kids - they were good students. I'm just so angry at them for putting me in this position. Any advice for a poor adjunct? TL/DR: two students took today's online exam together. What do I do?
RESPONSE A: This is going to sound extremely cynical, but if I were an adjunct and I noticed this, I would probably turn a blind eye. If you go on the warpath about it and the students claim some misunderstanding such as those other posters have raised, they could raise a huge stink and poison your chances of having your contract renewed. I wouldn't go out on a limb without institutional support.
RESPONSE B: I would not have emailed the students that they were "caught." I would have asked them individually to come to my office because there was a problem with their exam. Then you can ask the student point blank if they worked with someone else. Before that, though, I would have contacted the technical support for my course software and had them investigate the IP addresses to see what information that gives. If they were both in the college computer lab at the same time, that is more evidence. On the other hand, if they were both on random ISPs likely from home, that is less evidence. I have been vary cautious about people having the same wrong answers. While I have caught cheaters this way, I have also discovered some reasons behind this. I have seen exact same wrong answers from in-class exams from people sitting on different sides of the room. Once I found out that my TA had told people a wrong answer during the review session (verified from TA). Sometimes study partners learn it wrong together. This is why I am suggesting you investigate this more before saying someone is "caught." Quite frankly, if I got that email from my prof, I probably would not reply either.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: , but doesn't specifically state that you can't take exams together. I always thought it went without saying that you just don't do that. I'd hate like heck to have to flunk these kids - they were good students. I'm just so angry at them for putting me in this position. Any advice for a poor adjunct? TL/DR: two students took today's online exam together. What do I do?
RESPONSE A: How ironclad is your proof? It sounds a bit circumstantial right now. In my experience with dealing with academic dishonesty, I'd caution you that students will not always take their lesson and go home quietly, and you can't always count on administration to have your back. I'd advise you that if you don't have a smoking gun that's 100% incontrovertible, it's not worth pursuing. You're sticking your neck out, and if you're not guaranteed a conviction, it's not worth risking your job for two scumbag cheaters.
RESPONSE B: I would not have emailed the students that they were "caught." I would have asked them individually to come to my office because there was a problem with their exam. Then you can ask the student point blank if they worked with someone else. Before that, though, I would have contacted the technical support for my course software and had them investigate the IP addresses to see what information that gives. If they were both in the college computer lab at the same time, that is more evidence. On the other hand, if they were both on random ISPs likely from home, that is less evidence. I have been vary cautious about people having the same wrong answers. While I have caught cheaters this way, I have also discovered some reasons behind this. I have seen exact same wrong answers from in-class exams from people sitting on different sides of the room. Once I found out that my TA had told people a wrong answer during the review session (verified from TA). Sometimes study partners learn it wrong together. This is why I am suggesting you investigate this more before saying someone is "caught." Quite frankly, if I got that email from my prof, I probably would not reply either.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: is taught by a professor within the department who also has an administrative appointment. This professor has tenure. I have yet to encounter someone so inappropriate and non-professional in either academia or industry. This professor has made both racist and sexist remarks, as well as made multiple sexual innuendos. They have run various simulations in class that have been completely stupid, and often borderline inappropriate. Another student questioned why we were conducting and engaging in such a simulation, calling it stupid. This professor completely shut her down, in a very confrontational and aggressive but completely verbal manner. I don't want to reveal more of the specifics here, would rather do so through PM. Morally and ethically I feel like I'm in a dilemma. I know I could make it through the course and finish out the semester, but I feel as if I should do something. This is a classic example of someone abusing their power as well as acting completely unprofessional in a teaching role. My mentor advised me to let it go and use it as an example to learn from, and that rocking the boat will just make life more difficult for myself. Please help. I don't know that she truly understands the extent of the situation since she lives in another state. I didn't want to get into too much details with her - I feel bad about even having the conversation with her, especially since they have a preexisting relationship having gone to grad school together. What should I do? Please help.
RESPONSE A: I was bullied by the wife of my PI while I was doing my PhD. (She was the lab manager, and did everything in her power to sabotage my work.) The fact is that you cannot do anything most of the cases. The sexual, racist things are actually something the university actually acts upon, so if you choose to, you can file a report, but if the bullying is not sexual or racial, you are screwed. Academia is a very feudal world.
RESPONSE B: Document things with dates and actual quotes (as close as you can to what is actually said rather than a paraphrase) as they happen and at the end of the semester take it to your advisor again and see what she says then.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Dealing with a bullying professor Hello AskAcademia, I'm a doctoral student taking a cross-listed course with masters students. The class is required for both doctoral and masters students, and is taught by a professor within the department who also has an administrative appointment. This professor has tenure. I have yet to encounter someone so inappropriate and non-professional in either academia or industry. This professor has made both racist and sexist remarks, as well as made multiple sexual innuendos. They have run various simulations in class that have been completely stupid, and often borderline inappropriate. Another student questioned why we were conducting and engaging in such a simulation, calling it stupid. This professor completely shut her down, in a very confrontational and aggressive but completely verbal manner. I don't want to reveal more of the specifics here, would rather do so through PM. Morally and ethically I feel like I'm in a dilemma. I know I could make it through the course and finish out the semester, but I feel as if I should do something. This is a classic example of someone abusing their power as well as acting completely unprofessional in a teaching role. My mentor advised me to let it go and use it as an example to learn from, and that rocking the boat will just make life more difficult for myself. Please help. I don't know that she truly understands the extent of the situation since she lives in another state. I didn't want to get into too much details with her - I feel bad about even having the conversation with her, especially since they have a preexisting relationship having gone to grad school together. What should I do? Please help.
RESPONSE A: Your mentor is right. This isn't the time or place for you to be fighting battles.
RESPONSE B: Document things with dates and actual quotes (as close as you can to what is actually said rather than a paraphrase) as they happen and at the end of the semester take it to your advisor again and see what she says then.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: tenure. I have yet to encounter someone so inappropriate and non-professional in either academia or industry. This professor has made both racist and sexist remarks, as well as made multiple sexual innuendos. They have run various simulations in class that have been completely stupid, and often borderline inappropriate. Another student questioned why we were conducting and engaging in such a simulation, calling it stupid. This professor completely shut her down, in a very confrontational and aggressive but completely verbal manner. I don't want to reveal more of the specifics here, would rather do so through PM. Morally and ethically I feel like I'm in a dilemma. I know I could make it through the course and finish out the semester, but I feel as if I should do something. This is a classic example of someone abusing their power as well as acting completely unprofessional in a teaching role. My mentor advised me to let it go and use it as an example to learn from, and that rocking the boat will just make life more difficult for myself. Please help. I don't know that she truly understands the extent of the situation since she lives in another state. I didn't want to get into too much details with her - I feel bad about even having the conversation with her, especially since they have a preexisting relationship having gone to grad school together. What should I do? Please help.
RESPONSE A: I would say that nobody in this thread can extract enough information from you description. "Racist sexist stupid simulation" sounds as a very coded phrase that we cannot possibly decipher. It can be a "7th grade level reaction" as somebody suggested, but it may also be an unnecessary offensive and sexually loaded provocative pseudo-joke, made by a delusional person in power. But we simply cannot tell. In general, in most institutions, when tenured faculty are really "borderline", nothing can be done. That's the definition of "borderline": it's just bad enough to not be over the line. Again, I'm not sure this is your case, but it's quite possible.
RESPONSE B: Your mentor is right. This isn't the time or place for you to be fighting battles.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to read academic papers while exercising I wanted to know if anyone else has figured it out. I spend so much time sitting at a desk, I'm beginning to develop lower back pain. Even without the back pain, I'm so tired of staying at my desk. I would like to exercise more, such as going on walks, or doing some jogging outdoors or on a treadmill. It would be great if there was some type of read aloud feature for academic articles, or even some app that can make it much simpler to read articles without the awkward zooming in and out that comes along with reading typical two column/page format. I've tried importing the pdfs into an e-reader but that didn't work well since the e-reader was made for books. Let me know if you have any ideas or if there is anything that has worked for you.
RESPONSE A: I've used the accessibility features of my iPhone to do this exact thing. As long as you have a readable PDF of the article on your phone it can be read to you. Citations get really repetitive and I usually need to re-read some parts of the paper later, but it's a great start.
RESPONSE B: I’ve used screen readers like JAWS to read articles for me. Alternatively, you can prop your monitor or laptop on a box and stand while reading; make the text bigger so you can focus on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to read academic papers while exercising I wanted to know if anyone else has figured it out. I spend so much time sitting at a desk, I'm beginning to develop lower back pain. Even without the back pain, I'm so tired of staying at my desk. I would like to exercise more, such as going on walks, or doing some jogging outdoors or on a treadmill. It would be great if there was some type of read aloud feature for academic articles, or even some app that can make it much simpler to read articles without the awkward zooming in and out that comes along with reading typical two column/page format. I've tried importing the pdfs into an e-reader but that didn't work well since the e-reader was made for books. Let me know if you have any ideas or if there is anything that has worked for you.
RESPONSE A: Try saving the html versions to a service like Pocket that will strip out the formatting and save a one-column simplified version. I expect some difficulties with equations and graphs, but it should work for some papers.
RESPONSE B: I think stationary bikes are the best for this, there is usually a ledge you can prop your papers / phone / tablet in. I’ve also had success with this on ellipticals.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to read academic papers while exercising I wanted to know if anyone else has figured it out. I spend so much time sitting at a desk, I'm beginning to develop lower back pain. Even without the back pain, I'm so tired of staying at my desk. I would like to exercise more, such as going on walks, or doing some jogging outdoors or on a treadmill. It would be great if there was some type of read aloud feature for academic articles, or even some app that can make it much simpler to read articles without the awkward zooming in and out that comes along with reading typical two column/page format. I've tried importing the pdfs into an e-reader but that didn't work well since the e-reader was made for books. Let me know if you have any ideas or if there is anything that has worked for you.
RESPONSE A: I slapped a board on a $15 treadmill I got at a yard sale and ealk slow enough to read and fast enough to get my heart going
RESPONSE B: A lot of gyms have bikes with reclined seats. I like to pedal and read at the same time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Any advice on how to read an academic paper properly? I can not read a whole paper in one go so I read them part for part trying not to miss anything important but it feels "inefficient" for me. How are you handling this?
RESPONSE A: When I read papers for my master's thesis, I would read while writing notes on parts I found relevant/interesting and go section by section. I would also refer to the bibliography and mark the citation so I could look it up later. But, yeah... I pretty much did what you did. It probably only feels inefficient because you are going to do a loooooooooooooooot of reading. :)
RESPONSE B: Others here will certainly have more experience but here's how I was taught to do it. Note, it's not in linear order! 1. Start with the title. This should give you an idea what you're going to read about and help you decide if the paper will cover what you need to know. 2. Read the abstract. This is a summary of the paper a should tell you the hypothesis, scope of investigation, and conclusions. If you don't have time for anything else, you want to abstract. 3. Look at the authors and date. Consider where they're from, what kind of collaboration and facilities were involved, and the age of the paper. It may be outdated or superceded by more in-depth work with better equipment or techniques, so don't assume this paper is the final word on the subject. 4. Read the conclusions. This should better explain the limitations and nuances of the work than the abstract. 5. Read the introduction. This should explain the reasons the authors undertook the investigation, and detail the conditions of the work, sample sizes, test vs control groups, etc. 6. Finally, if you're not satisfied yet, read the body of the paper. This is where the authors spell out the methodology, discuss data sets, perform analyses, and otherwise get into the 'meat' of the work performed. Hope that helps and saves you some time! Also keep in mind that academic papers are very dense, with each sentence carrying a lot of information. You'll need to read them more slowly and carefully than most material, especially when you're new to it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: macOS vs Ubuntu for PhD research? For my PhD I am given a laptop and can choose between a Macbook Pro which obviously comes with macOS or a Dell Latitude which can come with Ubuntu. Which is better for research? I have only ever used Linux but have heard positive things about macOS for developers. For context my PhD is quite computational and will involve writing lots of code.
RESPONSE A: You’ll probably be fine either way. I use a Mac (physics phd) but a few of my classmates use linux. Nobody is having any trouble either way.
RESPONSE B: Is there a particular reason you want a Mac? A friend of mine has one and you can fry an egg on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: macOS vs Ubuntu for PhD research? For my PhD I am given a laptop and can choose between a Macbook Pro which obviously comes with macOS or a Dell Latitude which can come with Ubuntu. Which is better for research? I have only ever used Linux but have heard positive things about macOS for developers. For context my PhD is quite computational and will involve writing lots of code.
RESPONSE A: I think it will depend on the machine. linux and macos(which is linux based are quite similar). btw, you can run macos on a latitude (depending on model, look up hackintosh), and you can run linux on mac. what macbook is this? arm chip? I would look at performance specifically to decide on this one.
RESPONSE B: You’ll probably be fine either way. I use a Mac (physics phd) but a few of my classmates use linux. Nobody is having any trouble either way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: am given a laptop and can choose between a Macbook Pro which obviously comes with macOS or a Dell Latitude which can come with Ubuntu. Which is better for research? I have only ever used Linux but have heard positive things about macOS for developers. For context my PhD is quite computational and will involve writing lots of code.
RESPONSE A: 1) Definitely try out a friend's Mac to see if you like the UI (or use a virtual machine) because it's very different from Windows/Linux. I personally hate it, and I know someone who switched to a Mac at the beginning of the academic year and they've been complaining non-stop about the various little features they miss (now they mostly use their Mac to remote into their Windows desktop at home). If you're particular about your setup/aesthetics, switching UI can destroy your workflow/productivity/enjoyment. 2) Ask around to see what others in your field are using. Sometimes it doesn't matter, but at least in physics I know that some software will only run on Mac/Linux (eg ROOT in high energy physics), whereas some software will only run on Windows. There are workarounds but it can become a headache. Also look into WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux) if you want a unix shell. But personally, I'd just dual-boot Windows and Linux since it's most versatile and I'm used to that UI. If you need to, use a virtual machine or remote into a Mac at your institution (I'd recommend Chrome Remote Desktop to get started). If you want some novelty, maybe look into a different Linux distro. I really like Mint with the Cinnamon interface. And depending on how expensive your computation is, look into getting access to a cluster. Good luck
RESPONSE B: I think it will depend on the machine. linux and macos(which is linux based are quite similar). btw, you can run macos on a latitude (depending on model, look up hackintosh), and you can run linux on mac. what macbook is this? arm chip? I would look at performance specifically to decide on this one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: macOS vs Ubuntu for PhD research? For my PhD I am given a laptop and can choose between a Macbook Pro which obviously comes with macOS or a Dell Latitude which can come with Ubuntu. Which is better for research? I have only ever used Linux but have heard positive things about macOS for developers. For context my PhD is quite computational and will involve writing lots of code.
RESPONSE A: I think it will depend on the machine. linux and macos(which is linux based are quite similar). btw, you can run macos on a latitude (depending on model, look up hackintosh), and you can run linux on mac. what macbook is this? arm chip? I would look at performance specifically to decide on this one.
RESPONSE B: Is there a particular reason you want a Mac? A friend of mine has one and you can fry an egg on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: macOS vs Ubuntu for PhD research? For my PhD I am given a laptop and can choose between a Macbook Pro which obviously comes with macOS or a Dell Latitude which can come with Ubuntu. Which is better for research? I have only ever used Linux but have heard positive things about macOS for developers. For context my PhD is quite computational and will involve writing lots of code.
RESPONSE A: I own a personal macbook and was given a dell latitude for work as a software engineer at a robotics company. The specs on my dell are much better than that of my mac, so i wont compare their performance to you. I will say the mac has a really nice user interface, something apple always delivers on. Butterfly keyboard gets a lot of hate but i personally like it. I've never really done to much computational work on it, but again its going to come down to the specs of the exact laptop youre talking about. The new M1 really seems incredible. I also really love the latitude. Super easy just to dual boot ubuntu on it, and its got a lot of ports on it if youre doing anything in EECS. Its hard to give you much more of a review on it cuz my company got the top of the line specs on it so its been the most powerful laptop ive ever used. I guess overall they both are really solid options, and I would recommend comparing the specs if youre able to get those from whoever is giving you the choice. Im happy to answer any specific questions you have, best of luck in your PhD.
RESPONSE B: I think it will depend on the machine. linux and macos(which is linux based are quite similar). btw, you can run macos on a latitude (depending on model, look up hackintosh), and you can run linux on mac. what macbook is this? arm chip? I would look at performance specifically to decide on this one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do PIs choose PhD students? Just curious as to how PIs pick their students? Assuming that all applicants have good academic background and the lab's has more than sufficient funds, what is it that determines one student gets selected over the other? What qualities or red flags do PIs look out for when deciding to accept or reject students? How do PIs tell if one student has potential or not (assuming both cases of having worked together before and having never worked together before)? Also, would a PI rather keep a bright student that is not neccesarily the most hardworking, or a hardworking student that isn't as bright? Just out of curiosity!
RESPONSE A: hardworking but not as bright wins out, the work needs doing and they're more likely to be able to ride out/cope with the pitfalls and troughs of academic life fortunately, at least in my field, you rarely have 'identical applicants' so there's usually some little thing that edges someone else as being a bit better than the other person (I ultimately got my own job over the other candidate they interviewed because I was more familiar with UK academia, which basically meant I'd mentioned REF during my interview), but more often its work expereince or an elective course choice... There's also an x factor that can't really be defined but is usually just referred to as 'fit' and that's one of the reasons we interview people
RESPONSE B: Based on my experience getting into a PhD program, I think the process PIs go through is something like: 1. Light 5 black candles around the Blasphemous Circle. 2. Say the dark prayer that summons Randimon, God of Academic Chaos. 3. Place the stack of applications on the sacred altar. Read the SoP essays to Randimon. 4. As the Blasphemous Circle bursts into arcane flame, snatch an application from the magical inferno. 5. This is your new grad student. This is just my suspicion, though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do PIs choose PhD students? Just curious as to how PIs pick their students? Assuming that all applicants have good academic background and the lab's has more than sufficient funds, what is it that determines one student gets selected over the other? What qualities or red flags do PIs look out for when deciding to accept or reject students? How do PIs tell if one student has potential or not (assuming both cases of having worked together before and having never worked together before)? Also, would a PI rather keep a bright student that is not neccesarily the most hardworking, or a hardworking student that isn't as bright? Just out of curiosity!
RESPONSE A: Hardworking any day. Too bright tends to come together with various difficulties. Also someone I am happy to be in close proximity to for a long time, and who will influence the interpersonal dynamics of the group, so personal compatibility matters.
RESPONSE B: Based on my experience getting into a PhD program, I think the process PIs go through is something like: 1. Light 5 black candles around the Blasphemous Circle. 2. Say the dark prayer that summons Randimon, God of Academic Chaos. 3. Place the stack of applications on the sacred altar. Read the SoP essays to Randimon. 4. As the Blasphemous Circle bursts into arcane flame, snatch an application from the magical inferno. 5. This is your new grad student. This is just my suspicion, though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What database do you use to organize your research? I recently finished a project that took me a very long time. I used Toolbox (Field Linguists' Toobox, by SIL) to create databases to organize my research. It's a great product, but now that I'm transitioning to a new project I'd like to consider using a new database, one that can work on a Mac without a Windows emulator. Does anyone have suggestions? I'd like a database that allows me to create fields, do boolean searches, that sort of thing. I'd also like it to run on iPad.
RESPONSE A: I use a really fancy program called "Google sheets".
RESPONSE B: I use zotero. Not sure how it works with apple. Sorry.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What program do you use to organize your research ideas and journal articles? I am slow on tech. But I've a ton of quotes and phrases from journal articles I keep on notepad/word. I would like something more modern, something I can add tags to, so when needed, i can click the tags that sort by subject. Some of the note taking apps like google seem to be more oriented towards very simple notes and phrases. Can anyone recommend something better?
RESPONSE A: Try Evernote? They have a free option for you to try. Compatible across multiple platforms, you can tag notes and create folders.
RESPONSE B: Check out mendeley. Good for note taking, highlighting, and organizing evidence, with a great bibliography tool for Microsoft word.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What program do you use to organize your research ideas and journal articles? I am slow on tech. But I've a ton of quotes and phrases from journal articles I keep on notepad/word. I would like something more modern, something I can add tags to, so when needed, i can click the tags that sort by subject. Some of the note taking apps like google seem to be more oriented towards very simple notes and phrases. Can anyone recommend something better?
RESPONSE A: Microsoft OneNote.
RESPONSE B: Check out mendeley. Good for note taking, highlighting, and organizing evidence, with a great bibliography tool for Microsoft word.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What program do you use to organize your research ideas and journal articles? I am slow on tech. But I've a ton of quotes and phrases from journal articles I keep on notepad/word. I would like something more modern, something I can add tags to, so when needed, i can click the tags that sort by subject. Some of the note taking apps like google seem to be more oriented towards very simple notes and phrases. Can anyone recommend something better?
RESPONSE A: Try Evernote? They have a free option for you to try. Compatible across multiple platforms, you can tag notes and create folders.
RESPONSE B: I use zotero. That's to organize the things I've read. Beyond that, quotes and passages I keep track of by hand. I hand write summaries of things, and then mark important things in the document itself. It's not the most high tech and efficient way, but I know zotero does have the capabilities of note taking and archiving things as well. I know you can add tags.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What program do you use to organize your research ideas and journal articles? I am slow on tech. But I've a ton of quotes and phrases from journal articles I keep on notepad/word. I would like something more modern, something I can add tags to, so when needed, i can click the tags that sort by subject. Some of the note taking apps like google seem to be more oriented towards very simple notes and phrases. Can anyone recommend something better?
RESPONSE A: Microsoft OneNote.
RESPONSE B: I use zotero. That's to organize the things I've read. Beyond that, quotes and passages I keep track of by hand. I hand write summaries of things, and then mark important things in the document itself. It's not the most high tech and efficient way, but I know zotero does have the capabilities of note taking and archiving things as well. I know you can add tags.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to handle publishing after name change? I am what someone might call an early-mid carreer scientist. I have a respectable number of publications and I like to believe that my name is known in my community. Despite that, I will be marrying next March and I plan to take on my SO's last name. Should I publish future papers with my new name? (It is tremedously easier to read and pronounce for an international audience). Shall I email everyone I know about my name change? Is it legit (and pratical) to keep my old name for scientific publications? How did people in my situation handle this?
RESPONSE A: >Should I publish future papers with my new name? If you'd like to. Regardless, getting an ORCID account is a good idea. >Shall I email everyone I know about my name change? I wouldn't send an email explicitly for this purpose, though I have seen people change the name in their email signature to something like: FirstName NewLastName (OldLastName). >Is it legit (and pratical) to keep my old name for scientific publications? How did people in my situation handle this? I know female faculty in my departments who kept their name in the professional world, but do change the name personally.
RESPONSE B: Following because I’m about to publish two papers and am getting married in a year and really don’t know what to do!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to handle publishing after name change? I am what someone might call an early-mid carreer scientist. I have a respectable number of publications and I like to believe that my name is known in my community. Despite that, I will be marrying next March and I plan to take on my SO's last name. Should I publish future papers with my new name? (It is tremedously easier to read and pronounce for an international audience). Shall I email everyone I know about my name change? Is it legit (and pratical) to keep my old name for scientific publications? How did people in my situation handle this?
RESPONSE A: Following because I’m about to publish two papers and am getting married in a year and really don’t know what to do!
RESPONSE B: I published in FirstName LastName and then after I got married I just added my married name to the end professionally - FirstName LastName MarriedName. Means that for new publications my old full name is still there. I know people who have just continued publishing in their old name and used that professionally and their married name socially and it’s totally legitimate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to handle publishing after name change? I am what someone might call an early-mid carreer scientist. I have a respectable number of publications and I like to believe that my name is known in my community. Despite that, I will be marrying next March and I plan to take on my SO's last name. Should I publish future papers with my new name? (It is tremedously easier to read and pronounce for an international audience). Shall I email everyone I know about my name change? Is it legit (and pratical) to keep my old name for scientific publications? How did people in my situation handle this?
RESPONSE A: It's largely up to you. I know some people who still publish under their maiden name, others who have switched to their married names. As others said, an ORCID ID helps to link everything together anyway.
RESPONSE B: I published in FirstName LastName and then after I got married I just added my married name to the end professionally - FirstName LastName MarriedName. Means that for new publications my old full name is still there. I know people who have just continued publishing in their old name and used that professionally and their married name socially and it’s totally legitimate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Math PhDs/Graduate students (especially in the US), are undergrad degrees from liberal arts colleges a plausible route to a math PhD from a decent university? I am applying to college this year end, and I am looking at different options. I prefer the liberal arts style of education, as the small class sizes and high level of professor-student interaction. I understand that a high portion of LAC students do go on into PhD programs, but is this just clever marketing on the LAC's parts, or is it actually true?
RESPONSE A: SLAC Math prof here. Our math majors are a mixed bag. Some just want to get a job in industry, some want to go work for the government, some want to get into programming or more CS oriented jobs. We do, however, get the students who want to go on and get PhDs, and they get "the treatment". Special topics courses, independent studies, involvement (when possible) in current research projects, etc. The students we send off are well prepared for graduate school, usually get pretty awesome scholarships too (one was just offered a very special scholarship to attend graduate school in Florida, which was way above and beyond the normal stipend). What you need to do is make sure that wherever you go, the faculty in that department will be willing to work with you to ensure that you can study whatever you want!
RESPONSE B: I think you are confusing some terms. Liberal arts just means that undergraduate degrees require a lot of non-major courses to produce a well-rounded student and nothing about it implies small class sizes. Liberal arts also does not preclude research and there are R1 Universities where undergraduate science and math majors receive liberal arts educations. It sounds like what you really like is the "small" part of SLAC and you would prefer a small school to a larger one, even though many of the larger ones provide liberal arts educations. The only part that might be more challenging as a SLAC student will be getting research experience, but it's not impossible.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Math PhDs/Graduate students (especially in the US), are undergrad degrees from liberal arts colleges a plausible route to a math PhD from a decent university? I am applying to college this year end, and I am looking at different options. I prefer the liberal arts style of education, as the small class sizes and high level of professor-student interaction. I understand that a high portion of LAC students do go on into PhD programs, but is this just clever marketing on the LAC's parts, or is it actually true?
RESPONSE A: As long as you arent taking out loans it should be fine. Make sure to get research experience. I would recommend checking on state schools too. I grew up in the Midwest and while many peers went to SLACs, I went to the state school, and in my science classes we rarely had more than 20 students and the labs were taught by the professors. The things you want from the SLAC are not unique to liberal arts schools. Get a high GPA, research experience and summer experiences and youll be golden.
RESPONSE B: I think you are confusing some terms. Liberal arts just means that undergraduate degrees require a lot of non-major courses to produce a well-rounded student and nothing about it implies small class sizes. Liberal arts also does not preclude research and there are R1 Universities where undergraduate science and math majors receive liberal arts educations. It sounds like what you really like is the "small" part of SLAC and you would prefer a small school to a larger one, even though many of the larger ones provide liberal arts educations. The only part that might be more challenging as a SLAC student will be getting research experience, but it's not impossible.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Math PhDs/Graduate students (especially in the US), are undergrad degrees from liberal arts colleges a plausible route to a math PhD from a decent university? I am applying to college this year end, and I am looking at different options. I prefer the liberal arts style of education, as the small class sizes and high level of professor-student interaction. I understand that a high portion of LAC students do go on into PhD programs, but is this just clever marketing on the LAC's parts, or is it actually true?
RESPONSE A: As long as you arent taking out loans it should be fine. Make sure to get research experience. I would recommend checking on state schools too. I grew up in the Midwest and while many peers went to SLACs, I went to the state school, and in my science classes we rarely had more than 20 students and the labs were taught by the professors. The things you want from the SLAC are not unique to liberal arts schools. Get a high GPA, research experience and summer experiences and youll be golden.
RESPONSE B: SLAC Math prof here. Our math majors are a mixed bag. Some just want to get a job in industry, some want to go work for the government, some want to get into programming or more CS oriented jobs. We do, however, get the students who want to go on and get PhDs, and they get "the treatment". Special topics courses, independent studies, involvement (when possible) in current research projects, etc. The students we send off are well prepared for graduate school, usually get pretty awesome scholarships too (one was just offered a very special scholarship to attend graduate school in Florida, which was way above and beyond the normal stipend). What you need to do is make sure that wherever you go, the faculty in that department will be willing to work with you to ensure that you can study whatever you want!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Math PhDs/Graduate students (especially in the US), are undergrad degrees from liberal arts colleges a plausible route to a math PhD from a decent university? I am applying to college this year end, and I am looking at different options. I prefer the liberal arts style of education, as the small class sizes and high level of professor-student interaction. I understand that a high portion of LAC students do go on into PhD programs, but is this just clever marketing on the LAC's parts, or is it actually true?
RESPONSE A: TL;DR: yes. In general, undergrad degrees from liberal arts colleges are just as good preparation for grad school as degrees from other places. Heck, at least half the Ivy League is liberal arts colleges. Surely you aren't suggesting that a degree from the likes of Brown, Dartmouth, or Princeton is not a plausible route to grad school? ;-)
RESPONSE B: As long as you arent taking out loans it should be fine. Make sure to get research experience. I would recommend checking on state schools too. I grew up in the Midwest and while many peers went to SLACs, I went to the state school, and in my science classes we rarely had more than 20 students and the labs were taught by the professors. The things you want from the SLAC are not unique to liberal arts schools. Get a high GPA, research experience and summer experiences and youll be golden.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Cover letter letterhead - which institution to use? I am currently affliated with 2 universities: University A - I am a PhD candidate and sessional instructor University B - I am a sessional instructor I am applying for a full time position at University B. Can I use their letterhead? Or should I be using University A's letterhead since I have more affiliation with them? TIA!
RESPONSE A: A makes more sense to me.
RESPONSE B: I would use A. B is going to know your role there and probably think it’s strange.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Cover letter letterhead - which institution to use? I am currently affliated with 2 universities: University A - I am a PhD candidate and sessional instructor University B - I am a sessional instructor I am applying for a full time position at University B. Can I use their letterhead? Or should I be using University A's letterhead since I have more affiliation with them? TIA!
RESPONSE A: A makes more sense to me.
RESPONSE B: I would not use any letterhead for a job application, regardless of any position I currently held. Letterhead should be used for official business pertaining to your job representing the university. Job applications and cover letters are your business. The hiring manager is going to see who you work for in your CV anyways. Letters of recommendation should be on the letterhead of the institution where the recommender is employed. Those are considered official business.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Cover letter letterhead - which institution to use? I am currently affliated with 2 universities: University A - I am a PhD candidate and sessional instructor University B - I am a sessional instructor I am applying for a full time position at University B. Can I use their letterhead? Or should I be using University A's letterhead since I have more affiliation with them? TIA!
RESPONSE A: No letterhead. Your job application is not official business of either Institution.
RESPONSE B: A makes more sense to me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Cover letter letterhead - which institution to use? I am currently affliated with 2 universities: University A - I am a PhD candidate and sessional instructor University B - I am a sessional instructor I am applying for a full time position at University B. Can I use their letterhead? Or should I be using University A's letterhead since I have more affiliation with them? TIA!
RESPONSE A: A makes more sense to me.
RESPONSE B: Using an institutional letterhead for a job application would be a big no no over here. You are applying on your own behalf, not on behalf of your current intuition.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Cover letter letterhead - which institution to use? I am currently affliated with 2 universities: University A - I am a PhD candidate and sessional instructor University B - I am a sessional instructor I am applying for a full time position at University B. Can I use their letterhead? Or should I be using University A's letterhead since I have more affiliation with them? TIA!
RESPONSE A: A makes more sense to me.
RESPONSE B: You don’t use the College’s letterhead.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: get on with my life, but I'm having a hard time letting go of the idea of this lab without a firm "no." No other lab excites me like this one. I'm just so frustrated by this whole ordeal. Anyone have any opinions on what's going on here, or any advice for me? Thanks for letting me rant a bit. TL;DR: Had an interview for a postdoc lab. Was told I'd hear a decision by the end of March, but have still not heard anything at all, despite follow up emails. Don't know what to do.
RESPONSE A: I'd put money on "she's waiting on official notice of funding". It's not ok to handle it this way if that's the case, but this would be my guess. Don't put all of your eggs into this basket if the funding wasn't already there when she started talking to you. Even high-octane labs get sandbagged, and well-established PIs have a bad tendency to assume a proposal is a slam-dunk without waiting for official notice.
RESPONSE B: You must assume for your sake that the PI is not interested in hiring you. Get on with your "other prospective labs." Until you have an offer and a start date, you're facing unemployment, poverty, homelessness, starvation...you get the picture. Update: Reading your story again, the PI's response seems too lukewarm. In my experience, when a PI wants to hire you, they let you know ASAP because they don't want to let you get away. This PI hasn't done that at all. In fact, her non-response says to me that she's already made an offer to someone else and is waiting for that person to accept before letting you know that you didn't make the cut. In the meantime, she's letting you hang out to dry, just in case her top pick doesn't accept. And don't assume you're #2 on her list either. You could be #4 or 5. She's wasting your time. Find another position ASAP.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: higher salary). Some have said it's a pain-in-the-ass of a job that they would hate to have. What are your thoughts and experiences? Any positive perspectives? TIA!
RESPONSE A: A benevolent dictator. Someone organized enough to keep paperwork flowing, nerdy enough to handle endless meetings, and wise enough not to rock the boat too badly. Ultimately, someone trusted to make unpopular decisions with a smile, so everyone else doesn’t have to.
RESPONSE B: I became chair late in my career when the dean wandered by my office and asked me to apply. Our school had just split social sciences and the current chair was a historian and was going to continue to chair the history split-off. I wasn't planning on applying but she asked me to. The only reason I did was that we were starting a baccalaureate program in psychology (my area) and as chair of social sciences I would have a lot more influence in how the program developed than as the coordinator of psychology. I did have that influence and I hired all of the current faculty in psychology, so I was very satisfied with that. It was worth doing, only because of the psychology program development. I got paid $5000 and had 2 course releases; it turns out that's a lot compared to our sister institutions in the University System of Georgia. But, my research became a weekend thing and I essentially stopped publishing. I learned a lot about my colleagues that I didn't want to know, including which ones were idiots (well, I already knew most of that), which ones weren't working, and which ones were truly assholes. On the other hand, I learned that most were pretty cool people, working hard in difficult circumstances. I found it very gratifying to be able to help people in their career development. Ultimately I retired when I got to the maximum pension amount I'd earn (right before COVID, thank goodness) that occurs at 40 years of employment. I very likely wouldn't have retired if I hadn't been chair, but it really made no sense to go back to a faculty position and lose the chair bump because my net work pay would have been less than my retirement pay if I had done that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: the time. A prominent researcher at one of the city's top psychiatric institutes has offered her a voluntary ad-hoc position that would give her the chance to explore yet another field of neuroscience. The person hinted the possibility of evolving to a full paid position at the completion of the initial assignment (which would take a semester, I'm guessing). Without getting into the specifics, the field is a niche area, and paid openings in the field is supposedly hard to come by without prior experience. My worry is that this is essentially an unpaid research position, a glorified forced labor to be more blunt, and I think that there could come additional opportunities, preferably paid, for someone with a Master's like my SO. That being said, I also do want to maximize her chances of getting into a well-respected Ph.D., and if this unpaid position is the best option, we are willing to take it. What are your thoughts? Should my SO take this unpaid research assistant position? Or should she keep looking for more positions?
RESPONSE A: I would think undergrad students should be unpaid research assistants, not people who have completed their bachelors and a masters. It sounds like your SO is only going to be working in a paid position on weekends and then during the week work for free? This seems a bit odd to me. I don't feel like its appropriate or beneficial for someone at her stage to be spending most of her time working unpaid.
RESPONSE B: I agree that unpaid positions are discriminatory for those who need income support. Unfortunately, for highly technical field those who come in to train as an intern are for the most part a drain on the resources of the group--it takes a great deal of time and resources to train the person. Even when I take on unpaid volunteers, it actually negatively impacts my lab, at least for six months, usually for the whole volunteer period. I do try to support people after an initial period of a month or two, but this isn't because their labor is valuable; it is because it is the right thing to do. So, if the opportunity is great and you and your wife is not desperate for the support, then I think she should do it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: supposedly hard to come by without prior experience. My worry is that this is essentially an unpaid research position, a glorified forced labor to be more blunt, and I think that there could come additional opportunities, preferably paid, for someone with a Master's like my SO. That being said, I also do want to maximize her chances of getting into a well-respected Ph.D., and if this unpaid position is the best option, we are willing to take it. What are your thoughts? Should my SO take this unpaid research assistant position? Or should she keep looking for more positions?
RESPONSE A: > A prominent researcher at one of the city's top psychiatric institutes has offered her a voluntary ad-hoc position that would give her the chance to explore yet another field of neuroscience. The person hinted the possibility of evolving to a full paid position at the completion of the initial assignment (which would take a semester, I'm guessing). Without getting into the specifics, the field is a niche area, and paid openings in the field is supposedly hard to come by without prior experience. Then yes she should accept it, if he is not financially constrained. She should work for 3 months and then ask if the position is becoming paid or not. This is a common method to find out find out about a person's work habits and qualifications. EDIT: By 6/7 months if her position doesnt become paid, I would look for other options.
RESPONSE B: Unpaid work is unreasonable. Simple as that. I don't see how anyone can think this is reasonable even for the "experience" and "exposure". Even participants of psychological studies are paid, so how can someone working to execute studies not be paid. There are many PIs willing to hire and train MA/MS students. In my opinion, your SO should not even consider working for free for the promise of eventual employment. It speaks volumes on the kind of ethics the PI subscribes to. The worst thing is if the PI turns out to be toxic, then your SO won't even get a nice reference letter out of it. Stay away and steer clear of working for free and for "experience" in academia. Red flags all around it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: glorified forced labor to be more blunt, and I think that there could come additional opportunities, preferably paid, for someone with a Master's like my SO. That being said, I also do want to maximize her chances of getting into a well-respected Ph.D., and if this unpaid position is the best option, we are willing to take it. What are your thoughts? Should my SO take this unpaid research assistant position? Or should she keep looking for more positions?
RESPONSE A: At least at my institution (US, R1) I don’t think this would even be allowed. If your SO is working with humans, animals, chemicals, or biological samples wouldn’t she need to be officially employed to have her training and activities protected by institutional regulations. Currently enrolled students fall into a separate category since working in a lab is viewed as part of their educational experience. Even setting this aside, I would avoid any lab that doesn’t value staff enough to pay for them. Yes, new staff need to be trained. Just like any new employee in any job. I don’t think this is a reasonable rationale for not paying someone who is doing work on behalf of the lab. Can your SO come and go at her leisure, without anyone counting on her to do anything for the lab? If not, she has a job and should be paid accordingly.
RESPONSE B: > A prominent researcher at one of the city's top psychiatric institutes has offered her a voluntary ad-hoc position that would give her the chance to explore yet another field of neuroscience. The person hinted the possibility of evolving to a full paid position at the completion of the initial assignment (which would take a semester, I'm guessing). Without getting into the specifics, the field is a niche area, and paid openings in the field is supposedly hard to come by without prior experience. Then yes she should accept it, if he is not financially constrained. She should work for 3 months and then ask if the position is becoming paid or not. This is a common method to find out find out about a person's work habits and qualifications. EDIT: By 6/7 months if her position doesnt become paid, I would look for other options.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: too high, and that sooner or later I'll crash with reality and all of this will be over. I mean, it almost feels surreal to be here doing this when most of my life I've depended on the goodwill of others to even survive... I know I am just getting started but what I've done so far I've done with a lot of effort and I plan to keep doing that... I'm just not sure if it will be worth it, or if I should rather start following some other path.
RESPONSE A: Have you talked to the academic advisor in your university about it? I think money is going to be your biggest problem. You might consider working for a few years first to save up the fund. If you receive a PhD scholarship, you'll have a small stipend to tide you through your studies. However, there's generally no such thing for Master/Honours. Graduate programs don't tend to offer too many scholarships, especially to international students. And you'll hardly find any that covers everything; housing is extremely expensive in Australia.
RESPONSE B: It’s possible, I did that but I became PR before starting. I only need to pay for living cost. Don’t do a PhD if you don’t have scholarship in Australia. I did that and tried to work alongside, it was not fun. Problem with research in Australia is that you can’t get a job easily after PhD for the biology or biomedical field. For fellowships, you will need a lot of papers, for me, I got 19 papers (12 first authors) at the end of my PhD, that include another project which worth another phd after 4.5 years of (full/part time) phd. I did not have any days off during my PhD including public holiday. Then I managed to get a nhmrc early career fellow, but still I need to fight with uni for my salary gap, it was a nightmare. They simply don’t respect you if they need to have fancy new buildings. So think before you make any irrational decisions, your supervisor will always say that you can apply for scholarship after you start, don’t do it, it’s a trap!
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.