label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
A
|
POST: How many hours do you work on a regular workday? * Entrance-to-exit from the office/lab * Actual working hours (i.e. excluding any lunch/bathroom/phone break of any kind) * If possible, career stage, field/industry, country? Thanks!
RESPONSE A: I would say approximately 4-5 hours per day on a good day—and that’s actively writing/researching. Cognitively it seems I can’t do much more than that! Canada, PhD candidate.
RESPONSE B: I track my time pretty closely, and usually work ~9.5h on weekdays and ~4h on weekend days (not including meals, bathroom breaks, etc). I’m an ML PhD student in the US.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Publishing an academic book without PhD? I'm currently finishing a research masters in a humanities subject and would like to expand my research and try and publish it as a book. There's a good chance I have a terminal illness, so don't have the time nor the inclination to do a PhD. Is not having a PhD or working as a lecturer likely to effect my chances of finding a publisher? If so, are there any publishers that are more flexible, while still being good quality? Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Lots of "academic" books are written by folks without Ph.D.s or without academic positions. No academic press I know of screens their submissions based on credentials first-- write a good book that is well researched and you'll likely find an acquisitions editor happy to discuss it with you. Hell, start with one of them before it's even written: my first book was a revision of my dissertation and I had a couple of editors interested in it while I was still a grad student in the research phase. No Ph.D., no academic appointment or title, but they were happy to talk and share advice about the process. Convince an editor that the book has prospects and a market. Submit a completed mss. If they think it's good they will send it out for review. If those are good it will go through the process and ultimately the press's board will (or will not) approve a contract. Nobody along the way is going to say "This is a great book, but the author doesn't have a faculty job or a Ph.D., so we're going to pass." Or perhaps Harvard or Yale or Berkeley UP will do that (I don't know TBH, haven't ever dealt with them). But there are lots of other presses out there that won't care.
RESPONSE B: As others have said, author credibility plays a big role, but so does the author’s story. One of the questions any agent (for nonfiction, the most common route is to query agents with a book proposal, not the finished book) will ask is ‘why now?’, and you have an unfortunately interesting answer to that question.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: delve into what seemed to be such an important and subtle topic that has everyday implications (in this case, it seems to be one of those seminal studies which jumpstarted this fallacy kick that pop cognitive psychology is on). This is the first research paper that I've read in its entirety for fun... well, except this one detailing sea otters raping dead baby seals: [O_O] (http://www.aquaticmammalsjournal.org/attachments/article/505/36_4_Harris.pdf). Anyways, it got me thinking: what are some of the most revolutionary, insane, interesting, or influential published studies out there? Obviously, all fields of study are welcomed.
RESPONSE A: "Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful" - Is a paper I keep coming back to: http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~sillito/cpsc-601.23/readings/greenberg-2008.pdf Current practice in Human Computer Interaction as encouraged by educational institutes, academic review processes, and institutions with usability groups advocate usability evaluation as a critical part of every design process. This is for good reason: usability evaluation has a significant role to play when conditions warrant it. Yet evaluation can be ineffective and even harmful if naively done 'by rule' rather than 'by thought'. If done during early stage design, it can mute creative ideas that do not conform to current interface norms. If done to test radical innovations, the many interface issues that would likely arise from an immature technology can quash what could have been an inspired vision. If done to validate an academic prototype, it may incorrectly suggest a design's scientific worthiness rather than offer a meaningful critique of how it would be adopted and used in everyday practice. If done without regard to how cultures adopt technology over time, then today's reluctant reactions by users will forestall tomorrow's eager acceptance. The choice of evaluation methodology - if any - must arise from and be appropriate for the actual problem or research question under consideration.
RESPONSE B: "The Market for Lemons: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism" by George Akerlof
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Good "side-hustles" for a humanities prof? What are some good "side-hustles" (part-time jobs) for a humanities prof hoping to make some extra money? It's easy to come up with a list of possible-sounding jobs (e.g. editing, high-end tutoring), but I'm especially interested in first- or second-hand experiences and specific details. Have you (or has someone you know) tried working on the side while professoring? What kind of work did/do you do? How many hours/week? How much $$$?
RESPONSE A: Mind sharing your field? Looking to only pursue work relevant to your area of specialization? I've worked a ton of side gigs. Have you considered grading standardized tests? The work is monotonous and schedule brutal but pay is OK and it's typically less than 2 weeks a year after I give my finals. I've also worked as a tour guide. It's a nice gig if you like teaching and are knowledgable about your region.
RESPONSE B: I've heard writing short fiction stories for niche subcultures and selling them as e-books on Amazon can be a decent beer money hustle if you are good at writing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Good "side-hustles" for a humanities prof? What are some good "side-hustles" (part-time jobs) for a humanities prof hoping to make some extra money? It's easy to come up with a list of possible-sounding jobs (e.g. editing, high-end tutoring), but I'm especially interested in first- or second-hand experiences and specific details. Have you (or has someone you know) tried working on the side while professoring? What kind of work did/do you do? How many hours/week? How much $$$?
RESPONSE A: Mind sharing your field? Looking to only pursue work relevant to your area of specialization? I've worked a ton of side gigs. Have you considered grading standardized tests? The work is monotonous and schedule brutal but pay is OK and it's typically less than 2 weeks a year after I give my finals. I've also worked as a tour guide. It's a nice gig if you like teaching and are knowledgable about your region.
RESPONSE B: If you are proficient in languages other than English, there's likely a market for new translations of texts that you could self-publish as e-books on Amazon. You'd need to be strategic about this since it's a fair amount of work and you'll need to charge enough to make it worth it (but not so much that nobody will ever buy it). There may also be a market for e-book versions of certain texts in your field, which also happen to be in the public domain. You could re-publish those texts, maybe with additional scholarly material (concordances, summaries). I suspect there isn't much low-hanging fruit (like, pretty sure Shakespeare is out of the question) but in certain niche fields there may be enough demand to justify the effort. Do your homework about what's legal and ethical though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Good "side-hustles" for a humanities prof? What are some good "side-hustles" (part-time jobs) for a humanities prof hoping to make some extra money? It's easy to come up with a list of possible-sounding jobs (e.g. editing, high-end tutoring), but I'm especially interested in first- or second-hand experiences and specific details. Have you (or has someone you know) tried working on the side while professoring? What kind of work did/do you do? How many hours/week? How much $$$?
RESPONSE A: If you're okay with illegal but imo morally okay work (given the state of the academic job market and academic publishing), sell some of the three billion extra textbooks lying around the department on Amazon Ebay Craigslist.
RESPONSE B: I've heard writing short fiction stories for niche subcultures and selling them as e-books on Amazon can be a decent beer money hustle if you are good at writing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Good "side-hustles" for a humanities prof? What are some good "side-hustles" (part-time jobs) for a humanities prof hoping to make some extra money? It's easy to come up with a list of possible-sounding jobs (e.g. editing, high-end tutoring), but I'm especially interested in first- or second-hand experiences and specific details. Have you (or has someone you know) tried working on the side while professoring? What kind of work did/do you do? How many hours/week? How much $$$?
RESPONSE A: If you're okay with illegal but imo morally okay work (given the state of the academic job market and academic publishing), sell some of the three billion extra textbooks lying around the department on Amazon Ebay Craigslist.
RESPONSE B: If you are proficient in languages other than English, there's likely a market for new translations of texts that you could self-publish as e-books on Amazon. You'd need to be strategic about this since it's a fair amount of work and you'll need to charge enough to make it worth it (but not so much that nobody will ever buy it). There may also be a market for e-book versions of certain texts in your field, which also happen to be in the public domain. You could re-publish those texts, maybe with additional scholarly material (concordances, summaries). I suspect there isn't much low-hanging fruit (like, pretty sure Shakespeare is out of the question) but in certain niche fields there may be enough demand to justify the effort. Do your homework about what's legal and ethical though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: For those of you who tried to get a tenure-track job and failed: What is your story? As a Ph.D. student at a top R1, i'm only really exposed to success stories of people getting tenure-track jobs. Most people in my graduate program don't seem to be worried about it, and the professors all tell me that i'm being unrealistic by thinking the chances are exceedingly small (I posted a thread about this recently). For those of you who tried to get a tenure-track job and failed: What is your story? Were you ever unemployed for a time? How was the application/job talk process for you, and what are you doing now?
RESPONSE A: PhD in humanities from one of the top schools in the country. I was a stellar grad student (3 pubs, awards, etc.). Fourth year in the market I finally got a campus interview at a third tier school. Completely devastated when I didn’t get the job. It was TT job but 4/4, crappy location, low pay. Still devastated. Decided to try teaching private secondary schools rather than take on the last year of my very low wage postdoc and go on the market yet again. Honestly it was a huge blow to my ego, but once I got over it, it ended up well. Better pay, better students, less work than I would’ve had had I gotten the job. I know I’m a hell of a lot happier than I would’ve been, but it still does pinch the ego every once in a while. Trouble with grad school in my experience was the tunnel vision. Props to trying to see beyond the tunnel.
RESPONSE B: Haven't gone up for tenure yet, but do know a couple of people who failed. There one thing I can tell you, is that in both cases there were warning signs, and neither one was particularly surprised when they were denied. I'd like to think most departments and schools want to see their faculty succeed, so they make sure not to send people in totally blind to their chances. Also, both people I know who were denied ended up getting academic jobs elsewhere, at instructions that are a better fit for them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: My PI wants me to speak at a predatory conference I'm in the third year of a PhD. My PI is relatively inexperienced, and either does not see that it is a predatory organisation, or does not care. She thinks it's a great opportunity for me to speak, and that it's wonderful I received an invitation (a spam e-mail). I researched this organisation, raised my concerns plainly, and was told "a speech is a speech, you were invited, do it". I will not pay hundreds of dollars from my grant to travel and speak at such a summit. Any advice on how to proceed? She is not replying to my messages.
RESPONSE A: No. If you're invited, they will pay board, travel, fees. You only pay for well-known conferences in your related fields. Tell her you can't afford to pay for this thing that none of the respected people in your field will be at (so no networking worth). There are better ways to get stuff on your CV.
RESPONSE B: Have you suggested an alternative? Sounds like she wants you to give a talk at a conference, so if this one isn't right, propose one that is.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: My PI wants me to speak at a predatory conference I'm in the third year of a PhD. My PI is relatively inexperienced, and either does not see that it is a predatory organisation, or does not care. She thinks it's a great opportunity for me to speak, and that it's wonderful I received an invitation (a spam e-mail). I researched this organisation, raised my concerns plainly, and was told "a speech is a speech, you were invited, do it". I will not pay hundreds of dollars from my grant to travel and speak at such a summit. Any advice on how to proceed? She is not replying to my messages.
RESPONSE A: I assume that your Pi is trying to help, as an invited talk on the CV does look good and might help you find a job after you finish. But I completely understand why you don't want to do this. But approach it from a place of understanding that it is trying to help you. (Unless her student being invited helps her in someway?).
RESPONSE B: I'm confused why you even told them about spam mail...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: My PI wants me to speak at a predatory conference I'm in the third year of a PhD. My PI is relatively inexperienced, and either does not see that it is a predatory organisation, or does not care. She thinks it's a great opportunity for me to speak, and that it's wonderful I received an invitation (a spam e-mail). I researched this organisation, raised my concerns plainly, and was told "a speech is a speech, you were invited, do it". I will not pay hundreds of dollars from my grant to travel and speak at such a summit. Any advice on how to proceed? She is not replying to my messages.
RESPONSE A: Your PI sounds like an idiot. Any decently educated person will know these BS conferences do more harm than good on one's CV.
RESPONSE B: I assume that your Pi is trying to help, as an invited talk on the CV does look good and might help you find a job after you finish. But I completely understand why you don't want to do this. But approach it from a place of understanding that it is trying to help you. (Unless her student being invited helps her in someway?).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: My PI wants me to speak at a predatory conference I'm in the third year of a PhD. My PI is relatively inexperienced, and either does not see that it is a predatory organisation, or does not care. She thinks it's a great opportunity for me to speak, and that it's wonderful I received an invitation (a spam e-mail). I researched this organisation, raised my concerns plainly, and was told "a speech is a speech, you were invited, do it". I will not pay hundreds of dollars from my grant to travel and speak at such a summit. Any advice on how to proceed? She is not replying to my messages.
RESPONSE A: I assume that your Pi is trying to help, as an invited talk on the CV does look good and might help you find a job after you finish. But I completely understand why you don't want to do this. But approach it from a place of understanding that it is trying to help you. (Unless her student being invited helps her in someway?).
RESPONSE B: If she's stopped replying to your messages it's likely she's realized you were right about it being a scam and she's reluctant to admit it. I'd stop bringing the matter up, and she might just 'forget' about it entirely.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: My PI wants me to speak at a predatory conference I'm in the third year of a PhD. My PI is relatively inexperienced, and either does not see that it is a predatory organisation, or does not care. She thinks it's a great opportunity for me to speak, and that it's wonderful I received an invitation (a spam e-mail). I researched this organisation, raised my concerns plainly, and was told "a speech is a speech, you were invited, do it". I will not pay hundreds of dollars from my grant to travel and speak at such a summit. Any advice on how to proceed? She is not replying to my messages.
RESPONSE A: Maybe show them this: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/warning-conmen-and-shameless-scholars-operate-area
RESPONSE B: If she's stopped replying to your messages it's likely she's realized you were right about it being a scam and she's reluctant to admit it. I'd stop bringing the matter up, and she might just 'forget' about it entirely.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it bad form to bring your partner to a conference with you? I’m a grad student and just got my first conference proposal accepted. The conference is being held in a somewhat touristy city that’s in driving distance, and my partner would love to come with me, as he’s never seen it. Of course he would occupy himself during the conference sessions and such, but would like to grab dinner with me, see a museum, etc. I’ve never been to a conference, so I don’t really know what’s frowned upon and what isn’t. Would it be bad to bring him with me and enjoy some sightseeing together in my downtime? Or is that a no-no?
RESPONSE A: I see people do it all the time. We have a 7 week old and I'm breastfeeding so my husband is coming with me to the next several meetings so I can feed our baby and still be around him.
RESPONSE B: Definitely allowed, but make sure you leave time for networking after the conference. As long as your partner understands those expectations, this works really well - and it's so nice to come back to the hotel after a long day of conferencing to your SO!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it bad form to bring your partner to a conference with you? I’m a grad student and just got my first conference proposal accepted. The conference is being held in a somewhat touristy city that’s in driving distance, and my partner would love to come with me, as he’s never seen it. Of course he would occupy himself during the conference sessions and such, but would like to grab dinner with me, see a museum, etc. I’ve never been to a conference, so I don’t really know what’s frowned upon and what isn’t. Would it be bad to bring him with me and enjoy some sightseeing together in my downtime? Or is that a no-no?
RESPONSE A: The only way I would do this is if my partner was 100% on board with not really spending any time with me the whole weekend. Conferences are great places for making new connections and strengthening old ones, but most of that happens after hours.
RESPONSE B: I see people do it all the time. We have a 7 week old and I'm breastfeeding so my husband is coming with me to the next several meetings so I can feed our baby and still be around him.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it bad form to bring your partner to a conference with you? I’m a grad student and just got my first conference proposal accepted. The conference is being held in a somewhat touristy city that’s in driving distance, and my partner would love to come with me, as he’s never seen it. Of course he would occupy himself during the conference sessions and such, but would like to grab dinner with me, see a museum, etc. I’ve never been to a conference, so I don’t really know what’s frowned upon and what isn’t. Would it be bad to bring him with me and enjoy some sightseeing together in my downtime? Or is that a no-no?
RESPONSE A: I see people do it all the time. We have a 7 week old and I'm breastfeeding so my husband is coming with me to the next several meetings so I can feed our baby and still be around him.
RESPONSE B: It's okay to bring your partner, but I eventually stopped doing it. My ex-wife needed a lot of babysitting and would get very frustrated that I had events in the evening or had to get up early to go to the meeting. As long as your partner understands that it's basically a business event, and you will likely be tired and have lots of last-minute changes in plans, I think its fine. I would invite him along and make a planned day or time to do things with him. Set the expectations of when you think you'll be available... it's okay to skip out on parts of the meeting that seem useless. And maybe stay a day or two after the meeting to see more together.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it bad form to bring your partner to a conference with you? I’m a grad student and just got my first conference proposal accepted. The conference is being held in a somewhat touristy city that’s in driving distance, and my partner would love to come with me, as he’s never seen it. Of course he would occupy himself during the conference sessions and such, but would like to grab dinner with me, see a museum, etc. I’ve never been to a conference, so I don’t really know what’s frowned upon and what isn’t. Would it be bad to bring him with me and enjoy some sightseeing together in my downtime? Or is that a no-no?
RESPONSE A: I bring my partner all the time. I find it helpful especially during the cocktail parties in the evenings. I hate small talk and always feel so awkward. But having her there with me makes me feel a little more at ease engaging in the required chit chat at these functions.
RESPONSE B: It depends on your partner. If they can hang out independently for the time, then Yes. If they're ever going to ask something like "When are you going to make time for me?" then No.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it bad form to bring your partner to a conference with you? I’m a grad student and just got my first conference proposal accepted. The conference is being held in a somewhat touristy city that’s in driving distance, and my partner would love to come with me, as he’s never seen it. Of course he would occupy himself during the conference sessions and such, but would like to grab dinner with me, see a museum, etc. I’ve never been to a conference, so I don’t really know what’s frowned upon and what isn’t. Would it be bad to bring him with me and enjoy some sightseeing together in my downtime? Or is that a no-no?
RESPONSE A: It depends on your partner. If they can hang out independently for the time, then Yes. If they're ever going to ask something like "When are you going to make time for me?" then No.
RESPONSE B: I see people brings their partners/kids/parents etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: If I took like four classes with a professor around four years ago, and he said then that anyone in the class could come to him for a letter of recommendation, is that still valid? A semester after I took classes with him, I transferred schools, and we lost touch, but now I am finally graduating and want to pursue grad school in the next year or so, and that requires letters of recommendation. Is getting a letter of rec from my first university bad, weird, too long ago, have a possibility of them having forgotten about me? Any advice on the matter is welcome.
RESPONSE A: I’m gonna go against the current replies and say this may be ok to do. If you have better recommendations from your current school go with them but I don’t think you’d be asking this question if you had better options so I’m going to assume you’re like me and didn’t go out of your way to connect with professors. I had a professor make the same statement my senior year. I had her only once, never spoke to her out of class and didn’t think of grad school until I was 2 years out of undergrad. Still I needed 3 letter and only had 2 so I reached out and she was more than happy to help. We sent many emails back and forth to explain what I wanted to do and she gave me plenty of advice including what schools to apply to and where she had connections. In the end I got into a top 20 phd program so I assume the letter she wrote was pretty good.
RESPONSE B: If all you did was take a class with someone a lot of professors will ignore it out of hand. Especially given the time lapse. If you worked in anyones lab at your first institution that would be fine.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: If I took like four classes with a professor around four years ago, and he said then that anyone in the class could come to him for a letter of recommendation, is that still valid? A semester after I took classes with him, I transferred schools, and we lost touch, but now I am finally graduating and want to pursue grad school in the next year or so, and that requires letters of recommendation. Is getting a letter of rec from my first university bad, weird, too long ago, have a possibility of them having forgotten about me? Any advice on the matter is welcome.
RESPONSE A: If all you did was take a class with someone a lot of professors will ignore it out of hand. Especially given the time lapse. If you worked in anyones lab at your first institution that would be fine.
RESPONSE B: I would make an appointment to meet up with him if possible and talk to him about your grad school plans and then ask him for the letter so he can remember who you are.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do I keep up with the top papers in your field? Looking for specific resources, such as curated lists, blogs that track these, etc. For Computer Science, I would recommend The Morning Paper ( https://blog.acolyer.org) as a great resource.
RESPONSE A: Google scholar alerts with appropriate keywords works really well.
RESPONSE B: Alzforum has a list of both recent and sentinel papers in the Alzheimer's disease field.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do I keep up with the top papers in your field? Looking for specific resources, such as curated lists, blogs that track these, etc. For Computer Science, I would recommend The Morning Paper ( https://blog.acolyer.org) as a great resource.
RESPONSE A: Alzforum has a list of both recent and sentinel papers in the Alzheimer's disease field.
RESPONSE B: RSS feeds of the journals I care about are great. I use Zotero to save the actual papers (once I learn about them). Also, as others have stated, Google Alerts works great too if something comes up in a journal you don't follow via RSS feed.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do I keep up with the top papers in your field? Looking for specific resources, such as curated lists, blogs that track these, etc. For Computer Science, I would recommend The Morning Paper ( https://blog.acolyer.org) as a great resource.
RESPONSE A: This question gets asked multiple times a week on different subreddits. I always say: RSS feed with different journals (I use feedly) and Twitter.
RESPONSE B: Alzforum has a list of both recent and sentinel papers in the Alzheimer's disease field.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do I keep up with the top papers in your field? Looking for specific resources, such as curated lists, blogs that track these, etc. For Computer Science, I would recommend The Morning Paper ( https://blog.acolyer.org) as a great resource.
RESPONSE A: Alzforum has a list of both recent and sentinel papers in the Alzheimer's disease field.
RESPONSE B: If arXiv is heavily used by your field, which is mostly the case for mathematics, statistics, physics and computer science, then signing up for the relevant arXiv mailing lists is the way to go.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do I keep up with the top papers in your field? Looking for specific resources, such as curated lists, blogs that track these, etc. For Computer Science, I would recommend The Morning Paper ( https://blog.acolyer.org) as a great resource.
RESPONSE A: Like others have said, using feedly for RSS feeds is awesome
RESPONSE B: Alzforum has a list of both recent and sentinel papers in the Alzheimer's disease field.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep your books held-open while you're trying to reference a text while typing? Special tools like book-holders, etc.?
RESPONSE A: I use a Book Rock. It's just a regular rock that I set on the book.
RESPONSE B: I got a cookbook holder. Works great, and keeps the book at a handier angle while I’m typing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep your books held-open while you're trying to reference a text while typing? Special tools like book-holders, etc.?
RESPONSE A: I use a Book Rock. It's just a regular rock that I set on the book.
RESPONSE B: What's this "book" you speak of?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep your books held-open while you're trying to reference a text while typing? Special tools like book-holders, etc.?
RESPONSE A: I use a Book Rock. It's just a regular rock that I set on the book.
RESPONSE B: 13” glass Pyrex dish - keeps the book open and you can view it!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you keep your books held-open while you're trying to reference a text while typing? Special tools like book-holders, etc.?
RESPONSE A: An extra large binder clip works.
RESPONSE B: I use a Book Rock. It's just a regular rock that I set on the book.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you keep your books held-open while you're trying to reference a text while typing? Special tools like book-holders, etc.?
RESPONSE A: I use a Book Rock. It's just a regular rock that I set on the book.
RESPONSE B: I discovered 'snake weights' at the British Library and should probably buy some.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What causes people to have identity crises during PhD work (usually year 2)? How do you prevent it? I'm excited to start my PhD next fall. However, a number of people talk about having identity crises between year 2 and 3. It's after qualifying exams and before things start working. It makes people wonder what the hell they're doing with their lives, and question their self-worth. It happens even to people who took time off to work before graduate school.
RESPONSE A: If you're 2 years in you can jump ship with a masters. So it's kind of a point where a lot of people ask themselves, is this worth sticking out for another 3-4 years?
RESPONSE B: For many PhD students it is the first time they don't get regular feedback in the form of exams passed or progressing in an obvious way year by year. This can lead to a crisis where they really don't know how well they are doing, or even if they are going anywhere. This is compounded by the nature of research where often you *don't* know quite what it is you're doing. It can be further worsened by failing to take vacations and becoming burnt out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What causes people to have identity crises during PhD work (usually year 2)? How do you prevent it? I'm excited to start my PhD next fall. However, a number of people talk about having identity crises between year 2 and 3. It's after qualifying exams and before things start working. It makes people wonder what the hell they're doing with their lives, and question their self-worth. It happens even to people who took time off to work before graduate school.
RESPONSE A: People grow and change in 2 years time, and probably start losing track of their initial motivation, i think one way is to have a catch phrase that you write on a poster in your room to remind you of the target, just like politicians do in their campains "design good digital products" is mine
RESPONSE B: For many PhD students it is the first time they don't get regular feedback in the form of exams passed or progressing in an obvious way year by year. This can lead to a crisis where they really don't know how well they are doing, or even if they are going anywhere. This is compounded by the nature of research where often you *don't* know quite what it is you're doing. It can be further worsened by failing to take vacations and becoming burnt out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What causes people to have identity crises during PhD work (usually year 2)? How do you prevent it? I'm excited to start my PhD next fall. However, a number of people talk about having identity crises between year 2 and 3. It's after qualifying exams and before things start working. It makes people wonder what the hell they're doing with their lives, and question their self-worth. It happens even to people who took time off to work before graduate school.
RESPONSE A: Starting my second year. I'd say my current crisis is a fear that I'm so mediocre at everything I came in for that I'm not sure why I continue. But I will continue, at any rate.
RESPONSE B: For many PhD students it is the first time they don't get regular feedback in the form of exams passed or progressing in an obvious way year by year. This can lead to a crisis where they really don't know how well they are doing, or even if they are going anywhere. This is compounded by the nature of research where often you *don't* know quite what it is you're doing. It can be further worsened by failing to take vacations and becoming burnt out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What causes people to have identity crises during PhD work (usually year 2)? How do you prevent it? I'm excited to start my PhD next fall. However, a number of people talk about having identity crises between year 2 and 3. It's after qualifying exams and before things start working. It makes people wonder what the hell they're doing with their lives, and question their self-worth. It happens even to people who took time off to work before graduate school.
RESPONSE A: I'm looking at doing a PhD in later years and have this same fear.. Something about dedicating your life to one particular topic knowing fully that there's no guarantee of a real job at the end of it. That's why I'm taking time off I guess. I guess you have to enter into a PhD knowing you're doing it because it calls to you, that no matter what you get out of it, it's the right thing to do because you love what you're writing. The identity crisis may come from a fear of your topic not holding up or second thoughts based on difficult to reach outcomes, post-PhD. In my field there's a huge pressure to be not only a competent academic but also a vanguard as it's a growing field, so it's something I've struggled with greatly. If you have any of those fears, wait a while, work on some other projects or just work? Building knowledge and learning for fun can be very rewarding and you come out of it ready and dedicated to pursue higher education as a older, smarter version of yourself. Alternatively you find other opportunities in life and find meaning and purpose elsewhere.
RESPONSE B: For many PhD students it is the first time they don't get regular feedback in the form of exams passed or progressing in an obvious way year by year. This can lead to a crisis where they really don't know how well they are doing, or even if they are going anywhere. This is compounded by the nature of research where often you *don't* know quite what it is you're doing. It can be further worsened by failing to take vacations and becoming burnt out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What causes people to have identity crises during PhD work (usually year 2)? How do you prevent it? I'm excited to start my PhD next fall. However, a number of people talk about having identity crises between year 2 and 3. It's after qualifying exams and before things start working. It makes people wonder what the hell they're doing with their lives, and question their self-worth. It happens even to people who took time off to work before graduate school.
RESPONSE A: People grow and change in 2 years time, and probably start losing track of their initial motivation, i think one way is to have a catch phrase that you write on a poster in your room to remind you of the target, just like politicians do in their campains "design good digital products" is mine
RESPONSE B: Oh god, this is so true. During year 2, you start to write your dissertation proposal. You begin to realize that all your amazing research idea: 1) has already been done, 2) is unrealistic because it'll take too long and/or cost too much, and 3) is going to be picked apart by your advisors and turn into something completely different. OR, you have no idea what to research, and you're scrambling. Either way, the future is unknown, and everything sucks.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do search committees read applications as they come in, or all at once on the "review date?" Wondering whether there's any advantage to turning in an academic job application earlier than right before the deadline.
RESPONSE A: We can look at them and rate them as they come in. I don’t feel differently about early or late applicants.
RESPONSE B: It depends. I think the most common answer is that they do not get reviewed early. But things can vary. Where I am at, we don't get to peek at anything until the whole batch has been processed and released by HR. Technically if it says "review" date, they committee should not be starting early. But if it is a "closing" or "due" date, they could start reviewing whenever they feel like it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are search committees seeing changes in applicant pool sizes in 2021? A recruiter at my college reported that we've been seeing a way-below-average number of applicants-per-search this term. Are there any folks on active searches who can report their experience here? Are you seeing more, fewer, or a similar number of applicants compared to early-COVID / pre-COVID searches?
RESPONSE A: Far, far less. Currently running a visiting search at a SLAC near a major metropolitan city. We got TWO applications. We're off cycle for my discipline, but normally we'd get 50 for a visiting position, at least, and hundreds for a TT position. We were shocked.
RESPONSE B: This is strictly anecdotal, but I’m among a lot of people I know that have given up on the search. I was already on my way out, but I know the pandemic has exasperated things for other people in my position: I’m an adjunct. It’s been a decade. I have a book, articles, go to all kinds of conferences, high reviews from students, and it’s consistently crickets. I’m really lucky if I get a “we’ve received your application” let alone a rejection letter. And a lot of people I know in the same boat took the opportunity to go do other things. And I probably will too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are search committees seeing changes in applicant pool sizes in 2021? A recruiter at my college reported that we've been seeing a way-below-average number of applicants-per-search this term. Are there any folks on active searches who can report their experience here? Are you seeing more, fewer, or a similar number of applicants compared to early-COVID / pre-COVID searches?
RESPONSE A: I serve in a public health search committee and we only got 82 applications for one faculty position.
RESPONSE B: This is strictly anecdotal, but I’m among a lot of people I know that have given up on the search. I was already on my way out, but I know the pandemic has exasperated things for other people in my position: I’m an adjunct. It’s been a decade. I have a book, articles, go to all kinds of conferences, high reviews from students, and it’s consistently crickets. I’m really lucky if I get a “we’ve received your application” let alone a rejection letter. And a lot of people I know in the same boat took the opportunity to go do other things. And I probably will too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are search committees seeing changes in applicant pool sizes in 2021? A recruiter at my college reported that we've been seeing a way-below-average number of applicants-per-search this term. Are there any folks on active searches who can report their experience here? Are you seeing more, fewer, or a similar number of applicants compared to early-COVID / pre-COVID searches?
RESPONSE A: Wow! I know anyone who could sit out 2020 sat out 2020... maybe the trend is continuing into 2021, given there's a lag between deciding to stay on for another year and the pandemic ending?
RESPONSE B: As an applicant with a short-term position for next year, I think this goes both ways. The early season postdocs that I applied for had over 600 applicants, which is normal. The very few TT jobs in my humanities field had over 300 applicants (that's high for my area of specialization). With the dearth of TT jobs I wonder if everyone tried to squeeze themselves into these positions. Like others have mentioned, most ABDs that I know worked hard to figure out how to stay in their programs for another year, and the PhDs with short-term positions tried hard to extend. Many are very very discouraged about the possibility of landing a solid academic job, so I wonder if next year will have double the applicants or less than the normal amount of applicants as people find other avenues.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Are professors in Europe hired mostly behind the curtains? I asked a friend who did a PhD and a postdoc in Europe why I see so few professor jobs for my field in websites like Euraxess. He told me that based on his experience, it seemed that European professors are initially informally offered a position based on personal connection, and then they post an ad for that position exclusively on their university website just because that's a formal requirement, and then they formally hire the person they had in mind. Is this how it works most of the time?
RESPONSE A: I can only tell about my experience in Prague, Czech Republic. I got a tenure track job here without knowing anyone here before I applied. I never set foot in the country before being hired, and knew zero people working at the university.
RESPONSE B: I spent some time in the Irish system and there is a lot of corruption with academic staff appointments. I am not saying in every case but it is common. They don't even try to hide it. There are small departments with married couples (I know of one department that has two married couples as lecturing staff!). Is not like they met while working in the department... No, here one spouse was first hired and then the other. Nepotism is well and alive in Irish academia!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: doc in a new biophysics lab at the start of 2021 (US -> US). The PI is about making sure his students and postdocs are learning, working, and comfortable, **and** promotes breaks after long stretches of work. I really like the approach to the research and the little interaction I get with the rest of the lab (all remote). But I've been on edge for the last month, waking up and dreading starting work every morning. I've taken a couple of weekends to think about what I want more long term, and what I enjoyed and didn't in grad school, and I realized 1. I don't really want to do research. Small projects here and there sound like a lot of fun! Research as a primary focus doesn't feel right for me 2. I miss helping out with some of the lab's "administrative/bureaucratic" work (IT, who has which computer, adding to the lab library, building lab manuals, maintaining the git repository), and helping with the needs of students in the department via graduate student council and union (though this was limited due to covid my last 6 months) 3. I **really** miss teaching undergraduates, training other students on the tools we use, and doing workshops Question: Are there options in academics to teach rather than do research? I've been looking at NTT and high school teaching positions, but really I don't know what is out there. Any advice, questions, and critiques are much appreciated. And sorry if I don't reply right away!
RESPONSE A: There are definitely opportunities. I go to a university in Canada that has what is called a “teaching stream” professors in that stream don’t conduct research or have research students. I thought it was odd until someone told me it’s quite common. They work on admin, course development, etc which sounds like right up your alley. Not sure how it is in the US or other countries but may be something you do more research about (pun intended).
RESPONSE B: If you really like #2, Research Computing is a real thing. Helping researchers better utilize computing resources to get research done, everything from helping set up Outlook, to debugging scripts running on parallelized HPC set ups...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: last month, waking up and dreading starting work every morning. I've taken a couple of weekends to think about what I want more long term, and what I enjoyed and didn't in grad school, and I realized 1. I don't really want to do research. Small projects here and there sound like a lot of fun! Research as a primary focus doesn't feel right for me 2. I miss helping out with some of the lab's "administrative/bureaucratic" work (IT, who has which computer, adding to the lab library, building lab manuals, maintaining the git repository), and helping with the needs of students in the department via graduate student council and union (though this was limited due to covid my last 6 months) 3. I **really** miss teaching undergraduates, training other students on the tools we use, and doing workshops Question: Are there options in academics to teach rather than do research? I've been looking at NTT and high school teaching positions, but really I don't know what is out there. Any advice, questions, and critiques are much appreciated. And sorry if I don't reply right away!
RESPONSE A: I know everyone is saying SLACs and PUIs. But they are being nice and not telling you the unfortunate truth. You’re a research heavy post doc, and the fact you’re asking this question suggests you started at an R1 as well, and your exposure to being Instructor of Record is probably low. Your CV, while stellar, also isn’t screaming “I want to go into teaching!” And these places see that. And if they’re thinking “we only have 3 campus invites to afford, do we want to gamble on this amazing candidate who will get an offer at an R1?” That is to say - you should talk to your PI. Sounds like they’d be open to this convo. Maybe your department has some adjunct work over the summer or Fall for you. At least maybe a coteaching gig. Something. You need to prove you understand teaching comes first.
RESPONSE B: I'm at a 'teaching institution.' It is a small private Jesuit school. Teaching and community work far outweigh research when it comes to tenure.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Wondering what the academic community thinks of this article in the NYT https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/gender-science-study.html
RESPONSE A: For everyone complaining about the paywall, may I introduce you to this extension?
RESPONSE B: In this sub, we should aspire to link to the primary research article: ​ https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6573
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Wondering what the academic community thinks of this article in the NYT https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/gender-science-study.html
RESPONSE A: Personally, I would like to think that if I see a paper that describes its work as being "novel" or "excellent" I am more likely to be critical. Now my expectations are high, and either they are met but the abstract has gotten in the way my ability to evaluate the result, or they are not and now I am annoyed at the authors for their spin. But I'm not very sure if I end up actually feeling this way, and this piece makes me wonder if maybe unconsciously, I actually do the opposite.
RESPONSE B: In this sub, we should aspire to link to the primary research article: ​ https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6573
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Wondering what the academic community thinks of this article in the NYT https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/gender-science-study.html
RESPONSE A: It's funny, because the only thing I have ever been *taught* about talking up your own work is that one should not talk up their work. Some journals outright forbid adjective like novel, excellent, groundbreaking, paradigm-shifting in manuscript titles. And yet, this excessive self-promotion seems to be extremely prevalent.
RESPONSE B: Personally, I would like to think that if I see a paper that describes its work as being "novel" or "excellent" I am more likely to be critical. Now my expectations are high, and either they are met but the abstract has gotten in the way my ability to evaluate the result, or they are not and now I am annoyed at the authors for their spin. But I'm not very sure if I end up actually feeling this way, and this piece makes me wonder if maybe unconsciously, I actually do the opposite.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 5-year PhD vs 3-year PhD If I'm not mistaken, the US tends to have 5-year PhD and Europe 3-year. I wonder what are the drawbacks and merits, and which one would suit me better.
RESPONSE A: I did my PhD in the UK where the norm is 3 year (sometimes 4 years depending on the sponsor). One of the best things about a UK PhD is that because you have no classes you can focus on research more in-depth, so have potentially more opportunity to publish work from your PhD as a first author. Because you also do not have classes it's more flexible without set deadlines. I think fundamentally it's up to you, and more likely, up to the funding for your PhD, as to if you'd like to do more classes or if you want to focus on your area. In terms of graduates I've not seen a substantial difference in being an academic base on years, more commonly it's more closely related to the individual institutions and how independent a PhD student is during their degree.
RESPONSE B: Yes, between the US and Europe, PhD requirements are very different. Assuming that you already have a MS degree, European PhD's require very few, or at times no classes. Meanwhile, US PhD requires plenty of classes. If you don't have a MS degree already, that number of classes requires is even higher. Mainly this "class requirement" causes a great difference in the number of estimated years. What would be the consequence of getting a short PhD from Europe then? Some countries may cause trouble when accrediting your PhD, because their requirements are more fitting to that of US - involving many classes to be taken. So, you might want to consider where you'd like to go in the future - academia vs another direction, also which country etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 5-year PhD vs 3-year PhD If I'm not mistaken, the US tends to have 5-year PhD and Europe 3-year. I wonder what are the drawbacks and merits, and which one would suit me better.
RESPONSE A: This really becomes a field specific question. I know in my field there are programs in France that are 5 years. The real benefit really comes from which school you come from and/or who you worked with. US schools seem to be able to place everywhere in the world, but only high ranking Euro schools can do the same. In my field only about 10-15 Euro schools can easily place you anywhere in Europe and only about 5 can easily place in the US.
RESPONSE B: The 3 year is nice because, well, you're done earlier. You don't have to take more classes and you're often treated more like an employee. You also generally get to avoid some of the problems the US has, like the clusterfuck that is our healthcare system. The 5 year is nice because it (typically) includes a master's that is paid for with a stipend and the classes are often just things like keeping up with current lit, training in grant writing, etc that you'll need in an academic career rather than a "real" master's that will be more structured. You also can potentially take on a longer term project or more new methods with the extra time -- in some fields, it's really hard to get a meaningful project with an unfamiliar method done in under 3 years. You're more likely to get TA experience and if you're american, there will be more opportunities to apply for your own funding at US institutions. Honestly I would focus more on what sort of research you want to do/who you want to work with and where you want to live long term first. You aren't tied to a location, but will likely have a stronger network in whatever continent you go with so if you want to end up in the US, it can be easier to do your degree in the US and vice versa. Though also keep in mind that some countries have strong preference for their own citizens for academic positions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: s and merits, and which one would suit me better.
RESPONSE A: What is your field? I’m in chemistry and one school in my state doesn’t require any classes and another requires 8. You should really just look for programs that align with what you’re looking for.
RESPONSE B: I had a masters degree, and was choosing PhDs in australia the uk Europe and USA. The good lab in USA required me, a published scientist with a masters degree, to do some undergraduate level classes and would take 5-7 years. All the others were 3-4 years, with no classes. Classes at a PhD level are pretty much exclusively a North American phenomenon. The single benefit I see from people applying for postdocs in our lab from USA is that because they’ve been on the same project for seven years they tend to have a lot more publications and therefore experience on that particular subject matter. If I had the qualifications and experience to get into a 3 year PhD program I would 100% go for the shorter option. In terms of research output you are going to be more productive as a postdoc getting paid a generous salary sooner with a supportive team than struggling for those extra 2-4 years as a PhD student. So in the hypothetical 10 year picture at the same starting point: US graduate started PhD spent seven years got four or five publications on one project then started a postdoc in a new lab, three years, got one, maybe two publications in a new project. Non-US PhD graduate: three years, generated data for three publications, got one publication for graduation. Found postdocs, generated evidence they have a particular expertise in their own project design after seven years of postdoc, generated two more publications writing up their PhD data, got maybe one or two publications from their first three year postdoc, went on to one or two more postdocs with a lot of postdoc experience, and a research theme and probably funding of their own by now, a publication pipeline established and are churning out two or three publications of their own a year, for another four years. The non-US option, if you qualify without having to include two years going a masters, is going to put you in a more competitive spot for tenure in the same window from commencement.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How does Google Scholar know what's "scholarly" or not?
RESPONSE A: It offers a citation feature that is not available on its regular search engine. I think an entry's inclusion for 'scholarly' merit probably has something to do with its ability to be cited.
RESPONSE B: I've always felt like Google Scholar could be a lot better than it is. Considering what they get from their other products, why isn't author identification better? Why can't Google figure out that the B. Smith who writes papers about atmospheric physics isn't the same B. Smith writing about immunology?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: thought I cheated. I also saw him open an Excel sheet, which could be the access reports from Canvas or just me being paranoid. Should I email him and tell him what happened and hope he understands? Or leave it and hope he doesn't do anything because it was toward the end (20 minutes remaining in a 2.5 hour exam) of the quiz? This is meant to be my last semester in grad school, and I don't want to fuck it up with something like this. Does anyone have any advice? Or precedent for something like this? I'm really quite petrified, and my fragile mental isn't ready to deal with this.
RESPONSE A: This may be unpopular, but I don't buy this excuse at all and it seems really unlikely. If I were your professor, I'd assume you cheated, not bring it up, and give you the grade that you earned. Definitely not going to go to academic court about it, but it will likely not bode well for you if you are a borderline case at the end of the semester. If you gave me an excuse, I'd probably feel insulted that now you dragged me into pretending to believe your lie to preserve your dignity.
RESPONSE B: Hi! I work in LMS support and we run into issues like this a lot. I can’t speak to Canvas, but for Blackboard l, I would strongly encourage you to explain to your instructor what happened and that it was a mistake. Instructors CAN access course reports to determine what kind of activity occurred in a course on a particular day or with particular item and there are also more detailed activity reports available by querying the database. Definitely do not make it worse for yourself by being dishonest because if they pull conflicting information from the course, then you could be walking right yourself right into academic integrity issues. If it’s appropriate, you could always tell them what specific items you did click on during that time (if they were not related to items on the exam) and ask if they can request a query confirming that. I don’t know how common or uncommon it is for other universities to provide access to that but it is certainly a question you can ask. Best of luck to you!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: a peripheral researcher in my own paper. ​ If the academic researcher/supervisor really does need to go first, I don't mind all too much, but it doesn't seem right the way they're pushing so hard to have theirs first. I couldn't find anywhere online stating that this is a requirement, could anyone clear this up for me please? ​ Thanks. ​
RESPONSE A: Without commenting on the authorship order, it is typical for the professor to be the corresponding author; it's a reflection on who will likely be easier to track down, not the contribution of the work. Good luck!
RESPONSE B: This is unethical n her part. Authorship is based on contribution to the publication, not status. At best, she should be a second author, although - depending on circumstances - an acknowledgement may be more appropriate. Journals often do blind review. They strip off author identification and send it out to reviewers, so the content becomes the focus, not who wrote it. Some journals do 'desk review' where the editor makes the decision based on reading it and knowing who the authors are. I'd recommend looking up the review process, as you will have an especially good argument if it is a blind review. If you want to go on for a PhD, teach or do research, then you should make a big deal of this. Having a first author, even solo author, publication is important for your credentials - much more than a 'messy ending' to the relationship. Having yourself as a second author will make it look like you helped a bit on her research, rather than this being your research that she supported. If you're using your degree to go a different way, it might not matter as much. But don't be too accepting of her appropriating your work to advance her career; it's academically dishonest and theft. Finally, if you must, let her submit it with her name first and see what happens. Make the case for switching names when you need to submit a final draft. Say that you just discovered it was inappropriate and show her what you have found through your searches.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to (gently) correct those who call me Mrs, Miss, or by my first name? I am a young-ish woman who recently started a TT position at an R1. My students consistently refer to me as “Miss”, “Mrs” or by my first name, in email and in person. How do I correct them without coming off as bitchy or insecure?
RESPONSE A: Sign off your responses with how you’d like to be called / introduce yourself as said name too
RESPONSE B: My advisor (woman) deals with this very well on the first class every semester. She introduces herself and says "You can call me *firstname* or you can call me Dr. *lastname*" and moves straight on. If someone messes up, she corrects them calmly. They get it pretty fast from what I've witnessed so far.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to (gently) correct those who call me Mrs, Miss, or by my first name? I am a young-ish woman who recently started a TT position at an R1. My students consistently refer to me as “Miss”, “Mrs” or by my first name, in email and in person. How do I correct them without coming off as bitchy or insecure?
RESPONSE A: I include the title talk in my first day slides about email expectations. I also explain that Mrs. Wurdle is my mom, but only Dr. Wurdle can grant your makeup exam request. I also have this poem on my door, more as a reminder to my male colleagues that I don't like it when they introduce me to students by my first name: https://pressfolios-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/story/story_pdf/254906/2549061489249557.pdf
RESPONSE B: I'm a man, but I deal with all manners of etiquette on the first day. I don't allow undergrads to call me by my first name, I insist that emails address me as Dr. or Professor BBird, not "hey" or "hey dude". This is also where I tell them that students don't share personal anecdotes in my classes. They should join a study group and discuss the issues with their classmates outside of class. Just be patient, clear, and consistent. They are children in their first adult situations. Many of them come from situations where they have not been taught how to deal with power relationships or their parents have had them treat adults on an equal footing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to (gently) correct those who call me Mrs, Miss, or by my first name? I am a young-ish woman who recently started a TT position at an R1. My students consistently refer to me as “Miss”, “Mrs” or by my first name, in email and in person. How do I correct them without coming off as bitchy or insecure?
RESPONSE A: I teach a lot of writing courses, so it’s within my wheelhouse to talk to students about email protocol. That’s always an opportunity to discuss how to address an instructor, and differentiate between Dr. and Miss, etc... having that conversation has utility for the students and may well save another female professor the lame experience of being addressed as Ms. or another as Mr., and if you hold any privilege, it’s a good lesson to teach on behalf of your colleagues who don’t have the same social capital.
RESPONSE B: I include the title talk in my first day slides about email expectations. I also explain that Mrs. Wurdle is my mom, but only Dr. Wurdle can grant your makeup exam request. I also have this poem on my door, more as a reminder to my male colleagues that I don't like it when they introduce me to students by my first name: https://pressfolios-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/story/story_pdf/254906/2549061489249557.pdf
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to (gently) correct those who call me Mrs, Miss, or by my first name? I am a young-ish woman who recently started a TT position at an R1. My students consistently refer to me as “Miss”, “Mrs” or by my first name, in email and in person. How do I correct them without coming off as bitchy or insecure?
RESPONSE A: I include the title talk in my first day slides about email expectations. I also explain that Mrs. Wurdle is my mom, but only Dr. Wurdle can grant your makeup exam request. I also have this poem on my door, more as a reminder to my male colleagues that I don't like it when they introduce me to students by my first name: https://pressfolios-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/story/story_pdf/254906/2549061489249557.pdf
RESPONSE B: Slightly off topic, but do many professors have a preference between “Professor so and so” vs “Dr. so and so?”
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to (gently) correct those who call me Mrs, Miss, or by my first name? I am a young-ish woman who recently started a TT position at an R1. My students consistently refer to me as “Miss”, “Mrs” or by my first name, in email and in person. How do I correct them without coming off as bitchy or insecure?
RESPONSE A: I include the title talk in my first day slides about email expectations. I also explain that Mrs. Wurdle is my mom, but only Dr. Wurdle can grant your makeup exam request. I also have this poem on my door, more as a reminder to my male colleagues that I don't like it when they introduce me to students by my first name: https://pressfolios-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/story/story_pdf/254906/2549061489249557.pdf
RESPONSE B: So hierarchical and protocolary! Where is this all happening? I mean, I live in a country where it wouldn't be crazy to say "Yo Harald, wassup?" when addressing the King... My standards might be off a little.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Professors and PhD graduates, what were your grades like in college? I'm currently an Electrical Engineering student and there was this one class that bit me right in the butt. I have a 3.81 GPA and I'm expecting it to go down by A LOT once I get back my grades and it will discourage me. There are many factors which affect my grades such as severe anxiety and panic attacks. I do go to psychotherapy and take medication which helps a bit. I do however plan on getting a PhD in mathematics because I never had below an A in that field. I really love math. Were all professors brilliant straight A students? What were your dead ends? What was preventing you from getting the grades you wanted, and was all hope lost?
RESPONSE A: I generally did quite well in the courses related to my current field, and pretty abysmally in stuff that didn't interest me, with the one big exception that I failed criminal law the first time and am now a criminal lawyer. In the end, my grade average was mediocre but you could pick out what I cared about very easily on the transcript. I made sure to "prove myself" in my masters and only that transcript was relevant to my PhD application.
RESPONSE B: Not all professors were straight A students, but please don't place too much weight on these stories of "I was a bad student in university but now I'm a professor". They are the exception rather than the rule. Literally every professor I know well (n ~ 25) was an exceptional student as an undergrad. Note: I'm a STEM professor, so that may sway my comment here.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Professors and PhD graduates, what were your grades like in college? I'm currently an Electrical Engineering student and there was this one class that bit me right in the butt. I have a 3.81 GPA and I'm expecting it to go down by A LOT once I get back my grades and it will discourage me. There are many factors which affect my grades such as severe anxiety and panic attacks. I do go to psychotherapy and take medication which helps a bit. I do however plan on getting a PhD in mathematics because I never had below an A in that field. I really love math. Were all professors brilliant straight A students? What were your dead ends? What was preventing you from getting the grades you wanted, and was all hope lost?
RESPONSE A: I was definitely not a straight A student. I got A's and A-'s for my majors, but what really got me were the core classes for my school. Things like Biology and the hard sciences hurt my GPA a bit, mixed with the fact that I did not have great attendance for the first few semesters. I still graduated with a 3.72, which is not a terrible GPA at all. Thanks, fine arts electives!
RESPONSE B: Not all professors were straight A students, but please don't place too much weight on these stories of "I was a bad student in university but now I'm a professor". They are the exception rather than the rule. Literally every professor I know well (n ~ 25) was an exceptional student as an undergrad. Note: I'm a STEM professor, so that may sway my comment here.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Professors and PhD graduates, what were your grades like in college? I'm currently an Electrical Engineering student and there was this one class that bit me right in the butt. I have a 3.81 GPA and I'm expecting it to go down by A LOT once I get back my grades and it will discourage me. There are many factors which affect my grades such as severe anxiety and panic attacks. I do go to psychotherapy and take medication which helps a bit. I do however plan on getting a PhD in mathematics because I never had below an A in that field. I really love math. Were all professors brilliant straight A students? What were your dead ends? What was preventing you from getting the grades you wanted, and was all hope lost?
RESPONSE A: I'm neither a professor or phd graduate. However, I have recently been invited to interview at 2 top 10 departments in bioinformatics with a 3.0 GPA. I had previously wanted to be a teacher, thus I never cared whether my grades were As, B's or Cs. The truth is, that while anow abnormally low GPA may hinder you, a average GPA will still get you in the door. The rest depends on how much research experience you have, and how productive you are there.
RESPONSE B: Not all professors were straight A students, but please don't place too much weight on these stories of "I was a bad student in university but now I'm a professor". They are the exception rather than the rule. Literally every professor I know well (n ~ 25) was an exceptional student as an undergrad. Note: I'm a STEM professor, so that may sway my comment here.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Professors and PhD graduates, what were your grades like in college? I'm currently an Electrical Engineering student and there was this one class that bit me right in the butt. I have a 3.81 GPA and I'm expecting it to go down by A LOT once I get back my grades and it will discourage me. There are many factors which affect my grades such as severe anxiety and panic attacks. I do go to psychotherapy and take medication which helps a bit. I do however plan on getting a PhD in mathematics because I never had below an A in that field. I really love math. Were all professors brilliant straight A students? What were your dead ends? What was preventing you from getting the grades you wanted, and was all hope lost?
RESPONSE A: Not all professors were straight A students, but please don't place too much weight on these stories of "I was a bad student in university but now I'm a professor". They are the exception rather than the rule. Literally every professor I know well (n ~ 25) was an exceptional student as an undergrad. Note: I'm a STEM professor, so that may sway my comment here.
RESPONSE B: Like a lot of people with a solid K-12 background I found the first couple of years of college pretty easy and did not apply myself. For some reason, which I don't even remember, I got serious in my junior year and then my grades went way up. But my overall GPA was not strong and I think it may have hurt me in graduate school applications. Please note that it's not a binary situation. You might get into a grad program with a mediocre GPA but I can tell you that it definitely affects the level of support (funding) you get in the program. I don't think I got the highest level of support for my Ph.D. because my grades and test scores were not the highest.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Professors and PhD graduates, what were your grades like in college? I'm currently an Electrical Engineering student and there was this one class that bit me right in the butt. I have a 3.81 GPA and I'm expecting it to go down by A LOT once I get back my grades and it will discourage me. There are many factors which affect my grades such as severe anxiety and panic attacks. I do go to psychotherapy and take medication which helps a bit. I do however plan on getting a PhD in mathematics because I never had below an A in that field. I really love math. Were all professors brilliant straight A students? What were your dead ends? What was preventing you from getting the grades you wanted, and was all hope lost?
RESPONSE A: Not all professors were straight A students, but please don't place too much weight on these stories of "I was a bad student in university but now I'm a professor". They are the exception rather than the rule. Literally every professor I know well (n ~ 25) was an exceptional student as an undergrad. Note: I'm a STEM professor, so that may sway my comment here.
RESPONSE B: My advisor is clearly brilliant but was a letter grade in a summer class from failing out and having his name sent to the draft board during Vietnam. That being said, academia is completely different now so he may not have been accepted into the graduate school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Old (formerly very close) friend of mine is chair of dept. where a position just opened. Ethics of contacting her to ask about the position? The thread title really is the tl;dr here, but the relationship between her and me went a bit deeper-- she was the first person I ever slept with, back when we were both young graduate students (I was a bit of a late bloomer). She continued straight through for her PhD, while I took a different route that brought me around to the academic job search much later. She's now chair of a department where a position has just been advertised. I'm wondering whether it would be considered ethical or even just acceptable to contact her about the job, or if that's just a little too far over the line. She and I didn't part ways unpleasantly, we've remained Facebook friends, and she's since gotten married. I just don't know exactly how this would be perceived, and whether it would be considered "slimy" or not. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: I dont think its slimy at all, and to be very frank, backroom dealings happen all the time. Just throw her a mail and inquire about the position.
RESPONSE B: What others have said--if your purpose is to ask about the job and its various qualities, that's absolutely above-board. (Especially so if she's the official point of contact to learn more about the position!) If the purpose of your contact is to ask for some sort of underhanded advocacy on your behalf, then yes, that would be shitty and unethical.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How long did it take you to find a job in industry after graduation/postdoc? Just curious, I'm a postdoc (in physics) and have been trying for more than a year to get a job in an industry close to my field without any success (a few almost-job-offers hough).
RESPONSE A: From graduation, 6 months, 113 applications each with custom cover letters, 7 phone interviews, 2 post-doc in person interviews, 2 rejections, and the industry job came when I received a random message from a LinkedIn recruiter asking if I knew anybody with a certain skill set. Yes I do... me.
RESPONSE B: I was in a different field (neuroscience) but it took me about two - three months of phone screens, first round interviews, final interviews, etc to get my first offer. You have some one look over your application materials? Getting any feedback about your interviews?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: s not nice. After all this time here, I feel that I've had enough of this. I have been very close to breaking down and leaving my PhD, and thinking that I would choose to stay here even after being finally "free" to leave... that just smacks of Stockholm Syndrome. (on a side note, I feel that my personal life is totally stuck in this place, and from that perspective, I would certainly welcome a change of air) I understand that now I have to balance whether finding out where my approach goes is worth enduring one more year of this environment. As irrational as it is, I am leaning toward staying, if there is no other choice. However, turns out that there is an open postdoc position at another reasonably well-known European university that I think I might have a chance at. In the context of the idea that I mentioned before, I can see that we have overlapping research interests: I have expertise in *field A* and I am trying to use *technique B*, and the group is solid in *technique B* and aims to approach field A. Of course, nothing is guaranteed, but I think I might have a good case for saying "hey, I can be your one for this!". So of course, I feel tempted to apply to this position - it might not go anywhere, but then again, it might. The thing is that I am absolutely sure that if my PI were to find out that I am even remotely interested in leaving, the offer to stay would be withdrawn. And if the application doesn't work out (which, as everything in life, tends to be the case), then that's the end of it. So, yeah. I don't know. Am I overthinking this?
RESPONSE A: Not sure how you're going to get through the application process for any postdoc without a recommendation from your PI?
RESPONSE B: Have you accepted your PI's offer yet? If not, it's perfectly reasonable to apply for other positions, then make a decision if/when you have other offers. If you've already accepted your PI's offer, then applying for another position could be rightly interpreted as rescinding that offer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: step for him is. We live in a major city with multiple universities. He would need a lot of direction to finish this thesis. Is it in any way possible to transfer to another university? Or is there another path he can take? Thank you so much for taking the time to read this!
RESPONSE A: > He has tried to go back several times and worked with multiple advisors over the years but nothing ever worked out. What does this mean? Was the problem that he was still not in a place to finish the thesis or was the issue from the university side? Also was this a lab based project and he would need to get back in the lab to continue working on it? Cause 4 years is a long time in terms of biomedical science and if he was an undergrad doing his thesis on the side of a postgrad, that postgrad is probably long gone and those experiments have probably been done and dusted (potentially by a disgruntled postgrad who thought his undergrad would do it and then he disappeared...). If it was a paper review based project, then he could continue working on it, or if he has done all the science he needed to do and the problem is the write up then he could do that remotely IF (big if!) someone at his university was willing to work with him. If he had a proven medical condition that has been documented and that his supervisor is aware of, then he might be willing to go back and go over it again with him and allow him to finish and graduate, but if he burned bridges there I think it would be difficult to transfer this over to anywhere else.
RESPONSE B: Does the university require a thesis to graduate? If not, just make up the 4-8 credits due to the thesis and he's done. Tbh I suspect there is a lot more going on than your bf is letting on. Lots of undergrads fuck up their theses. It's an undergrad thesis, nobody expects it to be a serious or any kind of contribution to the field, and at the end of the day, you give the kid a B-, but you don't make him forfeit his 4-year 100k degree.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: debt from student loans. He says he feels like a failure and a fuck-up and I really want to help him with this. I was hoping to get some advice on what the next step for him is. We live in a major city with multiple universities. He would need a lot of direction to finish this thesis. Is it in any way possible to transfer to another university? Or is there another path he can take? Thank you so much for taking the time to read this!
RESPONSE A: I teach at a school of business (undergrad and grad students) and biomedical engineering is clearly out of my area of expertise. However, there are some constants across universities that will apply regardless of major. Generally speaking, your boyfriend has little choice but to return to the university where he had all but completed his degree, bite the bullet and either continue work on his thesis (if the university will allow him to do that) or begin a new thesis. Again, generally speaking most universities (and selective/highly selective universities in particular) will be generous as to transfer credit outside of the major but much less likely to accept significant credit in the major--especially in technical fields where knowledge becomes "stale" fairly quickly. Credit earned more than five years ago is unlikely to be accepted in the major at most universities. Transfer policies are not uniform across institutions but it is likely he will need to complete at least one additional year and more likely two in most institutions if he attempts the transfer route. Whatever his issues with his original institution, patching things up and returning to finish his degree as soon as possible is almost certainly the only reasonable solution in terms of cost and additional time required to obtain a degree.
RESPONSE B: Does the university require a thesis to graduate? If not, just make up the 4-8 credits due to the thesis and he's done. Tbh I suspect there is a lot more going on than your bf is letting on. Lots of undergrads fuck up their theses. It's an undergrad thesis, nobody expects it to be a serious or any kind of contribution to the field, and at the end of the day, you give the kid a B-, but you don't make him forfeit his 4-year 100k degree.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Are young researchers generally better trained in statistics than older researchers? I was wondering whether there is evidence to say that young researchers (PhD candidates and early career researchers) are better trained in (new or cutting edge) statistical techniques compared to researchers who have been in academia longer such as tenured full professors? I think this would be the case as young researchers were exposed to these techniques more and would have had more opportunity for training. What are your thoughts? If you some empirical evidence that would be great!
RESPONSE A: In Political Science, for the most part yes. Though you need to remember, those folks trained even 20 years ago aren't used to the computational power available today. Hell, 10 years ago I remember running Bayesian simulations that took multiple days to converge, now I can do it in about 10 minutes.
RESPONSE B: I'm sure it depends on the field. In my experience as a geneticist, this is definitely not the case. In fact, I find younger generations in general to be weaker computationally when they come into the PhD program. I now regularly have students who don't even know you need to press "return" to enter a command. It used to be it was a bit of hump to get people into doing command line work over GUIs, but now I have students who don't even seem that comfortable with the keyboard as the stdin, they like touch screens, apps, etc. much more than typing. And biology is still taught with relatively little rigorous mathematics at the undergrad level and a lot of people come in to the PhD not just far behind when it comes to the math, but genuinely afraid to even start.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Are young researchers generally better trained in statistics than older researchers? I was wondering whether there is evidence to say that young researchers (PhD candidates and early career researchers) are better trained in (new or cutting edge) statistical techniques compared to researchers who have been in academia longer such as tenured full professors? I think this would be the case as young researchers were exposed to these techniques more and would have had more opportunity for training. What are your thoughts? If you some empirical evidence that would be great!
RESPONSE A: In Political Science, for the most part yes. Though you need to remember, those folks trained even 20 years ago aren't used to the computational power available today. Hell, 10 years ago I remember running Bayesian simulations that took multiple days to converge, now I can do it in about 10 minutes.
RESPONSE B: I would say it can go both ways. In support of your idea, speaking to a really big deal but old school researcher at our university, one of their favourite lines is "Are you a scientist or a statistician? So focus on your science". Their grasp of stats is really bad. To counter, although this is potentially more of a different academic system thing, the way that British and Australian academic systems allow for students to go from undergrad straight to a PhD, have PhDs being completed in 3 years as a norm and often don't have mandatory grad classes such as stats, I would say that the typical PhD grad from these systems have a way weaker grasp on stats than those who do a more traditional 10 year approach that was common in North America. However, I bring this up as a young vs old thing because it seems like the rushed PhD route is becoming more common everywhere, NA included. EDIT: spelling
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are some possible career paths or jobs for someone who drops out of a well regarded PhD program in the social sciences or humanities? I'm in the midst of making this big decision for a variety of reasons and am wanting to explore what my career possibilities might be if I decide to drop out. I'm leaning towards withdrawing from a pretty prestigious PhD program in Political Science and would appreciate any insight or advice that anyone can offer. Also, if anyone has any specific recommendations of companies that are amenable towards hiring people in my situation, I'd love to hear about that as well. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: So, you might want to keep up with a burgeoning discussion known as "alt ac" or alternative academic careers. This includes careers in academia OTHER than traditional teaching/research tenure-track, AND careers outside of academia for those who are looking elsewhere. http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/alt-ac/ http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/alt-ac/alt-ac-context http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/01/14/essay-preparing-academic-or-alt-ac-careers http://chronicle.com/article/The-Alt-Ac-Track-Careers/136505/ You might find some useful guidance within this discourse; if you're lucky, you'll find someone writing about their own experience within political science. I gotta ask: is there any way, *any way* that you can finish? Taking a completed Ph.D. with you as you leave academia can be useful in opening many doors, even if you're not going in the traditional tenure-track path. Sometimes you can find the minimal standards, complete them, get the degree, and continue on your way. Is there any chance you can do that?
RESPONSE B: Would you get a masters out of it?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Leaving Postdoc Early for Industry Hi All, I have been at a postdoc in a small lab for the past 6 months. I originally took the position as I wanted to try and branch out into a new field after my PhD. However, since joining, I haven't really enjoyed the research as much as my previous field and the lab environment hasn't been a great fit. Additionally, this experience has furthered my desire to go into industry. Currently I have been interviewing for positions in a number of large pharmaceutical companies and I am hopeful that I will receive an offer. However, if I do, I am conflicted on leaving my position so early in the contract. My PI has been fairly accommodating and with his help I was able to obtain a F32 grant for one of his projects I am working on. My question is how unreasonable is it to leave a position so early. I feel bad about wasting my PIs time and backing out of a commitment early. At the same time, since I want to go to industry, I think the best thing for my career is getting my foot in the door to begin advancing at a company rather than further delaying my start out of a sense of obligation.
RESPONSE A: If your end goal is industry, then taking the job is definitely the best option. You have to do what’s best for yourself. Double check the terms on your F32 though. Sometimes you need to repay it if you don’t stay for the full length. Some industry jobs do satisfy the requirement so check that. I don’t know all the details of an F32, but def something you should look into.
RESPONSE B: I left an F32 early for an industry job. It's your life, you gotta do what's right for you, and life is too short to be doing something you know you don't wanna do. Definitely check the requirements, as payback is likely required depending on the time you signed on for vs when you leave, but doing mostly anything revolving around science will count towards that. Best of luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Pursuing a Ph.D. in likely Clinical or Developmental Psychology, where do I stand? Basically, I have no idea where to start looking and which schools I would even have a chance at. I’m graduating in December from my undergrad and I have a decent resume with 3 different research internships, some volunteer work, 3.8 gpa, and a research award. I’m also currently trying to get a paper published (might not work out, we’ll see). However, I’ve heard Ph.D programs in Psych are very difficult to get into. I’m looking into programs like Duke, Vanderbilt, Boston University, Northwestern etc but I’m wondering if I’m aiming my sights too high? Anyways, it won’t hurt my feelings one way or another. I’m just a first-gen college student with no one to ask these questions to and little resources from the university I attend now. Any info would help a lot.
RESPONSE A: You have pretty high chances at good universities. The key is the match between the advisor and your interests/past research. If you were in autism labs for instance and want to apply with advisors who focus on autism, even higher odds. Your statement of purpose should show why you want to work with that advisor/ask those questions.
RESPONSE B: The GPA and research experiences will help. Do you have any conference presentations or publications, even as a co-author? Did you take the GRE?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: bit better than mine. I always have the option to post-doc or take a visiting position. But frankly, I don't know if I can emotionally stand another two or three years in limbo, knowing at the end the same thing could happen again. I'm ready to make real money and get a career that I can start making my own. If I knew that I could get a good job I wanted post-postdoc, I'd totally be willing, but I've lately seen some postdocs even not find jobs and leave bitter and broken. I'm starting to seriously worry about this. I know that if I don't hear by the end of the next 2-3 weeks I'm going to have a tough time, and it's really wearing on me.. :(
RESPONSE A: Even if you are one of the lucky ones that get a TT position, it doesn't mean that you are actually going to *be happy* at it. In fact, if your field is really competitive, it is likely that the position you fought so hard for is going to be very demanding -- maybe a heavy teaching load and lots of other departmental stuff that no one else wants to do. (Did I hear someone say "budget cuts")? After all, working conditions in academia function under the same laws of supply and demand as the rest of the economy. Research? That comes in the evenings and on weekends when you are tired and want a break. Don't forget it because you have to do that to keep your job, which is mostly stuff that you don't want to do. And if you don't want to do it, then the director has a pile of resumes on his desk. They're following up, politely, every few days. Some of them look pretty good, too. I didn't really believe it the first few times people told me that academics often have little alternative but to churn out mediocre (but publishable) crap. Now that notion resonates with a clear, melodious ring to it. My subwoofer vibrates noticeably.
RESPONSE B: It took me three runs on the market to land a (good) TT job. So, I kept going.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: o, knowing at the end the same thing could happen again. I'm ready to make real money and get a career that I can start making my own. If I knew that I could get a good job I wanted post-postdoc, I'd totally be willing, but I've lately seen some postdocs even not find jobs and leave bitter and broken. I'm starting to seriously worry about this. I know that if I don't hear by the end of the next 2-3 weeks I'm going to have a tough time, and it's really wearing on me.. :(
RESPONSE A: I have an entrepreneur friend with a PhD in CS from a top school. He said the PhD was worthless, since he didn't want to go into academia, and that the MS provided him with all the necessary knowledge Ultimately, you could continuously reapply to TT positions while working in industry
RESPONSE B: Even if you are one of the lucky ones that get a TT position, it doesn't mean that you are actually going to *be happy* at it. In fact, if your field is really competitive, it is likely that the position you fought so hard for is going to be very demanding -- maybe a heavy teaching load and lots of other departmental stuff that no one else wants to do. (Did I hear someone say "budget cuts")? After all, working conditions in academia function under the same laws of supply and demand as the rest of the economy. Research? That comes in the evenings and on weekends when you are tired and want a break. Don't forget it because you have to do that to keep your job, which is mostly stuff that you don't want to do. And if you don't want to do it, then the director has a pile of resumes on his desk. They're following up, politely, every few days. Some of them look pretty good, too. I didn't really believe it the first few times people told me that academics often have little alternative but to churn out mediocre (but publishable) crap. Now that notion resonates with a clear, melodious ring to it. My subwoofer vibrates noticeably.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: me that my PhD wasn't "wasted", but I know that frankly, it was a waste of time to struggle through the emotional turmoil of a PhD to end up with a job I could have gotten with just an MS leaving four years ago and not spending the bulk of my twenties making no money and being a little bit lonely and frustrated. So I'm wondering what other people have done? I know that my life won't be over, it's not like I want to hurt myself or anything. I'm just really disappointed: I know I put together a top-rate application. It's just that other people did, too, and their's was a bit better than mine. I always have the option to post-doc or take a visiting position. But frankly, I don't know if I can emotionally stand another two or three years in limbo, knowing at the end the same thing could happen again. I'm ready to make real money and get a career that I can start making my own. If I knew that I could get a good job I wanted post-postdoc, I'd totally be willing, but I've lately seen some postdocs even not find jobs and leave bitter and broken. I'm starting to seriously worry about this. I know that if I don't hear by the end of the next 2-3 weeks I'm going to have a tough time, and it's really wearing on me.. :(
RESPONSE A: I would like to present post-doc as something more than "limbo". In our field post-doc is a mandatory stepping stone to a TT position, so I approached it as an adventure and a chance to learn new things. It has been really good for me and my post-doc years have been some of the happiest in my life. I definitely gained leadership skills and direction I missed beforehand. I developed better ideas, wider network, and I've definitely been making my career my own and pursuing my own research questions during this time. I hope you also find a position/direction that brings you happiness and fulfillment!
RESPONSE B: It took me three runs on the market to land a (good) TT job. So, I kept going.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: don't hear by the end of the next 2-3 weeks I'm going to have a tough time, and it's really wearing on me.. :(
RESPONSE A: First of all, I've had invitations for interviews coming to me in February and March, and in one specific (although somewhat haphazard case) - in April. Same thing from the other side of the isle: searches do not always land #1 candidates, and they continue until there is still time to interview a reasonable candidate. Of the few searches my department is conducting right now, three have not really contacted the candidates with interview offers. So, there... Having said that... Let's say, it's late March and no one called. You need plan B. With your field (same as mine), you have an option to stay in academia or to go into industry. Which one would you prefer? For industry, you are probably largely on your own - just figure out who is hiring in your field and apply. For academia.... I would start by talking to your advisor about plan B. Depending on what school you are in, who your advisor is, what their social network is, and so on, your advisor may be in position to suggest a plausible plan B, because a colleague here, or a colleague of a colleague there is looking for a postdoc in exactly what you are trained.... I've seen people do just that through their advisors' contacts (or other collaborators' contacts). Also, when you say "fewer in-person interviews", what exactly are we talking about? Have you been invited for on-campus interviews already?
RESPONSE B: I would like to present post-doc as something more than "limbo". In our field post-doc is a mandatory stepping stone to a TT position, so I approached it as an adventure and a chance to learn new things. It has been really good for me and my post-doc years have been some of the happiest in my life. I definitely gained leadership skills and direction I missed beforehand. I developed better ideas, wider network, and I've definitely been making my career my own and pursuing my own research questions during this time. I hope you also find a position/direction that brings you happiness and fulfillment!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are the big differences between publishing in refereed conference proceedings vs a peer-reviewed journal? Is there a big difference between the two? I would guess impact factor is the biggest difference, but if you're pressed for time to publish and present something, would publishing in a conference proceedings be advantageous in order to get your research findings published sooner?
RESPONSE A: In contrast to most other fields, computer science values conference publications much greater than journal publications. The problem with journals (for CS) is that the review cycle lasts years and the field is moving so fast that waiting years for your research to appear often means someone else will publish the same thing, or something very similar before your work appears. So, in CS: Conference > Journal We also have lesser conferences called workshops that are typically used for less refined ideas or lesser impact work. Journal pubs can still be high impact, I'd just say it's more rare.
RESPONSE B: In the sciences, journal articles are easier for potential readers to come across in literature databases. Also, conferences tend to be poorly indexed without abstracts and reference links when they're indexed at all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are the big differences between publishing in refereed conference proceedings vs a peer-reviewed journal? Is there a big difference between the two? I would guess impact factor is the biggest difference, but if you're pressed for time to publish and present something, would publishing in a conference proceedings be advantageous in order to get your research findings published sooner?
RESPONSE A: What field are you in? I'm in biological sciences research. In my field not many people pay much attention to conference publications, people tend not to publish major findings there. Also, fewer people are likely to find and read a conference publication. Most journals will not publish your paper if findings from it have already been published somewhere else. There are also a lot of lower impact journals now that to be honest, are not that hard to get published in, and that will have more views and readers than a conference article.
RESPONSE B: In the sciences, journal articles are easier for potential readers to come across in literature databases. Also, conferences tend to be poorly indexed without abstracts and reference links when they're indexed at all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you make good use of the informal, initial inquiries that are frequently invited on job advertisements? Hi Academica, I am applying for a tenure-track job in my research area. As is often the case for tenure-track jobs, a manager in charge of the hiring process has provided their email address on the job post. This manager, a Provost and Dean, invites prospective applicants to email them for "initial inquiries". Has anyone actually made good use of these "initial inquiries"? How does one avoid simply asking "so, do you think you would hire me?" There must be a way to leave a positive impression without asking too much or writing an email that is a burden to reply to. Do any of you lovely folks have thoughts/experiences on this? Thanks in advance for any help/perspective you can provide.
RESPONSE A: I would ask about specific research areas desired (beyond the fields stated) and some questions about the department overall (such as how much collaboration there is). I think that's a good time to try to figure out how well you might fit there in order to better tailor your application.
RESPONSE B: I was once turned down for a TT position because I had *not* reached out to existing faculty before the application. This was specifically mentioned in feedback following an interview for said position. Once in place, an individual's work will likely intersect with that of other faculty members, and the nature and type of that intersection cannot reasonably be predicted before the candidate is known, so it cannot be prescribed in the job specifications. In short, these invitations to enquire should be considered as "pre-interviews" where both sides explore the possible rewards from working together. Of course, having had such a discussion, your application will be better tailored to the expectations of the hiring committee than would be the application of someone who had not previously reached out. So, yes, always make "informal enquiries"...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is 40 hours a week of studying reasonable for one class? My general chemistry professor is having us sign a “contract” to say that we have to study 40 hours a week for this class, and anyone with other commitments should drop (jobs or other classes). I’ve taken a decent amount of STEM units before and I’ve never heard of having to study 40 hours for one class. I can see having to study a combined 40 hours for multiple classes, but not one class. This doesn’t really sit right with me. I know that the study hours aren’t enforceable at all, but the fact that it was on a contract is a little weird. The content so far is pretty straightforward but I don’t know how this professor grades. I’ve also applied to masters programs and this class is a prerequisite. I’m not sure if I absolutely have to take it before or during the masters program, but when I applied for the programs, I told them that I’ll take it this semester. I can technically still take it during the summer but I’m not sure if the grad schools will like that. If I were to not take classes this semester, I’ve been offered a research opportunity. I probably won’t be able to do this if I took this class. Overall I’m not sure what to do. I’ve already started to burn out from school and I’ve done some really self destructive behaviors during my previous class.
RESPONSE A: No, 40 hours a week for a single class is bunk. General rule is 2-3 hours outside of class for every credit. That said, it's likely that the professor is trying to get you to understand that the class is hard and you will have to work hard.
RESPONSE B: Gen chem professor here. That's nuts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: class? My general chemistry professor is having us sign a “contract” to say that we have to study 40 hours a week for this class, and anyone with other commitments should drop (jobs or other classes). I’ve taken a decent amount of STEM units before and I’ve never heard of having to study 40 hours for one class. I can see having to study a combined 40 hours for multiple classes, but not one class. This doesn’t really sit right with me. I know that the study hours aren’t enforceable at all, but the fact that it was on a contract is a little weird. The content so far is pretty straightforward but I don’t know how this professor grades. I’ve also applied to masters programs and this class is a prerequisite. I’m not sure if I absolutely have to take it before or during the masters program, but when I applied for the programs, I told them that I’ll take it this semester. I can technically still take it during the summer but I’m not sure if the grad schools will like that. If I were to not take classes this semester, I’ve been offered a research opportunity. I probably won’t be able to do this if I took this class. Overall I’m not sure what to do. I’ve already started to burn out from school and I’ve done some really self destructive behaviors during my previous class.
RESPONSE A: Uh, maybe if you're getting like 20 credits for this one class (like two semesters' worth for a grad student.) So, no. Professors have too much power over students, and deans exist to check that power (at some institutions, at least.) Getting the dean involved could be messy, though. I would talk to students who've taken it before, if there are any, to find out how much work it really is. If it really is absurd, drop it if possible.
RESPONSE B: As everyone else has noted, it’s bullshit. But it’s also *really* elitist. Only people who have taken out student loans or have a full ride can take his class? Nobody working can participate? I’d be pissed for that alone.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is 40 hours a week of studying reasonable for one class? My general chemistry professor is having us sign a “contract” to say that we have to study 40 hours a week for this class, and anyone with other commitments should drop (jobs or other classes). I’ve taken a decent amount of STEM units before and I’ve never heard of having to study 40 hours for one class. I can see having to study a combined 40 hours for multiple classes, but not one class. This doesn’t really sit right with me. I know that the study hours aren’t enforceable at all, but the fact that it was on a contract is a little weird. The content so far is pretty straightforward but I don’t know how this professor grades. I’ve also applied to masters programs and this class is a prerequisite. I’m not sure if I absolutely have to take it before or during the masters program, but when I applied for the programs, I told them that I’ll take it this semester. I can technically still take it during the summer but I’m not sure if the grad schools will like that. If I were to not take classes this semester, I’ve been offered a research opportunity. I probably won’t be able to do this if I took this class. Overall I’m not sure what to do. I’ve already started to burn out from school and I’ve done some really self destructive behaviors during my previous class.
RESPONSE A: God no. In a doctoral program you might be expected to commit 20hrs a week to one class (trust me, I got told this last week by my professor), but there is a huge difference... we are getting paid to take these classes. Well, to teach and do research.. but also to take the classes. For undergrads I’d expect a maximum of 10 hours a week for a seriously important and difficult class. Other classes maybe 3-9.
RESPONSE B: General rule I was give was 3 hours out of class for each credit hour.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can I attend a different university after academic dismissal? So I'm a computer science major at UCR who transferred here in Fall 2019 after spending 2 years at my local community college. During my first quarter here I ran into issues and ended up with a 1.40 GPA so I got categorized as "Subject to Dismissal." I'm waiting for a reply from my advisor but I believe I would need to get above a 2.0 GPA this quarter AND raise my cumulative GPA to above a 2.0 in order to stay. I can potentially get above a 2.0 GPA this quarter but it wouldn't bring my cumulative GPA above a 2.0 so I'm pretty sure I'm getting dismissed. Would it be possible to go back to my community college and take a few classes to transfer to a different college? I don't know how this would work since 1) I would have been dismissed from UCR so everything would be on my record and 2) I've already gone through the community college route and even received an associates degree. Optimally, I would like to end up at CSUF since it's not too far from where I live and I have a friend in CS there who says it's great. I'm located in California if that helps with anything.
RESPONSE A: OP talk to your advisor or registrar about university course retake rules. Typically only the retaken course will count towards your GPA. This should over time help to mitigate that bad semester. If you can't retake anything in the upcoming term where you are on probation, do the best you can. Talk to your advisor and be honest about your anxiety about this. Your progress should be taken into account, but let them tell you how it works. Good luck OP!
RESPONSE B: If you get over a 2.0 this semester and not a cumulative 2.0 you may remain on probation for another semester or be able to appeal a dismissal. But yes you can also go to a new school. It may not be as prestigious as UCR and you would probably have to be like "the computer science major turned our to kick my ass so now I'm majoring in geography" perhaps.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: if I should take the'safe' route or the personal fulfillment route. It seems like I'll just be going to school to remain as equally unemployable as I am now. Sorry for the rambling I'm just in full on crisis mode and it feels like years and years of knowing my exact goal are all falling apart at the last minute.
RESPONSE A: It’s worth it, but there are no guarantees. The academic job market is small- only the best get the jobs, but you can’t get one at all without the degree. Even then, you need some luck/opportunity. The people who don’t make it are often not the ones to listen to, at least, don’t listen only to them. Now, my caveat to all this is that it’s worth if if you are funded for the degree- I.e. they give you tuition wavers and a stipend. If you are paying yourself, the risks may well outweigh the reward. There are many programs that need you as a student to support themselves, and the quality of the degree/experience you will get may not be worth the cost. If you are completely unfunded, that’s a sign you may not be going in the right direction. But as a previous poster said, there are many paths. Personally, I did well enough in grad school to get job offers from masters institutions without a post doc. I decided the risk of a post doc was not worth it, and i took a position at a place where I can still do research but teach a 3/2 (now 2/2) load, and things have been good. If you understand academic culture, you’ll have a better idea of your chance of success. The people you talk to who don’t get jobs- they often are very smart, but can’t fit into the mentor driven culture of academia (or honestly they’ve been screwed at some point). So- how badly do you want to be a professor? If your answer is you’ll only accept an R1 job, well, that’s riskier. If they’re not paying you for the degree, you’re just not going to get that job.
RESPONSE B: No.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: ? If I don't do a PhD I could do a MSW which has infinitely more career options and will likely pay better in the long run, but I don't find myself nearly as excited to do it and I don't want to wake up after ten years in my field and realize I hate it. I don't know if I should take the'safe' route or the personal fulfillment route. It seems like I'll just be going to school to remain as equally unemployable as I am now. Sorry for the rambling I'm just in full on crisis mode and it feels like years and years of knowing my exact goal are all falling apart at the last minute.
RESPONSE A: I always find this question puzzling. A PhD is a degree for people who are intellectually curious. If you are really intellectually curious then it's for you! I have tenure and a super lucrative job. I went to an Ivy for a PhD and I have dealt with politics. But I also started as a HS dropout in a community college. But I never did any of this for tenure or to get job security. I did it initially because living off intellectual curiosity and playing the game at the highest level was appealing to me. Tenure had nothing to do with my choices. If that's what you're after, please stay away from academia. There are a lot of people who do it for that reason and it gives the academy a bad name. It also makes the academy much more like Office Space than it should be. I love my job because I let my intellectual curiosity guide me from project to project and topic-to-topic. Tenure is protection for the intellectually curious, not a reward for suffering. Every job has bad parts. I know a lot of iBankers that hate their lives. I know school teachers who are happy. The entire idea of our economy is that people with strong interests in things are allowed to pursue them. If you have a strong interest, go for it! But if you're already making calculations about how much money you can make doing this or that, I would suggest you get an MBA or a degree in computer science, because you can get a really good ROI on those.
RESPONSE B: No.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Work/life balance and expectations for PhD in US vs EU? Hello, I previously lived in the EU, but I am currently doing my Master's in the US. However, I am interested in returning to the EU for my PhD. ​ How does the work/life balance compare for PhD students in the US vs the EU? I've heard the stories of students in the US putting in long, arduous hours, so is the same thing equally common in the EU? ​ Also, since most PhD programs in the EU require a Master's degree, are you already expected to be somewhat of a specialist in the area that you are going to be researching in? For example, if you are interested in researching Machine Learning would that expected to be the topic of your Master's thesis? (My thesis is heavily interdisciplinary, but I am hoping to pivot into a slightly different research area.)
RESPONSE A: Long arduous hours is just the reality of any PhD. But you have more rights in many European countries, and as you are paid you're not as disposable. However this varies enormously by research group.
RESPONSE B: Yes, absolutely depends on the supervisor in the EU but most universities promote healthier attitudes to work/life balance and generally if you decide you only want to work a certain number of hours and are good at standing your ground, you shouldn't get too much kick back so long as the work is done (in my experience). In the UK your only role is to focus on your own project unless you decide to help with demonstrating, but that's your own decision and tends to be well paid.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Europe? I finished out a master’s of Experimental Psychology (focused on stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination through the lens of intersectionality) almost two years ago and plan on applying to PhD programs this coming fall. There’s a couple universities I’m interested in outside the United States. My question is, what differences should I expect in 1) the application process, 2) the programs themselves, 3) the job market potential where I would likely come back to the US to “settle down”? Any advice is appreciated!
RESPONSE A: Be aware that in the UK a large number (possibly the majority?) of PhD projects are funded by grants from the government research councils; which only British citizens and EU citizens resident in the UK for more than 3 years are eligible to receive. There are certainly projects with other funding sources which international applicants are eligible for, but it's something to be aware of. Of course it's also possible to self-fund (pay your own university fees and living costs), but I wouldn't recommend that. Edit: If you want to come to Europe, maybe look at Germany. There are no tuition fees for anybody, and I believe PhD students usually receive an employment contract and salary, without any nationality or residence restrictions. Many programs operate entirely in English (at least in the hard sciences, not sure about psychology).
RESPONSE B: Did my undergrad in U.S. and my PhD in Canada. (In physics, not psychology.) It was a good experience. Here are some differences: 1. The US system (at least in physics) mashes the PhD and masters together. The Canadian system treats them separately. Often you can go to the same school for both degrees, but you're not expected to and you will probably have to apply twice. 2. In the U.S., you apply to a school and you start working with a research lab after you've been there for a year or so. In Canada, you apply to work in a specific research group from the start and they pay your tuition. 3. At least in physics, the Canadian degrees tend to be shorter. It's not uncommon to do a seven year degree in the U.S., but the Canadian degree is almost universally 5 years: 2 for masters and 3 for phd
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: College Professors. How much written feedback are you required to write in the US? I'm currently teaching at a British University, and the process seems to involve a lot of busywork. For every assignment given we must apply all of the pass criteria provided to us by the accrediting company, and then we must then write feedback for every pass criteria. So if an assignment has 15 pass criteria we must write 15 paragraphs per student regarding how they achieved each of these 15 Pass Criteria. When you have 30 or 40 students this can obviously become a very laborious task, and one which doesn't seem to help students much because you could tell them verbally what you wrote in 5 minutes. Is this a thing in the US? Are college professors there also required to write so much written feedback to students?
RESPONSE A: Never heard of that. May depend on individual university policy
RESPONSE B: That is not normal for a British university. I don't work in one any more but I don't think it's changed *that* much. We did give students explicit marking schemes so that they knew where their marks would be coming from but whoever wrote the question also wrote the marking scheme and I never saw anyone produce something as daft as that. The only bit that ever needed to be done by heading was the mark awarded under each heading. "Accrediting company" is a new one on me. I'm not good on the inner workings of academia but this sounds like a poor university outsourcing to a consultancy that has no idea what it is doing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: College Professors. How much written feedback are you required to write in the US? I'm currently teaching at a British University, and the process seems to involve a lot of busywork. For every assignment given we must apply all of the pass criteria provided to us by the accrediting company, and then we must then write feedback for every pass criteria. So if an assignment has 15 pass criteria we must write 15 paragraphs per student regarding how they achieved each of these 15 Pass Criteria. When you have 30 or 40 students this can obviously become a very laborious task, and one which doesn't seem to help students much because you could tell them verbally what you wrote in 5 minutes. Is this a thing in the US? Are college professors there also required to write so much written feedback to students?
RESPONSE A: Never heard of that. May depend on individual university policy
RESPONSE B: If I had to do all that, I'd quit my job in an instant. We get to write our own assignments. We get to determine the grading rubrics. We get to instruct the graders/TAs how to apply those rubrics. We get to assign grades/approve of TA grade assignments. We get to determine how much information to give back to students. There is no such things as "pass criteria provided by the accrediting company".
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: College Professors. How much written feedback are you required to write in the US? I'm currently teaching at a British University, and the process seems to involve a lot of busywork. For every assignment given we must apply all of the pass criteria provided to us by the accrediting company, and then we must then write feedback for every pass criteria. So if an assignment has 15 pass criteria we must write 15 paragraphs per student regarding how they achieved each of these 15 Pass Criteria. When you have 30 or 40 students this can obviously become a very laborious task, and one which doesn't seem to help students much because you could tell them verbally what you wrote in 5 minutes. Is this a thing in the US? Are college professors there also required to write so much written feedback to students?
RESPONSE A: I work in a British university currently, and have never had to do any of that, or anything like it.
RESPONSE B: Never heard of that. May depend on individual university policy
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: College Professors. How much written feedback are you required to write in the US? I'm currently teaching at a British University, and the process seems to involve a lot of busywork. For every assignment given we must apply all of the pass criteria provided to us by the accrediting company, and then we must then write feedback for every pass criteria. So if an assignment has 15 pass criteria we must write 15 paragraphs per student regarding how they achieved each of these 15 Pass Criteria. When you have 30 or 40 students this can obviously become a very laborious task, and one which doesn't seem to help students much because you could tell them verbally what you wrote in 5 minutes. Is this a thing in the US? Are college professors there also required to write so much written feedback to students?
RESPONSE A: This sounds more like what might be done at secondary school, or maybe a college of further education, rather than at a "standard university" in the UK. What sort of institute are you teaching in?
RESPONSE B: Never heard of that. May depend on individual university policy
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST:
RESPONSE A: Like /u/13104598210, there is no universal answer. This will vary by field, job, and individual. Other than dealing with my PI, I don't think my PhD was the hardest thing I ever did. For me, that was teaching high school. But I also went into my PhD with the idea that it was a job, do it, go home, enjoy being at home. I treated my postdoc much the same way. But I've also known for a long time that I don't want to be a professor, and hence have not put in the work to do something like that.
RESPONSE B: Went from grad school to a full-time research staff position at a university: >Is your work day shorter or longer? It didn't really change. I hear a lot of stories about 80-hr work weeks in grad school, but that wasn't my experience. What has changed is that I am expected to produce more with my time, and I'm expected to use the vacation time im given. >Do you juggle fewer or more projects? More. Far more. And not just projects - I travel for training and coordination with collaborating institutions and write grant proposals on top of splitting my time between 5 or so projects. Managing time effectively is a balancing act. >Is your personal stress level higher or lower? It's higher, but honestly it was pretty low in grad school. I'd say it basically normaled-off. >Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? I was happy in grad school, but I'm a different kind of happy now that it's over. I make real money, I own a house, I feel like I contribute to my job, and I have a lot more freedom. In grad school I had one focus - complete grad school. And having that goal to strive toward helped me feel accomplished. You'll hear it from almost everyone - defending and finishing your PhD is anticlimactic. There's a "now what???" aspect to finishing. I was lucky to get full-time work right out of school, and it's very rewarding in ways that grad school was not.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: grad school easier or harder? So, the PhD I'm currently working on is the hardest thing in my life so far. I was wondering if life after the PhD will revert back to "normal", or if things stay the same or get even harder, regarding stress, clutter, and organization. * Is your work day shorter or longer? * Do you juggle fewer or more projects? * Is your personal stress level higher or lower? * Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? I'm curious to hear about postdocs in research, as well as those of you who went into the industry.
RESPONSE A: It really depends on the person and the situation. There are no consistent truths across disciplines and across personalities, but I can say for me: 1. My work day got substantially shorter, but that was only because I had several articles in the can before finishing my Ph.D. The job applying process is very stressful, but not as time consuming as doing actual research. And then in my first job, I was at an R1 so my teaching load was 2:2 and admin was very light. I was still conducting research, but it was easier than during the PhD phase. 2. More, with longer-term time horizons. 3. For me lower after I got into a TT position, but higher before. 4. I was happier in the TT position--I had money to buy food. But I hated academia and eventually left, so I wasn't as happy as possible.
RESPONSE B: I am definitely happier than I was while I was in grad school, but have more work and more projects. It's like anything in life -- the older stages look daunting when you are younger, but by the time you get there you have matured and have enough tools to handle it most of the time. My time is less flexible, but it's still pretty flexible. I don't know why I was so miserable in grad school, but I was. The school was a good fit academically, but not philosophically. I felt i had to go there because it was the best place to study what I study and the best school in general. Since then, I have been more choosey about my work place, so I am sure that has a lot to do with it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: PhD redditors, is life after grad school easier or harder? So, the PhD I'm currently working on is the hardest thing in my life so far. I was wondering if life after the PhD will revert back to "normal", or if things stay the same or get even harder, regarding stress, clutter, and organization. * Is your work day shorter or longer? * Do you juggle fewer or more projects? * Is your personal stress level higher or lower? * Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? I'm curious to hear about postdocs in research, as well as those of you who went into the industry.
RESPONSE A: Got a TT position at a research university following graduation. > Is your work day shorter or longer? Longer, definitely. But more enjoyable, since I have total control over all my projects. > Do you juggle fewer or more projects? More projects, but I have the freedom to explore more intriguing & creative projects than I could have as a student. > Is your personal stress level higher or lower? Mostly, lower. The most stressful part is paying student loans etc. I have a very supportive department so I'm not as stressed as I could be when it comes to working toward tenure requirements. > Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? So much happier, but I did enjoy my PhD student time as well.
RESPONSE B: Like /u/13104598210, there is no universal answer. This will vary by field, job, and individual. Other than dealing with my PI, I don't think my PhD was the hardest thing I ever did. For me, that was teaching high school. But I also went into my PhD with the idea that it was a job, do it, go home, enjoy being at home. I treated my postdoc much the same way. But I've also known for a long time that I don't want to be a professor, and hence have not put in the work to do something like that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: , is life after grad school easier or harder? So, the PhD I'm currently working on is the hardest thing in my life so far. I was wondering if life after the PhD will revert back to "normal", or if things stay the same or get even harder, regarding stress, clutter, and organization. * Is your work day shorter or longer? * Do you juggle fewer or more projects? * Is your personal stress level higher or lower? * Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? I'm curious to hear about postdocs in research, as well as those of you who went into the industry.
RESPONSE A: Got a TT position at a research university following graduation. > Is your work day shorter or longer? Longer, definitely. But more enjoyable, since I have total control over all my projects. > Do you juggle fewer or more projects? More projects, but I have the freedom to explore more intriguing & creative projects than I could have as a student. > Is your personal stress level higher or lower? Mostly, lower. The most stressful part is paying student loans etc. I have a very supportive department so I'm not as stressed as I could be when it comes to working toward tenure requirements. > Are you happier or less happy than in the PhD? So much happier, but I did enjoy my PhD student time as well.
RESPONSE B: It really depends on the person and the situation. There are no consistent truths across disciplines and across personalities, but I can say for me: 1. My work day got substantially shorter, but that was only because I had several articles in the can before finishing my Ph.D. The job applying process is very stressful, but not as time consuming as doing actual research. And then in my first job, I was at an R1 so my teaching load was 2:2 and admin was very light. I was still conducting research, but it was easier than during the PhD phase. 2. More, with longer-term time horizons. 3. For me lower after I got into a TT position, but higher before. 4. I was happier in the TT position--I had money to buy food. But I hated academia and eventually left, so I wasn't as happy as possible.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: am considering getting a M.S. in Mathematics, and I am trying to figure out what avenue works best for me. The reason I want this MS is for teaching purposes. I am looking to teach math at either High School or Community College. My understanding is that Community Colleges usually require their professors to have at least a Masters in the subject they want to teach. Also, having a Masters in the subject you are teaching can sometimes help getting higher pay or more job opportunities at the high school level. With regards to where to get my degree: I am looking at both online avenues through schools like JHU EP and UW Online, as well as, in person avenues at schools relatively local to me, which would be in California. The problem arises when I compare the math graduate programs of those at institutes like JHU and CSUSM. JHU's math graduate program is ranked #22 (US News) and CSUSM is not ranked. I am trying to figure out if it is better to get my degree online at a highly ranked university, or get it in person at a university that is not even ranked. To be clear, I am not dead set on any particular online program or in-person university. I am just trying to compare the two.
RESPONSE A: I mean the other thing community colleges look for besides a graduate degree is teaching experience - and that'll be tough to get online. Also, if you're considering JHU, I assume the program is offered through AAP. Just a heads up, AAP master's have no affiliation whatsoever with the eponymous departments at JHU (they aren't taught by the faculty of those departments, the credential you receive won't be from those departments, etc) and are seen as non-rigorous and a way for the university to make a quick buck off the Federal employees who need a piece of paper.
RESPONSE B: Personally I think that accredited online programs are growing in ranks as having just as much weight as an on-campus program. I am personally getting a masters online through a state school, and my diploma will not say whether or not I was online or “on campus”; it is the same degree as if I was a traditional student.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: best for me. The reason I want this MS is for teaching purposes. I am looking to teach math at either High School or Community College. My understanding is that Community Colleges usually require their professors to have at least a Masters in the subject they want to teach. Also, having a Masters in the subject you are teaching can sometimes help getting higher pay or more job opportunities at the high school level. With regards to where to get my degree: I am looking at both online avenues through schools like JHU EP and UW Online, as well as, in person avenues at schools relatively local to me, which would be in California. The problem arises when I compare the math graduate programs of those at institutes like JHU and CSUSM. JHU's math graduate program is ranked #22 (US News) and CSUSM is not ranked. I am trying to figure out if it is better to get my degree online at a highly ranked university, or get it in person at a university that is not even ranked. To be clear, I am not dead set on any particular online program or in-person university. I am just trying to compare the two.
RESPONSE A: Another point you might want to consider is how you learn best. Although both options have pros and cons you have to consider if you're someone that is motivated enough to do the work on your own and can primarily learn from books/videos. If you're the type of person that can easily do this, look more towards online courses. If you feel that you would be better in a traditional environment, then go the in-person route.
RESPONSE B: I mean the other thing community colleges look for besides a graduate degree is teaching experience - and that'll be tough to get online. Also, if you're considering JHU, I assume the program is offered through AAP. Just a heads up, AAP master's have no affiliation whatsoever with the eponymous departments at JHU (they aren't taught by the faculty of those departments, the credential you receive won't be from those departments, etc) and are seen as non-rigorous and a way for the university to make a quick buck off the Federal employees who need a piece of paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it better to get a Masters degree in-person at a decent university or online at a top ranked one? A little background: I am considering getting a M.S. in Mathematics, and I am trying to figure out what avenue works best for me. The reason I want this MS is for teaching purposes. I am looking to teach math at either High School or Community College. My understanding is that Community Colleges usually require their professors to have at least a Masters in the subject they want to teach. Also, having a Masters in the subject you are teaching can sometimes help getting higher pay or more job opportunities at the high school level. With regards to where to get my degree: I am looking at both online avenues through schools like JHU EP and UW Online, as well as, in person avenues at schools relatively local to me, which would be in California. The problem arises when I compare the math graduate programs of those at institutes like JHU and CSUSM. JHU's math graduate program is ranked #22 (US News) and CSUSM is not ranked. I am trying to figure out if it is better to get my degree online at a highly ranked university, or get it in person at a university that is not even ranked. To be clear, I am not dead set on any particular online program or in-person university. I am just trying to compare the two.
RESPONSE A: Personally I think that accredited online programs are growing in ranks as having just as much weight as an on-campus program. I am personally getting a masters online through a state school, and my diploma will not say whether or not I was online or “on campus”; it is the same degree as if I was a traditional student.
RESPONSE B: If you are looking for decent job, do what is the most cost effective and best for you. Where you went matters only in certain situations. Do some research first. If you know where you might want to teach then research the department. If the faculty consistently come from top ranked schools then that’s what they want to continue. If it looks like a diverse group of schools then go online.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Lots of international teaching experience, no degree. Is getting into a masters in ed program impossible? I've been and ESL teacher for about 7 years now overseas. I've taught in an international school grades K-12. I designed and implemented a whole new curriculum, introduced the International Baccalaureate Diploma program and even landed the school an official IB license. I also went in to teach English to adults in the public sector, teaching classes in the evenings at different ministries. Eventually I moved on to teaching in a private center professionals and young adults, giving one to one coaching and TOEFL preparation classes. I also teach MSA Arabic and local dialect to Fullbright scholars from the US during the summer which has been my favorite experience so far. As you can see already, I'm really enthusiastic about teaching. It's my craft, I feel so excited when I teach. I'm a US citizen, but my parents were deported when I was a teen. When I went back to the US for University I felt overwhelmed, homesick and just this weird culture shock. I barely got through several semesters and I didn't even know what I wanted to do so I ended up coming back "home". Can I get into a masters program in ed? Would schools even consider me? I did so much hard work, and I really want to formalize my qualifications in an academic environment. My dream would be to teach Arabic in a liberal arts college.
RESPONSE A: No accredited school is going to admit you for a masters degree without a bachelors.
RESPONSE B: You should contact the admissions office for the schools you’re interested in and ask so you can get a specific answer. You may have to complete a bachelor’s first, but some of your experience may help you pass any exams hey may have to test out of subjects etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Lots of international teaching experience, no degree. Is getting into a masters in ed program impossible? I've been and ESL teacher for about 7 years now overseas. I've taught in an international school grades K-12. I designed and implemented a whole new curriculum, introduced the International Baccalaureate Diploma program and even landed the school an official IB license. I also went in to teach English to adults in the public sector, teaching classes in the evenings at different ministries. Eventually I moved on to teaching in a private center professionals and young adults, giving one to one coaching and TOEFL preparation classes. I also teach MSA Arabic and local dialect to Fullbright scholars from the US during the summer which has been my favorite experience so far. As you can see already, I'm really enthusiastic about teaching. It's my craft, I feel so excited when I teach. I'm a US citizen, but my parents were deported when I was a teen. When I went back to the US for University I felt overwhelmed, homesick and just this weird culture shock. I barely got through several semesters and I didn't even know what I wanted to do so I ended up coming back "home". Can I get into a masters program in ed? Would schools even consider me? I did so much hard work, and I really want to formalize my qualifications in an academic environment. My dream would be to teach Arabic in a liberal arts college.
RESPONSE A: You should contact the admissions office for the schools you’re interested in and ask so you can get a specific answer. You may have to complete a bachelor’s first, but some of your experience may help you pass any exams hey may have to test out of subjects etc.
RESPONSE B: you need a bachelor's degree to be admitted to a master's. it's frankly a bit bizarre that you were allowed to teach anywhere without a bachelor's.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Lots of international teaching experience, no degree. Is getting into a masters in ed program impossible? I've been and ESL teacher for about 7 years now overseas. I've taught in an international school grades K-12. I designed and implemented a whole new curriculum, introduced the International Baccalaureate Diploma program and even landed the school an official IB license. I also went in to teach English to adults in the public sector, teaching classes in the evenings at different ministries. Eventually I moved on to teaching in a private center professionals and young adults, giving one to one coaching and TOEFL preparation classes. I also teach MSA Arabic and local dialect to Fullbright scholars from the US during the summer which has been my favorite experience so far. As you can see already, I'm really enthusiastic about teaching. It's my craft, I feel so excited when I teach. I'm a US citizen, but my parents were deported when I was a teen. When I went back to the US for University I felt overwhelmed, homesick and just this weird culture shock. I barely got through several semesters and I didn't even know what I wanted to do so I ended up coming back "home". Can I get into a masters program in ed? Would schools even consider me? I did so much hard work, and I really want to formalize my qualifications in an academic environment. My dream would be to teach Arabic in a liberal arts college.
RESPONSE A: You should contact the admissions office for the schools you’re interested in and ask so you can get a specific answer. You may have to complete a bachelor’s first, but some of your experience may help you pass any exams hey may have to test out of subjects etc.
RESPONSE B: I agree with others that you won't get into an MA program without having a BA but you may be able to find a combined program, BA/MA, that enables you to complete things faster. Best bet is to cultivate a faculty member who can appreciate your experience and see if you can translate some of it into a fast track.
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.