label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
A
|
POST: 't know how possible that is in the grad school/post-doc/professorship arena.
RESPONSE A: My advice is to find a partner who is not an academic. Several of my grad school friends fell in love with each other and it has been painful watching how impossible it is for two people who are not only in the same discipline, but also in the same field, try to manage their careers. Someone always compromises. If you have to date an academic, then find someone in a different discipline. My partner works in IT, which is ideal because he has a skill set that is highly mobile, and generally well paid. We have been together for 14 years, and he followed my to grad school, and to new jobs. We did have to live apart for 9 months when I took an East Coast postdoc that wasn't worth him relocating for. That was tough but doable. I tend to think that earning a PhD is not worth it unless you commit fully and resign yourself to the fact that you have very little control over your future. You need to love your discipline more that you love the idea of love. And yes, my poor husband is well aware that he always comes second to my love of history.
RESPONSE B: I met my husband my first year of grad school (about six years ago). We got married last year as he finished up his PhD and I wrapped up a short postdoc. We've had MANY conversations about what we'd each like our lives to look like and how that fits with the other person. In short we decided that since my husband wants to be a professor and I don't that his career prospects take the lead. Anywhere he'll be able to find a job, I should be able to too. I think the key piece is talking very openly about this kind of stuff. My husband was really worried in the beginning that I was giving something up just to follow him or not speaking up about what I wanted, but since I'm still not completely sure what I want to be when I grow up, I consider us following his career to be an adventure. I have watched friends struggle with this same topic and it's painful to watch because the trailing spouse doesn't always understand the academic trajectory.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I pretty much partied my way through undergrad and was lucky to graduate. Is graduate school a possibility? I really want to get my masters in applied math or statistics. I believe I have the "real world" requirement, I work with statisticians all day, I am proficient with SAS, etc. However, I am just worried that when I apply, my GPA is going to be a huge deterrent from gaining admission. Is there anything I can do in this situation? I was an incredibly lazy 22 year old, now I am a pretty focused 30 year old and would like to increase my chances for advancing professionally.
RESPONSE A: Email or talk to the people in the schools you are interested in. Show them how interested and determined you are. Emphasize your real world experience. It really can count for a lot. Are there any part time or night classes you could take? If so take those. Everything you can do to emphasize that you are now a dedicated, hard working person who is determined to succeed.
RESPONSE B: We had a student in a similar situation join our department. Several faculty members did not want to admit him, but he was admitted for several reasons. First, the his major professor lobbied extensively for him. She wanted him in her lab, and was willing to assume the "risk". Without her, he would have been denied admittance. Second, he had lots of post-college relevant experience, and that came with glowing letters of recommendations. He also had good GRE scores and was honest about the cause of his low grades, too much time partying, not enough time studying. His job history and letters of recommendation demonstrated that he had outgrown that behavior, and he ended up being one of our better students. So yes it is possible to go to grad school and do well, but finding someone in the department will likely be crucial in getting them to overlook low grades.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: noticed, though, is that many of them seem to really have fun when they do things like read research papers. One of my lab mates has even said that they "stay up until 5 a.m. because the new proceedings was so fun and interesting." I've never felt this type of joy when reading papers before. Ever. And I'm wondering if that's a problem or if that means that research life isn't for me. I usually get to the lab at 8:30 to 9 a.m. I work for a good 8-9 hours everyday and usually go home after that to either chill or do some personal work. I sometimes work on holidays and weekends too, but nothing too overboard (maaaaybe a few hours if I'm productive). When I read papers or listen to lectures/talks, it _sometimes_ is "fun" because I'm really curious about the results or findings of the authors. But even in this case I just read or skim through the abstract/intro/conclusion and write it down somewhere (usually a Google Spreadsheet) and I just think of it as another task I have to do to get the overall job done. I've never once felt this burning urge to sacrifice sleep or my personal life to read papers. However, it seems that if one wants to get ahead (so to speak) that's a necessary condition and I'm just wondering if my observation is true. Just wondering what other people here might think. I'm open to any thoughts or opinions. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: (It sounds like academia needs to get off its high horse and work on its communication and presentation skills and not value intellectualism so highly that it’s inaccessible even to people in the field)
RESPONSE B: I would never characterize this stuff as fun. It's difficult, and it's something that helps me feel accomplished in my professional life. As such, I would define it as engaging- engaging activities aren't always fun, but we do get a sense of pride and accomplishment from it. In my own graduate program, students often embellished this sort of love for the field in order to ingratiate themselves with professors or just to humblebrag in front of classmates.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: that I've noticed, though, is that many of them seem to really have fun when they do things like read research papers. One of my lab mates has even said that they "stay up until 5 a.m. because the new proceedings was so fun and interesting." I've never felt this type of joy when reading papers before. Ever. And I'm wondering if that's a problem or if that means that research life isn't for me. I usually get to the lab at 8:30 to 9 a.m. I work for a good 8-9 hours everyday and usually go home after that to either chill or do some personal work. I sometimes work on holidays and weekends too, but nothing too overboard (maaaaybe a few hours if I'm productive). When I read papers or listen to lectures/talks, it _sometimes_ is "fun" because I'm really curious about the results or findings of the authors. But even in this case I just read or skim through the abstract/intro/conclusion and write it down somewhere (usually a Google Spreadsheet) and I just think of it as another task I have to do to get the overall job done. I've never once felt this burning urge to sacrifice sleep or my personal life to read papers. However, it seems that if one wants to get ahead (so to speak) that's a necessary condition and I'm just wondering if my observation is true. Just wondering what other people here might think. I'm open to any thoughts or opinions. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: (It sounds like academia needs to get off its high horse and work on its communication and presentation skills and not value intellectualism so highly that it’s inaccessible even to people in the field)
RESPONSE B: I find an article or two every month that's interesting but I'd never call them fun. Also, academic conferences are the worst. I look through the schedule, find on or two presentations each day that sound interesting so I have something to report on, and spend the rest of the time enjoying the city and surrounding areas. It took me years to get to that level of comfort though. If you can do the work and stay current on relevant research, it doesn't matter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: clusion and write it down somewhere (usually a Google Spreadsheet) and I just think of it as another task I have to do to get the overall job done. I've never once felt this burning urge to sacrifice sleep or my personal life to read papers. However, it seems that if one wants to get ahead (so to speak) that's a necessary condition and I'm just wondering if my observation is true. Just wondering what other people here might think. I'm open to any thoughts or opinions. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I would not worry about comparing yourself to your labmate. (But for what it's worth, either your labmate is uniquely passionate in a way that goes far above and beyond what you'd need to do to be successful, or they're discussing their lack of sleep in a humble braggy kind of way to show how committed they are.) Speaking from personal experience, sometimes I sometimes feel really excited about papers, especially if they're very closely related to my areas of research. Other times, I read a paper as a means to an end--it's important background research but I wouldn't characterize myself as over-the-top excited (especially after reading through many such articles). I've experienced every gradient in-between. Do what works for you. Getting enough sleep and self-care is important--it helps you to do the work that you do in those 8-9 hours each day well. And it affirms that you are a human being with needs outside of academia, too! Suffice to say, it sounds like you're doing just fine. I encourage you to focus on your own achievement. Perhaps your lab mate is doing things in a way that works for them, but that doesn't have to be what works for you.
RESPONSE B: I find an article or two every month that's interesting but I'd never call them fun. Also, academic conferences are the worst. I look through the schedule, find on or two presentations each day that sound interesting so I have something to report on, and spend the rest of the time enjoying the city and surrounding areas. It took me years to get to that level of comfort though. If you can do the work and stay current on relevant research, it doesn't matter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do we all recover from paper rejection? A paper I worked on for several years was rejected after multiple rounds of review over almost a year. I went for a hike and am now on Reddit, drinking beer and eating crisps in bed (feeling quite disillusioned). (Postdoc in materials science in a European university)
RESPONSE A: This is my favourite piece of advice so far: http://academicjournalpublishing.blogspot.com/2014/06/what-to-do-when-you-are-rejected.html?m=1. Basically, breathe, realise this happens to everyone, and try again.
RESPONSE B: > drinking beer and eating crisps in bed This sounds completely appropriate. Allow yourself a day or two to sulk and wallow, that's fair. But then get back on the horse and start working through the comments, talk with colleagues for their input/advice in addressing them, polish up your story, try presenting posters/orally at conferences for more feedback, polish it some more, and resubmit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Why my professor refusing to give me a job that he has proposed himself at the first place? One of these days one professor in University asked me if I would be interested to participate in a research project. And I immediately proposed him to meet and discuss it. After a day or two he told me that he was too busy and he avoided to plan new a meeting with me by saying "If you have already a job maybe it doesn't make sense to ask you to participate in this project. (Note that by this time I haven't mentioned him that I'm currently working somewhere else). To my reply I said that Indeed I'm working in a company but under certain circumstances I would be interested to work in that project and that I would like us to discuss it in more detail. After two days he replied me and avoided again to meet with me in a more straightforward way. Did I offended him with something I said or it's maybe something else?
RESPONSE A: You should ask.
RESPONSE B: It's difficult to know why form the outside, but you know enough to think twice. Most likely, they are no longer interested, full stop. It can happen for a number of different reasons, the specifics of which are not going to help anyway. Alternatively, they are somewhat interested, but it's definitely not top priority/or they are not reliable. In which case, should you really insist to participate in that context? Or the professor is really interested, but is a really awful supervisor. In which case, run. From my perspective, this is no longer an option for you, and you should be considering future possibilities. If you think it's worthwhile working with this professor, maximize your future chances by telling them (or writing) that you appreciated the thought, are still interested in this topic/area/collaboration, and look forward to future opportunities.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is expected in the first year of PhD? Hello everyone, I know this varies a lot between PhD students, but suppose you get a 3.5 year contract to do a PhD in say.. biomedical sciences. And the data is already there available to you. What are you expected to have done 6 months into your PhD? What about one year into it? So for 6 months: Do you at least have to have an outline of the research topics? The specific research questions and an analysis plan? Keep in mind you’re also doing coursework. Or are you supposed to be in the data analysis phase? One year into a PhD: Should you already be writing and submitting your first paper? Is that realistic? How was your experience? Thanks for sharing, love this sub!!
RESPONSE A: I think it is common for PhD in biological or biomedical sciences to have rotation programs for first year students. By the end of your first year, you should have found a PI, but it is often fine if you haven't found one yet either. Edit: Oops this doesn't apply if you're doing a 3.5 year program.
RESPONSE B: This varies a lot by country and program. In my biomedical sciences PhD program, the first year was coursework and rotations in at least 3 different labs. Then you join one of those labs at the end of your first year. During the rotations, you typically work on a project that could be the start of a PhD thesis, doing wet and/or dry lab work. If it’s a super focused project you may even submit a paper. But the goal is to find a lab/thesis project in the first year, basically.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: in say.. biomedical sciences. And the data is already there available to you. What are you expected to have done 6 months into your PhD? What about one year into it? So for 6 months: Do you at least have to have an outline of the research topics? The specific research questions and an analysis plan? Keep in mind you’re also doing coursework. Or are you supposed to be in the data analysis phase? One year into a PhD: Should you already be writing and submitting your first paper? Is that realistic? How was your experience? Thanks for sharing, love this sub!!
RESPONSE A: I think this varies pretty widely, with particular difference between the US and Europe. In the US, a PhD is typically something like 5 years, with some coursework included. In Europe, the expectation is more like 3 years and research is much more immediate. In my PhD (US), the first year consisted of coursework and preparation for qualifying exams. Qualifying exams themselves varied quite a lot -- in my case, they occurred during the second year and had virtually nothing to do with my research area. You were given a set of research papers around some particular theme and two weeks to prepare a written analysis and prepare for an oral exam over them. My research area was in combinatorial optimization, and my qualifier topics were around compiler techniques for parallel architectures and face recognition in computer vision. After that, you were considered formally admitted to the PhD program and you spent another 3-ish years on your research program. Note that I entered with a Masters already, though not from that university. I've known other people who walked in to their first meeting with their advisor in week one of grad school, had him basically turn around, take a file folder out of a cabinet, hand it to them, and say, "Here's your research topic for the next few years. Let me know if you need anything."
RESPONSE B: I think it is common for PhD in biological or biomedical sciences to have rotation programs for first year students. By the end of your first year, you should have found a PI, but it is often fine if you haven't found one yet either. Edit: Oops this doesn't apply if you're doing a 3.5 year program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: . Or are you supposed to be in the data analysis phase? One year into a PhD: Should you already be writing and submitting your first paper? Is that realistic? How was your experience? Thanks for sharing, love this sub!!
RESPONSE A: I think it is common for PhD in biological or biomedical sciences to have rotation programs for first year students. By the end of your first year, you should have found a PI, but it is often fine if you haven't found one yet either. Edit: Oops this doesn't apply if you're doing a 3.5 year program.
RESPONSE B: Stress you should expect stress. The first semester is generally about learning. You’ll learn how to build a study, analyze data, etc. You should expect a lot of distractions with a lot of opportunities. And you should say no to every single one in your first semester. You should focus on your coursework. Some may push you to work on a paper, but I’d argue the priority should be learning what’s expected of you and just surviving your first semester. Once you survive, then see what you can contribute. I don’t know what data you have or what you can contribute to your field, but try and find something to contribute. I would work on a poster for a conference and then a paper, but that depends on the data, your knowledge of the literature, and how quickly you can write. After a year, you should be working on a paper or poster and be working towards your dissertation. By the end of year two, you should have chapters 1-3 complete and chapters 4-5 should be in progress. If you’re working on chapters 1-3, that’s ok, but you should be getting close. That’s generally what’s expected. But life happens. My mom died during my PhD and she was 60. Things happen that delay you or mess things up. A friend had a teenage daughter and she ran away and he had to stop to find his daughter. There are expectations, but realize that it’s not a race and it’s your journey. Sometimes it goes smoothly, sometimes it doesn’t. The key is doing your best and chipping away at it and before you know it you’ll be done.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I don't what to do. I'm heartbroken, upset, angry, confused. Has anyone else been through something like this?
RESPONSE A: Regardless of what other people say here, I'll be blunt. Treat this as a wake-up call to the realities of "being a rockstar researcher". Many of those people are unhappy, because they had to forego a lot of life's precious moments to get to where they are. On the other hand, it can be fulfilling, but I suggest taking it a bit slower from here on and trying to enjoy life simultaneously.
RESPONSE B: Hey, OP. This is probably one of the most important learning moments of your life. It is where you ask yourself what it is that you really want. In undergrad and grad school, people try to do everything because that's what they think life/research is. Overworking yourself year after year will take a toll on you and facing failures in that setting might completely break you. But, the ones who succeed in grad school are the one who pace themselves and understand what is truly important to them. Is success in the eyes of others, their acceptance and their awards truly the most important thing to you ? Or is life for you to do what you want and at a pace that you find fun? Few people realize this early on. It is why they are not upset when they fail or have a paper rejected or even fail qualifiers. They have a broader perspective that helps them be alright. I'm guessing you like me were not wise enough to handle and prioritize a relationship along with research. What you have to take away from this is that that is one area that you need to grow in. It takes time but once you feel like there is more to life than being at a dream school, once you truly feel that losing any title or position won't make you any less of a person, then you will be ready to devote enough attention to people that care about you because you will know what is important. So, take a break now OP and grow. It is going to be a hard and tough growth that you will have to do alone because self-reflection is the only way to grow. Ask yourself what chains tie you down and how to break them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: king of the ashes and I don't what to do. I'm heartbroken, upset, angry, confused. Has anyone else been through something like this?
RESPONSE A: You are doing what makes you feel happy and following your dream. The right person will embrace that and instead of feeling like 2nd place, they will embrace it too (and you in turn their goals). Sucks now, but that will fade and the right one will come along that makes it not feel like a choice between them and your dreams. Keep the faith, stay positive and dive in to your dream grad school 100%
RESPONSE B: Hey, OP. This is probably one of the most important learning moments of your life. It is where you ask yourself what it is that you really want. In undergrad and grad school, people try to do everything because that's what they think life/research is. Overworking yourself year after year will take a toll on you and facing failures in that setting might completely break you. But, the ones who succeed in grad school are the one who pace themselves and understand what is truly important to them. Is success in the eyes of others, their acceptance and their awards truly the most important thing to you ? Or is life for you to do what you want and at a pace that you find fun? Few people realize this early on. It is why they are not upset when they fail or have a paper rejected or even fail qualifiers. They have a broader perspective that helps them be alright. I'm guessing you like me were not wise enough to handle and prioritize a relationship along with research. What you have to take away from this is that that is one area that you need to grow in. It takes time but once you feel like there is more to life than being at a dream school, once you truly feel that losing any title or position won't make you any less of a person, then you will be ready to devote enough attention to people that care about you because you will know what is important. So, take a break now OP and grow. It is going to be a hard and tough growth that you will have to do alone because self-reflection is the only way to grow. Ask yourself what chains tie you down and how to break them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: is the only place I could think to post this. I am a first generation immigrant and minority from a family that doesn't really see the point of my field but I got into my dream graduate school this year after busting my ass for years in undergrad. I overloaded on credits for several semesters and achieved high marks in addition to doing research at my school and at other institutions concurrently with the overloaded course schedules to stand out. It seems I held this too far above things in my personal life. I just had my girlfriend of 2 years break up with me. She felt that the relationship was always number 2 to academics. I know I have been laser focused on school, but she was the person I feel I invested the most in. I opened up to her about things I never have to anyone in my life, she was the person I could always just be me around, my only friend and now I'm completely alone. I'm feeling a rush of emotions, I cried for the first time in years. Looking at my grades and my acceptance letter now it feels like a hollow victory. I got my dream but now what. It feels like I gave up the person I love for numbers next to the letters GPA. I feel like the king of the ashes and I don't what to do. I'm heartbroken, upset, angry, confused. Has anyone else been through something like this?
RESPONSE A: Regardless of what other people say here, I'll be blunt. Treat this as a wake-up call to the realities of "being a rockstar researcher". Many of those people are unhappy, because they had to forego a lot of life's precious moments to get to where they are. On the other hand, it can be fulfilling, but I suggest taking it a bit slower from here on and trying to enjoy life simultaneously.
RESPONSE B: You are doing what makes you feel happy and following your dream. The right person will embrace that and instead of feeling like 2nd place, they will embrace it too (and you in turn their goals). Sucks now, but that will fade and the right one will come along that makes it not feel like a choice between them and your dreams. Keep the faith, stay positive and dive in to your dream grad school 100%
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: what to do with inherited vintage academic regalia? I have inherited my grandfather's academic regalia, from his PhD at University of Michigan in 1942. I'm not interested in displaying it or keeping it in a box. What does one do with such an item? Any suggestions or thoughts will be appreciated!
RESPONSE A: Pick a department at Michigan, email a couple grad students. New regalia is about $800, so somebody would certainly be willing to pay shipping. ​ In fact, any chance your grandpa was over 6 feet tall and wore, like, a 50 jacket? ​ Or e-bay. For real.
RESPONSE B: Donate or sell it on eBay.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: what to do with inherited vintage academic regalia? I have inherited my grandfather's academic regalia, from his PhD at University of Michigan in 1942. I'm not interested in displaying it or keeping it in a box. What does one do with such an item? Any suggestions or thoughts will be appreciated!
RESPONSE A: Pick a department at Michigan, email a couple grad students. New regalia is about $800, so somebody would certainly be willing to pay shipping. ​ In fact, any chance your grandpa was over 6 feet tall and wore, like, a 50 jacket? ​ Or e-bay. For real.
RESPONSE B: Goodwill will take it and someone will make a Halloween costume from it. There's really no market or interest in old regalia as it's so commonplace. If you have the hood I'd perhaps keep that, since it would carry the school and degree colors. But the gown? Donate. Museums won't want it and the school certainly will not. I've served on the boards of history museums and have worked with university archivists often over the years...neither has the space to store more than one of such things and unless they have some reason to build a collection (i.e. if they had a design program that was somehow connected with regalia) there's just going to be no interest.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: what to do with inherited vintage academic regalia? I have inherited my grandfather's academic regalia, from his PhD at University of Michigan in 1942. I'm not interested in displaying it or keeping it in a box. What does one do with such an item? Any suggestions or thoughts will be appreciated!
RESPONSE A: Pick a department at Michigan, email a couple grad students. New regalia is about $800, so somebody would certainly be willing to pay shipping. ​ In fact, any chance your grandpa was over 6 feet tall and wore, like, a 50 jacket? ​ Or e-bay. For real.
RESPONSE B: You don't want to display it, so don't. No one else will want it imo, so I suggest you just chuck it in the basement. Maybe some great-great x something grandchild of yours will appreciate it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: also haven’t gotten to know any of my fellow students or professors well. I’m avoiding social interaction for some reason and I can tell it’s making things worse. Sorry for the rant but I desperately need some advice.
RESPONSE A: First off: anxiety and depression are super common among grad students, and often the culture of grad school can really exacerbate those but also make you feel weak for getting help. But most universities (at least in the US) have some sort of student counseling center that is cheap or free for students. Go there. Get therapy. The university where I went to grad school even had therapy groups specifically for grad students, if that’s your kind of thing. Student counseling centers vary in quality and resources, but even if yours isn’t particularly well-staffed or high quality, it can be really good to get some help dealing with anxiety. Second, look into other resources your university offers for grad students. Mine had a graduate writing center staffed with advanced grad students who could help with any step of the writing process. They also lead workshops and such on writing, which were really helpful and a good chance to connect with students in other departments who were struggling with writing in ways very similar to how I was. Finally, I would encourage you to try and socialize with other students in your department, if you can get yourself to do that. Your grad school classmates can be important allies in dealing with the ups and downs of your program, and I guarantee that many of them are going through struggles similar to yours— what you wrote sounds so similar to my grad school experience and that of many of my friends from grad school. It’s really hard, and it can be incredibly isolating. Being totally isolated from social connections can make things so much more difficult. Even if you don’t feel like you have much in common with your classmates, your shared grad school experience is a great thing to bond over.
RESPONSE B: There is no better time to start catching up on reading/writing than now! The hard part is actually starting, but once you do (after staring at all the reading feeling overwhelmed) you’ll be okay! Keep your chin up, you just started, you can do it!! You want this!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What I hate is how much work I have to do. I’ve failed at keeping up with the readings for class and now I’m turning in assignments late. I barely have a relationship with my advisor and that’s completely my fault. Lots of papers ahead and I can’t help but thinking about just giving up and not writing my final papers. I don’t know how to feel about any of this. I don’t know anyone closely that’s ever been in grad school. I also haven’t gotten to know any of my fellow students or professors well. I’m avoiding social interaction for some reason and I can tell it’s making things worse. Sorry for the rant but I desperately need some advice.
RESPONSE A: > I don’t know anyone closely that’s ever been in grad school. You do know someone: your advisor. Go to them and explain your situation. Don't make it a pity party, but explain that you are having problems and you would welcome suggestions on how to solve them.
RESPONSE B: In my experience, the first semester of grad school is EXCEPTIONALLY difficult and angst-ridden. I've experienced this twice (having done two graduate programs) and nearly all of my friends and colleagues in grad school reported similar experiences. I say this because, while it stayed tough, it was never like that first semester again. I also just wanted to offer a word of caution. You said you are tempted to just give up and not even do your final papers. Sometimes, with deadlines looming, the work before us seems like the most terrible, tortuous, impossible burden, and escaping it feels very, very important. You might be thinking that, if you are going to end up dropping out next semester anyway, why torture yourself anymore? I've definitely been there and seen others there, and often, what was really going on is that the burden of that work was the primary reason for contemplating leaving the program in the future, and once the deadlines were met, the distress and unhappiness massively decreased. So my advice to anyone thinking this way is to finish the work regardless of anything else, and make your big decisions about grad school when you don't have deadlines looming.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: fault. Lots of papers ahead and I can’t help but thinking about just giving up and not writing my final papers. I don’t know how to feel about any of this. I don’t know anyone closely that’s ever been in grad school. I also haven’t gotten to know any of my fellow students or professors well. I’m avoiding social interaction for some reason and I can tell it’s making things worse. Sorry for the rant but I desperately need some advice.
RESPONSE A: Hiya, wow! You got great answers already. I especially liked what /u/ariadnes-thread and /u/needlzor typed. Graduate schools spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on these resources. I used to work as an Accountant and as IT in those areas. The staff in those areas will do everything they can to help you be successful. You are on a journey of a lifetime. Get recentered and take off! Godspeed & Bon Voyage.
RESPONSE B: In my experience, the first semester of grad school is EXCEPTIONALLY difficult and angst-ridden. I've experienced this twice (having done two graduate programs) and nearly all of my friends and colleagues in grad school reported similar experiences. I say this because, while it stayed tough, it was never like that first semester again. I also just wanted to offer a word of caution. You said you are tempted to just give up and not even do your final papers. Sometimes, with deadlines looming, the work before us seems like the most terrible, tortuous, impossible burden, and escaping it feels very, very important. You might be thinking that, if you are going to end up dropping out next semester anyway, why torture yourself anymore? I've definitely been there and seen others there, and often, what was really going on is that the burden of that work was the primary reason for contemplating leaving the program in the future, and once the deadlines were met, the distress and unhappiness massively decreased. So my advice to anyone thinking this way is to finish the work regardless of anything else, and make your big decisions about grad school when you don't have deadlines looming.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: my MA. It’s my first semester of grad school. I just graduated with my BA last year and afterwards I got into the exact grad program I had dreamed of. I’m heading towards the end of my first semester and I’m really hating this. Grad school has made me feel like a lazy piece of shit because I’m constantly procrastinating and doing the bare minimum just to get by. I feel unhappy and anxious constantly. I love the program and I love what I’m studying. What I hate is how much work I have to do. I’ve failed at keeping up with the readings for class and now I’m turning in assignments late. I barely have a relationship with my advisor and that’s completely my fault. Lots of papers ahead and I can’t help but thinking about just giving up and not writing my final papers. I don’t know how to feel about any of this. I don’t know anyone closely that’s ever been in grad school. I also haven’t gotten to know any of my fellow students or professors well. I’m avoiding social interaction for some reason and I can tell it’s making things worse. Sorry for the rant but I desperately need some advice.
RESPONSE A: Hiya, wow! You got great answers already. I especially liked what /u/ariadnes-thread and /u/needlzor typed. Graduate schools spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on these resources. I used to work as an Accountant and as IT in those areas. The staff in those areas will do everything they can to help you be successful. You are on a journey of a lifetime. Get recentered and take off! Godspeed & Bon Voyage.
RESPONSE B: The start is the most important. Once you begin it gets better. As you work, your mind is occupied reducing the anxiety. The accomplishment of the task reduces the feelings of failure. The sooner you start to knock out tasks the better, start small, break jobs up into smaller pieces. Start over when you are distracted, then start over again. Make the lists, prioritize, include exercise and rest. Once you get started you can eventually begin to increase your productivity.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Advisor put his son as an author on a paper... As far as I can tell the son, an undergraduate at our university, did ZERO work for this paper. In fact, until I saw the final draft, I didn't even know his son was going to be an "author." The son is applying to grad school soon, and I think his father (my PhD advisor) was trying to give him a "leg up." Our university has a stringent anti-nepotism policy. I'm 100% sure my advisor's actions violate the policy. Can anything be done?
RESPONSE A: Decisions about authorship are generally left to the lead author or PI, whoever ranks higher (if they're not the same person, depending on the field). This situation sounds (based on your description) like *kind of* nepotism, but not the kind that the university cares about or really can or will do anything about. Any more than they'd tell him he can't include you as an author if he wanted to. What's your stake in this? Are you on the paper? Did the kid shift your position in the author list? Do you even have standing to protest?
RESPONSE B: >did ZERO work for this paper Are you certain? Father and son might have done some of the analysis at home together which you were unaware of. Importantly, your advisor can very well say this in his defense and you have no way to prove otherwise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Advisor put his son as an author on a paper... As far as I can tell the son, an undergraduate at our university, did ZERO work for this paper. In fact, until I saw the final draft, I didn't even know his son was going to be an "author." The son is applying to grad school soon, and I think his father (my PhD advisor) was trying to give him a "leg up." Our university has a stringent anti-nepotism policy. I'm 100% sure my advisor's actions violate the policy. Can anything be done?
RESPONSE A: I agree with the other folks who say just leave it be. If sonny gets into a grad program where he's out of his depth because of nepotistic help, karma will take care of everything.
RESPONSE B: >did ZERO work for this paper Are you certain? Father and son might have done some of the analysis at home together which you were unaware of. Importantly, your advisor can very well say this in his defense and you have no way to prove otherwise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Advisor put his son as an author on a paper... As far as I can tell the son, an undergraduate at our university, did ZERO work for this paper. In fact, until I saw the final draft, I didn't even know his son was going to be an "author." The son is applying to grad school soon, and I think his father (my PhD advisor) was trying to give him a "leg up." Our university has a stringent anti-nepotism policy. I'm 100% sure my advisor's actions violate the policy. Can anything be done?
RESPONSE A: >did ZERO work for this paper Are you certain? Father and son might have done some of the analysis at home together which you were unaware of. Importantly, your advisor can very well say this in his defense and you have no way to prove otherwise.
RESPONSE B: seems like academic misconduct.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: -15 years? x-posted to r/gradschool I recently graduated with a BS in electrical engineering and working at an RA job at a local institution so I can strengthen my research skills and get into a top program. Part of me is wondering if I should have just gotten an engineering job with a more comfortable salary but the choice I made was for in the long run. I keep reading about how people jump back and forth from postdocs to apply for a heavily competitive faculty position and how most people end up leaving academia altogether. My goal is to get into a top program (biomedical eng/elect eng) otherwise I wouldn't have made the choice to become an RA. If I do get into a great phd program, what if I have to move away from home? Is the lower salary worth it? Do postdocs make enough? With the oversupply of Phd's I wonder how much worse it will get in the future and whether or not it's worth me pursuing such a long route to get there.
RESPONSE A: I am in academia but this is about my husband. He finished his PhD and began applying for academic jobs, he saw very little salaries and big moves for non TT positions, he immediately went corporate and enjoys its struggles and challenges far more than it he had imagined. It seems like corporate is fast paced and not everyone has a PhD. In general, it appears that you can move from corporate to academia, but not the other way around. It's good for us because my academic job gives us the flexibility for me to do the lions share of sick days/no school days for our child. He has very little flexibility but his salary is higher than mine by almost 15K.
RESPONSE B: >If I do get into a great phd program, what if I have to move away from home? That's pretty much a given. >Do postdocs make enough? Nope, but they make more than you will as a grad student. It's a temporary position by definition; your goal should not be being a postdoc forever. What exactly do you want to do with your PhD? You haven't stated it explicitly.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are PhD programs about to be more competative due to the recession? I will apply to the Biology PhD program and the neuroscience program US here
RESPONSE A: Probably.
RESPONSE B: Yes and no. Yes, in the obvious sense: more people will apply to PhD programs because the job market has shrunk (and it was already not great). More people will see grad school as either a backup plan or as a way to get an edge on their peers on the job market (both of which are poor reasons, but nevertheless). Less apparently, the current pandemic may affect university operations and funding which could indirectly reduce graduate admissions slots, although we still don't know what things will look like 8 or 10 months from now at all. No, in a less-obvious sense, which is that the strongest candidates for PhD programs will likely still be able to get into strong programs. By "strongest candidates" I mean the people with the research experience, strong recommendations from professors they've built relationships with, strong application statements, and high GPAs that programs crave and compete for. The students who have these things (especially the research experience) tend to be the ones who were already planning on going for a PhD anyways, so there won't be a very big increase in strong applicants correlating to the increase in total applicants (there may be some increase still, but weakly correlated). So if you have all of the strong application elements, especially substantial research experience, you probably do not need to worry too much. If you are missing significantly from these aspects, particularly the research and recommendations, it is probably wise to spend extra diligence on preparing your other options or at least applying more broadly than you would otherwise plan to.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to write a good academic proposal? I was asked to write a proposal for my thesis. Since I have never written one before, I wanted to ask you what the dos and don'ts are and what has to be included.
RESPONSE A: It really depends on your field and, sometimes, your University and the depth required (which is different depending on honours, master or PhD proposals or the intended purpose).
RESPONSE B: I break things down into three parts: Collection: what are you sources, scope, and hypothesis Analysis: what methods are you using to review your sources? A model, an equation, protocol or theory? Discuss this and the limitations for your project. Presentation: what will the final project look like? What are any expected challenges or opportunities. How will it be published or accessible You can also include a timeline or budget and any collaborators or planned conferences/papers
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Leaving a masters program after 2 weeks I am considering permanently leaving my masters program in economics, it has just started. Can you please tell whether this will have a significant effect on my future endeavors (e.g. applying to another program, job etc.) considering only 2 weeks have passed? Thanks
RESPONSE A: Tbh after 2 weeks I wouldn’t even bother putting it on any future CVs
RESPONSE B: Absolutely not. We all are humans, choices are never meant to be perfect at the first try. The sooner you realise something is not good enough for you, the sooner you can redirect all your energy and efforts towards a choice the fits better. In your future applications just be honest with whoever is interviewing you, you will be perceived as an adult with a clear view of yourself and your professional surrounding.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How common is jumping TT jobs right before tenure? I've seen numerous R1 assistant professors in the job market during their 4th or 5th year before their tenure review to look for higher ranked departments. Is it easier to switch jobs before tenure rather than after? Does switching TT jobs increase the overall tenure clock at the new department?
RESPONSE A: There are a lot of good reasons to go on the market before tenure. 1. A competing offer increases bargaining power at your present institution. This is particularly true if the new institution offers tenure as part of their offer. 2. It's a way of hedging your bets; if there's a chance you won't get tenure, you resign to start a new job and you were never denied tenure. 3. There are MANY more job openings for assistant professors than associates or fulls; if you want to switch institutions, it's easiest as an assistant. 4. You may be able to extend the tenure clock by jumping institutions, but still get a salary bump.
RESPONSE B: I'm also interested in this answer. From what I've been told, having a competing offer when you're about to be offered tenure is one way to increase your salary and other lab-related benefits. However, the number of data points I have on this is not as strong, people tend to be cagey about this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: expected level of reactionary profanity have ensued. Given the past history of our university system, the concern is well-justified. Something strange is going on and we all are expecting a three-ring circus to ensue Monday morning when we'll presumably all get an e-mail from this new interim president who's not even from our campus, to the point we're ready to sell tickets and popcorn to fund scholarships. We know that we need to at least appear calm on the outside, but we're not sure how to deal with the rest of this, given the circumstances. We're not sure how to watch out for ourselves, let alone everyone else on our campus. Should we be trying to quietly push through anything and everything that requires funding from the administration before the proverbial fecal matter has the chance to really hit the fan? How do we answer questions once the news breaks, either via official e-mails or if it gets leaked to the media? If some scandal does break from this and causes our nascent school's reputation to tank, will it have any implications for our students applying to professional and graduate schools or faculty who decide to seek their fortunes elsewhere? If we do wind up as the next contestant on this university system's game of mergers and hostile takeovers, is it worth bracing for the worst and making sure our CVs are in order? Like I said earlier, I'm not looking for a political debate. Just some advice on how to keep calm and carry on while making sure that we look out for the best interests of everyone that we care about. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​
RESPONSE A: this happened at my school and it turned out the chancellor needed emergency heart surgery and decided she couldn't come back to work afterwards when she found out how long the recovery would be.
RESPONSE B: Sounds like almost everything is outside of your control. Keep doing a good job and don’t worry about things outside of your sphere of control. Life isn’t always easy, so keep your CV up to date, just in case you decide you no longer want to handle the mess at your institution.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 'Bad' letter of recommendation: what next? (graduate school in molecular biology) I worked in a lab for about a year under the lab supervisor. The PI was generally out sick and when they were in, they did not come into the lab. Knowing that the lab supervisor didn't have a PhD and that typically being a requirement, I asked them if they could write a joint-letter. After two months have gone by and 13 letters have been submitted....I inadvertently was allowed to read the letter: "To who it may concern: I do not know NAME well, but NAME has worked in my lab for one year on PROJECT. During this time he has shown good work and is very motivated. He would be a fine candidate for graduate school. Regards, PI" Now, I consider this to be a kiss of death. Unless I am completely wrong, now what? It seems like I can't remove his letters from most programs. Do I talk to him about his letter that could have been written in ten minutes or less? Any ideas or suggestions are appreciated. Also, I have a total of 5 letters submitted if that helps (the other 4 people offered to write a letter for me [I didn't need to ask], so, they should be good).
RESPONSE A: "Dear Sir/Madam NAME has worked in my lab for the past year. During this year, he has been rarely seen in the lab and has exhibited a lack of motivation and self-direction. I would invite you to consider his application on its merits, but I would be somewhat concerned about his ability to manage the workload and pressure of graduate school." That would be a bad letter of recommendation. Yours is neutral and nothing to worry about, since you have others. For future reference, this is why you don't ask someone who doesn't know you to write a letter of recommendation.
RESPONSE B: Wow that is an awful letter. He should have at least declined to write you a letter, anything would be better than that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 'Bad' letter of recommendation: what next? (graduate school in molecular biology) I worked in a lab for about a year under the lab supervisor. The PI was generally out sick and when they were in, they did not come into the lab. Knowing that the lab supervisor didn't have a PhD and that typically being a requirement, I asked them if they could write a joint-letter. After two months have gone by and 13 letters have been submitted....I inadvertently was allowed to read the letter: "To who it may concern: I do not know NAME well, but NAME has worked in my lab for one year on PROJECT. During this time he has shown good work and is very motivated. He would be a fine candidate for graduate school. Regards, PI" Now, I consider this to be a kiss of death. Unless I am completely wrong, now what? It seems like I can't remove his letters from most programs. Do I talk to him about his letter that could have been written in ten minutes or less? Any ideas or suggestions are appreciated. Also, I have a total of 5 letters submitted if that helps (the other 4 people offered to write a letter for me [I didn't need to ask], so, they should be good).
RESPONSE A: To be honest, if I read this letter, I would think your PI was an ass. How do you not know someone who has worked in your lab for a year? The lack of detail is kind of embarrassing. I mean, does your PI not know what you have been doing? That's not your fault. I feel like this letter needs a "PS. I drink."
RESPONSE B: Wow that is an awful letter. He should have at least declined to write you a letter, anything would be better than that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How important is it to earn your undergraduate and graduate degrees from two different universities? It seems that *everybody* changes schools between their graduate and undergraduate degrees. The most common reason I've heard is to build a wider network of connections. In my situation is does not logistically make sense to attend a different university. I am already attending one of the top schools in my state and own a home near the university. Thank you for your opinions!
RESPONSE A: I don't think it's important at all! There are various reasons that people go to different schools for their grad degree. One common reason is that as an undergrad that wants to go to grad school, a student may realize that a different school matches their interests better. Since professors serve as advisors to grad students, they generally like to have grad students who are at least somewhat interested in what they are interested in. Another reason could be "the grass is greener" effect. As undergrads get more involved in research they may see things they don't like about the college in regards to the grad level world. They may think that another school may be better, but generally all colleges have their problems. I could also see students getting antsy to move. If you spend four to five years on one campus, you may want to seek out other options. There are probably many more reasons, but in general I don't think that it's taboo to stay at the school you did your undergrad at. That is if you get selected...
RESPONSE B: Depends on what you want to do with a grad degree. If it's research science, then it's pretty important, both for the network, and because you may as well get used to moving every few years now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: changes schools between their graduate and undergraduate degrees. The most common reason I've heard is to build a wider network of connections. In my situation is does not logistically make sense to attend a different university. I am already attending one of the top schools in my state and own a home near the university. Thank you for your opinions!
RESPONSE A: I don't think it's important at all! There are various reasons that people go to different schools for their grad degree. One common reason is that as an undergrad that wants to go to grad school, a student may realize that a different school matches their interests better. Since professors serve as advisors to grad students, they generally like to have grad students who are at least somewhat interested in what they are interested in. Another reason could be "the grass is greener" effect. As undergrads get more involved in research they may see things they don't like about the college in regards to the grad level world. They may think that another school may be better, but generally all colleges have their problems. I could also see students getting antsy to move. If you spend four to five years on one campus, you may want to seek out other options. There are probably many more reasons, but in general I don't think that it's taboo to stay at the school you did your undergrad at. That is if you get selected...
RESPONSE B: It can also be helpful to consider what concerns it raises when someone stays put. Namely, doing all one's degrees at the same institution possibly raises the concerns that: (a) you've peaked where you are in terms of institutional prestige; (b) you couldn't flourish in an unfamiliar environment; or, (c) you're dependent on one specific supervisor. Doing a prestigious postdoc elsewhere can mitigate these concerns. They can also be mitigated if your advisor/institution is near the top of the field (like /u/sciklops said, *field*, not state) so that when people see your record their reaction is: "Oh, of course they stayed at X / stayed working with so-and-so," and not, "Why did they choose to stay *there*?".
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Did you make close friendships in grad school? I was talking to a coworker and said over Spring Break I'm going to Arizona to visit a friend from grad school and she kind of made a face that conveyed she was confused/surprised. I have a PhD in Biology, she has a MS in Library Science or something like that. I was thinking about and wondered if people who don't work in a lab for their PhD form close relationships like us lab rats do. My experience was spending 40 hours per week for up to 6 years (depending on how much our time overlapped) with the people in my lab. We got help from each other to troubleshoot, helped out when someone was going to lunch/class/weekends, and just in general interacted a lot. Some of these people I became friends with and keep up with them even now 8 years after graduating. Non-lab people with a graduate degree, do you see your classmates much? Did you form many close friendships in grad school?
RESPONSE A: Definitely. My entire cohort stays in touch and we make a point to visit when we're in the same town. We've been to (or in) each others' weddings, etc. Several are very good friends.
RESPONSE B: The only friends I’m inviting to my wedding are all from my PhD program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Did you make close friendships in grad school? I was talking to a coworker and said over Spring Break I'm going to Arizona to visit a friend from grad school and she kind of made a face that conveyed she was confused/surprised. I have a PhD in Biology, she has a MS in Library Science or something like that. I was thinking about and wondered if people who don't work in a lab for their PhD form close relationships like us lab rats do. My experience was spending 40 hours per week for up to 6 years (depending on how much our time overlapped) with the people in my lab. We got help from each other to troubleshoot, helped out when someone was going to lunch/class/weekends, and just in general interacted a lot. Some of these people I became friends with and keep up with them even now 8 years after graduating. Non-lab people with a graduate degree, do you see your classmates much? Did you form many close friendships in grad school?
RESPONSE A: My two BEST friends are from my grad program. We are all English Literature and Rhet/Comp folks. I keep in touch with 3-4 other people from the program too that I would consider life long friends.
RESPONSE B: The only friends I’m inviting to my wedding are all from my PhD program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Did you make close friendships in grad school? I was talking to a coworker and said over Spring Break I'm going to Arizona to visit a friend from grad school and she kind of made a face that conveyed she was confused/surprised. I have a PhD in Biology, she has a MS in Library Science or something like that. I was thinking about and wondered if people who don't work in a lab for their PhD form close relationships like us lab rats do. My experience was spending 40 hours per week for up to 6 years (depending on how much our time overlapped) with the people in my lab. We got help from each other to troubleshoot, helped out when someone was going to lunch/class/weekends, and just in general interacted a lot. Some of these people I became friends with and keep up with them even now 8 years after graduating. Non-lab people with a graduate degree, do you see your classmates much? Did you form many close friendships in grad school?
RESPONSE A: My two BEST friends are from my grad program. We are all English Literature and Rhet/Comp folks. I keep in touch with 3-4 other people from the program too that I would consider life long friends.
RESPONSE B: I'm a non-lab person. I have one friend from grad school. We meet every so often for coffee. I interact with a few others online, but that's it. I think for non-lab people, the experience of a PhD is much more solitary. You write by yourself. You conduct research by yourself. You analyze data by yourself. You teach undergraduates by yourself. You grade their papers by yourself. Also, the few people I know who got tenure track jobs had to move far away, and are constantly busy (or at least pretending to be constantly busy) traveling for research and conferences. The vast majority didn't get tenure track jobs, however. Most of us did not end up where we expected, and I think being around each other would remind us of that. Or at least, for me it would.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'm going to Arizona to visit a friend from grad school and she kind of made a face that conveyed she was confused/surprised. I have a PhD in Biology, she has a MS in Library Science or something like that. I was thinking about and wondered if people who don't work in a lab for their PhD form close relationships like us lab rats do. My experience was spending 40 hours per week for up to 6 years (depending on how much our time overlapped) with the people in my lab. We got help from each other to troubleshoot, helped out when someone was going to lunch/class/weekends, and just in general interacted a lot. Some of these people I became friends with and keep up with them even now 8 years after graduating. Non-lab people with a graduate degree, do you see your classmates much? Did you form many close friendships in grad school?
RESPONSE A: I wouldn’t have gotten through grad school if it weren’t for the extremely close friendships that I made. Some of the best and dearest friends I’ve had in my life are from grad school for sure. We hang out constantly and I even currently live with someone in my program. I’m in a social science, and so we do have teams but also our program is pretty large and has required coursework that helps you to meet people even outside of your cohort.
RESPONSE B: I'm a non-lab person. I have one friend from grad school. We meet every so often for coffee. I interact with a few others online, but that's it. I think for non-lab people, the experience of a PhD is much more solitary. You write by yourself. You conduct research by yourself. You analyze data by yourself. You teach undergraduates by yourself. You grade their papers by yourself. Also, the few people I know who got tenure track jobs had to move far away, and are constantly busy (or at least pretending to be constantly busy) traveling for research and conferences. The vast majority didn't get tenure track jobs, however. Most of us did not end up where we expected, and I think being around each other would remind us of that. Or at least, for me it would.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Did you make close friendships in grad school? I was talking to a coworker and said over Spring Break I'm going to Arizona to visit a friend from grad school and she kind of made a face that conveyed she was confused/surprised. I have a PhD in Biology, she has a MS in Library Science or something like that. I was thinking about and wondered if people who don't work in a lab for their PhD form close relationships like us lab rats do. My experience was spending 40 hours per week for up to 6 years (depending on how much our time overlapped) with the people in my lab. We got help from each other to troubleshoot, helped out when someone was going to lunch/class/weekends, and just in general interacted a lot. Some of these people I became friends with and keep up with them even now 8 years after graduating. Non-lab people with a graduate degree, do you see your classmates much? Did you form many close friendships in grad school?
RESPONSE A: No. I mean I like my colleagues, but i wouldn’t hang out with any of them
RESPONSE B: I'm a non-lab person. I have one friend from grad school. We meet every so often for coffee. I interact with a few others online, but that's it. I think for non-lab people, the experience of a PhD is much more solitary. You write by yourself. You conduct research by yourself. You analyze data by yourself. You teach undergraduates by yourself. You grade their papers by yourself. Also, the few people I know who got tenure track jobs had to move far away, and are constantly busy (or at least pretending to be constantly busy) traveling for research and conferences. The vast majority didn't get tenure track jobs, however. Most of us did not end up where we expected, and I think being around each other would remind us of that. Or at least, for me it would.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: talk about publishing and how having published papers is a sort of currency in research. We, as undergrads, were urged to start publishing as soon as we can, but my question is how? They made it seem very easy and painless, but is it really? In all the labs I've been in as an undergraduate, I feel as though my work has not been significant enough to publish (field is astrophysics btw). tdlr; How do I approach publishing as an undergrad?
RESPONSE A: A lot of great comments here already. I’ll add that if by senior year your research isn’t quite enough for publication in a professional journal, there are also undergrad journals you can submit to. The Journal of Young Investigators is the biggest, but many other universities such as Harvard sponsor their own smaller journals as well. This can also be one of the only ways to publish a literature review as an undergrad.
RESPONSE B: Most undergrads aren’t aware of the time sinks involved in getting a paper published long after the research is actually finished, which is why I think it’s foolish to expect a competitive applicant to a graduate program to have a paper if they’re coming right out of undergrad. I wrote a paper from an analysis of an epidemiological dataset during a summer research internship between junior and senior year of undergrad. I’m not aware that anyone else in that summer program even wrote a paper, they were busy collecting data while I had been given one that was ready to go. Anyway I managed to finish this paper within the two months we were there for the summer, and after I left the PI ended up working on it and submitting it to a journal maybe a month or two after. That journal took a few weeks and said no, so he sent it to another journal, and another journal after that. The paper finally got selected for publication about a year and a half after I had actually finished writing my final version of the draft. My point being, publishing always takes longer than what you’d expect. Even now, papers that do accept us for reviews/revisions usually take 6 months from submission to acceptance, especially when we have to do other experiments to address the comments from the reviewers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to publish as an undergraduate? How important is publishing as an undergraduate? Today I was at a talk about publishing and how having published papers is a sort of currency in research. We, as undergrads, were urged to start publishing as soon as we can, but my question is how? They made it seem very easy and painless, but is it really? In all the labs I've been in as an undergraduate, I feel as though my work has not been significant enough to publish (field is astrophysics btw). tdlr; How do I approach publishing as an undergrad?
RESPONSE A: Most undergrads aren’t aware of the time sinks involved in getting a paper published long after the research is actually finished, which is why I think it’s foolish to expect a competitive applicant to a graduate program to have a paper if they’re coming right out of undergrad. I wrote a paper from an analysis of an epidemiological dataset during a summer research internship between junior and senior year of undergrad. I’m not aware that anyone else in that summer program even wrote a paper, they were busy collecting data while I had been given one that was ready to go. Anyway I managed to finish this paper within the two months we were there for the summer, and after I left the PI ended up working on it and submitting it to a journal maybe a month or two after. That journal took a few weeks and said no, so he sent it to another journal, and another journal after that. The paper finally got selected for publication about a year and a half after I had actually finished writing my final version of the draft. My point being, publishing always takes longer than what you’d expect. Even now, papers that do accept us for reviews/revisions usually take 6 months from submission to acceptance, especially when we have to do other experiments to address the comments from the reviewers.
RESPONSE B: It almost never happens in history. There are a handful of undergrad journals, most of which are almost never cited or even paid heed.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ve been in as an undergraduate, I feel as though my work has not been significant enough to publish (field is astrophysics btw). tdlr; How do I approach publishing as an undergrad?
RESPONSE A: Most undergrads aren’t aware of the time sinks involved in getting a paper published long after the research is actually finished, which is why I think it’s foolish to expect a competitive applicant to a graduate program to have a paper if they’re coming right out of undergrad. I wrote a paper from an analysis of an epidemiological dataset during a summer research internship between junior and senior year of undergrad. I’m not aware that anyone else in that summer program even wrote a paper, they were busy collecting data while I had been given one that was ready to go. Anyway I managed to finish this paper within the two months we were there for the summer, and after I left the PI ended up working on it and submitting it to a journal maybe a month or two after. That journal took a few weeks and said no, so he sent it to another journal, and another journal after that. The paper finally got selected for publication about a year and a half after I had actually finished writing my final version of the draft. My point being, publishing always takes longer than what you’d expect. Even now, papers that do accept us for reviews/revisions usually take 6 months from submission to acceptance, especially when we have to do other experiments to address the comments from the reviewers.
RESPONSE B: I'm in physics (hopefully will do mathematical physics in grad school) as well and publishing as an undergrad is really difficult. To my knowledge, nobody in my year (going into junior) is published yet, and there are very few in the year above me who are published, and I'm at a large university. I was close to publishing last semester in plasma theory but our results just turned out to be not very interesting/surprising. I think especially if you're working in theory as an undergrad, unless you are some kind of prodigy/get lucky, publishing is a big challenge, and it's not necessary to get into grad programs, although very helpful.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to publish as an undergraduate? How important is publishing as an undergraduate? Today I was at a talk about publishing and how having published papers is a sort of currency in research. We, as undergrads, were urged to start publishing as soon as we can, but my question is how? They made it seem very easy and painless, but is it really? In all the labs I've been in as an undergraduate, I feel as though my work has not been significant enough to publish (field is astrophysics btw). tdlr; How do I approach publishing as an undergrad?
RESPONSE A: Most undergrads aren’t aware of the time sinks involved in getting a paper published long after the research is actually finished, which is why I think it’s foolish to expect a competitive applicant to a graduate program to have a paper if they’re coming right out of undergrad. I wrote a paper from an analysis of an epidemiological dataset during a summer research internship between junior and senior year of undergrad. I’m not aware that anyone else in that summer program even wrote a paper, they were busy collecting data while I had been given one that was ready to go. Anyway I managed to finish this paper within the two months we were there for the summer, and after I left the PI ended up working on it and submitting it to a journal maybe a month or two after. That journal took a few weeks and said no, so he sent it to another journal, and another journal after that. The paper finally got selected for publication about a year and a half after I had actually finished writing my final version of the draft. My point being, publishing always takes longer than what you’d expect. Even now, papers that do accept us for reviews/revisions usually take 6 months from submission to acceptance, especially when we have to do other experiments to address the comments from the reviewers.
RESPONSE B: Could anyone comment on this same question but for social sciences/humanities? Specifically in political science, philosophy, or economics? Any important differences from the other responses in this thread?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: and don't want to be caught out! Interestingly, I often find the competency questions challenging...
RESPONSE A: I had a fairly odd interview with a professor while I was interviewing for a PhD program. The first portion went like this: Prof: Why did you go to X school for your Masters after going to Y school for your undergrad? (X school was a tier below Y school). Me: Well, I lacked research experience and had previously met one of the professors at X school. I followed his research and wanted to do similar work, so I applied there, got in, and decided to go there. Prof: No, people don't choose schools based on one researcher. Just say you were naive. Me: There were of course more factors that went into it, but he was a major reason why I chose to go there. Prof: Just say you were naive. Me: I don't think I was. Later in the interview we had another strange dialogue: Prof: What books have you read recently? Me: I haven't had the time to sit down and read for pleasure lately, but I've been wanting to start reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks when I have time. Prof: No, that's non-fiction. What books have you read recently? Me: I think the last book I got to sit down and read was East of Eden. Prof: Who is that by? Me: John Steinbeck. Prof: No, he's dead. Choose another. Me: ... I guess what I'm saying is: they may ask you bizarre questions or have strange reactions just to trip you up. I don't know if I handled this situation well enough, since I went away feeling like the conversation was awkward. The other grad students in the program were surprised this particular prof acted this way, so I don't know. Maybe it was me haha.
RESPONSE B: We do micro-mini interviews, like med schools do. We try and evaluate non-grade dependent things that make students successful like empathy, problem solving, and creativity. They often throw our students off when we start off with them and they do ~8 min rotations with each of the faculty.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What challenging or unusual questions have you been asked in interviews for PhD positions? Or to more senior academics, what questions do you ask on interview panels? I've got an interview next week and don't want to be caught out! Interestingly, I often find the competency questions challenging...
RESPONSE A: We do micro-mini interviews, like med schools do. We try and evaluate non-grade dependent things that make students successful like empathy, problem solving, and creativity. They often throw our students off when we start off with them and they do ~8 min rotations with each of the faculty.
RESPONSE B: The weirdest one was "you have lived in exciting places like New York and Stockholm, won't you get bored in Eindhoven?" I did not expect that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What challenging or unusual questions have you been asked in interviews for PhD positions? Or to more senior academics, what questions do you ask on interview panels? I've got an interview next week and don't want to be caught out! Interestingly, I often find the competency questions challenging...
RESPONSE A: The weirdest one was "you have lived in exciting places like New York and Stockholm, won't you get bored in Eindhoven?" I did not expect that.
RESPONSE B: My first question is always “why do you want to work here?” I’m particularly interested to know what the person thinks they will gain from working with me. I find it stumps undergraduates quite a bit (people with PhDs as well, for that matter).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What challenging or unusual questions have you been asked in interviews for PhD positions? Or to more senior academics, what questions do you ask on interview panels? I've got an interview next week and don't want to be caught out! Interestingly, I often find the competency questions challenging...
RESPONSE A: We do micro-mini interviews, like med schools do. We try and evaluate non-grade dependent things that make students successful like empathy, problem solving, and creativity. They often throw our students off when we start off with them and they do ~8 min rotations with each of the faculty.
RESPONSE B: Technically it is illegal to ask, but every program I interviewed at asked if I was married or planning to bring a family.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What challenging or unusual questions have you been asked in interviews for PhD positions? Or to more senior academics, what questions do you ask on interview panels? I've got an interview next week and don't want to be caught out! Interestingly, I often find the competency questions challenging...
RESPONSE A: You're asking the wrong question. If you want to be prepared, you don't want to know the unusual questions; by definition you want to know the usual questions. Moreover, I've done over 100+ interviews in the private sector, and had around 12-15 at 5 schools I interviewed at. For the PhD, all the questions were to the point. You should be prepared to answer why you want to do the PhD, why you are interested in the field, the specific area, and the school you are applying to. You should know how to answer why you want to become a professor (hint it isn't teaching). You should seem ambitious without bordering on psychopathic, the department wants to admit you in the hope you will be a star and enhance their legacies in that way. You should be prepared to talk about your past research experience (if any). As an aside, in the private sector the weirdest question I got was about my favorite president. Technically, the question was inappropriate as it was inferring my political beliefs. I answered Roosevelt as it was far enough away from the current political climate.
RESPONSE B: My first question is always “why do you want to work here?” I’m particularly interested to know what the person thinks they will gain from working with me. I find it stumps undergraduates quite a bit (people with PhDs as well, for that matter).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: PhD interviews: How to choose the right PI (Red/ green flags) Hi r/AskAcademia, I hold a Master’s in molecular biology and I wish to pursue an international PhD in another country. I understand that it’s really important to find a good match with a PI and their lab, because no matter how great a project is, it’ll just suck if you don’t get along with the PI and the rest of the lab. Especially, if you have moved away from friends and family for the project. I am going to have interviews with a couple of PI’s with open PhD positions next month (in Switzerland). What are some red/ green flags to look for during the interview and lab visits? How will I know if there’s a good match with the PI? I consider myself socially challenged and am really trying to fight off the Impostor syndrome, so during the interviews I’ll most likely be feeling scared and nervous, and my gut feeling and instinct will likely just be to throw up. Are there any objective signs that I can focus on if I eventually should get to the point where I have to decide on an offer? Any advice or input is greatly appreciated, thanks!
RESPONSE A: Ask other grad students questions like "are they easy to get hold of, how do they react when things get stressful" etc, not just "do you like it here".
RESPONSE B: You will never know until you experience them. It's a gamble! But try to dig up information from the current students and postdocs. Ask how they feel about the boss, how the boss is treating them... Also don't forget to check out the alumni to make sure that people are getting solid jobs after leaving the lab. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ) Hi r/AskAcademia, I hold a Master’s in molecular biology and I wish to pursue an international PhD in another country. I understand that it’s really important to find a good match with a PI and their lab, because no matter how great a project is, it’ll just suck if you don’t get along with the PI and the rest of the lab. Especially, if you have moved away from friends and family for the project. I am going to have interviews with a couple of PI’s with open PhD positions next month (in Switzerland). What are some red/ green flags to look for during the interview and lab visits? How will I know if there’s a good match with the PI? I consider myself socially challenged and am really trying to fight off the Impostor syndrome, so during the interviews I’ll most likely be feeling scared and nervous, and my gut feeling and instinct will likely just be to throw up. Are there any objective signs that I can focus on if I eventually should get to the point where I have to decide on an offer? Any advice or input is greatly appreciated, thanks!
RESPONSE A: As a current Ph.D. student who is not happy with my lab, I would not feel comfortable telling a potential student whether I'm happy or not. I wouldn't lie about being happy, but I'd quickly switch topics. What their students do not discuss may also be informative.
RESPONSE B: My biggest indicators to look for is how many of their doc students graduate and how long did it take them. Next I look at where the previous doc students ended up and does this line up with your goals (e.g., if you want to go into academics and the previous students go into industry, etc.). Then I look for the productivity of grad students and co-authorships. This gives me an idea if it is every grad student for themselves or if people collaborate. Finally, talk with the grad students about work-life balance, work expectations, what is the lab like around deadlines, how does the PI respond when experiments fail or data collection is slower than expected, and how available the PI is outside of lab meetings.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PhD interviews: How to choose the right PI (Red/ green flags) Hi r/AskAcademia, I hold a Master’s in molecular biology and I wish to pursue an international PhD in another country. I understand that it’s really important to find a good match with a PI and their lab, because no matter how great a project is, it’ll just suck if you don’t get along with the PI and the rest of the lab. Especially, if you have moved away from friends and family for the project. I am going to have interviews with a couple of PI’s with open PhD positions next month (in Switzerland). What are some red/ green flags to look for during the interview and lab visits? How will I know if there’s a good match with the PI? I consider myself socially challenged and am really trying to fight off the Impostor syndrome, so during the interviews I’ll most likely be feeling scared and nervous, and my gut feeling and instinct will likely just be to throw up. Are there any objective signs that I can focus on if I eventually should get to the point where I have to decide on an offer? Any advice or input is greatly appreciated, thanks!
RESPONSE A: Try to talk to the students! Do they seem happy or depressed? Ask about her/his managing style, are they more hands on or hands off? Do they meet with each student weekly/monthly/yearly? Its also important that you ask yourself how you like to be manged, do you want lots of guidance and oversight or do you want to be mostly left to your own devices?
RESPONSE B: As a current Ph.D. student who is not happy with my lab, I would not feel comfortable telling a potential student whether I'm happy or not. I wouldn't lie about being happy, but I'd quickly switch topics. What their students do not discuss may also be informative.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PhD interviews: How to choose the right PI (Red/ green flags) Hi r/AskAcademia, I hold a Master’s in molecular biology and I wish to pursue an international PhD in another country. I understand that it’s really important to find a good match with a PI and their lab, because no matter how great a project is, it’ll just suck if you don’t get along with the PI and the rest of the lab. Especially, if you have moved away from friends and family for the project. I am going to have interviews with a couple of PI’s with open PhD positions next month (in Switzerland). What are some red/ green flags to look for during the interview and lab visits? How will I know if there’s a good match with the PI? I consider myself socially challenged and am really trying to fight off the Impostor syndrome, so during the interviews I’ll most likely be feeling scared and nervous, and my gut feeling and instinct will likely just be to throw up. Are there any objective signs that I can focus on if I eventually should get to the point where I have to decide on an offer? Any advice or input is greatly appreciated, thanks!
RESPONSE A: Also, allof this asking that everyone is advising really should be done in person(!!!) because people are way less likely to spill the beans by email. So make sure you set up meetings w current grad students during your trip!
RESPONSE B: As a current Ph.D. student who is not happy with my lab, I would not feel comfortable telling a potential student whether I'm happy or not. I wouldn't lie about being happy, but I'd quickly switch topics. What their students do not discuss may also be informative.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PhD interviews: How to choose the right PI (Red/ green flags) Hi r/AskAcademia, I hold a Master’s in molecular biology and I wish to pursue an international PhD in another country. I understand that it’s really important to find a good match with a PI and their lab, because no matter how great a project is, it’ll just suck if you don’t get along with the PI and the rest of the lab. Especially, if you have moved away from friends and family for the project. I am going to have interviews with a couple of PI’s with open PhD positions next month (in Switzerland). What are some red/ green flags to look for during the interview and lab visits? How will I know if there’s a good match with the PI? I consider myself socially challenged and am really trying to fight off the Impostor syndrome, so during the interviews I’ll most likely be feeling scared and nervous, and my gut feeling and instinct will likely just be to throw up. Are there any objective signs that I can focus on if I eventually should get to the point where I have to decide on an offer? Any advice or input is greatly appreciated, thanks!
RESPONSE A: You will never know until you experience them. It's a gamble! But try to dig up information from the current students and postdocs. Ask how they feel about the boss, how the boss is treating them... Also don't forget to check out the alumni to make sure that people are getting solid jobs after leaving the lab. Good luck!
RESPONSE B: As a current Ph.D. student who is not happy with my lab, I would not feel comfortable telling a potential student whether I'm happy or not. I wouldn't lie about being happy, but I'd quickly switch topics. What their students do not discuss may also be informative.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: a student perspective, which has been very helpful, but something's still not clicking. Generally, I'm one of those people who need an example of something before I understand how to do it, and while I've found example letters of rec from professors to students on the web, I haven't found the reverse. Without an example letter to work off of, I'm concerned that I'm talking about *myself* too much in the letter (focusing on my experience in the classroom with the professor, how he helped me get into grad school, how much his class taught/impacted me, etc) as opposed to talking about the professor himself. But the point of such a letter is to emphasize the positive impact he has on students, right? I'm having a hard time understanding how much to center my own experience of the professor versus talk more generally about his virtues. If anyone has any advice on how to strike this balance or is willing to share an example of such a letter (all personal information redacted, of course), I'd be truly appreciative.
RESPONSE A: I think it should be about his impact on your education and trajectory. Share specifics about what he did and why it felt or was different from the experience you’ve had with other profs is also helpful. All of those stories provide examples of his virtues.
RESPONSE B: As a chair I find these student letters most useful when they are 1) personal, and 2) specific. Students are generally not viewed as experts on pedagogy or content, so a student letter that says Dr.X is an excellent teacher and knows a lot aren't very helpful. Conversely, those that explain the role a professor had in the educational journey of the writer-- inspired them, focused them, helped improve their writing, gave great advice, etc. --are helpful. Better still if they include specific examples, "I found Dr. X's use of different materials and teaching styles to be a perfect match for the course content, their feedback really helped my writing, and I will take away their lessons on \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ as a guide throughout my life." Or whatever. Personal. Specific. Brief. A page should be enough.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: of those people who need an example of something before I understand how to do it, and while I've found example letters of rec from professors to students on the web, I haven't found the reverse. Without an example letter to work off of, I'm concerned that I'm talking about *myself* too much in the letter (focusing on my experience in the classroom with the professor, how he helped me get into grad school, how much his class taught/impacted me, etc) as opposed to talking about the professor himself. But the point of such a letter is to emphasize the positive impact he has on students, right? I'm having a hard time understanding how much to center my own experience of the professor versus talk more generally about his virtues. If anyone has any advice on how to strike this balance or is willing to share an example of such a letter (all personal information redacted, of course), I'd be truly appreciative.
RESPONSE A: As a chair I find these student letters most useful when they are 1) personal, and 2) specific. Students are generally not viewed as experts on pedagogy or content, so a student letter that says Dr.X is an excellent teacher and knows a lot aren't very helpful. Conversely, those that explain the role a professor had in the educational journey of the writer-- inspired them, focused them, helped improve their writing, gave great advice, etc. --are helpful. Better still if they include specific examples, "I found Dr. X's use of different materials and teaching styles to be a perfect match for the course content, their feedback really helped my writing, and I will take away their lessons on \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ as a guide throughout my life." Or whatever. Personal. Specific. Brief. A page should be enough.
RESPONSE B: I think that all the specific examples you mentioned about the impact the professor has had on your intellectual and professional development are the most impactful things you could write in support of your professor's tenure. Generic statements from a student about a professor's virtues will likely have very little impact, so I would avoid them unless they are illustrated with your personal experiences with the professor.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: into grad school, how much his class taught/impacted me, etc) as opposed to talking about the professor himself. But the point of such a letter is to emphasize the positive impact he has on students, right? I'm having a hard time understanding how much to center my own experience of the professor versus talk more generally about his virtues. If anyone has any advice on how to strike this balance or is willing to share an example of such a letter (all personal information redacted, of course), I'd be truly appreciative.
RESPONSE A: I think it’s a great idea to have a sentence about the specific impact on you, and then provide broader statements drawing from that experience to make generalizations about the prof’s impact on others more globally. For example: “It was Professor X’s enthusiasm about [the subject] that piqued my interest in this area of study. Without Professor X, I would not have gone to graduate student to pursue [this topic]. It is this general attitude and excitement that Professor X brings to the classroom every day and it’s easy to see why they inspire so many students. Sometimes, it’s as simple as when Professor X makes a joke to relax the class, other times, they use new memes and videos to really get the class involved. Their passion for the topic is infectious!
RESPONSE B: As a chair I find these student letters most useful when they are 1) personal, and 2) specific. Students are generally not viewed as experts on pedagogy or content, so a student letter that says Dr.X is an excellent teacher and knows a lot aren't very helpful. Conversely, those that explain the role a professor had in the educational journey of the writer-- inspired them, focused them, helped improve their writing, gave great advice, etc. --are helpful. Better still if they include specific examples, "I found Dr. X's use of different materials and teaching styles to be a perfect match for the course content, their feedback really helped my writing, and I will take away their lessons on \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ as a guide throughout my life." Or whatever. Personal. Specific. Brief. A page should be enough.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: has been very helpful, but something's still not clicking. Generally, I'm one of those people who need an example of something before I understand how to do it, and while I've found example letters of rec from professors to students on the web, I haven't found the reverse. Without an example letter to work off of, I'm concerned that I'm talking about *myself* too much in the letter (focusing on my experience in the classroom with the professor, how he helped me get into grad school, how much his class taught/impacted me, etc) as opposed to talking about the professor himself. But the point of such a letter is to emphasize the positive impact he has on students, right? I'm having a hard time understanding how much to center my own experience of the professor versus talk more generally about his virtues. If anyone has any advice on how to strike this balance or is willing to share an example of such a letter (all personal information redacted, of course), I'd be truly appreciative.
RESPONSE A: As a chair I find these student letters most useful when they are 1) personal, and 2) specific. Students are generally not viewed as experts on pedagogy or content, so a student letter that says Dr.X is an excellent teacher and knows a lot aren't very helpful. Conversely, those that explain the role a professor had in the educational journey of the writer-- inspired them, focused them, helped improve their writing, gave great advice, etc. --are helpful. Better still if they include specific examples, "I found Dr. X's use of different materials and teaching styles to be a perfect match for the course content, their feedback really helped my writing, and I will take away their lessons on \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ as a guide throughout my life." Or whatever. Personal. Specific. Brief. A page should be enough.
RESPONSE B: a lot of details and examples! I would recommend to start with 2-3 examples of situation when professors action added significant impact to your personal or professional life and then just connected them together. The promotion committee searching for proof that the professor cares about students. Do not afraid to be too personal!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: focusing on my experience in the classroom with the professor, how he helped me get into grad school, how much his class taught/impacted me, etc) as opposed to talking about the professor himself. But the point of such a letter is to emphasize the positive impact he has on students, right? I'm having a hard time understanding how much to center my own experience of the professor versus talk more generally about his virtues. If anyone has any advice on how to strike this balance or is willing to share an example of such a letter (all personal information redacted, of course), I'd be truly appreciative.
RESPONSE A: I think it’s a great idea to have a sentence about the specific impact on you, and then provide broader statements drawing from that experience to make generalizations about the prof’s impact on others more globally. For example: “It was Professor X’s enthusiasm about [the subject] that piqued my interest in this area of study. Without Professor X, I would not have gone to graduate student to pursue [this topic]. It is this general attitude and excitement that Professor X brings to the classroom every day and it’s easy to see why they inspire so many students. Sometimes, it’s as simple as when Professor X makes a joke to relax the class, other times, they use new memes and videos to really get the class involved. Their passion for the topic is infectious!
RESPONSE B: I wrote a recommendation letter like this once - not for tenure, but for an external mentorship award. I too struggled with how much of 'me' to put into the letter, but ultimately decided that since this particular professor had done so much to shape the direction and success of my career, it was important to include information on my background. My final letter read kind of like a narrative of our relationship, highlighting specific actions they took that guided me on my academic journey - things like encouraging me to join a particular club, writing reference letters, helping me secure an internship, etc. I also made sure to include things they consistently did for all students, and not just me. Best of luck with your letter! Though I found the writing process really difficult, I was also appreciative of the opportunity to support my mentor in this way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting a PhD in 2017 - job outlook in a Trump presidency? Hi, I'm a wildlife ecologist starting a PhD program at a top R1 in Fall 2017. Along with the general uncertainty around this commitment, I'm especially concerned about employment when I finish. I've read some popular articles about the topic, but I'm interested in reddit's perspective. Employment goal: research scientist with a (federal) government agency or academia (if I can my foot in the door!!)
RESPONSE A: In 7-9 years when you're done they'll be a new president anyways.
RESPONSE B: Likely the same as the job outlook in an Obama presidency, Clinton presidency, and Bush presidency: Shitty with a chance of shit. The field is very very oversaturated.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Starting a PhD in 2017 - job outlook in a Trump presidency? Hi, I'm a wildlife ecologist starting a PhD program at a top R1 in Fall 2017. Along with the general uncertainty around this commitment, I'm especially concerned about employment when I finish. I've read some popular articles about the topic, but I'm interested in reddit's perspective. Employment goal: research scientist with a (federal) government agency or academia (if I can my foot in the door!!)
RESPONSE A: Likely the same as the job outlook in an Obama presidency, Clinton presidency, and Bush presidency: Shitty with a chance of shit. The field is very very oversaturated.
RESPONSE B: Much ado about nothing. Institutionally, it's really hard to undo bureaucratic agencies (NSF); plus, I doubt they even want to. It's not like Pence defunded Purdue and IU-Bloomington while he was governor of Indiana.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting a PhD in 2017 - job outlook in a Trump presidency? Hi, I'm a wildlife ecologist starting a PhD program at a top R1 in Fall 2017. Along with the general uncertainty around this commitment, I'm especially concerned about employment when I finish. I've read some popular articles about the topic, but I'm interested in reddit's perspective. Employment goal: research scientist with a (federal) government agency or academia (if I can my foot in the door!!)
RESPONSE A: Much ado about nothing. Institutionally, it's really hard to undo bureaucratic agencies (NSF); plus, I doubt they even want to. It's not like Pence defunded Purdue and IU-Bloomington while he was governor of Indiana.
RESPONSE B: In truth, I do not recommend anyone getting into this field. It is a fact that we graduate too many MS and PhDs for the number of jobs there are (though too few relative to the societal need). The question you must ask yourself is, are you capable of being better than the vast majority of other applicants AND will you have skills in a marketable area? No one cares about an unpublished lichen-specialist (no offense to those studying lichen, but once you have three, do you really need any more?). You have to obviously stand out from the crowd and even then it will be tough and driven entirely by luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Starting a PhD in 2017 - job outlook in a Trump presidency? Hi, I'm a wildlife ecologist starting a PhD program at a top R1 in Fall 2017. Along with the general uncertainty around this commitment, I'm especially concerned about employment when I finish. I've read some popular articles about the topic, but I'm interested in reddit's perspective. Employment goal: research scientist with a (federal) government agency or academia (if I can my foot in the door!!)
RESPONSE A: In 7-9 years when you're done they'll be a new president anyways.
RESPONSE B: Much ado about nothing. Institutionally, it's really hard to undo bureaucratic agencies (NSF); plus, I doubt they even want to. It's not like Pence defunded Purdue and IU-Bloomington while he was governor of Indiana.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Starting a PhD in 2017 - job outlook in a Trump presidency? Hi, I'm a wildlife ecologist starting a PhD program at a top R1 in Fall 2017. Along with the general uncertainty around this commitment, I'm especially concerned about employment when I finish. I've read some popular articles about the topic, but I'm interested in reddit's perspective. Employment goal: research scientist with a (federal) government agency or academia (if I can my foot in the door!!)
RESPONSE A: Best advice I can give a first year graduate student is to seek out and make time for opportunities that diversify your skills and build up your resume. You didn't get into graduate school simply by getting good grades, going forward you'll want more on your resume than 'did research and published these papers.' Seek out leadership opportunities in your graduate student association, offer to assist in planning scientific meetings being held in your city, join your school's science policy club, take workshops about science communication, serve as treasurer for your volunteer theatre group, all these things will not only help you find out what your strengths are and what various careers might interest you if research doesn't work out, they'll also make you a more competitive candidate and give you tangible things to point to when a position calls for experience/skills in X, Y and Z.
RESPONSE B: Much ado about nothing. Institutionally, it's really hard to undo bureaucratic agencies (NSF); plus, I doubt they even want to. It's not like Pence defunded Purdue and IU-Bloomington while he was governor of Indiana.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Visa issues. I'm afraid I will lose my postdoc proposal I live in Belgium with a family reunion visa which doesn't gives me a right to work. However I received postdoctoral proposal to start working here in two months from now. I will apply for my visa soon, but I am afraid I won't receive it on time. My colleague said that it's ok, and I can start working while I wait for the reply since I already have a national number. Do you know if that's really the case? I am afraid that if the visa don't get ready on time I will lose the work opportunity. (Wallonia region) Thank you
RESPONSE A: all universities have an office that deals with their foreign students/staff immigration issues. Have you checked that of your prospective institution? They would give you all the info you need.
RESPONSE B: To confirm that that’s really the case, talk to an immigration lawyer. International office workers that aren’t lawyers at labs/institutions aren’t actually that familiar with the nitty gritty of this stuff in my experience.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Visa issues. I'm afraid I will lose my postdoc proposal I live in Belgium with a family reunion visa which doesn't gives me a right to work. However I received postdoctoral proposal to start working here in two months from now. I will apply for my visa soon, but I am afraid I won't receive it on time. My colleague said that it's ok, and I can start working while I wait for the reply since I already have a national number. Do you know if that's really the case? I am afraid that if the visa don't get ready on time I will lose the work opportunity. (Wallonia region) Thank you
RESPONSE A: all universities have an office that deals with their foreign students/staff immigration issues. Have you checked that of your prospective institution? They would give you all the info you need.
RESPONSE B: Hire an attorney who specializes in visa/immigration issues. It shouldn't cost much for them to give you some advise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Visa issues. I'm afraid I will lose my postdoc proposal I live in Belgium with a family reunion visa which doesn't gives me a right to work. However I received postdoctoral proposal to start working here in two months from now. I will apply for my visa soon, but I am afraid I won't receive it on time. My colleague said that it's ok, and I can start working while I wait for the reply since I already have a national number. Do you know if that's really the case? I am afraid that if the visa don't get ready on time I will lose the work opportunity. (Wallonia region) Thank you
RESPONSE A: Talk to your university about it. They will have handled many cases like this. The university I worked for now even hired an agency that did all the paperwork for immigration, opening a bank account etc for me. In my experience, you won't be breaking the law if you start work while your visa application is being processed, but the university may have to wait until after your visa is approved before they can start paying you. If you cannot work until you have your visa, I'm sure the university will be fine delaying your start date.
RESPONSE B: To confirm that that’s really the case, talk to an immigration lawyer. International office workers that aren’t lawyers at labs/institutions aren’t actually that familiar with the nitty gritty of this stuff in my experience.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Visa issues. I'm afraid I will lose my postdoc proposal I live in Belgium with a family reunion visa which doesn't gives me a right to work. However I received postdoctoral proposal to start working here in two months from now. I will apply for my visa soon, but I am afraid I won't receive it on time. My colleague said that it's ok, and I can start working while I wait for the reply since I already have a national number. Do you know if that's really the case? I am afraid that if the visa don't get ready on time I will lose the work opportunity. (Wallonia region) Thank you
RESPONSE A: Talk to your university about it. They will have handled many cases like this. The university I worked for now even hired an agency that did all the paperwork for immigration, opening a bank account etc for me. In my experience, you won't be breaking the law if you start work while your visa application is being processed, but the university may have to wait until after your visa is approved before they can start paying you. If you cannot work until you have your visa, I'm sure the university will be fine delaying your start date.
RESPONSE B: Hire an attorney who specializes in visa/immigration issues. It shouldn't cost much for them to give you some advise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: can help me. I am a 6th year PhD student in chemistry. I have passed every requirement throughout my graduate career, but as it stands my adviser (P.I.) is unwilling to discuss anything graduation. I have met with the dean and she was as unhelpful and non-committal as one could expect from someone in her position. At this point I don't care about a letter of rec. or keeping any form of a relationship with my adviser. All I wan't is that stupid piece of paper that says I have my PhD. I have tried discussing things with my adviser and it turned into a verbal assault in which I stood their and was called horrible names for bringing the subject up (this doesn't begin to describe the level of abuse that my adviser exhibits over myself and other students). I am most certainly not alone, there are three other students in my lab that are my year and going through the same experiences. What I am really asking is does anyone know of a process by which I can force my graduation. Whether it is petitioning or speaking to a certain representative. The dean that I spoke with said that the only way for me to graduate is with my advisers signature, but I cannot believe that the university does not have a fail safe to protect its students from sociopath professors. Especially considering I have passed every bench mark asked of me (besides my thesis defense of course). Any help would be appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I'm only a second year PhD student (biology), but I've been trying to manage an unpleasant advisor situation right now as well, and the advice I've gotten several times is to go speak to my other committee members. Don't they have to sign off on your degree as well? Since they've been following your progress for a few years as well, they should know something about your situation and be able to help mitigate your interactions with your primary advisor.
RESPONSE B: If the chair of your department and your graduate advisor are unwilling to help, the next step is an advisor in either graduate studies or the college of natural sciences, depending how your university is organized. You can also get in touch with the ombudsman and start escalating if you feel like you are being verbally abused.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: possible, but mainly I'm just hoping someone has been in my shoes and can help me. I am a 6th year PhD student in chemistry. I have passed every requirement throughout my graduate career, but as it stands my adviser (P.I.) is unwilling to discuss anything graduation. I have met with the dean and she was as unhelpful and non-committal as one could expect from someone in her position. At this point I don't care about a letter of rec. or keeping any form of a relationship with my adviser. All I wan't is that stupid piece of paper that says I have my PhD. I have tried discussing things with my adviser and it turned into a verbal assault in which I stood their and was called horrible names for bringing the subject up (this doesn't begin to describe the level of abuse that my adviser exhibits over myself and other students). I am most certainly not alone, there are three other students in my lab that are my year and going through the same experiences. What I am really asking is does anyone know of a process by which I can force my graduation. Whether it is petitioning or speaking to a certain representative. The dean that I spoke with said that the only way for me to graduate is with my advisers signature, but I cannot believe that the university does not have a fail safe to protect its students from sociopath professors. Especially considering I have passed every bench mark asked of me (besides my thesis defense of course). Any help would be appreciated.
RESPONSE A: Many universities (e.g. Cornell I believe) will accept a bound copy of 3 first author publications instead of signatures from your commitee. Talk to the thesis secretary and registrar to see if there are any other avenues available to you.
RESPONSE B: I'm only a second year PhD student (biology), but I've been trying to manage an unpleasant advisor situation right now as well, and the advice I've gotten several times is to go speak to my other committee members. Don't they have to sign off on your degree as well? Since they've been following your progress for a few years as well, they should know something about your situation and be able to help mitigate your interactions with your primary advisor.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: as much info as possible, but mainly I'm just hoping someone has been in my shoes and can help me. I am a 6th year PhD student in chemistry. I have passed every requirement throughout my graduate career, but as it stands my adviser (P.I.) is unwilling to discuss anything graduation. I have met with the dean and she was as unhelpful and non-committal as one could expect from someone in her position. At this point I don't care about a letter of rec. or keeping any form of a relationship with my adviser. All I wan't is that stupid piece of paper that says I have my PhD. I have tried discussing things with my adviser and it turned into a verbal assault in which I stood their and was called horrible names for bringing the subject up (this doesn't begin to describe the level of abuse that my adviser exhibits over myself and other students). I am most certainly not alone, there are three other students in my lab that are my year and going through the same experiences. What I am really asking is does anyone know of a process by which I can force my graduation. Whether it is petitioning or speaking to a certain representative. The dean that I spoke with said that the only way for me to graduate is with my advisers signature, but I cannot believe that the university does not have a fail safe to protect its students from sociopath professors. Especially considering I have passed every bench mark asked of me (besides my thesis defense of course). Any help would be appreciated.
RESPONSE A: What's your publication record like? Your advisor may feel you haven't contributed enough novel work to warrant graduating. I know at my uni, 5 years is pretty average for chemistry, but some people do go into 6 or more years. In any case you may be able to convince another PI to take you on in your last year so you can graduate with them instead of your horrible advisor, granted you provide some interesting research to his/her group.
RESPONSE B: Many universities (e.g. Cornell I believe) will accept a bound copy of 3 first author publications instead of signatures from your commitee. Talk to the thesis secretary and registrar to see if there are any other avenues available to you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: possible, but mainly I'm just hoping someone has been in my shoes and can help me. I am a 6th year PhD student in chemistry. I have passed every requirement throughout my graduate career, but as it stands my adviser (P.I.) is unwilling to discuss anything graduation. I have met with the dean and she was as unhelpful and non-committal as one could expect from someone in her position. At this point I don't care about a letter of rec. or keeping any form of a relationship with my adviser. All I wan't is that stupid piece of paper that says I have my PhD. I have tried discussing things with my adviser and it turned into a verbal assault in which I stood their and was called horrible names for bringing the subject up (this doesn't begin to describe the level of abuse that my adviser exhibits over myself and other students). I am most certainly not alone, there are three other students in my lab that are my year and going through the same experiences. What I am really asking is does anyone know of a process by which I can force my graduation. Whether it is petitioning or speaking to a certain representative. The dean that I spoke with said that the only way for me to graduate is with my advisers signature, but I cannot believe that the university does not have a fail safe to protect its students from sociopath professors. Especially considering I have passed every bench mark asked of me (besides my thesis defense of course). Any help would be appreciated.
RESPONSE A: A PhD without a letter of recommendation from your adviser isn't worth much. Any job that requires a PhD is gonna require letters of recommendation. You need to motivate your boss. No one on reddit can speculate on your bosses personality, that's up to you. Find out how to do it and do it. Consider it your last project as a graduate student.
RESPONSE B: >I have met with the dean and she was as unhelpful and non-committal as one could expect from someone in her position. I laughed harder than I should have at this. But seriously, that sucks. Also, more information? It seems like there's more to the story than what you said in the OP.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What has been the most memorable moment of your academic career thus far? I am an aspiring undergrad to grad student and I want to hear the moments you found your life/career choice most worth it. Give me your sap, your cliché- give me your feels!
RESPONSE A: I'd always thought the moment that the committee informed me that I had passed the comps was the most memorable one. I felt similar when I got my acceptance for the PhD program. But just yesterday, I was informed that I won an award from the US Embassy in Turkey for my research. This beats the previous ones for now. I think that feeling when you realize people actually see and appreciate your work could keep the motivation going for a lifetime.
RESPONSE B: Getting offered an amazing postdoc gig three days after I submitted my thesis for examination.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What has been the most memorable moment of your academic career thus far? I am an aspiring undergrad to grad student and I want to hear the moments you found your life/career choice most worth it. Give me your sap, your cliché- give me your feels!
RESPONSE A: I'd always thought the moment that the committee informed me that I had passed the comps was the most memorable one. I felt similar when I got my acceptance for the PhD program. But just yesterday, I was informed that I won an award from the US Embassy in Turkey for my research. This beats the previous ones for now. I think that feeling when you realize people actually see and appreciate your work could keep the motivation going for a lifetime.
RESPONSE B: Graduating was pretty great
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What has been the most memorable moment of your academic career thus far? I am an aspiring undergrad to grad student and I want to hear the moments you found your life/career choice most worth it. Give me your sap, your cliché- give me your feels!
RESPONSE A: Graduating was pretty great
RESPONSE B: I found an important thing in some books that apparently escaped people’s notice for 4-500 years. Jumped up and yelled and ran around the library.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What has been the most memorable moment of your academic career thus far? I am an aspiring undergrad to grad student and I want to hear the moments you found your life/career choice most worth it. Give me your sap, your cliché- give me your feels!
RESPONSE A: Graduating was pretty great
RESPONSE B: First fundable score from NIH for one of my big grant proposals!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What has been the most memorable moment of your academic career thus far? I am an aspiring undergrad to grad student and I want to hear the moments you found your life/career choice most worth it. Give me your sap, your cliché- give me your feels!
RESPONSE A: Graduating was pretty great
RESPONSE B: My supervisor retired the day I had my viva. Felt a bit like passing the torch. Also, I passed with no corrections, which helped as well. The first time I was accepted to speak at a conference, I felt so happy and excited. I was still an MA student at the time, hadn't even written my MA thesis yet. I was so excited. I don't get excited like that any more for conferences or journal publications. The first time I held my own book in my hand, published by Oxford. That was pretty cool. Felt like I had accomplished something. Looking forward to holding my second book sometime this year, we'll see if it's the same feeling.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Reasons for having a “notable rejections/failures” section in your CV? Grad student here! So I came across something interesting recently when I was looking at a professor’s CV. They had a designated section for their “notable rejections/failures” in which they listed out their number of rejections from doctoral training programs, tenure-track position application rejections, article rejections, etc. I was just wondering if this is something other professors include when they’re sharing their CV with universities and what would be the motivation behind having a section like this on your CV?
RESPONSE A: I don't do this and I've never seen this before. Is this professor a superstar?
RESPONSE B: There was an article some time ago in the Chronicle of Higher Education arguing that academics should start listing these kinds of "notable rejections" in their c.v., largely to normalize or de-stigmatize not getting a grant etc. But just as folks here are already noting, the response to the article was largely "that's the privilege of the already successful and secure talking". I wouldn't ever put that information on a c.v. If there's a place for it, it's in a cover letter where you can narrate it and make it contextually relevant. E.g., I don't really find that someone didn't get a grant an important piece of information shorn of context, but I do think it's interesting to hear if someone's past experimental work ended up having negative findings or if the work they're doing now was originally rejected by granting agencies until it hit a key juncture, etc. If it's part of a story that helps me understand someone's work and career and appreciate them all the more for what they're doing now, great, but even there I'd say don't dwell over much on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Reasons for having a “notable rejections/failures” section in your CV? Grad student here! So I came across something interesting recently when I was looking at a professor’s CV. They had a designated section for their “notable rejections/failures” in which they listed out their number of rejections from doctoral training programs, tenure-track position application rejections, article rejections, etc. I was just wondering if this is something other professors include when they’re sharing their CV with universities and what would be the motivation behind having a section like this on your CV?
RESPONSE A: I am a 5th year PhD student and I have a CV of failures that I am keeping (separate from my regular CV). Like many, presumably, who do this, I was inspired by the Nature article by Melanie Stefan. -- https://www.nature.com/articles/nj7322-467a At this time, the only place I would share this would be 1:1 with a peer, applicant, or undergraduate, in order to normalize failure. If, one day, I happen to be very successful, then I hope to be able to post it more openly. And I'll have a really good tally compared to people who try to post their failures only from memory, haha. (I do think that critiques about survivorship bias are very valid, though.)
RESPONSE B: I don't do this and I've never seen this before. Is this professor a superstar?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Reasons for having a “notable rejections/failures” section in your CV? Grad student here! So I came across something interesting recently when I was looking at a professor’s CV. They had a designated section for their “notable rejections/failures” in which they listed out their number of rejections from doctoral training programs, tenure-track position application rejections, article rejections, etc. I was just wondering if this is something other professors include when they’re sharing their CV with universities and what would be the motivation behind having a section like this on your CV?
RESPONSE A: I am a 5th year PhD student and I have a CV of failures that I am keeping (separate from my regular CV). Like many, presumably, who do this, I was inspired by the Nature article by Melanie Stefan. -- https://www.nature.com/articles/nj7322-467a At this time, the only place I would share this would be 1:1 with a peer, applicant, or undergraduate, in order to normalize failure. If, one day, I happen to be very successful, then I hope to be able to post it more openly. And I'll have a really good tally compared to people who try to post their failures only from memory, haha. (I do think that critiques about survivorship bias are very valid, though.)
RESPONSE B: As a professor they can afford to do this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Silly Question: What font do you use on manuscripts? I'm trying to spice things up in my life and veer away from Times New Roman. What do you use?
RESPONSE A: Comic sans because my manuscripts are a joke!
RESPONSE B: For submission, whatever the journal asks for. I compose in Calibri 11, which is the default on the version of Word I use. In general I prefer sans serif fonts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Silly Question: What font do you use on manuscripts? I'm trying to spice things up in my life and veer away from Times New Roman. What do you use?
RESPONSE A: I like Baskerville, Constantia, and Garamond.
RESPONSE B: Arial. Always and only
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Silly Question: What font do you use on manuscripts? I'm trying to spice things up in my life and veer away from Times New Roman. What do you use?
RESPONSE A: I like Baskerville, Constantia, and Garamond.
RESPONSE B: Troll response: Computer Modern Serif. Actual response: Palatino Linotype, unless I need to sneak under a page limit, in which case I usually revert to the slightly more compact Times New Roman.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Co-first author - does order really matter? I'm curious to hear how folks feel about the order of authors in a co-first author situation: in theory, since both authors have contributed what is considered equal weight, how does one determine who is 'first' first author? Beyond the trivial quibbles that may bring, does the difference really matter in the grand scheme of things? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: List them alphabetically, add an asterisk to their affiliation and then: *\*Both authors contributed equally.* in the footnote. It's a win-win.
RESPONSE B: Depends on the field, but not much at all. Authorship is fairly important for faculty jobs, but a couple of papers with co-first author (show with an asterisk) are treated the same as first author papers. Source: Been in a couple of R1 faculty search committees.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Co-first author - does order really matter? I'm curious to hear how folks feel about the order of authors in a co-first author situation: in theory, since both authors have contributed what is considered equal weight, how does one determine who is 'first' first author? Beyond the trivial quibbles that may bring, does the difference really matter in the grand scheme of things? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: List them alphabetically, add an asterisk to their affiliation and then: *\*Both authors contributed equally.* in the footnote. It's a win-win.
RESPONSE B: For equal contribution the author order should be alphabetical (last name). At least this is the norm in my field.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Co-first author - does order really matter? I'm curious to hear how folks feel about the order of authors in a co-first author situation: in theory, since both authors have contributed what is considered equal weight, how does one determine who is 'first' first author? Beyond the trivial quibbles that may bring, does the difference really matter in the grand scheme of things? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: I've seen people toss a coin. Unless there's a journal's policy, the authors decide on the order themselves
RESPONSE B: List them alphabetically, add an asterisk to their affiliation and then: *\*Both authors contributed equally.* in the footnote. It's a win-win.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Co-first author - does order really matter? I'm curious to hear how folks feel about the order of authors in a co-first author situation: in theory, since both authors have contributed what is considered equal weight, how does one determine who is 'first' first author? Beyond the trivial quibbles that may bring, does the difference really matter in the grand scheme of things? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: For equal contribution the author order should be alphabetical (last name). At least this is the norm in my field.
RESPONSE B: In my field (medicine), first author or co author matters a lot if you don't have many first author papers. Later in career the importance is smaller. If you go shared first, as far as I am aware you are allowed to place yourself first for example in your CV or grant application even if your listed as second with shard first condition. But this could be country and institution dependant.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Co-first author - does order really matter? I'm curious to hear how folks feel about the order of authors in a co-first author situation: in theory, since both authors have contributed what is considered equal weight, how does one determine who is 'first' first author? Beyond the trivial quibbles that may bring, does the difference really matter in the grand scheme of things? Thank you!
RESPONSE A: In my field (medicine), first author or co author matters a lot if you don't have many first author papers. Later in career the importance is smaller. If you go shared first, as far as I am aware you are allowed to place yourself first for example in your CV or grant application even if your listed as second with shard first condition. But this could be country and institution dependant.
RESPONSE B: Yes
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is your department culture like? I'm finishing up my first year on the tenure track and have learned a lot a lot about academia. I'm in the humanities at a large state school and was assigned a mentor when I got here. He's been very helpful but otherwise I don't really meet or talk to any of my other colleagues. We really only see each other at meetings and occasionally in the hall. Our culture here seems to be one of isolation and people being generally stressed out all the time. I can see academia going that way but I'm curious if this is typical. I've read of fractured departments, but mine isn't really fractured as much as we just don't really communicate. There's no fights or anything else that I know of, everyone just does their own thing.
RESPONSE A: Dont you guys go out for drinks? In my department we celebrate birthdays too. We have meeting twice a week. We have regular parties like in National holidays, welcome party for new members and farewell for leaving members. Overall, we have quite frequent communication between all lab members. This is the scenario for Japan.
RESPONSE B: Epithelial cells mostly
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is your department culture like? I'm finishing up my first year on the tenure track and have learned a lot a lot about academia. I'm in the humanities at a large state school and was assigned a mentor when I got here. He's been very helpful but otherwise I don't really meet or talk to any of my other colleagues. We really only see each other at meetings and occasionally in the hall. Our culture here seems to be one of isolation and people being generally stressed out all the time. I can see academia going that way but I'm curious if this is typical. I've read of fractured departments, but mine isn't really fractured as much as we just don't really communicate. There's no fights or anything else that I know of, everyone just does their own thing.
RESPONSE A: Epithelial cells mostly
RESPONSE B: I was part of a small (around 6) math and computer science department at a teaching university for a year. It was pretty laid-back, although the school was hurting for money - more stress came from that than from individual workloads. We had weekly meetings, ate lunch together about once a week, and generally got along pretty well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is your department culture like? I'm finishing up my first year on the tenure track and have learned a lot a lot about academia. I'm in the humanities at a large state school and was assigned a mentor when I got here. He's been very helpful but otherwise I don't really meet or talk to any of my other colleagues. We really only see each other at meetings and occasionally in the hall. Our culture here seems to be one of isolation and people being generally stressed out all the time. I can see academia going that way but I'm curious if this is typical. I've read of fractured departments, but mine isn't really fractured as much as we just don't really communicate. There's no fights or anything else that I know of, everyone just does their own thing.
RESPONSE A: It's a bit mixed in my department (epidemiology/statistics, mostly people in offices with 2-6 desks). The most senior people have been here for years and are quite familiar with each other. The PhDs/RAs also hang out together a lot (mostly in the pub), but everyone in between mostly does their own thing. Most postdocs are here for only a few years before moving on, we've got quite a high turnover for the post-PhD/pre-senior researcher/lecturer stage. I did start a book club, which is kind of working. Though people mostly turn up because we meet over lunch in the outside world (we've got a real lunch-at-desk culture).
RESPONSE B: I work in a chemistry department and it's incredibly collegial and collaborative. We have a faculty club where we go for drinks once or twice a week. All of the Chem departments I've worked in are like this, but i can't speak for the humanities.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Conferences canceled due to Corona virus? Are academic conferences being cancelled due to the corona virus? I read that a big physics conference was cancelled last minute (APS meeting). I need to make the final submission of a paper for a big conference in the US this summer (2000+ attendees). Thinking about withdrawing it instead. This conference is not prestigious in any sense, it is about meeting people
RESPONSE A: I was supposed to go to a conference in Switzerland in the spring. It was moved to August.
RESPONSE B: Heading to a conference next month. Will attend others if accepted. COVID-19 is here. Conferences won't change anything. And acceptance still counts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Conferences canceled due to Corona virus? Are academic conferences being cancelled due to the corona virus? I read that a big physics conference was cancelled last minute (APS meeting). I need to make the final submission of a paper for a big conference in the US this summer (2000+ attendees). Thinking about withdrawing it instead. This conference is not prestigious in any sense, it is about meeting people
RESPONSE A: I'm scheduled to attend a conference on the west coast of the US during the last week of March - still waiting to hear if it will be cancelled. I've got another one in Oregon in July and I'm wondering if that one might happen as well...
RESPONSE B: Summer is a long time away in terms of the progress of this virus. What's the worst case scenario if you submit?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Conferences canceled due to Corona virus? Are academic conferences being cancelled due to the corona virus? I read that a big physics conference was cancelled last minute (APS meeting). I need to make the final submission of a paper for a big conference in the US this summer (2000+ attendees). Thinking about withdrawing it instead. This conference is not prestigious in any sense, it is about meeting people
RESPONSE A: Summer is a long time away in terms of the progress of this virus. What's the worst case scenario if you submit?
RESPONSE B: Heading to a conference next month. Will attend others if accepted. COVID-19 is here. Conferences won't change anything. And acceptance still counts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Conferences canceled due to Corona virus? Are academic conferences being cancelled due to the corona virus? I read that a big physics conference was cancelled last minute (APS meeting). I need to make the final submission of a paper for a big conference in the US this summer (2000+ attendees). Thinking about withdrawing it instead. This conference is not prestigious in any sense, it is about meeting people
RESPONSE A: I can't remember what conference it was but one that my co-mentor was going to got cancelled. Think it was in Colorado
RESPONSE B: Summer is a long time away in terms of the progress of this virus. What's the worst case scenario if you submit?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Conferences canceled due to Corona virus? Are academic conferences being cancelled due to the corona virus? I read that a big physics conference was cancelled last minute (APS meeting). I need to make the final submission of a paper for a big conference in the US this summer (2000+ attendees). Thinking about withdrawing it instead. This conference is not prestigious in any sense, it is about meeting people
RESPONSE A: Summer is a long time away in terms of the progress of this virus. What's the worst case scenario if you submit?
RESPONSE B: Some conferences are being cancelled and the other are being switched to remote (online) format, but so far just the conferences in March - summer is still very far away, the whole situation is likely to be long over by then.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to contact professors for research internships I have tried contacting professors by cold-emailing them every time and if possible, calling their offices to know whether they do have internship positions available. However, I receive a one-in-a-million replies and mostly it redirects me to the university admissions page. Consistent e-mailing might be regarded as spam bombing What do you think is the best way to contact professors politely to ask for research internships?
RESPONSE A: Many universities have programs that offer summer research internships that you can apply for. If you google REU (research experience for undergrads) you will find a lot of options and they all pay really well (~4K for a summer after taxes). These look great on resumes and don’t add extra work to your semesters.
RESPONSE B: Emailing would definitely be your best bet. Your wording of the email is extremely important, and I’ve been told by my research mentor that a majority won’t answer you. You have to keep on emailing (not spamming them, wait a few intervals of time before emailing again)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to contact professors for research internships I have tried contacting professors by cold-emailing them every time and if possible, calling their offices to know whether they do have internship positions available. However, I receive a one-in-a-million replies and mostly it redirects me to the university admissions page. Consistent e-mailing might be regarded as spam bombing What do you think is the best way to contact professors politely to ask for research internships?
RESPONSE A: How exactly are you wording your emails? Can you give us a sample?
RESPONSE B: Many universities have programs that offer summer research internships that you can apply for. If you google REU (research experience for undergrads) you will find a lot of options and they all pay really well (~4K for a summer after taxes). These look great on resumes and don’t add extra work to your semesters.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to contact professors for research internships I have tried contacting professors by cold-emailing them every time and if possible, calling their offices to know whether they do have internship positions available. However, I receive a one-in-a-million replies and mostly it redirects me to the university admissions page. Consistent e-mailing might be regarded as spam bombing What do you think is the best way to contact professors politely to ask for research internships?
RESPONSE A: As a recipient of many emails from prospective students and postdocs, the one thing that doesn't make me automatically recycle an email is a specific mention of my research or some connection with a work colleague. In my mind it's showing the applicant is interested in working in my group, and not interested in just working. I get a lot of emails from international students and most of these appear to be along the lines of "I want a job". I want the best folks in my group (most engaged, hard working, willing to learn, excellent communicators, etc.) So I would suggest including a couple of lines of your connection to the professors you are interested in working with - "my basket-weaving professor Dr G spoke highly of your work", "I am interested in research using rectangular paper, such as described in your 2014 paper on origami, and would like to ask if you have any openings for a research internship", etc.
RESPONSE B: Emailing would definitely be your best bet. Your wording of the email is extremely important, and I’ve been told by my research mentor that a majority won’t answer you. You have to keep on emailing (not spamming them, wait a few intervals of time before emailing again)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to contact professors for research internships I have tried contacting professors by cold-emailing them every time and if possible, calling their offices to know whether they do have internship positions available. However, I receive a one-in-a-million replies and mostly it redirects me to the university admissions page. Consistent e-mailing might be regarded as spam bombing What do you think is the best way to contact professors politely to ask for research internships?
RESPONSE A: How exactly are you wording your emails? Can you give us a sample?
RESPONSE B: As a recipient of many emails from prospective students and postdocs, the one thing that doesn't make me automatically recycle an email is a specific mention of my research or some connection with a work colleague. In my mind it's showing the applicant is interested in working in my group, and not interested in just working. I get a lot of emails from international students and most of these appear to be along the lines of "I want a job". I want the best folks in my group (most engaged, hard working, willing to learn, excellent communicators, etc.) So I would suggest including a couple of lines of your connection to the professors you are interested in working with - "my basket-weaving professor Dr G spoke highly of your work", "I am interested in research using rectangular paper, such as described in your 2014 paper on origami, and would like to ask if you have any openings for a research internship", etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to contact professors for research internships I have tried contacting professors by cold-emailing them every time and if possible, calling their offices to know whether they do have internship positions available. However, I receive a one-in-a-million replies and mostly it redirects me to the university admissions page. Consistent e-mailing might be regarded as spam bombing What do you think is the best way to contact professors politely to ask for research internships?
RESPONSE A: As a recipient of many emails from prospective students and postdocs, the one thing that doesn't make me automatically recycle an email is a specific mention of my research or some connection with a work colleague. In my mind it's showing the applicant is interested in working in my group, and not interested in just working. I get a lot of emails from international students and most of these appear to be along the lines of "I want a job". I want the best folks in my group (most engaged, hard working, willing to learn, excellent communicators, etc.) So I would suggest including a couple of lines of your connection to the professors you are interested in working with - "my basket-weaving professor Dr G spoke highly of your work", "I am interested in research using rectangular paper, such as described in your 2014 paper on origami, and would like to ask if you have any openings for a research internship", etc.
RESPONSE B: Was in a similar position to yourself, and I was advised to attach my CV - that helped a bunch. That way the PI you're contacting has a better idea of who you are and what you've done compared to a few generic sentences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: response from those I asked (maybe because it was at the tail end of winter break?) but ultimately, they all agreed with one asking I send them a reminder a few days before the deadline. Since then, I have only received 1 and the application is due in 2 days. I sent the two individuals I haven’t received the letter from a gentle reminder / thank you to see what’s going on, and literally, no response from either. I have good relationships with these individuals and they’ve always expressed to me that they would be happy to write me letters of recommendation for jobs, grad school, whatever. I’m feeling kinda hurt to be honest, I’ve worked (and am currently working for) for these people who both applauded me for being a good employee. What do I do? It’s definitely too short of notice to find 2 replacements. It’s also making me really worried about getting my letters of rec for grad school applications later this year, which, again, they all know I’ll be requesting them in the fall.
RESPONSE A: My research advisor submitted his letters for grad school the day before it was due and another letter writer submitted his hours before it was due. It’s stressful but they likely haven’t forgotten about the deadline
RESPONSE B: I remember being an undergrad stressing about my professors not submitting their letters until the last minute. I also know that, as a professor now, I tend to triage things and don't work on letters until a day or two before they are due. I know I'm not the only one in that boat. So far, you're doing everything right. If you'd like, send a final email the day the letters are due early in the afternoon with a final reminder that the letter is due that day. I know on my end that I would understand a student feeling that sense of urgency under the circumstances. Whereas programs may be unwilling to consider your application if you submit materials late, they are generally more understanding of professors submitting letters of recommendation late. After all, you can't control when a letter writer submits their letter of rec. I both empathize with the stress you feel, and want to assure you that things are likely to be fine.
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.