label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B
|
POST: Is the job market really that bad? I was talking to a post-doc today (in STEM) and he said there can be over 300 applicants for a single tenure track position. Is this true? I know it's not anything like admissions but isn't that a less than 1% acceptance rate? Apart from high impact publications, what can you do to improve your chances if this is the case?
RESPONSE A: Depends on the field really. I’m am currently in a small town with a relatively large university that has trouble filling certain spots
RESPONSE B: Perhaps the "STEM" grouping is useful in some contexts, but I don't think this is one of them. Your field (or perhaps subfield) will play a role, and I suspect the institution you apply to will also play a large role. The high-tier places probably get more applications. My department (Biostatistics) is in a low R1, and between two positions we had just over 40 applications, of which about 12 were either incomplete or clearly unqualified.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: pharma company - which should I take?
RESPONSE A: Assuming the internship is for a lab type position. I did a STEM PhD then moved to consulting then big pharma, although on the commercial/business analytics side. So not exactly relevant to your case, but a PhD is not needed on the commercial side. I would really hesitate to enter PhD as it will severely narrow your career choices to certain positions, whereas working in big pharma directly will not. You also have to think about the opportunity cost: PhD takes a long time and you can advance several levels in pharma by that time. Also it is hard to get offers in pharma out of academia, you may not be able to get that type of internship offer later after your PhD. Personally I’d take the internship in your situation
RESPONSE B: Some things to think about: 1. Is your potential PhD supervisor internationally well known and someone who is connected both in academe and industry? It sounds like it. Getting a PhD from this person would be far more beneficial to your career than working a low paid / entry level job. 2. Maybe it's just me but given your track record of doing an honors degree and having publications already even if you aren't first author and only being offered a 'low paying / entry level internship' is more than kind of insulting. If you were to go out with a CS degree and get a job offer like that you'd be insulted, no doubt. Why accept it because it's pharma? Full disclosure, I'm a Yank that did a 3 year postdoc at ANU. My research was in the earth sciences but I've spent the last 20 years in the tech sector. Just as a bit of advice, if, when you're done with your PhD you decide the academic life isn't for you and you'd rather be in industry, make it clear that you aren't just interviewing for jobs so that you can eat while you wait for that academic job to show up. Trust me, I've interviewed people like this and generally it's pretty clear when their heart isn't in to it and they're just looking for a way to get back to an academic environment.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Following my postdoc turned PI into grad school? My situation is kind of weird. The postdoc in my current lab recently got a position in University of Dundee in Scotland as a PI/assistant professor and will be opening his own lab, and he asked me (a 4th year undergrad) to join him as a PhD student once I graduate. The school is great, the research i will be doing is amazing, and everything just seems a little too good... My question is: is it frequent for students to follow their postdocs/PIs/mentors like this? Does it look bad for other positions down the line? is there something I should be wary of?
RESPONSE A: Is this person moving to the UK from elsewhere? I think they might find UK recruitment laws come as a bit of a surprise; they can't just appoint you to a PhD unless you are planning on self funding.
RESPONSE B: The biggest thing for you to think about is whether you want to be in a lab with someone in their first year as a faculty member. There are advantages: You will likely be his only grad student, and he will be highly motivated to get work published, so you will have a lot of his attention. However, this can also be a stressful environment to be in. He'll also just be learning how to be an effective supervisor, which takes time, and in the meantime you won't have more senior grad students in your lab to turn to for advice. Moreover, because he's so junior, he doesn't have as established of a name/reputation yet which can make things more difficult for you when you're applying for opportunities down the line. One thing you might think about is seeing whether there is a more established researcher at the university that the postdoc plans on collaborating with that may be able to be a co-supervisor for you. Having someone more established in your corner (even if they have less time/energy for you) can help overcome some of the stumbling blocks of working with someone that's just starting out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Feels like I've lost hours googling locations of publishing companies Elsevier is where again? And why doesn't it say in the book I'm trying to cite? And which one of the freaking Springer publishing companies do I need to cite? Are they in Wiesbaden or Berlin? Anyone else? What else are you googling constantly - or feels like that?
RESPONSE A: Are you sure you even need to do this? For example, the APA (https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/publisher-locations-in-book-references) and the AMA (https://amastyleinsider.com/2020/05/01/where-in-the-world-is-the-publishers-location/) have both dropped publisher location in their latest style manuals.
RESPONSE B: Even if it's nominally the same publishing house, different books might be published by different branches/locations. If, for whatever reason, you really require that information, you can always just put the name of the book into Google and either get a full citation from Scholar or follow to the entry on publisher's website which should give you all that info too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Feels like I've lost hours googling locations of publishing companies Elsevier is where again? And why doesn't it say in the book I'm trying to cite? And which one of the freaking Springer publishing companies do I need to cite? Are they in Wiesbaden or Berlin? Anyone else? What else are you googling constantly - or feels like that?
RESPONSE A: Are you sure you even need to do this? For example, the APA (https://apastyle.apa.org/blog/publisher-locations-in-book-references) and the AMA (https://amastyleinsider.com/2020/05/01/where-in-the-world-is-the-publishers-location/) have both dropped publisher location in their latest style manuals.
RESPONSE B: the referencing guidelines are waaay outdated, they were made for a time when it was hard to access those books/papers, now a doi number should be sufficient to cite something.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Feels like I've lost hours googling locations of publishing companies Elsevier is where again? And why doesn't it say in the book I'm trying to cite? And which one of the freaking Springer publishing companies do I need to cite? Are they in Wiesbaden or Berlin? Anyone else? What else are you googling constantly - or feels like that?
RESPONSE A: When in doubt, just say they are in New York. Everybody's got an office in New York. ;-)
RESPONSE B: I just download the citation file from the entry on my university library's website and import it to Zotero. It takes minimal editing on my end to clean up all the info and will generate citations for me :)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Feels like I've lost hours googling locations of publishing companies Elsevier is where again? And why doesn't it say in the book I'm trying to cite? And which one of the freaking Springer publishing companies do I need to cite? Are they in Wiesbaden or Berlin? Anyone else? What else are you googling constantly - or feels like that?
RESPONSE A: Even if it's nominally the same publishing house, different books might be published by different branches/locations. If, for whatever reason, you really require that information, you can always just put the name of the book into Google and either get a full citation from Scholar or follow to the entry on publisher's website which should give you all that info too.
RESPONSE B: When in doubt, just say they are in New York. Everybody's got an office in New York. ;-)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Feels like I've lost hours googling locations of publishing companies Elsevier is where again? And why doesn't it say in the book I'm trying to cite? And which one of the freaking Springer publishing companies do I need to cite? Are they in Wiesbaden or Berlin? Anyone else? What else are you googling constantly - or feels like that?
RESPONSE A: the referencing guidelines are waaay outdated, they were made for a time when it was hard to access those books/papers, now a doi number should be sufficient to cite something.
RESPONSE B: When in doubt, just say they are in New York. Everybody's got an office in New York. ;-)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Proper etiquette for dropping out Hi all! For the first time in my academic endeavors, I am deciding to drop out of a graduate program because “life” and am experiencing feelings of guilt and anxiety. Is there a formal, professional way to go about dropping out of a master’s program without burning bridges? Will this reflect poorly on me if I decide to pursue further education in the future? Will my professors hate me? What kind of information should I vs should I not include when I let my professors know? Any and all advice is greatly appreciated!
RESPONSE A: I’d give them each a handwritten thank you card, focused on how much you appreciate specifics of how they taught you, and how you hope to someday enjoy a position that allows you to return to academic pursuits. Nobody does handwritten cards anymore, and for an older generation, they go a very long way. Avoids burning bridges.
RESPONSE B: I had a student drop out a few years ago. I was much more concerned about them than anything else. And it's not because I'm some sort of selfless compassionate type (although, I like to think that I'm a decent guy). Grad students tend to be a lot of work and if you lose one, as long as they're not leaving because they hate you or the program or some other negative reason, then it ultimately just means less work. Most people would prefer less work (under the right circumstances), so it's often not a bad thing for the professor. I do agree with the other reply that sending them a nice thank-you note or email explaining why you're leaving and wishing them well would be very nice.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Proper etiquette for dropping out Hi all! For the first time in my academic endeavors, I am deciding to drop out of a graduate program because “life” and am experiencing feelings of guilt and anxiety. Is there a formal, professional way to go about dropping out of a master’s program without burning bridges? Will this reflect poorly on me if I decide to pursue further education in the future? Will my professors hate me? What kind of information should I vs should I not include when I let my professors know? Any and all advice is greatly appreciated!
RESPONSE A: I had a student drop out a few years ago. I was much more concerned about them than anything else. And it's not because I'm some sort of selfless compassionate type (although, I like to think that I'm a decent guy). Grad students tend to be a lot of work and if you lose one, as long as they're not leaving because they hate you or the program or some other negative reason, then it ultimately just means less work. Most people would prefer less work (under the right circumstances), so it's often not a bad thing for the professor. I do agree with the other reply that sending them a nice thank-you note or email explaining why you're leaving and wishing them well would be very nice.
RESPONSE B: What bridges? These people will barely remember you come 2 years later, they see hundreds of students a year.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Proper etiquette for dropping out Hi all! For the first time in my academic endeavors, I am deciding to drop out of a graduate program because “life” and am experiencing feelings of guilt and anxiety. Is there a formal, professional way to go about dropping out of a master’s program without burning bridges? Will this reflect poorly on me if I decide to pursue further education in the future? Will my professors hate me? What kind of information should I vs should I not include when I let my professors know? Any and all advice is greatly appreciated!
RESPONSE A: I’m not sure how far along you are but don’t drop out, see if you can take a deferral. It might only be a couple of months, but “life” might be better in a couple of months, if not you can withdraw. BTW I’m speaking from personal experience.
RESPONSE B: No bridges to burn, but I do tend to take a much closer look at students with a history of dropping out during admissions. It’s not exactly a red flag, but there needs to be a solid reason to mitigate the risk of taking on a student with a history of dropping out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: the first time in my academic endeavors, I am deciding to drop out of a graduate program because “life” and am experiencing feelings of guilt and anxiety. Is there a formal, professional way to go about dropping out of a master’s program without burning bridges? Will this reflect poorly on me if I decide to pursue further education in the future? Will my professors hate me? What kind of information should I vs should I not include when I let my professors know? Any and all advice is greatly appreciated!
RESPONSE A: I’m not sure how far along you are but don’t drop out, see if you can take a deferral. It might only be a couple of months, but “life” might be better in a couple of months, if not you can withdraw. BTW I’m speaking from personal experience.
RESPONSE B: I don't really know but before yesterday, I withdrew from my semester when I had lovely proffessors So, the ones I could meet with I told them about it so that they don't keep my name in attendance, I also mentioned briefly that is it due to personal matters and I have thought about this choice of mine very well. Not to mention, thanked them for being, as I said before, truly one of the best bunch of proffessors that I had the pleasure of learning from and told them I wish I'd be put in their classes once again in the future! The ones who weren't on campus I simply recited what I said above to them in an email. Also, if you have any kind of projects don't forget to tell your classmates so that they can accomodate your previous role and if you liked them you could thank them too for the semster. Mine were great too I hope I won't regret my decision on the long run. Other than that and your family, you did well. Maybe you could give a heads up to your friends if you meet usually or they are in your major/share same classes. But I believe that if they don't it's better to keep quite tell some time later so that they don't get worried about you.. Dunno those are my thoughts do whatever you feel comfortable with. And good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: working without working every day? I'm a graduate student in wet lab STEM. The nature of my experiments means that every day I'm not working is a day I **could** be working and making progress. Five years ago as a tech I was more capable of working 7 days a week, but I'm struggling now. I don't know if it was because I was making more money then and could afford to pay for things that would make my life easier (takeout, laundry services) or if it's just that I'm getting older. There are postdocs in the lab that work 7 days a week, and I'm really trying but it's eating away at my mental and physical health. I understand that there are periods of time where you might have to push harder than others, but it feels like that's been never ending (the lab is moving in a few months so I'm running out of time for experiments). I tell myself that I need one day off a week, but when my advisor says, "You just need a few good days!" I push myself to do more and it never works out well for me. I spent this past weekend physically ill and feeling guilty for losing days. At this point I don't know if the problem is me. If it is, then it seems like I shouldn't plan for a postdoc or even to stay in lab work at all. :( Thanks all.
RESPONSE A: Nobody should be working 7 days a week. Especially not for an academic stipend. This is exactly what academic and grad worker unions are supposed to be for.
RESPONSE B: Same boat with you too. But I’m postdoc. I think my body is literally refusing working during weekends unless I scare myself with another hard deadline … They say work smart. But the fact is that I don’t see my work quality is presentable within 40 hr limit. I see really capable people they can use every minute meaningfully. Ex: quickly re-concentrate within minutes in between reading, experiments, and meetings. Use scattered time to read paper, reply emails …etc. I didn’t even push myself that hard in my grad school. Maybe that’s why 😂
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: out, laundry services) or if it's just that I'm getting older. There are postdocs in the lab that work 7 days a week, and I'm really trying but it's eating away at my mental and physical health. I understand that there are periods of time where you might have to push harder than others, but it feels like that's been never ending (the lab is moving in a few months so I'm running out of time for experiments). I tell myself that I need one day off a week, but when my advisor says, "You just need a few good days!" I push myself to do more and it never works out well for me. I spent this past weekend physically ill and feeling guilty for losing days. At this point I don't know if the problem is me. If it is, then it seems like I shouldn't plan for a postdoc or even to stay in lab work at all. :( Thanks all.
RESPONSE A: The language you are using is of "pushing" and thinking in rigid units of 7. I think both are working against you. In my experience, there are ways to accomplish something toward a large goal every day that don't involve pushing. If it's a large project, I think it's a good to keep momentum going by doing *something* on the project every day. You are not slaying a dragon, you are walking a dog. My approach, when I was writing my dissertation, was simply to declare the time between breakfast and lunch focused work time. Most days, I would also continue after lunch, but some days when I felt like taking a break, I wouldn't work after lunch. Since I was (and you are) a grad student and normal business calendar days (ie. weekdays and weekends) are mostly irrelevant and purely artificial anyway. So take an afternoon or two off when you feel like it. Assuming the project works still, stay late Sunday, take Monday afternoon. Try to come up with a slow *and* steady strategy that works for you.
RESPONSE B: Nobody should be working 7 days a week. Especially not for an academic stipend. This is exactly what academic and grad worker unions are supposed to be for.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can you be successful working without working every day? I'm a graduate student in wet lab STEM. The nature of my experiments means that every day I'm not working is a day I **could** be working and making progress. Five years ago as a tech I was more capable of working 7 days a week, but I'm struggling now. I don't know if it was because I was making more money then and could afford to pay for things that would make my life easier (takeout, laundry services) or if it's just that I'm getting older. There are postdocs in the lab that work 7 days a week, and I'm really trying but it's eating away at my mental and physical health. I understand that there are periods of time where you might have to push harder than others, but it feels like that's been never ending (the lab is moving in a few months so I'm running out of time for experiments). I tell myself that I need one day off a week, but when my advisor says, "You just need a few good days!" I push myself to do more and it never works out well for me. I spent this past weekend physically ill and feeling guilty for losing days. At this point I don't know if the problem is me. If it is, then it seems like I shouldn't plan for a postdoc or even to stay in lab work at all. :( Thanks all.
RESPONSE A: Nobody should be working 7 days a week. Especially not for an academic stipend. This is exactly what academic and grad worker unions are supposed to be for.
RESPONSE B: Honestly I'm in the same boat as you and I'm dying
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to approach a PhD I bailed on in a resume? About eighteen months ago I posted on here about a pretty terrible situation with my PhD. I'm pretty sure the supervisor I had was mentally ill and needed some serious treatment. I won't go into too much detail (maybe I will somewhere else, because the whole thing is pretty surreal honestly) but my supervisor was suspended for some lengthy period for being abusive. I wanted out of there and was thinking of quitting academia and becoming a fisherman or something when I got an email from an academic who had found my resume on line and wanted me to do a PhD with him at one of the top universities in the world, with one of the leading groups in the field. I've been here over a year now and it's been fantastic, completely different experience from before and I've really lucked out. The problem I'm now facing is that I'm applying for things that require my resume, and I don't know what to write for that period of time. Is it better to say that I dropped one PhD to go to another, to say something else or to hide it completely? How negatively will it be viewed? When I spoke to my now supervisor I just said that things weren't working out and tried to be pretty diplomatic about it, but I could do that in person. I'm not sure how to write a very brief part about it
RESPONSE A: It could be listed as completed course work, or it could be ABD (the latter which might not be the greatest to list on a c.v.). Or you may have been able to transfer old courses to the new PhD program, in which case they would be course work under the aegis of your current degree progress. Or, if you're just happy now in a new program, you could say, XYZ in progress and just list other coursework as though it were prep or on your own.
RESPONSE B: "After my supervisor at my prior phd program left the position I decided to move to another program where I would be able to obtain mentorship more aligned with my research interests"
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: , and I do believe her interest in education is sincere, but she also has social anxiety issues and occasional bouts with depression that have interfered with her academics. It's difficult to imagine her interacting with a classroom of students every day. I'm not convinced that she's suited for teaching as a profession, and I feel a letter that speaks only to her positive attributes would be misleading. At the same time, I don't know her well enough to say that she couldn't rise to the challenge, and I don't want to be responsible for denying her at least the opportunity to give it a try. I'm not sure what other career options she has. I would appreciate any thoughts or advice on this dilemma, any suggestions for writing a letter that doesn't paint her in an unrealistic light, but also won't immediately torpedo her chances at being accepted.
RESPONSE A: > I'm not convinced that she's suited for teaching as a profession, and I feel a letter that speaks only to her positive attributes would be misleading. Then it sounds like you shouldn't be writing a letter of recommendation for her. Listen, your duty is to your students, not their potential employers. You either need to inform her you can no longer fulfill your duty (which is a perfectly acceptable thing to do), or bite the bullet and stick to the positives. Look at her CV or ask her for a quick interview if you need help. Your university's office that aids with student employment should have resources to help guide you through this process. Above all, don't sabotage a student's career because you're too embarrassed to say, no, to them. As a reminder, a student's mental health history (health history in general) is protected by their right to privacy. You could be sued for divulging such information in a letter of recommendation were it come to light. Be careful.
RESPONSE B: Maybe you should sit her down and talk these things through with her. You might be able to provide some more useful perspective on alternate directions where she might be far more successful, saving her many wasted years. And still offer to write as good a letter as you can, if she still wants to go in that direction.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: , but she also has social anxiety issues and occasional bouts with depression that have interfered with her academics. It's difficult to imagine her interacting with a classroom of students every day. I'm not convinced that she's suited for teaching as a profession, and I feel a letter that speaks only to her positive attributes would be misleading. At the same time, I don't know her well enough to say that she couldn't rise to the challenge, and I don't want to be responsible for denying her at least the opportunity to give it a try. I'm not sure what other career options she has. I would appreciate any thoughts or advice on this dilemma, any suggestions for writing a letter that doesn't paint her in an unrealistic light, but also won't immediately torpedo her chances at being accepted.
RESPONSE A: > I'm not convinced that she's suited for teaching as a profession, and I feel a letter that speaks only to her positive attributes would be misleading. Then it sounds like you shouldn't be writing a letter of recommendation for her. Listen, your duty is to your students, not their potential employers. You either need to inform her you can no longer fulfill your duty (which is a perfectly acceptable thing to do), or bite the bullet and stick to the positives. Look at her CV or ask her for a quick interview if you need help. Your university's office that aids with student employment should have resources to help guide you through this process. Above all, don't sabotage a student's career because you're too embarrassed to say, no, to them. As a reminder, a student's mental health history (health history in general) is protected by their right to privacy. You could be sued for divulging such information in a letter of recommendation were it come to light. Be careful.
RESPONSE B: Be very factual--describe how you know the student, for how long, what program she is in, etc. They say something along the lines of, " Student's biggest strength is that she ...(is very smart, was dedicated to completing her masters dissertation, etc)" That way you are not being misleading, but also do emphasize her biggest strength.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: to write a reference letter for her application to a teacher training school. I agreed because I'm her only real option; she hasn't interacted much with other members of staff over the last year. She's plenty smart and her grades are not terrible, and I do believe her interest in education is sincere, but she also has social anxiety issues and occasional bouts with depression that have interfered with her academics. It's difficult to imagine her interacting with a classroom of students every day. I'm not convinced that she's suited for teaching as a profession, and I feel a letter that speaks only to her positive attributes would be misleading. At the same time, I don't know her well enough to say that she couldn't rise to the challenge, and I don't want to be responsible for denying her at least the opportunity to give it a try. I'm not sure what other career options she has. I would appreciate any thoughts or advice on this dilemma, any suggestions for writing a letter that doesn't paint her in an unrealistic light, but also won't immediately torpedo her chances at being accepted.
RESPONSE A: If you don't feel like you are able to write a *strong* letter, then don't accept the request. You are not actually doing her a favor by writing an okay letter. In your case, I would ask her to meet in person because you feel the need to. And if she avoids that, it is her fault. You are not her parent.
RESPONSE B: > She's plenty smart and her grades are not terrible, and I do believe her interest in education is sincere, but she also has social anxiety issues and occasional bouts with depression that have interfered with her academics. Depression and anxiety are conditions that give her additional challenges. The fact that she has made it this far despite those challenges means she is dedicated. I would write her a positive letter (even if it's not a glowing review). > It's difficult to imagine her interacting with a classroom of students every day. But you're not recommending her for a teaching job right now - you're recommending her for a teacher training school. Maybe that's just what she needs?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is 55 too old to start a PhD? UK / Europe I've been working in industry a long time, just done an MSc in robotics area. I'm looking for something interesting in image processing, neural networks etc. I've no experience in it though. My friends are sceptical, mostly because we're all old. Regards,
RESPONSE A: No you are not too old, there are plenty of older people studying. I'm a UK academic and we have a few students in their 40s and 50s. If you're interested, and want to put the work in, you're in the same position as everyone else. That said I'd strongly consider what your motivations are re the PhD. It's a big investment, a huge opportunity cost.
RESPONSE B: One of my colleagues in grad school is about 48 years old and he started his PhD 3 years ago. If you have the motivation for research then go for it. Edit. Just ask yourself what you want to do next. Because it takes about 5 years or more to get a degree.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is 55 too old to start a PhD? UK / Europe I've been working in industry a long time, just done an MSc in robotics area. I'm looking for something interesting in image processing, neural networks etc. I've no experience in it though. My friends are sceptical, mostly because we're all old. Regards,
RESPONSE A: Admittance is based on the application and merits. I've had two PhD candidate colleagues who were in their 50s and 60s respectively. Both completed their PhDs, I might add.
RESPONSE B: No you are not too old, there are plenty of older people studying. I'm a UK academic and we have a few students in their 40s and 50s. If you're interested, and want to put the work in, you're in the same position as everyone else. That said I'd strongly consider what your motivations are re the PhD. It's a big investment, a huge opportunity cost.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is 55 too old to start a PhD? UK / Europe I've been working in industry a long time, just done an MSc in robotics area. I'm looking for something interesting in image processing, neural networks etc. I've no experience in it though. My friends are sceptical, mostly because we're all old. Regards,
RESPONSE A: If you're financially secure and want the PhD for its own sake, then go for it! It's tough but barring any major health problems, I don't think age would be a huge obstacle when it comes to completing the degree itself. If you're looking to start a full-time academic career after the PhD, that's a much tougher ask...even in fields with a reasonably healthy job market, most departments will prefer to hire a junior prof in their late 20s / early 30s rather than someone who is 60. But I do know someone who landed a tenure-track position at a research university in their early 50s, so it's not impossible.
RESPONSE B: No problem, just don't expect it to increase your earning prospects.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is 55 too old to start a PhD? UK / Europe I've been working in industry a long time, just done an MSc in robotics area. I'm looking for something interesting in image processing, neural networks etc. I've no experience in it though. My friends are sceptical, mostly because we're all old. Regards,
RESPONSE A: If you're financially secure and want the PhD for its own sake, then go for it! It's tough but barring any major health problems, I don't think age would be a huge obstacle when it comes to completing the degree itself. If you're looking to start a full-time academic career after the PhD, that's a much tougher ask...even in fields with a reasonably healthy job market, most departments will prefer to hire a junior prof in their late 20s / early 30s rather than someone who is 60. But I do know someone who landed a tenure-track position at a research university in their early 50s, so it's not impossible.
RESPONSE B: Income and career issues aside, I think the success of the PhD largely depends on the attitude of both the student and the supervisor? I've seen both cases where it works well and when it doesn't. It works well when the student adopts a learning attitude, and the supervisor is either a) older/more experienced than the student or b) younger but knows how manage the older students' learning style.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: than five years old they're not sure they can "do anything"). My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. :(
RESPONSE A: > I've always been interested in literature and the idea of researching and teaching excites me. I love school and love knowledge. I have spoken to some professors about ideas and possible bigger projects and they're all so encouraging. One professor was pleased on my understanding on semiotics and narratology, particularly in non-western folklore. I'm sorry, but I feel an obligation to warn you that the English Literature job market is easily among the worst of all humanities job markets. It's frankly a bit worrying that faculty aren't telling you the unvarnished truth about it. Judging on this post, you're not independently wealthy, which means that you won't have structural advantages that a lot of PhD students do have. > My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. No, you're not too old to start. I think it's worth your while to try to dispute the poor marks you received. It is likely in your interest to try to find a **funded** MA program.
RESPONSE B: I’m 31 (turning 32 in a few months) and I’m applying for PhD programs this fall. You never know unless you try. Go for it and good luck! Edit: If you check out my recent post on r/gradschool, you’ll see that I’m sort of in the same boat as you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: s and *then* ask. Others have suggested I ask for a medical grievance from the student records/financial aid office (tried, they said considering the case is more than five years old they're not sure they can "do anything"). My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. :(
RESPONSE A: > I've always been interested in literature and the idea of researching and teaching excites me. I love school and love knowledge. I have spoken to some professors about ideas and possible bigger projects and they're all so encouraging. One professor was pleased on my understanding on semiotics and narratology, particularly in non-western folklore. I'm sorry, but I feel an obligation to warn you that the English Literature job market is easily among the worst of all humanities job markets. It's frankly a bit worrying that faculty aren't telling you the unvarnished truth about it. Judging on this post, you're not independently wealthy, which means that you won't have structural advantages that a lot of PhD students do have. > My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. No, you're not too old to start. I think it's worth your while to try to dispute the poor marks you received. It is likely in your interest to try to find a **funded** MA program.
RESPONSE B: It might be hard to start of now and push further enough to get the Nobel prize, but research in general not that much hard really. Go for it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: s and *then* ask. Others have suggested I ask for a medical grievance from the student records/financial aid office (tried, they said considering the case is more than five years old they're not sure they can "do anything"). My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. :(
RESPONSE A: I got into my masters program at age 44...was 4 plus 1 program dual undergrad post grad classes for 1 year then on with grad classes
RESPONSE B: > I've always been interested in literature and the idea of researching and teaching excites me. I love school and love knowledge. I have spoken to some professors about ideas and possible bigger projects and they're all so encouraging. One professor was pleased on my understanding on semiotics and narratology, particularly in non-western folklore. I'm sorry, but I feel an obligation to warn you that the English Literature job market is easily among the worst of all humanities job markets. It's frankly a bit worrying that faculty aren't telling you the unvarnished truth about it. Judging on this post, you're not independently wealthy, which means that you won't have structural advantages that a lot of PhD students do have. > My question is this: how screwed am I? Is there no hope for me? And is 28-30 too old to begin a PhD? What do you guys suggest upon reading this? Part of me is excited to go back to school but I'm kicking myself that the younger me couldn't have thought ahead and covered all bases before dropping out of school. I'm freaking out whenever I think of this. No, you're not too old to start. I think it's worth your while to try to dispute the poor marks you received. It is likely in your interest to try to find a **funded** MA program.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Why hasn’t the #MeToo Movement caught up with Academia yet? With Dr. Ford’s riveting testimony today (regardless of your political affiliation, no one can deny her courage to speak), it left me thinking: Why hasn’t the ‘#MeToo’ movement caught on with the academic world? In my university there are tons of rumors of “that professor” swirling and when we had an incident go public last year, admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug and offered the faculty a retirement package- keeping status, benefits, pension - etc. Whats the deal?
RESPONSE A: > admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug I believe you answered a large part yourself. University administrators are so afraid of the hit to their reputation (which directly equals money) that they would prefer to keep it quiet out of self-preservation rather than seek justice and bad publicity for someone who is associated with the university.
RESPONSE B: Publicity is bad for the institution—hurts with faculty recruitment and possibly rankings, which are largely based on peer perception.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Why hasn’t the #MeToo Movement caught up with Academia yet? With Dr. Ford’s riveting testimony today (regardless of your political affiliation, no one can deny her courage to speak), it left me thinking: Why hasn’t the ‘#MeToo’ movement caught on with the academic world? In my university there are tons of rumors of “that professor” swirling and when we had an incident go public last year, admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug and offered the faculty a retirement package- keeping status, benefits, pension - etc. Whats the deal?
RESPONSE A: There's this: https://theprofessorisin.com/2017/12/01/a-crowdsourced-survey-of-sexual-harassment-in-the-academy/ Was sad when a grad school friend pointed out an old colleague of ours was on it.
RESPONSE B: In entomology it's definitely here. Our national organization was one of the first to create and widely publicize a code of conduct for meetings. We have symposia on diversity and inclusion. We have an actual diversity and inclusion committee. There are events specifically for women to network. I actually feel really supported by my national organization.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Why hasn’t the #MeToo Movement caught up with Academia yet? With Dr. Ford’s riveting testimony today (regardless of your political affiliation, no one can deny her courage to speak), it left me thinking: Why hasn’t the ‘#MeToo’ movement caught on with the academic world? In my university there are tons of rumors of “that professor” swirling and when we had an incident go public last year, admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug and offered the faculty a retirement package- keeping status, benefits, pension - etc. Whats the deal?
RESPONSE A: A very senior scholar in my field had his lifetime membership from the society revoked.
RESPONSE B: There's this: https://theprofessorisin.com/2017/12/01/a-crowdsourced-survey-of-sexual-harassment-in-the-academy/ Was sad when a grad school friend pointed out an old colleague of ours was on it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Why hasn’t the #MeToo Movement caught up with Academia yet? With Dr. Ford’s riveting testimony today (regardless of your political affiliation, no one can deny her courage to speak), it left me thinking: Why hasn’t the ‘#MeToo’ movement caught on with the academic world? In my university there are tons of rumors of “that professor” swirling and when we had an incident go public last year, admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug and offered the faculty a retirement package- keeping status, benefits, pension - etc. Whats the deal?
RESPONSE A: There's this: https://theprofessorisin.com/2017/12/01/a-crowdsourced-survey-of-sexual-harassment-in-the-academy/ Was sad when a grad school friend pointed out an old colleague of ours was on it.
RESPONSE B: Publicity is bad for the institution—hurts with faculty recruitment and possibly rankings, which are largely based on peer perception.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Why hasn’t the #MeToo Movement caught up with Academia yet? With Dr. Ford’s riveting testimony today (regardless of your political affiliation, no one can deny her courage to speak), it left me thinking: Why hasn’t the ‘#MeToo’ movement caught on with the academic world? In my university there are tons of rumors of “that professor” swirling and when we had an incident go public last year, admin did their hardest to sweep it under the rug and offered the faculty a retirement package- keeping status, benefits, pension - etc. Whats the deal?
RESPONSE A: As a student currently attending USC (SoCal), aspects of the #MeToo movement are definitely hitting the campus- to the point where our current University President is stepping down. There was the very large (at least 200+) case of the Gynecologist at the University Health Center who physically violated, verbally harassed, and just abused the crap out of his position for over several years. Then there was the PhD advisor and professor who sexually harassed his advisee to the point where she felt terrified to attend a conference she was going to present at. There have been other circumstances, so it is approaching a boiling point, imo.
RESPONSE B: My guess is because it might shine a light to other abuses of power that occur in academia because of how academic advancement and tenure works. I’ve heard stories of students having their publications delayed by years or even taken off the authorship list because the PI has someone else repeat the experiment or even professors making non standard modifications to a building’s floor plans so they didn’t have to walk so far from their office to their lab.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is there less "ageism" in academia (computer science) compared to silicon valley? https://www.businessinsider.com/we-hire-old-people-ageism-tech-inudstry-2021-8 It seems ageism is quite rampant in silicon valley? But how is it in academia? Especially in the computer science department when deciding whom to hire for tenure track position or whether to grant tenure to the tt track faculty or when deciding whom to admit for the competitive phd program.
RESPONSE A: I have seen ageism in academia. I was once on a search committee and the most qualified candidate (by a long shot) was older than the rest. She didn't even get an interview because: "I'm not sure she'd be able to adapt, at this point in her career" "I'm not sure she'd react well to attempts to mentor her" Ironically, it was the oldest, tenured members of the search committee who were most ageist. the pre-tenure faculty all wanted to interview her. I called them out on it, and I was basically told to never suggest such a thing, especially by email, for legal reasons.
RESPONSE B: IME, there's less ageism in academia ***if*** you can show that you can teach and do research. I spent the first few decades of my career in industry, and shifted over to be a "professor of practice" later on. I had teaching and research experience already (including publishing), which probably made this doable at all. But man, the ageism pressure in industry climbs pretty fast and becomes un unrelenting. Note that I had done the management track, had started and run my own companies, etc., so I wasn't just bumping along in a "job" expecting promotions to come to me or whatever. Still the "up or out" pressure became intense, which is one reason I prepared and made the jump to academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is the best way of being in touch with the latest research in a new field? I'm in junior year in Psychology and am going to do an undergraduate thesis on the topic of 'Memory'. My supervisor advised me to read up on the literature and since I wanted to know what the state of the field was, I skimmed through 'The Oxford Handbook of Memory'. While it has good summaries, it was written in the year 2000. Should I search for review articles and read them or just pick up latest journal issues and see the latest papers written? I'm not sure what my plan of action should be.
RESPONSE A: Probably not helpful in the short-term, but for me the best way of staying in-touch with the latest research is to go to conferences. In my field, by the time something is actually published, it has been 1-2 years and people have moved on to other things. Conferences are chances to get brief, high-density surveys of what people are doing *this year*.
RESPONSE B: If you're in physics or mathematics, the arXiv gets most preprints. You can set up mail alerts to show you the most recent stuff: here's the link for current recent preprints in my field (experimental high energy physics).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: s as possible to increase the chance of having someone eventually take you. p.s. I'm currently looking into bio labs (biophysics/computational biology/bioinformatics). But I'm also interested in applying to photonics and physics labs. Any insights would be greatly appreciated!!
RESPONSE A: > so I'm guessing like maybe reading 2 of their most recent papers thoroughly?? Skimming is fine. The goal here is not to have deep comprehension and novel ideas to contribute - as a first year, that's simply not going to happen and everyone knows it and that's totally fine. The goal is to show that a) you have put a little bit of thought into what you're interested in doing in a job and why, and b) you were willing to put in more than zero effort. For (a), you *can* express interest in the scientific end goals of their work, but it's also entirely reasonable (and probably more realistic) to form your interests around developing skills in the type of work they do. So for example, you mentioned a photonics lab. You're a first year, I know you're not going to have anything amazing to say about what advanced physics research you can do by creating a Bose Einstein condensate or whatever people are doing these days. But you *can* say "That sounds super cool, when I looked at your paper / your website I saw that you are combining material science with photonics and I really enjoyed learning both of those things in <course> because of <reason>. I found the hands-on high-precision work in our lab courses really suited me so I would really like a chance to work here."
RESPONSE B: If you're looking to do research at your university you can always stop by (I guess not now with COVID) their office or stick around after class to talk to them. Definitely read a few papers if you can. I know it was difficult in the beginning to understand all the jargon in the papers, so try a few easier/shorter ones. And ask other professors for recommendations/introductions to the professors you want to work with. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: even after we went through the atmospheric chemistry of air pollution and the input precursors from automotive emissions. This was a graduating senior undergrad. At a highly ranked R1 university. He ended up dropping the class later and called me a liberal shill. (I'm actually registered no party preference). Politically, I feel like the engineering students at my school generally lean slightly conservative or libertarian, but not by much and there are also a lot of politically liberal engineers as well (in the U.S. sense). In general, **my student's political views have not strongly affected how students learn my material**, but I feel like in other fields this can be a significant factor. Do you have any experience / stories about how your material is filtered by a student's political views?
RESPONSE A: I'm a MD/PhD student, not an instructor, but was having a conversation with an engineer who told me that CO2 emissions were just as bad from nuclear power plants as from fossil fuel burning ones so it didnt make sense to switch. He also implied climate change wasnt real. In my field (medicine and physiology) I've had fellow students and colleagues suggest things like astrology as having made valid predictions and so they hold them up as equivalent to science. I feel the problem is not that one's political beliefs are coloring feelings about topic, but that there's a larger disbelief in or misunderstanding of concepts in science in general. The political bent makes it too emotional to overcome with just education sometimes (see: evolution). Also, in medical research, I feel the grant writing process forces us to over-inflate what we believe about our own data. That engineer obviously didnt understand how nuclear fission worked. The medical students I've talked to (and this is true in medical professionals) have some superstitions that they hold barring any evidence. Individually it might not be an issue but at population levels, these misunderstandings start to have serious effects. Op, have you had any experiences with students where you've overcome their biases? Is it something we can fix?
RESPONSE B: Yes, science, education, and compassion now = libtard cucks. What a time to be alive.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: / stories about how your material is filtered by a student's political views?
RESPONSE A: I enjoy the way my high school biology teacher taught evolution. He said "some of you may not believe in evolution, or believe in other aspects of creation, but I am teaching you the theory of evolution by natural selection, and the supporting evidence and that is what you will be tested on. So even if you do not agree with it, you are required to learn it and answer questions on it based off of what is in the text book and what I teach in class." ​ So I always liked that he tried to nip it in the bud to prevent controversy overall. While it isn't the best at trying to convince people who doubt the facts in politically charged areas, it allows you to spend time focusing on teaching the material to those who want to learn without being dragged into political arguments. ​
RESPONSE B: I'm a MD/PhD student, not an instructor, but was having a conversation with an engineer who told me that CO2 emissions were just as bad from nuclear power plants as from fossil fuel burning ones so it didnt make sense to switch. He also implied climate change wasnt real. In my field (medicine and physiology) I've had fellow students and colleagues suggest things like astrology as having made valid predictions and so they hold them up as equivalent to science. I feel the problem is not that one's political beliefs are coloring feelings about topic, but that there's a larger disbelief in or misunderstanding of concepts in science in general. The political bent makes it too emotional to overcome with just education sometimes (see: evolution). Also, in medical research, I feel the grant writing process forces us to over-inflate what we believe about our own data. That engineer obviously didnt understand how nuclear fission worked. The medical students I've talked to (and this is true in medical professionals) have some superstitions that they hold barring any evidence. Individually it might not be an issue but at population levels, these misunderstandings start to have serious effects. Op, have you had any experiences with students where you've overcome their biases? Is it something we can fix?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'm actually registered no party preference). Politically, I feel like the engineering students at my school generally lean slightly conservative or libertarian, but not by much and there are also a lot of politically liberal engineers as well (in the U.S. sense). In general, **my student's political views have not strongly affected how students learn my material**, but I feel like in other fields this can be a significant factor. Do you have any experience / stories about how your material is filtered by a student's political views?
RESPONSE A: Absolutely. I’m a sociologist and teach Intro to Sociology. I’m in a red state and have many conservative students who physically balk at a lot of the material. There is a lot of pushback. These particular students don’t believe in inequality, privilege, unequal distributions of wealth, etc. even though we have the evidence and show them the data.
RESPONSE B: I'm a MD/PhD student, not an instructor, but was having a conversation with an engineer who told me that CO2 emissions were just as bad from nuclear power plants as from fossil fuel burning ones so it didnt make sense to switch. He also implied climate change wasnt real. In my field (medicine and physiology) I've had fellow students and colleagues suggest things like astrology as having made valid predictions and so they hold them up as equivalent to science. I feel the problem is not that one's political beliefs are coloring feelings about topic, but that there's a larger disbelief in or misunderstanding of concepts in science in general. The political bent makes it too emotional to overcome with just education sometimes (see: evolution). Also, in medical research, I feel the grant writing process forces us to over-inflate what we believe about our own data. That engineer obviously didnt understand how nuclear fission worked. The medical students I've talked to (and this is true in medical professionals) have some superstitions that they hold barring any evidence. Individually it might not be an issue but at population levels, these misunderstandings start to have serious effects. Op, have you had any experiences with students where you've overcome their biases? Is it something we can fix?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: ’ve been following The Guardian’s “Academics Anonymous” series for a while now, and it’s making me pretty pessimistic about staying in Academia. Here’s the latest “true tale from the academe” (so to speak): My toxic supervisor ruined my health – but my university did nothing. Ok, the author could be lying, could be an awful student or researcher, or whatever... but what gets me is the comments section. Right now there are about 200 comments, and everyone is saying the same thing: “Yeah. Exactly. That’s exactly how it is.” What's your experience??? Is academia basically "toxic"??
RESPONSE A: My personal experience is that it is not at all, but the hierarchical nature makes it easy for these kind of situations to occur, and it also seems like there are few consequences for this kind of behaviour.
RESPONSE B: So, I’m just finishing up my PhD in the social sciences and heading off to a TT job this fall. My advisor is great - we’ve definitely had our differences in the past, but I’ve never doubted that he genuinely has my best interest at heart. I think the same is true of maybe 80-90% of grad students I know. The problem is the other 10-20%. If you have a shitty advisor after a certain point in grad school (say, third year), it becomes impossible to leave them, and you have no recourse from the university. The other faculty in the dept wouldn’t be willing to work with you bc they don’t want to piss off your shitty advisor. I had a (brief) experience TAing for someone well known within my department as a sociopath. Just a terrible, terrible human. Midway through the semester, I went to the dept to be like, yo, can you get this guy to be less insane? And they just shrugged their shoulders. This is why I’m in favor of grad student unionization. I’d say that in my field, 80-90% of grad students don’t need a union. But the other 10-20% really, really do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is the most useful bash scripts/aliases/etc you have ever written to help with your work? e.g. automate renaming files, grab bibliography references, grab and aggregate new jobs from multiple websites?
RESPONSE A: One time I had 3 versions of 48 audio files (so 144 files) that I had to append silence to the front and back of and convert to a different file type. That was definitely the most time I’ve ever saved using a bash script.
RESPONSE B: It loads my project environment, changes directory to the root project directory and opens an ide with that directory already loaded. It's like 3 lines but instead I type 5 letters.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: a professor, STEM or not, and could describe what it’s like. I currently teach and tutor kids as a job and a side hustle, and I find teaching not necessarily fun but worthwhile as I am leaving a positive impact on the community. Also to those STEM professors, I was looking into teaching Physics partially because I’d love to do research. Is it a realistic option to do research while being a professor or is that only for the chairmen and high ranking people. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: It’s essential to do research as a professor, especially in STEM. But you can’t really plan an academic career by which particular university you’d like to have hire you. Academic jobs are highly competitive and usually require a great deal of flexibility in where you can find a position. Most are not hiring locals; they are national searches. That being said, being a professor is great. Working with students and in areas you love is deeply fulfilling. It’s hard, especially at the beginning. But it is satisfying and exciting work. But not for the faint of heart.
RESPONSE B: You're only in high school - you can have it in mind to be a professor, but it's way too early to entertain it seriously. Four years of undergrad, five or six of grad school, a few more postdoccing ... it's a long time away. And, if you've heard of a university, then your job is probably largely about research, and only somewhat secondarily about teaching. Texas A&M or Rice are going to hire physics professors foremostly on how well they bring in grant dollars. But once you're a professor at such a place, it's largely your graduate students and postdocs doing the research. You're teaching, servicing, and begging for money. And, of course, the academic job market doesn't work like you think of a place you'd like to work and apply there - you apply for every job you're remotely qualified for, then discover what continent you're going to be living on. America is big enough that one can effectively limit themselves to apply only in the US and still have some chance of finding a job, but I wouldn't advise it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Professor: pros and cons I am a high schooler from Texas that loves physics. I find it very interesting and would love to do something involving physics as a job. Something I and my parents have discussed is being a professor at a university- a couple in mind are Texas A&M and perhaps Rice. I was wondering if anyone here is a professor, STEM or not, and could describe what it’s like. I currently teach and tutor kids as a job and a side hustle, and I find teaching not necessarily fun but worthwhile as I am leaving a positive impact on the community. Also to those STEM professors, I was looking into teaching Physics partially because I’d love to do research. Is it a realistic option to do research while being a professor or is that only for the chairmen and high ranking people. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: It’s essential to do research as a professor, especially in STEM. But you can’t really plan an academic career by which particular university you’d like to have hire you. Academic jobs are highly competitive and usually require a great deal of flexibility in where you can find a position. Most are not hiring locals; they are national searches. That being said, being a professor is great. Working with students and in areas you love is deeply fulfilling. It’s hard, especially at the beginning. But it is satisfying and exciting work. But not for the faint of heart.
RESPONSE B: One thing to realize, and I am willing to bet most posters' parents here refuse to accept this... is that you don't just get a position at the institution down the road. The likelihood you end up at Rice or Texas A&M are practically nil. You'll be lucky to end up in Texas, though there are lots of institutions there, so maybe you have a better shot than, say, picking something in Kansas specifically. The reason is that they have to have a job that fits your training specifically come open just when you need a job. And because there's not really a lot of turn over in any one physics department, that's unlikely to happen.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Professor: pros and cons I am a high schooler from Texas that loves physics. I find it very interesting and would love to do something involving physics as a job. Something I and my parents have discussed is being a professor at a university- a couple in mind are Texas A&M and perhaps Rice. I was wondering if anyone here is a professor, STEM or not, and could describe what it’s like. I currently teach and tutor kids as a job and a side hustle, and I find teaching not necessarily fun but worthwhile as I am leaving a positive impact on the community. Also to those STEM professors, I was looking into teaching Physics partially because I’d love to do research. Is it a realistic option to do research while being a professor or is that only for the chairmen and high ranking people. Thanks!
RESPONSE A: One thing to realize, and I am willing to bet most posters' parents here refuse to accept this... is that you don't just get a position at the institution down the road. The likelihood you end up at Rice or Texas A&M are practically nil. You'll be lucky to end up in Texas, though there are lots of institutions there, so maybe you have a better shot than, say, picking something in Kansas specifically. The reason is that they have to have a job that fits your training specifically come open just when you need a job. And because there's not really a lot of turn over in any one physics department, that's unlikely to happen.
RESPONSE B: There are a million things that have to line up to get a tenure job, you should focus on doing well and getting into college first.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Struggling with Scientific Writing...Any good books/articles to suggest? Hey all, 1st Year Ph.D. Marine Biology Ph.D. student here. As an undergrad I was quite a confident writer, but at Ph.D. level I am really struggling. My supervisor recently commented that my work is "Good enough for 'New Scientist', but not 'Annual Review' series". Most people have said to me "It takes time to develop your own style"...which I believe to be true, however I am merely looking for literature to either boost confidence or provide good ideas. I have recently purchased "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk Jr. after I read that it was a timeless guide to writing in general. Any advice or links you can give will be much appreciated :)
RESPONSE A: "On Writing Well" by William Zinsser (we used this in my science writing class). It's a general book on writing non-fiction, but it's fun to read and has lots of good advice for keeping your readers interested.
RESPONSE B: Penrose & Katz, _Writing in the Sciences_ might help http://www.amazon.com/Writing-Sciences-Conventions-Scientific-Communication/dp/0205616712/
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Struggling with Scientific Writing...Any good books/articles to suggest? Hey all, 1st Year Ph.D. Marine Biology Ph.D. student here. As an undergrad I was quite a confident writer, but at Ph.D. level I am really struggling. My supervisor recently commented that my work is "Good enough for 'New Scientist', but not 'Annual Review' series". Most people have said to me "It takes time to develop your own style"...which I believe to be true, however I am merely looking for literature to either boost confidence or provide good ideas. I have recently purchased "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk Jr. after I read that it was a timeless guide to writing in general. Any advice or links you can give will be much appreciated :)
RESPONSE A: "Everything is an Argument"!!! Totally changed my whole mindset about writing, and made me an exponentially better writer overall. It helps you learn how to make sure that everything that you're arguing/ stating actively helps guide the reader to come to the point you want to make. It helped me improve the flow, length and impact of my scientific writing.
RESPONSE B: Does your University have a writing center? Ours has a few part-time staff who specialize in graduate-level writing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Struggling with Scientific Writing...Any good books/articles to suggest? Hey all, 1st Year Ph.D. Marine Biology Ph.D. student here. As an undergrad I was quite a confident writer, but at Ph.D. level I am really struggling. My supervisor recently commented that my work is "Good enough for 'New Scientist', but not 'Annual Review' series". Most people have said to me "It takes time to develop your own style"...which I believe to be true, however I am merely looking for literature to either boost confidence or provide good ideas. I have recently purchased "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk Jr. after I read that it was a timeless guide to writing in general. Any advice or links you can give will be much appreciated :)
RESPONSE A: "Everything is an Argument"!!! Totally changed my whole mindset about writing, and made me an exponentially better writer overall. It helps you learn how to make sure that everything that you're arguing/ stating actively helps guide the reader to come to the point you want to make. It helped me improve the flow, length and impact of my scientific writing.
RESPONSE B: Google Don Treiman (not sure of spelling). I've got a list of his 10 commandments of writing well on my office wall. Doesn't keep me from procrastinating, bug helpful nonetheless.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Struggling with Scientific Writing...Any good books/articles to suggest? Hey all, 1st Year Ph.D. Marine Biology Ph.D. student here. As an undergrad I was quite a confident writer, but at Ph.D. level I am really struggling. My supervisor recently commented that my work is "Good enough for 'New Scientist', but not 'Annual Review' series". Most people have said to me "It takes time to develop your own style"...which I believe to be true, however I am merely looking for literature to either boost confidence or provide good ideas. I have recently purchased "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk Jr. after I read that it was a timeless guide to writing in general. Any advice or links you can give will be much appreciated :)
RESPONSE A: "Everything is an Argument"!!! Totally changed my whole mindset about writing, and made me an exponentially better writer overall. It helps you learn how to make sure that everything that you're arguing/ stating actively helps guide the reader to come to the point you want to make. It helped me improve the flow, length and impact of my scientific writing.
RESPONSE B: Penrose & Katz, _Writing in the Sciences_ might help http://www.amazon.com/Writing-Sciences-Conventions-Scientific-Communication/dp/0205616712/
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Struggling with Scientific Writing...Any good books/articles to suggest? Hey all, 1st Year Ph.D. Marine Biology Ph.D. student here. As an undergrad I was quite a confident writer, but at Ph.D. level I am really struggling. My supervisor recently commented that my work is "Good enough for 'New Scientist', but not 'Annual Review' series". Most people have said to me "It takes time to develop your own style"...which I believe to be true, however I am merely looking for literature to either boost confidence or provide good ideas. I have recently purchased "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk Jr. after I read that it was a timeless guide to writing in general. Any advice or links you can give will be much appreciated :)
RESPONSE A: Penrose & Katz, _Writing in the Sciences_ might help http://www.amazon.com/Writing-Sciences-Conventions-Scientific-Communication/dp/0205616712/
RESPONSE B: There is an online Coursera class called "Writing in the Sciences". It starts out kind of basic, but it was really good, even if you dummy do the assignments, just watch the lectures. It might have already stated, but I think you can pick it up at any time to watch the lectures.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What should you do if your supervisor is very 'hands-off' & you're basically on your own? (Humanities) Anyone have experience of this? And what if you don't want to change supervisor because your supervisor is the one with the expertise & it's quite a niche area.
RESPONSE A: (1) Build a committee of people you can go to when you want advice, usually, a younger faculty member is more accessible. (2) Learn how to self-mentor, read books, articles, and blogs about your field and how to succeed in academia. (3) Build co-mentoring groups with students at differing stages of their career, meet at a set time (e.g. for lunch every other Tuesday). (4) Celebrate, this is how you will launch your career in academia as an independent scholar. Overall, I find hands-off advising is a gift for people who really want a career in academia because you learn to build a base an independent scholar - which is what people who give grants, prizes, and jobs want to see more than anything else.
RESPONSE B: I am also dealing with that same problem (at least i am trying lets say). I tried to talk to him (my supervisor) but nothing has changed. Now, I am just trying to graduate. Sorry, can’t help you there.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What should you do if your supervisor is very 'hands-off' & you're basically on your own? (Humanities) Anyone have experience of this? And what if you don't want to change supervisor because your supervisor is the one with the expertise & it's quite a niche area.
RESPONSE A: I can't give much helpful advice because after being in this exact boat I failed out and moved on but... Don't blame yourself. Don't try to do everything yourself. Don't make yourself the scapegoat. Look after yourself, and try to make a good support network for yourself both at work and outside of work. And lastly, don't try to please the unpleasable. That can drive you mad.
RESPONSE B: (1) Build a committee of people you can go to when you want advice, usually, a younger faculty member is more accessible. (2) Learn how to self-mentor, read books, articles, and blogs about your field and how to succeed in academia. (3) Build co-mentoring groups with students at differing stages of their career, meet at a set time (e.g. for lunch every other Tuesday). (4) Celebrate, this is how you will launch your career in academia as an independent scholar. Overall, I find hands-off advising is a gift for people who really want a career in academia because you learn to build a base an independent scholar - which is what people who give grants, prizes, and jobs want to see more than anything else.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can a community college become a 4 year university? I tried looking this up on google but couldn’t find anything. Can a 2 year community college become a 4 year state college if they decide to add bachelors degrees and are growing fast in size?
RESPONSE A: Yes. And some community colleges already offer four year degrees while maintaining their cc title. They just have to send their programs through an accreditation process.
RESPONSE B: My local CC now offers a single bachelors. It's an interesting biotech one, too. I'm very happy for them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can a community college become a 4 year university? I tried looking this up on google but couldn’t find anything. Can a 2 year community college become a 4 year state college if they decide to add bachelors degrees and are growing fast in size?
RESPONSE A: Yes. And some community colleges already offer four year degrees while maintaining their cc title. They just have to send their programs through an accreditation process.
RESPONSE B: i feel like gulf coast state college in panama city was a community college at one point. i heard some community colleges will be able to offer bachelors degrees in the near future
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Can a community college become a 4 year university? I tried looking this up on google but couldn’t find anything. Can a 2 year community college become a 4 year state college if they decide to add bachelors degrees and are growing fast in size?
RESPONSE A: Depends on the state. Some states have laws preventing ccs from competing with 4-year colleges.
RESPONSE B: Sure can! An example... Broward Community College is now Broward College now that they have a few 4 years. I will be calling it BCC until I die though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Can a community college become a 4 year university? I tried looking this up on google but couldn’t find anything. Can a 2 year community college become a 4 year state college if they decide to add bachelors degrees and are growing fast in size?
RESPONSE A: Search “community college baccalaureate association.”
RESPONSE B: Sure can! An example... Broward Community College is now Broward College now that they have a few 4 years. I will be calling it BCC until I die though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Can a community college become a 4 year university? I tried looking this up on google but couldn’t find anything. Can a 2 year community college become a 4 year state college if they decide to add bachelors degrees and are growing fast in size?
RESPONSE A: Sure can! An example... Broward Community College is now Broward College now that they have a few 4 years. I will be calling it BCC until I die though.
RESPONSE B: Yep. My 2 year college added bachelor degrees the year I started, making it officially a "state college" instead of just a "college" In my state.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What makes a good mentor?
RESPONSE A: From the late, great Ben Barres here
RESPONSE B: Someone who honestly critiques you but also cheers you on
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What makes a good mentor?
RESPONSE A: Good mentors are willing to give suggestions and reassurance in times of unavoidable adversity during grad school. They have an open door policy and they are excited to see you succeed. They also appreciate the value of a strong lesson and will challenge you to brainstorm solutions, strategize next moves, and present your work to a critical audience. I think you'll be able to quickly tell if a mentor is rooting for you during the beginnings of your project.
RESPONSE B: From the late, great Ben Barres here
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What makes a good mentor?
RESPONSE A: Somebody who answers your emails. Seriously, they can have all the qualities listed by other commenters, but if the person is terrible at answering emails/phone calls, you’ll find yourself up a certain creek with no paddle on more than one occasion.
RESPONSE B: Humility
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What makes a good mentor?
RESPONSE A: Somebody who answers your emails. Seriously, they can have all the qualities listed by other commenters, but if the person is terrible at answering emails/phone calls, you’ll find yourself up a certain creek with no paddle on more than one occasion.
RESPONSE B: Someone who wants to be a mentor and can give you what you need, as well as saying, "I can't help you with that, but I might know someone who can." I've also found that unless I know what I want to do, a lot of "mentors" can give bad advice or advice that is no longer relevant or useful.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What makes a good mentor?
RESPONSE A: Someone with a "Go, you good thing!" mentality.
RESPONSE B: Somebody who answers your emails. Seriously, they can have all the qualities listed by other commenters, but if the person is terrible at answering emails/phone calls, you’ll find yourself up a certain creek with no paddle on more than one occasion.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What makes a university good? This is a very broad question. If you look at undergraduate institutions, what sticks out as a defining characteristic of a good university? I know there are many factors, but what really makes a university stick out?
RESPONSE A: Speaking as a person who went to a liberal arts college that only had undergraduate students, here are some things that helped to make it an excellent education for me: -Low student to faculty ratio / faculty are very involved (e.g., provide thorough feedback on papers, foster class discussions, etc.) -Research opportunities for students -Opportunities to learn outside of the classroom and lab -A culture that values learning and academic inquiry
RESPONSE B: My standards are low. A subscription to Nature and I'm sold.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to deal with horrible department administrator? I’m currently a researcher at a university and every time I have to deal with one of the administrators in the department, this person is extremely rude, condescending, and unhelpful. They are also not at all competent at their job— for example they do not communicate clearly, don’t get things done on time, and have to have every single bit of paperwork or information forwarded to them multiple times. I’m trying to be understanding (perhaps they have a lot on their plate) but the fact that they seem to be incapable of having any kind of system (despite being in a job that is by natural supposed to be organized and systematic) makes me think that they are simply incapable of handling their position. Is there any way this can be addressed, and if so, how? I would be willing to avoid them and ignore the issue, but their inability to handle their job makes it incredibly hard for me to accomplish certain parts of my position. Also, I’m not the only one who has issues dealing with this person.
RESPONSE A: From what I have seen at my department, some of the administrators hate their job. Or are suffering from burnouts. Maybe try being as succinct as possible when communicating with them.
RESPONSE B: Is this person staff or faculty? It changes the answer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: it during an academic position, especially early on. So when is best? How do universities handle pregnant profs? (I've been in the school systems for 8 years now-- I know how public schools deal with it, no idea to colleges). I desperately want a family. It is part of me that I am not giving up. It's never the "optimal time," I know, but what have you all experienced?
RESPONSE A: I had my daughter just before starting my PhD program (and I mean *just* before - she was 8 weeks when I started coursework). It's been fine, mainly because my husband is not an academic and is able to do more of the heavy lifting in terms of childcare. Maternity leave is important, but you don't necessarily need 12 weeks like many people take. You will need time off, though. If you end up with a c-section, you will be in the hospital for up to a week. Even if you have a vaginal birth, you need time to heal, rest, and take care of the baby. My advice? Have the kid while you're in school. If it means it takes you a bit longer to graduate, so be it. Kids complicate things, and it will likely be easier to tweak your schedule as a dissertator than as an early career professor. The older your child is when you go through the tenure process, the easier it is likely to be on everyone. And, really, don't stress too much, if at all possible. People in PhD programs have children all the time. I never regret having my daughter when I did, even though it was difficult. If you are this close to having your doctorate, you know difficult and you can do difficult. Kids are worth it.
RESPONSE B: This is an excellent article, and (among other things) answers your question beautifully: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/07/21/the-awesomest-7-year-postdoc-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-tenure-track-faculty-life/ (Sorry for formatting, I'm on mobile)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Managing family and early career status This is a topic that none of the academics in my faculty talk about: children & marriage. (I'm thinking mainly because most of them are divorced and without children). Here's my question... when? I am married, 30, looking at my PhD this Spring. I'm not giving up a family for a career, or a career for a family. I want both. I've basically been told that if I have children during my time at the school, I won't graduate (literally the program won't give any time off for maternity and they won't let me defend until next year), but yet, I've been told have them now because its career suicide to do it during an academic position, especially early on. So when is best? How do universities handle pregnant profs? (I've been in the school systems for 8 years now-- I know how public schools deal with it, no idea to colleges). I desperately want a family. It is part of me that I am not giving up. It's never the "optimal time," I know, but what have you all experienced?
RESPONSE A: Good question. A few weeks ago, this article came out. I'm not sure if it directly answers your question, but it brings up some sobering facts about academia. Good luck with whatever you decide.
RESPONSE B: This is an excellent article, and (among other things) answers your question beautifully: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/07/21/the-awesomest-7-year-postdoc-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-tenure-track-faculty-life/ (Sorry for formatting, I'm on mobile)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: all experienced?
RESPONSE A: Had my son after my Master's degree was done (and all my coursework) but before proposing and defending the dissertation. Was perfect timing for us as a family because we were living in the same town as my parents & his parents. Having the grandparents around to help out when money was very tight and we were both really busy with school/work helped a lot. Have a kid when you're ready as a family. Plenty of people do it. You're just unfortunately at a place where they're not accustomed to it. I took a 'medical leave of absence' - anyone (I mean ANY grad student) could take it for a semester and return. No stipend, no health insurance though during that time. We didn't have maternity leave for grad students at my place; that didn't stop me and it shouldn't stop you either. It doesn't get easier and frankly your biological clock is ticking. You don't want to wait until you have tenure and then find out at age 37 that you're infertile/need lots of fertility treatments that may or may not work because you waited too long. Not trying to scare you, but this is reality, and I've seen it happen to too many women. There's no clock to graduate that you're worried about, is there? If you're in year 8 or 9 and only have x months to finish up otherwise you can't graduate with your degree, then that's different. Otherwise, no one cares that you took one more year to finish your degree; just make sure you have enough stuff in the pipeline to keep publishing or at least have something submitted while you're away during the time after the birth.
RESPONSE B: This is an excellent article, and (among other things) answers your question beautifully: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/07/21/the-awesomest-7-year-postdoc-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-tenure-track-faculty-life/ (Sorry for formatting, I'm on mobile)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Sham Interview for a Tenure Track Faculty Position All right, here’s the deal. I’ve got an interview for a faculty position at a R1 university. While I’m excited for the opportunity, I have reason to suspect that the interview is entirely just for show. I suspect this because I learned—through the grapevine—the identity of another job candidate. It turns out that not only are they an alumni of this university, but they were also mentored by the person whose position was vacated and that I am now interviewing for. Thus, I think they are the preferred candidate for this position, and I am interviewing merely so that they can say that they are interviewing other people (as they are required to do). If true, this would explain the extremely curt nature of the phone call from the head of the search committee, whose invitation to interview was of the nature of “So, uh...do you still want this job? You do? OK, I’ll have our administrative assistant contact you...” I am also suspicious because of the rather inconspicuous nature of the job announcement—it seems as if they didn’t WANT to get a lot of applications, which is very odd. After all, this is a top-tier university that would normally get well over 100 applications for such a position. Obviously, if they have a favourite, then there’s nothing I can do but interview. However, just because the head of the search committee has someone in mind doesn’t mean they can force people to vote for them, so it could be that they are just stacking the deck as much as they can. So, I’m wondering—does this happen a lot? And what—if anything—can do I about it?
RESPONSE A: If the ad was very oddly specific, then that might be the case. I've seen a sham ad before and realized who it was for. I was happy for my friend though.
RESPONSE B: You shouldn't discount the fact that they may also be expecting a vacant spot next year, and may in fact consider you for THAT spot so as to avoid repeating the search committee process for that cycle.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: show. I suspect this because I learned—through the grapevine—the identity of another job candidate. It turns out that not only are they an alumni of this university, but they were also mentored by the person whose position was vacated and that I am now interviewing for. Thus, I think they are the preferred candidate for this position, and I am interviewing merely so that they can say that they are interviewing other people (as they are required to do). If true, this would explain the extremely curt nature of the phone call from the head of the search committee, whose invitation to interview was of the nature of “So, uh...do you still want this job? You do? OK, I’ll have our administrative assistant contact you...” I am also suspicious because of the rather inconspicuous nature of the job announcement—it seems as if they didn’t WANT to get a lot of applications, which is very odd. After all, this is a top-tier university that would normally get well over 100 applications for such a position. Obviously, if they have a favourite, then there’s nothing I can do but interview. However, just because the head of the search committee has someone in mind doesn’t mean they can force people to vote for them, so it could be that they are just stacking the deck as much as they can. So, I’m wondering—does this happen a lot? And what—if anything—can do I about it?
RESPONSE A: There is so much that can happen! I saw a similar case last year where an alum came back to interview for a faculty position, and the chair and dean both pretty much said to the faculty, "you can rank candidates however you want, but this person is getting the job." Fast forward a few weeks, and this candidate who was served up a job on a golden platter (after a mediocre-at-best job talk) turned down the offer for another job at a slightly better school.
RESPONSE B: If the ad was very oddly specific, then that might be the case. I've seen a sham ad before and realized who it was for. I was happy for my friend though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Sham Interview for a Tenure Track Faculty Position All right, here’s the deal. I’ve got an interview for a faculty position at a R1 university. While I’m excited for the opportunity, I have reason to suspect that the interview is entirely just for show. I suspect this because I learned—through the grapevine—the identity of another job candidate. It turns out that not only are they an alumni of this university, but they were also mentored by the person whose position was vacated and that I am now interviewing for. Thus, I think they are the preferred candidate for this position, and I am interviewing merely so that they can say that they are interviewing other people (as they are required to do). If true, this would explain the extremely curt nature of the phone call from the head of the search committee, whose invitation to interview was of the nature of “So, uh...do you still want this job? You do? OK, I’ll have our administrative assistant contact you...” I am also suspicious because of the rather inconspicuous nature of the job announcement—it seems as if they didn’t WANT to get a lot of applications, which is very odd. After all, this is a top-tier university that would normally get well over 100 applications for such a position. Obviously, if they have a favourite, then there’s nothing I can do but interview. However, just because the head of the search committee has someone in mind doesn’t mean they can force people to vote for them, so it could be that they are just stacking the deck as much as they can. So, I’m wondering—does this happen a lot? And what—if anything—can do I about it?
RESPONSE A: The student of the retiring professor would be the last person I'd think they'd want to hire to replace them.
RESPONSE B: If the ad was very oddly specific, then that might be the case. I've seen a sham ad before and realized who it was for. I was happy for my friend though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Sham Interview for a Tenure Track Faculty Position All right, here’s the deal. I’ve got an interview for a faculty position at a R1 university. While I’m excited for the opportunity, I have reason to suspect that the interview is entirely just for show. I suspect this because I learned—through the grapevine—the identity of another job candidate. It turns out that not only are they an alumni of this university, but they were also mentored by the person whose position was vacated and that I am now interviewing for. Thus, I think they are the preferred candidate for this position, and I am interviewing merely so that they can say that they are interviewing other people (as they are required to do). If true, this would explain the extremely curt nature of the phone call from the head of the search committee, whose invitation to interview was of the nature of “So, uh...do you still want this job? You do? OK, I’ll have our administrative assistant contact you...” I am also suspicious because of the rather inconspicuous nature of the job announcement—it seems as if they didn’t WANT to get a lot of applications, which is very odd. After all, this is a top-tier university that would normally get well over 100 applications for such a position. Obviously, if they have a favourite, then there’s nothing I can do but interview. However, just because the head of the search committee has someone in mind doesn’t mean they can force people to vote for them, so it could be that they are just stacking the deck as much as they can. So, I’m wondering—does this happen a lot? And what—if anything—can do I about it?
RESPONSE A: Yes. I know of a few cases of this happening. Academia is just as petty and "about who you know" as any other industry.
RESPONSE B: https://chroniclevitae.com/news/1158-academic-job-hunts-from-hell-the-fake-search
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: ...do you still want this job? You do? OK, I’ll have our administrative assistant contact you...” I am also suspicious because of the rather inconspicuous nature of the job announcement—it seems as if they didn’t WANT to get a lot of applications, which is very odd. After all, this is a top-tier university that would normally get well over 100 applications for such a position. Obviously, if they have a favourite, then there’s nothing I can do but interview. However, just because the head of the search committee has someone in mind doesn’t mean they can force people to vote for them, so it could be that they are just stacking the deck as much as they can. So, I’m wondering—does this happen a lot? And what—if anything—can do I about it?
RESPONSE A: Got free time? Go to the interview, but don't sweat it. Treat it like a mini-vacation where you get to talk about your research and goals to a captive audience (but do try to invite them into engagement). But enjoy the free meals and find fun things to do in the town and around the campus. You already know they aren't going to hire you, so be incredibly laid back about the whole interview. Know your stuff, but be stress free because its a free trip, meals included. I know your pain. I was invited to apply for a position at a small college in their chemistry department. I have a background in four of the five areas of chemistry. I could comfortably teach biochemistry, physical chemistry, organic chemistry, and even analytical chemistry. Guess what they wanted? An inorganic chemist. Not that this was posted, but only one of the three applicants interviewed was an inorganic chemist, and he was an alumnus and knew some of the search committee very well. At first I was a bit angry about the situation, but then I realized they had at least covered all my expenses. Too bad the food was really bad in that town.
RESPONSE B: https://chroniclevitae.com/news/1158-academic-job-hunts-from-hell-the-fake-search
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to say no for phd offer from current advisor? Currently final semester (international) masters student, also part of lab under thesis advisor as research assistant. Key incidences: 1) Few month ago, my advisor asked about future plan. Unsure I said 'probably look for job after graduation'. 2) 3 month ago, I was still not sure (Yes I know this is bad thing). So I decided to apply for two doctoral program, just so to have option later. Ask advisor for rec letters. 3) Advisor writes it. 4) 2 month ago, during our meeting he ask status of application and suggest I should consider continuing as phd student under him. Explains pros and cons which were all very well thought and reasonable. 5) Yesterday asked me if I had filled the application for it and want to discuss financial support in next weeks meeting. Issue: I am really do not like it here. I have struggled to fit into environment and develop social circle but have miserably failed. I have often contemplated dropping out, but just convinced myself that getting through this will be worth it and much better then giving up and having past two years be gone to waste. On the other hand, I absolutely love the research direction of lab and have learned a lot in past year under him. Infact, the only way I have been able to stay sane is by drowning in research work as much as possible. I know that from outside perspective it may seems 'Just say no LOL' but I am not looking to burn bridges here. I absolutely would love to continue but part of me knows that sooner or later I would have total breakdown and would leave wasting my and his time and resources. If anyone has faced such situation, I would really appreciate your experience and opinion on how to handle this.
RESPONSE A: I mean, it's perfectly understandable to not want to remain in academia. Simply telling your prof that you're grateful but have decided for now against doing a PhD is more than enough. It takes a rare person who would get offended by something like this. And given that your professor so far has been just helpful, it doesn't sound like he's that sort of person
RESPONSE B: Just be honest? You love the lab but your personal life suffers in this location.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: sure (Yes I know this is bad thing). So I decided to apply for two doctoral program, just so to have option later. Ask advisor for rec letters. 3) Advisor writes it. 4) 2 month ago, during our meeting he ask status of application and suggest I should consider continuing as phd student under him. Explains pros and cons which were all very well thought and reasonable. 5) Yesterday asked me if I had filled the application for it and want to discuss financial support in next weeks meeting. Issue: I am really do not like it here. I have struggled to fit into environment and develop social circle but have miserably failed. I have often contemplated dropping out, but just convinced myself that getting through this will be worth it and much better then giving up and having past two years be gone to waste. On the other hand, I absolutely love the research direction of lab and have learned a lot in past year under him. Infact, the only way I have been able to stay sane is by drowning in research work as much as possible. I know that from outside perspective it may seems 'Just say no LOL' but I am not looking to burn bridges here. I absolutely would love to continue but part of me knows that sooner or later I would have total breakdown and would leave wasting my and his time and resources. If anyone has faced such situation, I would really appreciate your experience and opinion on how to handle this.
RESPONSE A: Just be honest? You love the lab but your personal life suffers in this location.
RESPONSE B: Have to see about your professor. My professor always want his master students to continue PhD. If you don’t want, he will extend your master’s study period until 3-4 years depend on his mood. Or he will let you graduate until you agree to do PhD (yes my advisor is shit). One of my senior said he want to do phd, but decide to said no 1 month before his defense, my professor angry and not passed his defense so he need to stay for other 6 month. If you professor not as this shit, better you politely say that you are not interested, otherwise he will feel dissapointed for the excitement because he think he will have new PhD student
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: If you have a Master's degree, and your undergrad GPA is bad, will they still use the undergrad GPA to screen you out from the applicant pool? Even with a good MS GPA and GRE scores of over 90 percentile? If so, what can I do to avoid this from happening, other than retaking some undergrad courses?
RESPONSE A: They will still consider your undergraduate GPA. That doesn't mean you'll automatically be cut because of a weak undergrad GPA, but it will be something they consider nonetheless.
RESPONSE B: Are you trying to get into a PhD program or get a job? In my experience, your work as an MS student is far more important than your graduate GPA, which is far more important than your undergrad GPA. If you did good work (got published, impresses your prospective PI, meshes with their intetests) you probably just need to meet the department's minimum requirements for them to take you. On the other hand, if your research work is mideocre, or the PI is totally disinterested, a 3.95 and stellar GRE scores is not going to save you. ________ This applies to research doctorates, not professional doctorates like the MD or DVM. In the latter, they often focus on the GPA of your last 60 semester hours regardless of level. I have no idea what non-academic industry wants out of an applicant, though I would guess a history of good work is more important than GPA to them also (unless we're talking entry level stuff).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: If you have a Master's degree, and your undergrad GPA is bad, will they still use the undergrad GPA to screen you out from the applicant pool? Even with a good MS GPA and GRE scores of over 90 percentile? If so, what can I do to avoid this from happening, other than retaking some undergrad courses?
RESPONSE A: They will still consider your undergraduate GPA. That doesn't mean you'll automatically be cut because of a weak undergrad GPA, but it will be something they consider nonetheless.
RESPONSE B: Obviously I can only give a personal anecdote, but I was in a similar position. Had a really bad undergrad GPA, somehow got into an MA program anyway. I ended up with a 4.0, did thesis track, taught two classes, did well on the GRE, and participated in several research conferences. Still got accepted to a Tier 1 research university for their Ph.D program. I can't promise it'll work out, but don't lose hope. Just try your best and do everything you can to show that you're serious now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do I really reach diverse groups of PhD candidates? Hi all, I am a researcher at a German Uni in climate physics, non-binary and neurodiverse (and not German not English). At last, I am at the point where I will be advertising my own PhD position. However, from past experiences and friends' ones, I noticed that there is a lack of diverse applications. Does anyone has some suggestion on how to improve it in the pool of candidates? I am aware that removing the looked traits as mandatory, helps. But what else? Cause for myself the "the university X strives for a diverse blabla" does not work, it seems like prepacked front-words.. and I wonder if I am not the only one. Any suggestion on how to improve it is welcome!! :) thanks!
RESPONSE A: Twitter is a great place for getting stuff out there - especially if you use hashtags well. I'd also reach out to societies on campus and ask if they can share with their communities and beyond. You could do some digging and see if there are any professional networks in your discipline for under-represented individuals and ask them to share. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: actively recruit. As in you go out and find folks that you think would do well, either by social media groups or conferences - am thinking of professional organizations like oSTEM or National Society of Black Engineers, or conferences like The Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS) - which of course may not fit with climate physics but something similar for your field.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: am not the only one. Any suggestion on how to improve it is welcome!! :) thanks!
RESPONSE A: You can't really ascertain diversity from a resume, and presumably you aren't gonna ask candidates about their sexuality, whether they're neurodivergent, or anything of the sort. The main advantage of having a diverse group of researchers is to have people who think in different ways. To this end, I think the best course is to interview as many candidates as possible, and ask questions which don't test book knowledge exclusively.
RESPONSE B: Start with paying any undergrads in your lab. I believe this is the number one way to diversify stem. Undergrads of color or low income background are often disproportionately excluded from research experience opportunities because they are asked to do so without pay and they have to hold down another job to pay for their other expenses like rent, food, transportation, etc. this is what happened to me and made it really difficult for me to get as much research experience as some of my more privileged peers who had everything payed for by their parents and were able to fully volunteer their time to a lab. Paying undergrads levels that out so that more diverse students can gain the necessary research experience to apply for grad school. Even if they don’t decide to do grad school with you you’ll still be contributing to diversifying the phd student pool. When I was picking my PI was really appreciative of the diversity statement on her personal lab page which said “in this lab we believe Black Lives Matter, immigrants are welcome, love is love, feminism is for everyone” things along those lines. I think I was really drawn to their willingness to put those specific issues on their personal lab page rather than just the blanket diversity statements given on the home page of the university. It was more meaningful to me and attracted me there more. I also liked that my PI, while caring about diversifying her lab, also clearly appreciated my knowledge and experience and was convinced of my potential. She wasn’t just trying to use me for a cover photo or to increase funding. I think it’s important to lead with that attitude. As an undergraduate I went to a minority serving institution. Try starting your recruitment efforts there. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: work, it seems like prepacked front-words.. and I wonder if I am not the only one. Any suggestion on how to improve it is welcome!! :) thanks!
RESPONSE A: Twitter is a great place for getting stuff out there - especially if you use hashtags well. I'd also reach out to societies on campus and ask if they can share with their communities and beyond. You could do some digging and see if there are any professional networks in your discipline for under-represented individuals and ask them to share. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: Start with paying any undergrads in your lab. I believe this is the number one way to diversify stem. Undergrads of color or low income background are often disproportionately excluded from research experience opportunities because they are asked to do so without pay and they have to hold down another job to pay for their other expenses like rent, food, transportation, etc. this is what happened to me and made it really difficult for me to get as much research experience as some of my more privileged peers who had everything payed for by their parents and were able to fully volunteer their time to a lab. Paying undergrads levels that out so that more diverse students can gain the necessary research experience to apply for grad school. Even if they don’t decide to do grad school with you you’ll still be contributing to diversifying the phd student pool. When I was picking my PI was really appreciative of the diversity statement on her personal lab page which said “in this lab we believe Black Lives Matter, immigrants are welcome, love is love, feminism is for everyone” things along those lines. I think I was really drawn to their willingness to put those specific issues on their personal lab page rather than just the blanket diversity statements given on the home page of the university. It was more meaningful to me and attracted me there more. I also liked that my PI, while caring about diversifying her lab, also clearly appreciated my knowledge and experience and was convinced of my potential. She wasn’t just trying to use me for a cover photo or to increase funding. I think it’s important to lead with that attitude. As an undergraduate I went to a minority serving institution. Try starting your recruitment efforts there. Good luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is biology a better major than physics for a student who struggles with math? My 17-year-old daughter is finishing up an early college program offered through our school district, so next May she'll be graduating high school and simultaneously getting her associates degree in liberal arts/general studies from our local community college. She's currently first in her graduating class and has a 3.5 unweighted GPA -- about 4.1 weighted -- and she loves science, especially physics and biology. She took introductory physics in 9th grade and this was one course where the math actually made sense to her. She also loves biology and is fascinated with all the stuff that happens at the cellular level and with genetics. She says physics is really her first choice -- more specifically astrophysics, but she's afraid her math difficulties make that a non-option for her. Whichever way she goes, she ultimately wants to get her doctorate and do research. We've been told that biology requires a lot of math, too, but my daughter seems to feel that it's more critical in physics. I personally know nothing about it, so thought I'd seek input from people in science. Thanks for any and all advice!
RESPONSE A: Has she had good/great math teachers? A lot of people who are "bad at math" just have terrible instructors IMO. But yes, biology will typically have easier math to get through, does not make it any less competitive being with a bunch of pre-med student though, being at a community college might mitigate this.
RESPONSE B: She should take what she likes, and see if she wants to major in something after that. As mentioned, the math required for physics is different than what she's probably had. If she likes both, she really should consider looking into biophysics. But if physics is her first choice, letting her be dissuaded by feeling like she can't do it is a real shame. Very little of college level work has anything to do with "being good at" something, and more to do with being interested and willing to put the work in. This is even more true at the graduate level.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: She also loves biology and is fascinated with all the stuff that happens at the cellular level and with genetics. She says physics is really her first choice -- more specifically astrophysics, but she's afraid her math difficulties make that a non-option for her. Whichever way she goes, she ultimately wants to get her doctorate and do research. We've been told that biology requires a lot of math, too, but my daughter seems to feel that it's more critical in physics. I personally know nothing about it, so thought I'd seek input from people in science. Thanks for any and all advice!
RESPONSE A: Has she had good/great math teachers? A lot of people who are "bad at math" just have terrible instructors IMO. But yes, biology will typically have easier math to get through, does not make it any less competitive being with a bunch of pre-med student though, being at a community college might mitigate this.
RESPONSE B: This is more like a personal plea: please don't tell your daughter not to major in something because she isn't good at it. Maybe she isn't, but it's her personal choice and it's not fair to deprive her of the opportunity to find out for herself whether she can do it, either because she actually is good or because it's worth working really hard for, or decide that ultimately it's not her thing and let the dream go of her own will. What she is good/bad at in high school is a poor predictor of her likelihood to study it at the PhD level - there are many more factors that go into it, which mostly have to do with effort rather than intelligence. My mother tried to talk me out of majoring in something because I wasn't good at math, and I'm not and I will never be the best in the field, but doing it makes me happy and the work worth it. I'm pretty headstrong, but I know some people that did let their parents talk them into doing something other than what they wanted to, and now they're either trying to transition into that field or living with regrets. It may not seem like a big deal, but your parent telling you you're not good enough at such a sensitive age can be devastating.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: cellular level and with genetics. She says physics is really her first choice -- more specifically astrophysics, but she's afraid her math difficulties make that a non-option for her. Whichever way she goes, she ultimately wants to get her doctorate and do research. We've been told that biology requires a lot of math, too, but my daughter seems to feel that it's more critical in physics. I personally know nothing about it, so thought I'd seek input from people in science. Thanks for any and all advice!
RESPONSE A: I did a biology (specifically Genetics) degree in the UK. My housemate did Physics (with specialism in astrophysics). In the UK you specialize from the first year, rather than the US where you pick classes and can change majors. My Physics housemate said what he was doing felt like a maths degree. It looked like one to me. I didn't need too much maths. Also depends on what area of biology one likes. If she is more interested in the cellular stuff like you said, then maths is important but you can get away with a lot lot less than any physics degree. One thing she might want to learn is a bit of programming. I recently learned some programming (in Python) for work and it has helped a lot for work, but is also good for training the mind in pure logic and spend more time with some (simple) maths.
RESPONSE B: Theoretical physicist and professor of computational biology here. The first question I'd have is what exactly about math she finds difficult. There's very little actual math that is being taught in US high schools. The curriculum focuses on calculating things, mostly with numbers, which math very much is not about. I can't add 2 and 3 to save my life, but I'm pretty good at abstract thought and problem solving, and that's what matters in physics and biology. And I'd also mirror the statements of others here that it's better to take the harder classes and push yourself than avoid material you think will be difficult. If she wants to go into research, she should try to learn as much math as she can, as well as stats and computer programming.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you do when you've been scooped on a publication? Suppose you've been scooped on a publication by a competitor group, what would you typically do?
RESPONSE A: Offer to collaborate
RESPONSE B: Focus on different details in your own study and use the published paper as a springboard to boost the perceived importance of your paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What do you do when you've been scooped on a publication? Suppose you've been scooped on a publication by a competitor group, what would you typically do?
RESPONSE A: Drink
RESPONSE B: Offer to collaborate
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: be considered ideal behaviour), because that person would have come to a certain conclusion without the help of the other scholar, even though the argument might be similar. My fear is not that I would do this, but rather what happens if you publish something and then after the fact someone else points out that part of your argument is similar to that of another publication and accuses you of having taken someone else's idea, even though you simply missed that particularly publication during the writing of your article. I have certainly seen quite often that two historians make similar arguments without acknowledging each other and this seems to be fine, but I am still wondering how this is viewed ethically.
RESPONSE A: *Disclaimer: not a historian, just a STEM trying to be helpful* It is probably fine to just cite it and note that elements of your own argument have been made before. If the work you've done was not based on that work, a detailed discussion of it should not be warranted. It could be worth revising your own work if that article causes you to re-evaluate or reassess your own thinking. However that doesn't sound like the case, so it's probably fine to just note that the same thought has been discussed in the past. Usually this is a good thing, because if someone else has made elements of your own argument before then that provides support for your own work. It's perfectly okay if some of your thoughts have been written and published by others before, because no work is wholly original anyways. As long as your work contributes *something* original, some overlap with older literature is acceptable and frankly inevitable, nothing to worry about.
RESPONSE B: > I am thinking of simply including this article in the literature review of that chapter and point out how I differ from it (different argument, more detail etc.). Yeah that's the right move. >But do I have to do even more and go through my chapter page by page and add a footnote (X also makes a similar point...) for every minor point that is similar? No, that's too much. If he's wrong about things, then you can throw in footnotes disputing with him when you arrive at those points, but an upfront review of his work is enough.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: publish something and then after the fact someone else points out that part of your argument is similar to that of another publication and accuses you of having taken someone else's idea, even though you simply missed that particularly publication during the writing of your article. I have certainly seen quite often that two historians make similar arguments without acknowledging each other and this seems to be fine, but I am still wondering how this is viewed ethically.
RESPONSE A: I must have had that same heart attack 20 times while working on my dissertation. What you propose to do is exactly right. Incorporate it into your background discussion and move on. In my experience, once I actually calmed down and reread the "oh my god, someone already did it" article, I found that it was significantly different in important respects, so I added it into my background discussion and discussed how it differed from my work. I do think it is ethically wrong to just pretend that it doesn't exist, unless you conclude after reading it that it is simply irrelevant due to the differences and/or quality of the work. That said, people do often miss some related work and it isn't a career-ending mistake. It simply isn't possible to read everything everyone has ever published.
RESPONSE B: *Disclaimer: not a historian, just a STEM trying to be helpful* It is probably fine to just cite it and note that elements of your own argument have been made before. If the work you've done was not based on that work, a detailed discussion of it should not be warranted. It could be worth revising your own work if that article causes you to re-evaluate or reassess your own thinking. However that doesn't sound like the case, so it's probably fine to just note that the same thought has been discussed in the past. Usually this is a good thing, because if someone else has made elements of your own argument before then that provides support for your own work. It's perfectly okay if some of your thoughts have been written and published by others before, because no work is wholly original anyways. As long as your work contributes *something* original, some overlap with older literature is acceptable and frankly inevitable, nothing to worry about.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you thing about pot and grad school? I was discussing with a friend yesterday telling me that he enjoyed pot a lot more than alcohol (which has bad collateral effects on him). He smokes pot for relaxing mainly. I was thinking, with the high level of stress in academia, instead of alcohol, what do you think of using pot from time to time to relax? I'm not a smoker myself and am mainly wary of the negative cognitive effects on the long term and of developing an addiction to the feeling. (FYI : Pot is legal where I live). ​ Any experience? Thanks
RESPONSE A: weed was very helpful with my anxiety..a lifesaver at times during grad school. i always have (and still do) become very paranoid when smoking weed socially, but a few hits in the evening before bed with my husband is just wonderful. i don't find it addictive at all, but ymmv. i've gone months/years without smoking and it hasn't been a big deal. as far as an impact on cognition from long-term use...i doubt it highly if you are using it sparingly.
RESPONSE B: So long as it doesn’t get in the way of the work it’s all g. Nobody wants to rawdog with reality
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What do you thing about pot and grad school? I was discussing with a friend yesterday telling me that he enjoyed pot a lot more than alcohol (which has bad collateral effects on him). He smokes pot for relaxing mainly. I was thinking, with the high level of stress in academia, instead of alcohol, what do you think of using pot from time to time to relax? I'm not a smoker myself and am mainly wary of the negative cognitive effects on the long term and of developing an addiction to the feeling. (FYI : Pot is legal where I live). ​ Any experience? Thanks
RESPONSE A: So long as it doesn’t get in the way of the work it’s all g. Nobody wants to rawdog with reality
RESPONSE B: If you are nervous about smoking, don't do it. For me personally it's honestly not ever really had any effect, and it's not generally addictive. My dad always said "doesn't cost much, doesn't do much. We call it the giggling herb." There is the risk for developing schizophrenia, but that is quite rare, especially after the age of 25. Generally, not much to worry about except for the smell. Turning to any substance for relaxation is not a good idea though, be it (legal or illegal) drugs, alcohol, or food. Yes, I am the Debbie downer of the comment section. Just here to be your grad school mum and say: try vigorous exercise, or abstract acrylic painting, or going for occasional long walks as your go to relaxation mode. Sounds laughable as a suggestion in a drugs thread but honestly, as shit as I am at art and rowing, nothing takes my mind off of work quite like it. Everything else (read:substances) can be the occasional treat. You should never feel like you rely on them - grad school is unhealthy enough!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What do you thing about pot and grad school? I was discussing with a friend yesterday telling me that he enjoyed pot a lot more than alcohol (which has bad collateral effects on him). He smokes pot for relaxing mainly. I was thinking, with the high level of stress in academia, instead of alcohol, what do you think of using pot from time to time to relax? I'm not a smoker myself and am mainly wary of the negative cognitive effects on the long term and of developing an addiction to the feeling. (FYI : Pot is legal where I live). ​ Any experience? Thanks
RESPONSE A: So long as it doesn’t get in the way of the work it’s all g. Nobody wants to rawdog with reality
RESPONSE B: Well, it has negative effects over time, as any drug does on the body. But cannabis is a lot better for you than alcohol. As with anything i'd just say use in moderation. Maybe give it a go once a week when you want to truly unwind. I'd also recommend edibles rather than smoking, so you don't ruin your lungs.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What do you thing about pot and grad school? I was discussing with a friend yesterday telling me that he enjoyed pot a lot more than alcohol (which has bad collateral effects on him). He smokes pot for relaxing mainly. I was thinking, with the high level of stress in academia, instead of alcohol, what do you think of using pot from time to time to relax? I'm not a smoker myself and am mainly wary of the negative cognitive effects on the long term and of developing an addiction to the feeling. (FYI : Pot is legal where I live). ​ Any experience? Thanks
RESPONSE A: If I could smoke weed in a warm comfortable place outside my own home (like you can in Amsterdam for instance), and if I had some friends to smoke with me, I would say that weed is vastly superior to alcohol. At least for me, weed is pretty self limiting: once I get where I'm going, I don't want any more. The next day is much better, it's less addictive, I would be surprised if the long term effects are that much worse (assuming I smoke weed about twice a month which is how often I drink roughly). Of course this is all just my own case, but I think in and of itself there's nothing wrong with weed that isn't worse with alcohol.
RESPONSE B: So long as it doesn’t get in the way of the work it’s all g. Nobody wants to rawdog with reality
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What do you thing about pot and grad school? I was discussing with a friend yesterday telling me that he enjoyed pot a lot more than alcohol (which has bad collateral effects on him). He smokes pot for relaxing mainly. I was thinking, with the high level of stress in academia, instead of alcohol, what do you think of using pot from time to time to relax? I'm not a smoker myself and am mainly wary of the negative cognitive effects on the long term and of developing an addiction to the feeling. (FYI : Pot is legal where I live). ​ Any experience? Thanks
RESPONSE A: One thing I'll mention is that if the US federal government hires academics in your field, you might suddenly be faced with issues, both with basic employment and especially if you need (or would benefit from) a clearance. If you're an academic working at a university in a state with legalized weed, getting in trouble for weed might not be something that ever occurs to you. But in my field there are some nice postdocs and permanent positions with the feds, and then all the sudden you have to deal with their ridiculous policies. I had a friend who had to start his postdoc over half a year late because having a single usage of pot within 12 months of applying for your clearance is apparently an automatic rejection.
RESPONSE B: weed was very helpful with my anxiety..a lifesaver at times during grad school. i always have (and still do) become very paranoid when smoking weed socially, but a few hits in the evening before bed with my husband is just wonderful. i don't find it addictive at all, but ymmv. i've gone months/years without smoking and it hasn't been a big deal. as far as an impact on cognition from long-term use...i doubt it highly if you are using it sparingly.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: a senior professor in my field and is editing a special issue on a very hot topic. B is me, a early career researcher who just happens to be an expert in this very hot, very new topic. In June, I submitted a paper to A's special issue. The paper was mostly conceptual and advanced some ideas about what this very new, very hot topic is different from previous similar topics. The idea wasn't anything incredibly technical, but it required a really deep understanding of about 5 unrelated literatures to be able to make it. In July, I reviewed a paper on this topic for a different journal. It was a good enough paper and I recommend an R&R with some changes to its structure and methodology. Later on thorough the grapevine I learn that A is an author on this paper. Later in July, I get the responses to my paper from A. The reviewers' comments are positive and he wants revisions. Yay! Now, I've received A's revised paper for the other journal to re-review. The intro has been re-writen to basically repeat the ideas that were in my paper. It's not a word for word copy and paste job, but it's the core ideas of my paper right there in the intro. What are my options here? I could raise a stink, but (1) he's a very senior person and (2) he's still the editor of a journal that I want to publish in and (3) it's impossible to prove. I could try to tank his article I'm reviewing, but it's a good article at the end of the day and I want to be able to cite it. Is this just something I've got accept and grumble about? How have other people dealt with similar issues?
RESPONSE A: Try to look at it from an objective standpoint, how will you be able to convince the editor that the ideas are yours? In the end seniors will always get away with these things and battling against will seldom be of any use. Retreat, learn from this and take it with you.
RESPONSE B: You could host a pre-print of your paper on your institution's website, then include in your review a request for them to cite your paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: that's a red flag. I'm wondering if taking a position that someone just a couple years out of a BS is qualified to do would be too big of a step back for me. Being told I could move up the ranks "if I work hard" makes me think they don't recognize a PhD and four years as a postdoc as already demonstrating I work my ass off. And it makes me wonder if I am being too flexible in stepping backwards for my next career move in order to leave academia. With that said, this is a fairly small R&D dept in a large manufacturing company that is a part of a much larger and well-established corporation in my field. This tells me they may not do a lot of hiring for R&D - which would also explain why they defined a role with research requirements as an Engineering I job. What do you think AskAcademia? I'm I looking at this too hard through an academic lens, or am I right to have the impression that they might end up treating me like a fresh college grad? I know I need to be flexible if I'm to stay in one location with my background, but also don't want to sell myself too short.
RESPONSE A: It's not academia, you don't have to stay in the same job for life. Take a step back, show you got the chops to make it in industry, and then move to a different company at a higher position. Your phd will always be on your resume making you stand out when applying for those upper level jobs, what you lack is what is seen as "real life" experience in industry. Working as a grad student/postdoc does not necessarily carry the same expectations as working a 9-5, and people are usually looking for more directly relevant experience when hiring. So build up that experience and you'll be good to go. I say take it (especially if it's in an area you want to live in) but keep looking and applying to other local better opportunities. That's how it works in the real world I hear.
RESPONSE B: Nothing wrong with working a job you're overqualified for until you find a better one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Employed academics, how much of a say did you have in your geographic location? On a scale of 1 to 10, maybe? 1 being absolutely no choice and 10 being the ability to decide exactly where you want to be.
RESPONSE A: First job: 10 2nd job: 3 3rd job: 7
RESPONSE B: 1; smell the sweet, sweet factory smoke
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Assistant Professors: how much time to you spend in your campus office? This will vary some by field, I am sure. I usually aim for three days per week on campus and around 4-5 hours per day as a minimum, a habit I kept though the end of grad school and my postdoc. These are *not* office hours, but time when I work there and generally have face time with my colleagues. Some meetings with graduate students get tacked on to these periods. However, in semesters when I teach little or not at all, some weeks are harder to make my three days than others. I can work just as well at home as I can in my office. I know what my local colleagues do, but I’m curious about what others do.
RESPONSE A: My schedule is arbitrary and capricious.
RESPONSE B: Get in a little after 9 and I leave after my last class ends so on MW I'm out around 3 maybe 4. On TR I'm there til after 5 usually. I do work some on weekends but usually not weeknights.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Assistant Professors: how much time to you spend in your campus office? This will vary some by field, I am sure. I usually aim for three days per week on campus and around 4-5 hours per day as a minimum, a habit I kept though the end of grad school and my postdoc. These are *not* office hours, but time when I work there and generally have face time with my colleagues. Some meetings with graduate students get tacked on to these periods. However, in semesters when I teach little or not at all, some weeks are harder to make my three days than others. I can work just as well at home as I can in my office. I know what my local colleagues do, but I’m curious about what others do.
RESPONSE A: I find it extremely challenging to get any type of meaningful work (i.e. writing) done in my office, but lately I'm here four days a week for 8 - 9 hours a day, because of ongoing data collection and meetings. I'd much rather write from my couch or home office.
RESPONSE B: Most of it. I get a lot of work done at my office, and it's harder for me to concentrate elsewhere. I also live about 10 minutes away, so it's not hard to get here if I have work I need / want to do. And my files are here (My Cloud backup) so sometimes it's easier when I'm working with large datasets to just come here. 5 / 5:30am - 4pm most days weekdays, and often 8 - 4 on Sundays. Occasionally later arrival, but rarely earlier departure.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Assistant Professors: how much time to you spend in your campus office? This will vary some by field, I am sure. I usually aim for three days per week on campus and around 4-5 hours per day as a minimum, a habit I kept though the end of grad school and my postdoc. These are *not* office hours, but time when I work there and generally have face time with my colleagues. Some meetings with graduate students get tacked on to these periods. However, in semesters when I teach little or not at all, some weeks are harder to make my three days than others. I can work just as well at home as I can in my office. I know what my local colleagues do, but I’m curious about what others do.
RESPONSE A: Can I ask what's your institute type, your rough area, and your geographical location (if not US). Most assistant professors I know work on campus about 50-60 hours per week.
RESPONSE B: 8-6, 4 days a week, but often 5 days a week. Out of those 40 hours, I am in class and in regular/recurring meetings for about 30 of them. Nominally, that one day is reserved for "research," but I haven't been able to do any research in weeks. My "research day" becomes "overflow meeting day" about 50% of the time. I have an admin role, and I do much of my admin work from home in the evenings or on the weekends.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Assistant Professors: how much time to you spend in your campus office? This will vary some by field, I am sure. I usually aim for three days per week on campus and around 4-5 hours per day as a minimum, a habit I kept though the end of grad school and my postdoc. These are *not* office hours, but time when I work there and generally have face time with my colleagues. Some meetings with graduate students get tacked on to these periods. However, in semesters when I teach little or not at all, some weeks are harder to make my three days than others. I can work just as well at home as I can in my office. I know what my local colleagues do, but I’m curious about what others do.
RESPONSE A: 8-6, 4 days a week, but often 5 days a week. Out of those 40 hours, I am in class and in regular/recurring meetings for about 30 of them. Nominally, that one day is reserved for "research," but I haven't been able to do any research in weeks. My "research day" becomes "overflow meeting day" about 50% of the time. I have an admin role, and I do much of my admin work from home in the evenings or on the weekends.
RESPONSE B: I used to spend more time in the office, but no one was ever around and students didn't show up for office hours. Now I come in about 90 minutes before classes begin and stay for about 90 minutes after. So... 10-3 m/w/f / More if there are meetings, of course.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: just as well at home as I can in my office. I know what my local colleagues do, but I’m curious about what others do.
RESPONSE A: This does indeed vary dramatically by school and oftentimes by department as well. As a senior department chair who has mentored several faculty through the tenure process at our SLAC, I generally tell pre-tenure faculty that they need to be available to students and visible to colleagues. What that means in practice for us is being in the office every day, and usually for most of it. My current untenured junior colleagues are typically in the office by 900 and are usually there until 4:30-5:00pm. They are of course also doing a lot of work at home in the evenings/weekends as well. That said, as a senior full professor I am usually on campus at 7:30am and several days a week am there past 600pm. Ours is a "high touch" environment, as they say, so we all spend a *lot* of time working one-on-one with students. As chair I know I spend more hours each week meeting with students than I do in class or on my research, probably 10-15 on average and 30+ in a really busy week. So when tenured faculty are putting in 50+ hour weeks it's not uncommon for pre-tenure faculty to be there longer as they are under the pressure to deliver new courses as well as publish. No graduate programs for us. Our largest classes are 25 and we're on a 3/3 load. The way our course schedule works it's quite uncommon for anyone to have a day they don't teach, so very few people would be able to avoid coming to campus M-F at least for class. Campus culture is pretty much universally student-centered so there's a general expectation that faculty are in their offices with doors open if they aren't in class, but nobody keeps track and it's certainly not a problem for people to do other things as long as the general impression is that they are around about as much as their colleagues.
RESPONSE B: Can I ask what's your institute type, your rough area, and your geographical location (if not US). Most assistant professors I know work on campus about 50-60 hours per week.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you remain focused when there is so much political chaos? My current position (post doc in STEM) is not directly impacted by the non-stop crazy political circus that’s going on, but I find myself losing several hours of productivity a day because of it. I’ll come in early and get a lot of work done before grad students show up. Ill retreat to my office to deal with emails and inadvertently start reading the last 24 hours new cycle/Twitter/Reddit... then bam 2 hours are gone... I’ll go back to work and shortly after lunch... bam another hour or two are gone. I might be working while skimming articles or whatever, but it’s a distraction I need to get rid of but can’t. There is little I can do at this moment except for vote and tell friends/family to vote. How do you make it through the day without getting distracted by the reality TV shit show commonly referred to as MAGA.
RESPONSE A: try rescuetime. logs the amount of time you spend on each website or app. then pops up to tell you how productive you've been or how much time you've wasted
RESPONSE B: Try studying politics through the political chaos...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you remain focused when there is so much political chaos? My current position (post doc in STEM) is not directly impacted by the non-stop crazy political circus that’s going on, but I find myself losing several hours of productivity a day because of it. I’ll come in early and get a lot of work done before grad students show up. Ill retreat to my office to deal with emails and inadvertently start reading the last 24 hours new cycle/Twitter/Reddit... then bam 2 hours are gone... I’ll go back to work and shortly after lunch... bam another hour or two are gone. I might be working while skimming articles or whatever, but it’s a distraction I need to get rid of but can’t. There is little I can do at this moment except for vote and tell friends/family to vote. How do you make it through the day without getting distracted by the reality TV shit show commonly referred to as MAGA.
RESPONSE A: Use your work to make it better. I've researched in AI and reasoning for a while now, but after the last election I decided I needed to help make the world a better place with my work. So I established a new research lab dedicated to specifically advancing the kind of AI that makes us reason better. Now, whenever I see the political turmoil and get depressed by it, I ask myself and my students "what flaws in reasoning brought us here, and how can we fix it with AI?"
RESPONSE B: Don't use Twitter and keep news for the morning or after work.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you remain focused when there is so much political chaos? My current position (post doc in STEM) is not directly impacted by the non-stop crazy political circus that’s going on, but I find myself losing several hours of productivity a day because of it. I’ll come in early and get a lot of work done before grad students show up. Ill retreat to my office to deal with emails and inadvertently start reading the last 24 hours new cycle/Twitter/Reddit... then bam 2 hours are gone... I’ll go back to work and shortly after lunch... bam another hour or two are gone. I might be working while skimming articles or whatever, but it’s a distraction I need to get rid of but can’t. There is little I can do at this moment except for vote and tell friends/family to vote. How do you make it through the day without getting distracted by the reality TV shit show commonly referred to as MAGA.
RESPONSE A: Use your work to make it better. I've researched in AI and reasoning for a while now, but after the last election I decided I needed to help make the world a better place with my work. So I established a new research lab dedicated to specifically advancing the kind of AI that makes us reason better. Now, whenever I see the political turmoil and get depressed by it, I ask myself and my students "what flaws in reasoning brought us here, and how can we fix it with AI?"
RESPONSE B: I was really struggling with this. I transitioned myself to getting the NYTimes [insert your news source here] e-mail of the day before I leave for work and then trying to ban myself from the news the rest of the day.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you remain focused when there is so much political chaos? My current position (post doc in STEM) is not directly impacted by the non-stop crazy political circus that’s going on, but I find myself losing several hours of productivity a day because of it. I’ll come in early and get a lot of work done before grad students show up. Ill retreat to my office to deal with emails and inadvertently start reading the last 24 hours new cycle/Twitter/Reddit... then bam 2 hours are gone... I’ll go back to work and shortly after lunch... bam another hour or two are gone. I might be working while skimming articles or whatever, but it’s a distraction I need to get rid of but can’t. There is little I can do at this moment except for vote and tell friends/family to vote. How do you make it through the day without getting distracted by the reality TV shit show commonly referred to as MAGA.
RESPONSE A: Don't use Twitter and keep news for the morning or after work.
RESPONSE B: Simple: don't log into social media or news sites during work hours. Block them on your browser and phone if you need to.
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.