label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
A
|
POST: The daunting task of writing your first paper...where on earth do you begin?! I'm a graduate student in statistics getting ready to write my first paper. It is quite an intimidating task. To start, I figured it would be a good idea to create an outline... However, I feel like my outline is a page long and I have everything I can think of in there! A one page outline is not going to provide me enough information to write a legitimate paper. My advisor suggested going through every bullet and asking myself a few questions: - what is the purpose of this bullet? - does this bullet serve its purpose? - does this bullet contribute to the overall question begin answered in the paper? - if someone knows nothing about this subject, will they understand this bullet? - etc... Running through my outline a few times asking questions like this helped me fill in some gaps, but I still feel like I'm missing things. Academic redditors...what is your process for outlining an academic paper?
RESPONSE A: I've never read a stats paper so I don't know how different the structure is. What I usually do is: 1. Write the methods. This is just an explanation of things you did, so you don't have to do too much cognitive heavy lifting. 2. Write the results. Also just a list of stuff you did, basically. 3. As you're writing the results, you'll naturally start to think of things that belong in the discussion. So write that next. 4. Now go back to the introduction. Try to justify all the stuff you just wrote. 5. Ta da! You're done!
RESPONSE B: A 1-page outline can definitely turn into a paper. You could start with putting together a lit review justifying the work you plan to present, if you're having trouble getting started. It's those first few sentences that I always find the most difficult - I end up rewriting them over and over again.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Looking for degrees at the intersection of Computer Science and Humanities with a focus on tech I've got a bachelor's degree in computer science and I've had a programming career of around a decade. Now I feel like my interests have changed and I'd like to pivot towards the humanities side of things if possible. I've always been interested in how tech intersects with society and I was wondering if there are degrees that would help me learn more and explore this topic. So maybe things like history of computing or say algorithmic fairness or questions involving our life online or our interactions with machines. I know that this seems like a wide stretch but I wanted to contrast what I do NOT want - something like digital humanities, which involves using computing to augment the study of humanities. Are there degrees like this? Am I searching for the wrong keywords? I'm still trying to figure out what I want, so any help/ideas would be great. Thanks for your time! :)
RESPONSE A: Have you thought about computational neuroscience ? You can do different things like : designing brain chips or prostheses, modeling the brain or neural networks, working on brain interface machines, etc…
RESPONSE B: You've got some good answers but as I work in this area, I'll throw out a few more for you. Basically, you can look at the subdiscipline of Computer Science that goes down this path -- human-computer interaction. Maybe Computer Science education, which critically examines how CS is taught. Or, you can look at disciplines within the humanities or social sciences that tend computational, including media studies or certain liberal arts programs. Information schools (ischools) are another one that tends to include this focus. Since this is an interdisciplinary area of study, you'll find a lot of cumbersome names for the departments or programs involved. You might do well to find faculty that write things you're interested in, then find out where they're working.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Looking for degrees at the intersection of Computer Science and Humanities with a focus on tech I've got a bachelor's degree in computer science and I've had a programming career of around a decade. Now I feel like my interests have changed and I'd like to pivot towards the humanities side of things if possible. I've always been interested in how tech intersects with society and I was wondering if there are degrees that would help me learn more and explore this topic. So maybe things like history of computing or say algorithmic fairness or questions involving our life online or our interactions with machines. I know that this seems like a wide stretch but I wanted to contrast what I do NOT want - something like digital humanities, which involves using computing to augment the study of humanities. Are there degrees like this? Am I searching for the wrong keywords? I'm still trying to figure out what I want, so any help/ideas would be great. Thanks for your time! :)
RESPONSE A: The Texts and Technology PhD at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, FL may be worth exploring. It does have a digital humanities track, so don’t let that scare you off. However, the program is *extremely* flexible and can be molded to fit your interests and needs. It’s almost like a liberal arts degree for doctoral students. Perhaps this might fit the bill for you. Good luck finding a program!
RESPONSE B: You've got some good answers but as I work in this area, I'll throw out a few more for you. Basically, you can look at the subdiscipline of Computer Science that goes down this path -- human-computer interaction. Maybe Computer Science education, which critically examines how CS is taught. Or, you can look at disciplines within the humanities or social sciences that tend computational, including media studies or certain liberal arts programs. Information schools (ischools) are another one that tends to include this focus. Since this is an interdisciplinary area of study, you'll find a lot of cumbersome names for the departments or programs involved. You might do well to find faculty that write things you're interested in, then find out where they're working.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Looking for degrees at the intersection of Computer Science and Humanities with a focus on tech I've got a bachelor's degree in computer science and I've had a programming career of around a decade. Now I feel like my interests have changed and I'd like to pivot towards the humanities side of things if possible. I've always been interested in how tech intersects with society and I was wondering if there are degrees that would help me learn more and explore this topic. So maybe things like history of computing or say algorithmic fairness or questions involving our life online or our interactions with machines. I know that this seems like a wide stretch but I wanted to contrast what I do NOT want - something like digital humanities, which involves using computing to augment the study of humanities. Are there degrees like this? Am I searching for the wrong keywords? I'm still trying to figure out what I want, so any help/ideas would be great. Thanks for your time! :)
RESPONSE A: Have you thought about computational neuroscience ? You can do different things like : designing brain chips or prostheses, modeling the brain or neural networks, working on brain interface machines, etc…
RESPONSE B: I would look at History and Philosophy of Science or Science and Technology Studies departments. There's also a small bunch of anthropologists working on this topic, but I'm not sure if they're in anthro departments proper or interdisciplinary programs. The Society for the Social Study of Science (4S) likely has some resources that could be helpful for you. At least as of their most recent professional meeting (October), these were definitely hot topics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Looking for degrees at the intersection of Computer Science and Humanities with a focus on tech I've got a bachelor's degree in computer science and I've had a programming career of around a decade. Now I feel like my interests have changed and I'd like to pivot towards the humanities side of things if possible. I've always been interested in how tech intersects with society and I was wondering if there are degrees that would help me learn more and explore this topic. So maybe things like history of computing or say algorithmic fairness or questions involving our life online or our interactions with machines. I know that this seems like a wide stretch but I wanted to contrast what I do NOT want - something like digital humanities, which involves using computing to augment the study of humanities. Are there degrees like this? Am I searching for the wrong keywords? I'm still trying to figure out what I want, so any help/ideas would be great. Thanks for your time! :)
RESPONSE A: The Texts and Technology PhD at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, FL may be worth exploring. It does have a digital humanities track, so don’t let that scare you off. However, the program is *extremely* flexible and can be molded to fit your interests and needs. It’s almost like a liberal arts degree for doctoral students. Perhaps this might fit the bill for you. Good luck finding a program!
RESPONSE B: I would look at History and Philosophy of Science or Science and Technology Studies departments. There's also a small bunch of anthropologists working on this topic, but I'm not sure if they're in anthro departments proper or interdisciplinary programs. The Society for the Social Study of Science (4S) likely has some resources that could be helpful for you. At least as of their most recent professional meeting (October), these were definitely hot topics.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: of absence from my PhD studies. My symptoms were total burn-out and severe depression (now responding well to meds). Without giving out too much info, the reason for my depression was that a massive, and I mean massive, scientific misconduct investigation went on in my institution = the working environment was a complete pile of shit. I was just lucky not to have my name on any involved articles, but my research group has basically fallen apart and I have no possibilities of going back. But - since I had a contract and funding for four years, and the university has concluded that I do not have any fault in what went down, they are offering to give me a new project in another lab. I don't know really what to do with this. A part of me has just really lost confidence in research as a whole. Why should I keep working my ass off when people above and around me fake data? How can I ever keep to my high ethical standards in an environment where money and connections seem to be more important than solid, robust results that actually help people? By january, I need to tell my university how I choose. Do I stay (in research?) or do I go (to an uncertain future, although I have my MD so no risk of not getting a job). Any nice advice from you seniors?
RESPONSE A: > A part of me has just really lost confidence in research as a whole. Why should I keep working my ass off when people above and around me fake data? How can I ever keep to my high ethical standards in an environment where money and connections seem to be more important than solid, robust results that actually help people? If this bothers you, know that it isn't any better in the private sector. Blow whistles. Take the high ground.
RESPONSE B: To me it depends how far along you are. If you're in the dissertation writing phase go ahead and finish. You don't necessarily have to go into research when you're done, but the degree will give you more options. You can also look into teaching schools or even junior colleges. Not everyone needs or wants to shiny prestigious research job. And I feel for you. I'm in humanities, so no research lab implosion, but grad school was a collection of nightmares for me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do prof ever choose to stay at associate-with-tenure and not go for promotion to full? I was thinking back to a conversation I had a few years ago. I'd looked up a favorite undergrad professor and saw that, twenty years later, she was still AWT and hadn't published anything since the 1990s. I asked a colleague who knew her why that was, and he said "All she ever wanted was to teach and advise. She did what she needed to get tenure and then, well, taught and advised. She teaches two or three subjects every semester and is totally happy with that." But that's still the only time I've heard of someone doing that, and I'm curious if it's just because my knowledge is limited to the culture of one institution.
RESPONSE A: On my campus there's an expectation of higher overall performance as we go to higher ranks. So, when I was chair, I had a conversation with a colleague who told me he was going to apply for full and then never do anything else except teach his classes. I pointed out that he would be expected to do more as full than as associate. He asked what could anybody do about it since he's tenured. I reminded him that our system has merit raises only (when we manage to get raises!) and that a faculty member who operates at an associate level when full wouldn't get the same raise as s/he would have as an associate. So, he didn't apply.
RESPONSE B: One my advisors when I was a PhD student told me that he had no interest in a full professorship. I asked why and I won’t forget his answer. “Priorities change.” He went on to explain that he’d rather spend time with his kids than spend time publishing and fighting for a title. In addition despite the common perception that academia is a meritocracy, it’s not fully one. There is a lot of politics. Sometimes it’s enough to keep people out of certain positions. It can mean a lot of effort for very little gain.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do prof ever choose to stay at associate-with-tenure and not go for promotion to full? I was thinking back to a conversation I had a few years ago. I'd looked up a favorite undergrad professor and saw that, twenty years later, she was still AWT and hadn't published anything since the 1990s. I asked a colleague who knew her why that was, and he said "All she ever wanted was to teach and advise. She did what she needed to get tenure and then, well, taught and advised. She teaches two or three subjects every semester and is totally happy with that." But that's still the only time I've heard of someone doing that, and I'm curious if it's just because my knowledge is limited to the culture of one institution.
RESPONSE A: Most of the profs I know in the humanities haven’t/don’t plan to apply for full
RESPONSE B: One my advisors when I was a PhD student told me that he had no interest in a full professorship. I asked why and I won’t forget his answer. “Priorities change.” He went on to explain that he’d rather spend time with his kids than spend time publishing and fighting for a title. In addition despite the common perception that academia is a meritocracy, it’s not fully one. There is a lot of politics. Sometimes it’s enough to keep people out of certain positions. It can mean a lot of effort for very little gain.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do prof ever choose to stay at associate-with-tenure and not go for promotion to full? I was thinking back to a conversation I had a few years ago. I'd looked up a favorite undergrad professor and saw that, twenty years later, she was still AWT and hadn't published anything since the 1990s. I asked a colleague who knew her why that was, and he said "All she ever wanted was to teach and advise. She did what she needed to get tenure and then, well, taught and advised. She teaches two or three subjects every semester and is totally happy with that." But that's still the only time I've heard of someone doing that, and I'm curious if it's just because my knowledge is limited to the culture of one institution.
RESPONSE A: yep, there are all kinds of reasons for it. Some realize they would NOT get promoted to professor…. but then others choose not too… it’s a thing
RESPONSE B: One my advisors when I was a PhD student told me that he had no interest in a full professorship. I asked why and I won’t forget his answer. “Priorities change.” He went on to explain that he’d rather spend time with his kids than spend time publishing and fighting for a title. In addition despite the common perception that academia is a meritocracy, it’s not fully one. There is a lot of politics. Sometimes it’s enough to keep people out of certain positions. It can mean a lot of effort for very little gain.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do prof ever choose to stay at associate-with-tenure and not go for promotion to full? I was thinking back to a conversation I had a few years ago. I'd looked up a favorite undergrad professor and saw that, twenty years later, she was still AWT and hadn't published anything since the 1990s. I asked a colleague who knew her why that was, and he said "All she ever wanted was to teach and advise. She did what she needed to get tenure and then, well, taught and advised. She teaches two or three subjects every semester and is totally happy with that." But that's still the only time I've heard of someone doing that, and I'm curious if it's just because my knowledge is limited to the culture of one institution.
RESPONSE A: yep, there are all kinds of reasons for it. Some realize they would NOT get promoted to professor…. but then others choose not too… it’s a thing
RESPONSE B: I know lots of people who are well aware of what the requirements for full are at their institution and choose not to even try to meet them. I also know people who have gone for full and been turned down. Finally, I know people who actually have a decent shot of getting it, but don't apply for it. In some cases this is perfectionism; in others, it's still having a sense of imposter syndrome; in others, fear of rejection.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do prof ever choose to stay at associate-with-tenure and not go for promotion to full? I was thinking back to a conversation I had a few years ago. I'd looked up a favorite undergrad professor and saw that, twenty years later, she was still AWT and hadn't published anything since the 1990s. I asked a colleague who knew her why that was, and he said "All she ever wanted was to teach and advise. She did what she needed to get tenure and then, well, taught and advised. She teaches two or three subjects every semester and is totally happy with that." But that's still the only time I've heard of someone doing that, and I'm curious if it's just because my knowledge is limited to the culture of one institution.
RESPONSE A: On my campus there's an expectation of higher overall performance as we go to higher ranks. So, when I was chair, I had a conversation with a colleague who told me he was going to apply for full and then never do anything else except teach his classes. I pointed out that he would be expected to do more as full than as associate. He asked what could anybody do about it since he's tenured. I reminded him that our system has merit raises only (when we manage to get raises!) and that a faculty member who operates at an associate level when full wouldn't get the same raise as s/he would have as an associate. So, he didn't apply.
RESPONSE B: yep, there are all kinds of reasons for it. Some realize they would NOT get promoted to professor…. but then others choose not too… it’s a thing
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: ll also bring a grey or camel colored blazer if it gets cold inside, but the interview is in southern US so still pretty hot this time of year. * I'm bringing backup outfits of midi skirt and blouse, dress pants and blouse, or pencil knee-length skirt and blouse. * None of my options are heavily patterned (mini polka dots or tuxedo pin stripes at most). Mainly dark neutral colors! * **Shoes.** I am 4'11" with a young face so I feel like heels are an absolute must. I just bought a mid-height block heel (2.75"). (I will bring flat shoes in a bag just in case). Would heels be looked down upon given the amount of walking around we will likely do? * **Bag.** I am not a purse gal. I do own a designer professional tote but I never use it. If I bring this, is it "too feminine" or "too bulky"? Should I opt for something more androgynous like a minimalist backpack (I don't own one but I probably can borrow from a friend). TLDR: are heels ok for a job interview in academia (especially considering i'm so short)? And are tote bags acceptable to carry my things (back up shoes, laptop for presentation, snacks, etc)?
RESPONSE A: If you’re confident in heels then go for it. For the elements you can’t predict I think you should go with the option you feel most comfortable and confident in. The final step being do not doubt yourself, do not second guess your decision. Usually you can get away with anything if you own it.
RESPONSE B: I don't know your field, but my usual advice is to wear closed toe shoes and pants that don't leave skin exposed. The shoes shouldn't be breathable. The fabric depends on field (like no fleece if there is a radiochem department). In other words, if you are getting a facilities tour, then make sure your outfit is likely to fit their safety requirements. The last thing you want is an awkward pause while they go look for an extra pair of sweatpants for you to borrow.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: and bag are stressing me out. Help/advise is greatly appreciated!! * **Interview agenda.** Facilities tour, present my research to the department, meeting multiple professors and trainees. * **Outfit.** I'll wear a black knee-length sheath dress. I'll also bring a grey or camel colored blazer if it gets cold inside, but the interview is in southern US so still pretty hot this time of year. * I'm bringing backup outfits of midi skirt and blouse, dress pants and blouse, or pencil knee-length skirt and blouse. * None of my options are heavily patterned (mini polka dots or tuxedo pin stripes at most). Mainly dark neutral colors! * **Shoes.** I am 4'11" with a young face so I feel like heels are an absolute must. I just bought a mid-height block heel (2.75"). (I will bring flat shoes in a bag just in case). Would heels be looked down upon given the amount of walking around we will likely do? * **Bag.** I am not a purse gal. I do own a designer professional tote but I never use it. If I bring this, is it "too feminine" or "too bulky"? Should I opt for something more androgynous like a minimalist backpack (I don't own one but I probably can borrow from a friend). TLDR: are heels ok for a job interview in academia (especially considering i'm so short)? And are tote bags acceptable to carry my things (back up shoes, laptop for presentation, snacks, etc)?
RESPONSE A: If you’re confident in heels then go for it. For the elements you can’t predict I think you should go with the option you feel most comfortable and confident in. The final step being do not doubt yourself, do not second guess your decision. Usually you can get away with anything if you own it.
RESPONSE B: Heels are fine for an academic interview. However, if you don't typically wear heels and you know you're going to be doing a fair amount of walking, I would strongly recommend wearing something flat.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: are stressing me out. Help/advise is greatly appreciated!! * **Interview agenda.** Facilities tour, present my research to the department, meeting multiple professors and trainees. * **Outfit.** I'll wear a black knee-length sheath dress. I'll also bring a grey or camel colored blazer if it gets cold inside, but the interview is in southern US so still pretty hot this time of year. * I'm bringing backup outfits of midi skirt and blouse, dress pants and blouse, or pencil knee-length skirt and blouse. * None of my options are heavily patterned (mini polka dots or tuxedo pin stripes at most). Mainly dark neutral colors! * **Shoes.** I am 4'11" with a young face so I feel like heels are an absolute must. I just bought a mid-height block heel (2.75"). (I will bring flat shoes in a bag just in case). Would heels be looked down upon given the amount of walking around we will likely do? * **Bag.** I am not a purse gal. I do own a designer professional tote but I never use it. If I bring this, is it "too feminine" or "too bulky"? Should I opt for something more androgynous like a minimalist backpack (I don't own one but I probably can borrow from a friend). TLDR: are heels ok for a job interview in academia (especially considering i'm so short)? And are tote bags acceptable to carry my things (back up shoes, laptop for presentation, snacks, etc)?
RESPONSE A: Heels are fine for an academic interview. However, if you don't typically wear heels and you know you're going to be doing a fair amount of walking, I would strongly recommend wearing something flat.
RESPONSE B: Sensible heels (like the block heels you mention) are fine, as long as you’re comfortable wearing them. Your tote is also fine. Focus on feeling comfortable and confident. As long as your self-presentation is confident and professional so that you can focus on your potential contributions, you’ll do well!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: appreciated!! * **Interview agenda.** Facilities tour, present my research to the department, meeting multiple professors and trainees. * **Outfit.** I'll wear a black knee-length sheath dress. I'll also bring a grey or camel colored blazer if it gets cold inside, but the interview is in southern US so still pretty hot this time of year. * I'm bringing backup outfits of midi skirt and blouse, dress pants and blouse, or pencil knee-length skirt and blouse. * None of my options are heavily patterned (mini polka dots or tuxedo pin stripes at most). Mainly dark neutral colors! * **Shoes.** I am 4'11" with a young face so I feel like heels are an absolute must. I just bought a mid-height block heel (2.75"). (I will bring flat shoes in a bag just in case). Would heels be looked down upon given the amount of walking around we will likely do? * **Bag.** I am not a purse gal. I do own a designer professional tote but I never use it. If I bring this, is it "too feminine" or "too bulky"? Should I opt for something more androgynous like a minimalist backpack (I don't own one but I probably can borrow from a friend). TLDR: are heels ok for a job interview in academia (especially considering i'm so short)? And are tote bags acceptable to carry my things (back up shoes, laptop for presentation, snacks, etc)?
RESPONSE A: Heels are fine for an academic interview. However, if you don't typically wear heels and you know you're going to be doing a fair amount of walking, I would strongly recommend wearing something flat.
RESPONSE B: As someone who is also 4' 11", I learned to wear heels, at least block heels everywhere, including labs. But I know what kind of heel materials work aka no slip-rubber heels. So make sure if u are wearing heels, they are comfortable and you can walk. For bags, carry something reasonably sized, you don't want to accidently hit something.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: is greatly appreciated!! * **Interview agenda.** Facilities tour, present my research to the department, meeting multiple professors and trainees. * **Outfit.** I'll wear a black knee-length sheath dress. I'll also bring a grey or camel colored blazer if it gets cold inside, but the interview is in southern US so still pretty hot this time of year. * I'm bringing backup outfits of midi skirt and blouse, dress pants and blouse, or pencil knee-length skirt and blouse. * None of my options are heavily patterned (mini polka dots or tuxedo pin stripes at most). Mainly dark neutral colors! * **Shoes.** I am 4'11" with a young face so I feel like heels are an absolute must. I just bought a mid-height block heel (2.75"). (I will bring flat shoes in a bag just in case). Would heels be looked down upon given the amount of walking around we will likely do? * **Bag.** I am not a purse gal. I do own a designer professional tote but I never use it. If I bring this, is it "too feminine" or "too bulky"? Should I opt for something more androgynous like a minimalist backpack (I don't own one but I probably can borrow from a friend). TLDR: are heels ok for a job interview in academia (especially considering i'm so short)? And are tote bags acceptable to carry my things (back up shoes, laptop for presentation, snacks, etc)?
RESPONSE A: Sensible heels (like the block heels you mention) are fine, as long as you’re comfortable wearing them. Your tote is also fine. Focus on feeling comfortable and confident. As long as your self-presentation is confident and professional so that you can focus on your potential contributions, you’ll do well!
RESPONSE B: I realise you want to taller but every interview I've ever done has involved me being walked around to labs and people's offices and even around the whole site before. If you can't stand and walk in them comfortably for hours don't wear them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What would be the best way to introduce myself? I am a first year PhD student, and I just learned that a new assistant professor just joined the department and their research interests are very similar to mine. My advisor has encouraged me to approach other professors in the department about research opportunities, but I'm unsure of *how* to do it. I'm generally a very shy and quiet person, and having just started here I've been feeling out of my element socially and I'm scared about making a bad first impression. How should I approach introducing myself to this new professor and stating my interest in research? Thanks in advance.
RESPONSE A: "Hi, my name is X and I'm a first year PhD student. I'm looking for a research advisor, and I see that your work is in <area I'm interested in also>. Can I schedule a meeting with you to talk about doing research with you?" General tip (learrned the hard way, I'm awkward about this also) - Be direct about your purpose, ask for the meeting so that you both know there's a window of time set aside for discussing it. Even a brand new prof should know to expect such conversations, worst case is mild surprise ("me? but I haven't really done anything here yet!").
RESPONSE B: Maybe check to see if they have office hours and try to pop by, or shoot them an e-mail. Before meeting try to read up about what they have done in the past. As a new student they should understand that you're dipping your toes in so don't be too intimidated - professors are just people. This is a great way to get face time and see if you want to work with this person!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: good academic job by doing that. I want to develop my own ideas for papers, working through the theory and then publishing them. If I wanted to code I would have gotten a Master's degree and left years ago. My ideas for papers take the statistic developed in the first paper I helped write and apply it to more contexts, kinda like the paper I'm working on now. Another idea was to take a statistical model I read about in a journal and develop a procedure tailored for it that's taking a well-established statistical procedure (online change point detection) and using it for that model. Admittedly these aren't groundbreaking ideas but at least they're mine. When I told a friend of mine about my ideas he said the problem with them is that they're "derivative" since all they do is taking known ideas and combining them in I guess an obvious way. He said that this will silo me in to one topic. Basically he didn't like the approach I was taking. Is being "derivative" like this a problem? Am I thinking the right way when it comes to making new paper ideas?
RESPONSE A: 1) there’s a math joke here: “I wanted to do research in calculus, but it was derivative.” 2) as someone above me said, your work is part of the process of discovery. One adaptation follows another follows another until a new model is formed from the aggregated steps. There’s nothing wrong with taking the next logical step in the chain.
RESPONSE B: I'm in a different field so take my 2 cents for all it's worth, but I wouldn't worry too much. When working on my lit review I came across like 7 papers in respected journals, cited plenty of times, that were all basically rehashes on the same idea with some *very* minor experimental tweaks. Your idea sounds to me like it meets the requirement of being sufficiently novel to be considered original research (tailoring a well known procedure for a specific application). We all like to dream we'll do something totally out of left field that no one has ever seen before, but most research is the smaller, iterative steps like yours. As you say, not groundbreaking but also not nothing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: the first paper but for a different context, and while I had more say in developing the theoretical side of that paper I feel as if most of the theoretical heavy lifting came from my advisor; my biggest contribution, again, was coding, where I did the simulations and am now (struggling) finding a data example to which to apply the method. And my advisor suggested for the next project a different topic where again I'll probably be doing a data application and simulations, from how he described it. I'm getting tired of writing code implementing someone else's ideas; I don't think I can get a good academic job by doing that. I want to develop my own ideas for papers, working through the theory and then publishing them. If I wanted to code I would have gotten a Master's degree and left years ago. My ideas for papers take the statistic developed in the first paper I helped write and apply it to more contexts, kinda like the paper I'm working on now. Another idea was to take a statistical model I read about in a journal and develop a procedure tailored for it that's taking a well-established statistical procedure (online change point detection) and using it for that model. Admittedly these aren't groundbreaking ideas but at least they're mine. When I told a friend of mine about my ideas he said the problem with them is that they're "derivative" since all they do is taking known ideas and combining them in I guess an obvious way. He said that this will silo me in to one topic. Basically he didn't like the approach I was taking. Is being "derivative" like this a problem? Am I thinking the right way when it comes to making new paper ideas?
RESPONSE A: 1) there’s a math joke here: “I wanted to do research in calculus, but it was derivative.” 2) as someone above me said, your work is part of the process of discovery. One adaptation follows another follows another until a new model is formed from the aggregated steps. There’s nothing wrong with taking the next logical step in the chain.
RESPONSE B: > derivative If you're not remaining the same things you do shouldn't be reduced to zero.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: third publication that I'm wrapping up with my advisor building on the theory from the first paper but for a different context, and while I had more say in developing the theoretical side of that paper I feel as if most of the theoretical heavy lifting came from my advisor; my biggest contribution, again, was coding, where I did the simulations and am now (struggling) finding a data example to which to apply the method. And my advisor suggested for the next project a different topic where again I'll probably be doing a data application and simulations, from how he described it. I'm getting tired of writing code implementing someone else's ideas; I don't think I can get a good academic job by doing that. I want to develop my own ideas for papers, working through the theory and then publishing them. If I wanted to code I would have gotten a Master's degree and left years ago. My ideas for papers take the statistic developed in the first paper I helped write and apply it to more contexts, kinda like the paper I'm working on now. Another idea was to take a statistical model I read about in a journal and develop a procedure tailored for it that's taking a well-established statistical procedure (online change point detection) and using it for that model. Admittedly these aren't groundbreaking ideas but at least they're mine. When I told a friend of mine about my ideas he said the problem with them is that they're "derivative" since all they do is taking known ideas and combining them in I guess an obvious way. He said that this will silo me in to one topic. Basically he didn't like the approach I was taking. Is being "derivative" like this a problem? Am I thinking the right way when it comes to making new paper ideas?
RESPONSE A: To add to other replies: try not to be overly idealistic or naive about the likely significance of your research. While we all want to discover a new big theory, the reality is that 99% of research is incremental. Sounds like you're on a good path.
RESPONSE B: > derivative If you're not remaining the same things you do shouldn't be reduced to zero.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: in to one topic. Basically he didn't like the approach I was taking. Is being "derivative" like this a problem? Am I thinking the right way when it comes to making new paper ideas?
RESPONSE A: As someone that works in certain subfields of statistics... What exactly are they saying is derivative about what you do? Like...the amount of truly new ideas that come out of the mathematical sciences are really, really few and far between. Most times I see the word "novel" thrown around I roll my eyes. Like...hell, my most famous stuff really isn't anything new...just applied to a new area. That's it. It's about as derivative as you can get. You're still learning. Do what you like, it's not worth it doing "hot" things if you don't like them. There is a point to listening to others but do it too much and you'll hate yourself. I learned this the hard way in my postdoc.
RESPONSE B: i know your field so here are my thoughts. first, it really depends on what you want to do. if you want to become a professor at an R1 then yes you probably need more "novel" papers that can get you into JASA/annals, etc. if you go to a lower rank school then getting more publications (regardless if they are derivative) could make your tenure case. deans don't know the difference between communications in statistics vs. JASA, but they all know how to count! if you want to go into the industry or data science, then knowing how to actually implement algorithms, code, modify existing ideas and code them, etc, is valuable in my opinion. ​ second, i think research is hard, and publishing is very, very hard. if you don't have groundbreaking ideas right now then it is ok to work on more "derivative" ideas first. we all need to learn how to walk before we can run. some people try to start running first and end up with nothing. that's what happened to many of my classmates. but if you have novel ideas and the aptitude to actually execute them then these should be prioritized.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: model I read about in a journal and develop a procedure tailored for it that's taking a well-established statistical procedure (online change point detection) and using it for that model. Admittedly these aren't groundbreaking ideas but at least they're mine. When I told a friend of mine about my ideas he said the problem with them is that they're "derivative" since all they do is taking known ideas and combining them in I guess an obvious way. He said that this will silo me in to one topic. Basically he didn't like the approach I was taking. Is being "derivative" like this a problem? Am I thinking the right way when it comes to making new paper ideas?
RESPONSE A: You should read Richard Feynmann's letter to one of his students who now had a faculty position and was worried about working on unimportant things.. Basically, he says you should derive satisfaction from problems you can make progress on and people care about.
RESPONSE B: i know your field so here are my thoughts. first, it really depends on what you want to do. if you want to become a professor at an R1 then yes you probably need more "novel" papers that can get you into JASA/annals, etc. if you go to a lower rank school then getting more publications (regardless if they are derivative) could make your tenure case. deans don't know the difference between communications in statistics vs. JASA, but they all know how to count! if you want to go into the industry or data science, then knowing how to actually implement algorithms, code, modify existing ideas and code them, etc, is valuable in my opinion. ​ second, i think research is hard, and publishing is very, very hard. if you don't have groundbreaking ideas right now then it is ok to work on more "derivative" ideas first. we all need to learn how to walk before we can run. some people try to start running first and end up with nothing. that's what happened to many of my classmates. but if you have novel ideas and the aptitude to actually execute them then these should be prioritized.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: From a practical standpoint, is a career in academia worth the risk? Hi everyone, I love linguistics. Specifically, sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics, and I’d like to pursue a PhD at one point in either but for now I’m starting by getting a masters in sociocultural linguistics in the UK. However, recently I’ve started having doubts as I had to defer my offer to next year because of financial issues and that has caused me to doubt my choice of pursuing a career in academia. I love teaching, but teaching in schools is not for me (I’ve experienced it). I know that the experience is different depending on the field, but I’d like some realistic insight into whether I can have a career in either field. While my course will be in the UK, I’m not an EU citizen so this will be quite the investment and I’d like to know if I should pursue something that I’m genuinely passionate about or if I should give up on it now and try to find some other masters course that will help me start a new career in a different field that I’m equally interested in. Possibly business consulting or educational consulting. Thank you for reading and I appreciate your insights.
RESPONSE A: No, it is not worth the risk.
RESPONSE B: (USA, stem) I pursued academia and landed at TT position at my #1 choice university. I found the risk to be worth it because 1) I wanted to be a professor more than anything and 2) I had a plan for what I would do if I didn't land an academic job, and I would be nearly as happy with that outcome. Having a backup plan is a big deal for getting a PhD, and I was happy enough with my backup that I almost didnt accept the faculty position because my industry offers were very good and very interesting.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: schools is not for me (I’ve experienced it). I know that the experience is different depending on the field, but I’d like some realistic insight into whether I can have a career in either field. While my course will be in the UK, I’m not an EU citizen so this will be quite the investment and I’d like to know if I should pursue something that I’m genuinely passionate about or if I should give up on it now and try to find some other masters course that will help me start a new career in a different field that I’m equally interested in. Possibly business consulting or educational consulting. Thank you for reading and I appreciate your insights.
RESPONSE A: Linguistics is a pretty rarefied field. Not a lot of schools even have full linguistics departments. If you love it, do it, though. I majored in Linguistics (though my masters was in TESOL, which is sometimes packaged under "applied linguistics") and in the nearly 3 decades since I graduated, which includes about 13 years of college teaching, I have only ever taught one linguistics course. But to be fair, I veered away from pure linguistics a long time ago. Linguistics does however offer a variety of in-roads with other disciplines, and there's a lot of opportunity in coding, AI, corpus linguistics, speech therapy, and even medical research (i.e. brain injury, head trauma, etc... ). Or, of course, education -- I apply what I learned to teaching, and working with English Language Learners. I love, love LOVE sociolinguistics, and I found it invaluable in my high school and college teaching careers working in cities with large populations of immigrants. If you full on into socio, you will also wade in the waters of sociology, anthropology, ethnic studies, and history. it really is a field that gives one a big picture understanding of how the human condition works. Not sure I actually gave you anything of value in all my rambling. But it's not often one comes across someone in the wild who says they're down with Linguistics :-)
RESPONSE B: No, it is not worth the risk.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: From a practical standpoint, is a career in academia worth the risk? Hi everyone, I love linguistics. Specifically, sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics, and I’d like to pursue a PhD at one point in either but for now I’m starting by getting a masters in sociocultural linguistics in the UK. However, recently I’ve started having doubts as I had to defer my offer to next year because of financial issues and that has caused me to doubt my choice of pursuing a career in academia. I love teaching, but teaching in schools is not for me (I’ve experienced it). I know that the experience is different depending on the field, but I’d like some realistic insight into whether I can have a career in either field. While my course will be in the UK, I’m not an EU citizen so this will be quite the investment and I’d like to know if I should pursue something that I’m genuinely passionate about or if I should give up on it now and try to find some other masters course that will help me start a new career in a different field that I’m equally interested in. Possibly business consulting or educational consulting. Thank you for reading and I appreciate your insights.
RESPONSE A: No, it is not worth the risk.
RESPONSE B: I'd recommend reading this report from the UK royal society from 2018 PDF, especially their figure 1.6. It shows where all the PhD graduates go past their PhD: roughly half go on to do research, 3.5% go on to a non-professor researcher position, and *0.45%* make it to a tenured professor position. This is not specific for sociolinguistics of course, but I at least think that this picture is pretty grim. The good news is that statistically speaking, a PhD is likely to give you above-average chances of fulfilling employment, whatever you end up doing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: and I don't know what, if anything, I can do to help? I am a young research professor, only in my third year at this University, and teaching my first class - up until now, I've been involved with research and research only. There's a student in my class who I am very concerned about. In the 2 months I have been teaching this class, she has dropped a lot of weight, going from a slim healthy looking girl to a stick with a head, literally. I mean, I look at her and I think her neck is about to snap under the weight of her head. The class is multiple times a week, and *every* class she just looks sicker and sicker. Sunken eyes, extremely slow movements. I finally decided to ask this question when I saw her nearly faint when getting up. It's shocking. I have no knowledge of eating disorders, but this seems like the epitome of anorexia. It's a bloody shame too, she seemed like a very bright and engaged student to start with, now she hardly even looks up during class. I am not in america or in any of the more... evolved western countries, and unfortunately, there really is not much focus on student mental health or even a guide on scopes of faculty-student interactions, basically as long as we stand in front of class and teach them something, and as long as the students show up, the leadership is happy with it. This student is from abroad, and more than likely doesn't see her family more than once or twice a year, and I haven't really seen her with any friends, so I think if I don't do anything, no one will. Honestly I'm scared she might die, and there could have been something I could have done about it. What can I, as faculty, do to help her?
RESPONSE A: I think you may be better off asking someone who's local about what to do, rather than here. Mental health, the concepts of personal space/privacy, concern for others etc. can be drastically different depending on a culture. Better yet, ask a local professor about what they'd do.
RESPONSE B: What about asking her if she's okay?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: concerned about. In the 2 months I have been teaching this class, she has dropped a lot of weight, going from a slim healthy looking girl to a stick with a head, literally. I mean, I look at her and I think her neck is about to snap under the weight of her head. The class is multiple times a week, and *every* class she just looks sicker and sicker. Sunken eyes, extremely slow movements. I finally decided to ask this question when I saw her nearly faint when getting up. It's shocking. I have no knowledge of eating disorders, but this seems like the epitome of anorexia. It's a bloody shame too, she seemed like a very bright and engaged student to start with, now she hardly even looks up during class. I am not in america or in any of the more... evolved western countries, and unfortunately, there really is not much focus on student mental health or even a guide on scopes of faculty-student interactions, basically as long as we stand in front of class and teach them something, and as long as the students show up, the leadership is happy with it. This student is from abroad, and more than likely doesn't see her family more than once or twice a year, and I haven't really seen her with any friends, so I think if I don't do anything, no one will. Honestly I'm scared she might die, and there could have been something I could have done about it. What can I, as faculty, do to help her?
RESPONSE A: I think you may be better off asking someone who's local about what to do, rather than here. Mental health, the concepts of personal space/privacy, concern for others etc. can be drastically different depending on a culture. Better yet, ask a local professor about what they'd do.
RESPONSE B: Is there a Dean of Student Services or anyone like that? Who on campus handles student clubs and housing and stuff? That's the direction for you to look toward. Also, notifying your department chair is probably a good idea, assuming s/he is more connected to the rest of the administration than you are. I hope you're able to help your student.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: research only. There's a student in my class who I am very concerned about. In the 2 months I have been teaching this class, she has dropped a lot of weight, going from a slim healthy looking girl to a stick with a head, literally. I mean, I look at her and I think her neck is about to snap under the weight of her head. The class is multiple times a week, and *every* class she just looks sicker and sicker. Sunken eyes, extremely slow movements. I finally decided to ask this question when I saw her nearly faint when getting up. It's shocking. I have no knowledge of eating disorders, but this seems like the epitome of anorexia. It's a bloody shame too, she seemed like a very bright and engaged student to start with, now she hardly even looks up during class. I am not in america or in any of the more... evolved western countries, and unfortunately, there really is not much focus on student mental health or even a guide on scopes of faculty-student interactions, basically as long as we stand in front of class and teach them something, and as long as the students show up, the leadership is happy with it. This student is from abroad, and more than likely doesn't see her family more than once or twice a year, and I haven't really seen her with any friends, so I think if I don't do anything, no one will. Honestly I'm scared she might die, and there could have been something I could have done about it. What can I, as faculty, do to help her?
RESPONSE A: I think you may be better off asking someone who's local about what to do, rather than here. Mental health, the concepts of personal space/privacy, concern for others etc. can be drastically different depending on a culture. Better yet, ask a local professor about what they'd do.
RESPONSE B: If she's deteriorated since starting, then it may well be stress, etc., as often affects students who are away from home for the first time. This would be especially hard if she has moved to a new country. Have you considered speaking to her, or contacting her parents?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: When did you know you wanted to enter academia? And how did you know?
RESPONSE A: (In science) When you find a question, and then realize that you absolutely can not bear the thought of doing anything besides working toward answering it.
RESPONSE B: I was "unschooled" until high school and spent most of my time reading books about pretty much anything I was interested in. When I was about 11, I got really into King Arthur studies for about a year or so, and decided at that time that I would almost certainly get a PhD and work in Arthurian studies. My interests gradually moved towards other areas, but the idea of going into academia never left me. I honestly can't imagine how I'd survive in any career that didn't involve reading and writing about things I feel like reading and writing about. The only real question was which field I wanted to go into.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Re-Applying to Same TT Position One Year Later (When You Were Rejected the First Time Around) Hi! A year ago I applied to a TT position offered at a somewhat prestigious small liberal arts college. I got Skype-interviewed (didn't feel like I knocked it out of the park, TBH). Anyhow, about a month goes by, no news, I email the search committee chair, he tells me they have invited three people for campus interviews, sorry and good luck. That was a year ago and a few days ago they posted the exact same position announcement. I suppose somewhere along the line the search/hiring process tanked for some reason. Anyhow, I wanted to ask your opinion, should I re-apply; do you think I stand a chance? I feel like I am a great fit for the position and I have 'enriched' my CV with publications and other departmental duties compared to a year ago.
RESPONSE A: Having just served on four search committees... Apply again. If you got the phone interview, they were curious about you. Talk directly to the position in your letter and highlight in your writing how you fit. Whatever the position is, link your research and scholarship into that. I will tell you that following phone interviews, there were people that I was heart broken not to invite to campus. They were phenomenal, we just only had x number of spots to bring and people who fit themselves into our vision better. In the end, sometimes as a committee you hope for a chance to bring your next option after in person interviews.
RESPONSE B: Why would you not? If you're like me, you've applied to many, many positions, so what's one more.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Re-Applying to Same TT Position One Year Later (When You Were Rejected the First Time Around) Hi! A year ago I applied to a TT position offered at a somewhat prestigious small liberal arts college. I got Skype-interviewed (didn't feel like I knocked it out of the park, TBH). Anyhow, about a month goes by, no news, I email the search committee chair, he tells me they have invited three people for campus interviews, sorry and good luck. That was a year ago and a few days ago they posted the exact same position announcement. I suppose somewhere along the line the search/hiring process tanked for some reason. Anyhow, I wanted to ask your opinion, should I re-apply; do you think I stand a chance? I feel like I am a great fit for the position and I have 'enriched' my CV with publications and other departmental duties compared to a year ago.
RESPONSE A: Having just served on four search committees... Apply again. If you got the phone interview, they were curious about you. Talk directly to the position in your letter and highlight in your writing how you fit. Whatever the position is, link your research and scholarship into that. I will tell you that following phone interviews, there were people that I was heart broken not to invite to campus. They were phenomenal, we just only had x number of spots to bring and people who fit themselves into our vision better. In the end, sometimes as a committee you hope for a chance to bring your next option after in person interviews.
RESPONSE B: I agree with others - apply for the position again, and look for ways you can improve on last year. Having a better CV will help and it may be that is all that it takes to tip the balance but there may be other factors you can improve on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: campus interview tips? I’m going to have my first ever in-person campus interview in a R2 public university in the US. Would really love to hear some tips here. Is there anything in particular you wish you knew before your campus interview? Or anything you did/said during the campus visit that made you a favorable candidate to the search committee/dean/chair/students/other faculty members?
RESPONSE A: Give them a sense that you can parachute in and save them a lot of work if they appoint you. Show you've thought about how you'd approach the role.
RESPONSE B: Bring a granola bar! Or a snack in case you get hungry or drained but can’t run out to get food. Honestly the best advice I was given.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: campus interview tips? I’m going to have my first ever in-person campus interview in a R2 public university in the US. Would really love to hear some tips here. Is there anything in particular you wish you knew before your campus interview? Or anything you did/said during the campus visit that made you a favorable candidate to the search committee/dean/chair/students/other faculty members?
RESPONSE A: Congrats! One thing that tripped me up the first time I had an on-campus interview was a question that came up in the one-on-ones. I knew stuff about my own research, but I wasn’t prepared to talk about the literature more generally. So when I got asked about my thoughts on recent work in my field, I just crashed and burned. That was at an R1, but it’s still a reasonable question at an R2.
RESPONSE B: Bring a granola bar! Or a snack in case you get hungry or drained but can’t run out to get food. Honestly the best advice I was given.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: campus interview tips? I’m going to have my first ever in-person campus interview in a R2 public university in the US. Would really love to hear some tips here. Is there anything in particular you wish you knew before your campus interview? Or anything you did/said during the campus visit that made you a favorable candidate to the search committee/dean/chair/students/other faculty members?
RESPONSE A: Bring a granola bar! Or a snack in case you get hungry or drained but can’t run out to get food. Honestly the best advice I was given.
RESPONSE B: Congrats!! I’d mirror some of the basic sentiments like ask questions, be interested, etc. But I’d also like to say don’t idolize the whole “grad school in America” process. I find that many international applicants put American grad programs on a pedestal — whether it be in their personal statements, or personal interactions, etc. — and it can come off a bit overbearing. I’ve heard from people who have served on grad committees that they can tell when an applicant is international because their corresponding emails always start with “To the most highly regarded professor in ______” (not word for word, but along those lines) and their statements also place so much honor and regard for the school and the profs. While this is not particularly a bad thing, here in America, it’s not a *mundane* thing, and may be taken with a general air of discomfort. So, my point is that you should just be yourself, and remember the profs and students of said uni are humans just like you. You’re interviewing them just as much as they’re interviewing you. Go with confidence and remind yourself that you earned this spot, show enthusiasm for the research, and if it’s a good fit, both parties will know :) best wishes OP!!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: campus interview tips? I’m going to have my first ever in-person campus interview in a R2 public university in the US. Would really love to hear some tips here. Is there anything in particular you wish you knew before your campus interview? Or anything you did/said during the campus visit that made you a favorable candidate to the search committee/dean/chair/students/other faculty members?
RESPONSE A: Having worked at a large university I would say the best thing you can do is try and make it conversational. In all of the jobs, I've held thus far. I've been on countless hiring committees and the candidates we usually picked were those we connected with. If you know ahead of time any of the people you will be meeting with especially if it's a one-on-one interview try and research them a little bit. You never know what you can bring up during your interview to connect with them. If you've made it this far, of course, you're someone they like. Now it is just time to show them why you'd be a good fit for the university community! Best of luck!
RESPONSE B: Bring a granola bar! Or a snack in case you get hungry or drained but can’t run out to get food. Honestly the best advice I was given.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: campus interview tips? I’m going to have my first ever in-person campus interview in a R2 public university in the US. Would really love to hear some tips here. Is there anything in particular you wish you knew before your campus interview? Or anything you did/said during the campus visit that made you a favorable candidate to the search committee/dean/chair/students/other faculty members?
RESPONSE A: A couple pieces of advice I was given or I’ve seen from interviewees: Try not to mention any other programs specifically. I’ve seen students trash talk other programs or mention how much they loved another school right in front of faculty or students and it always hurts. (Though if you’re asked directly you can discuss your options) Students are your best bet for honest opinions, ask them the tough questions. You are interviewing them as much as they are interviewing you! If you’re interviewing that means they want you too! Be confident but modest. Have questions prepared for everyone, everyone will ask what questions you have. Ask to use the restroom regularly, they may rush you around and forget. Bring a water bottle and a snack if possible. Be nice to everyone, you never know who is watching. Be prepared for tough questions. Being invited you’ve already passed all their requirements so try to make some personal connections. Be someone they’ll want to work with for 5 years. Congratulations and good luck!!
RESPONSE B: Congrats! One thing that tripped me up the first time I had an on-campus interview was a question that came up in the one-on-ones. I knew stuff about my own research, but I wasn’t prepared to talk about the literature more generally. So when I got asked about my thoughts on recent work in my field, I just crashed and burned. That was at an R1, but it’s still a reasonable question at an R2.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: : The prospect of not finding a job after I defend my doctorate is causing rapid deterioration of my self-confidence and sanity. So, obviously I'm asking in a place full of academics, meaning you did all get jobs. What was the timeline like? Did you get an ulcer or lose sanity in the process? Are you doing what you wanted to do in the first place?
RESPONSE A: >I began applying for teaching positions at SLAC's **(12 positions so far)** and a **couple** teaching fellowship post-docs (2) in mid-December. How selective are you being in your job search? Are you applying for all the jobs you're qualified for, or are you only looking for jobs in certain specializations or locations?
RESPONSE B: I can understand why you're losing self-confidence and sanity in this process. I think you're wildly underestimating just how difficult it is to get a assistant professor position. You've gotten two rejections thus far, and I'm sure each one felt awful. But you have to put it into context: the people who do get assistant professor positions get 30+ rejections before they're able to find a job, and usually they already have a post doc. I'm not questioning your reasons for wanting to limit your search for positions to a certain geographical area, but you should know that you are greatly reducing your chances by doing this. If by chance you happen to be able to get a position elsewhere, you may be able to get them to pay for your moving expenses. But if you are set on staying in the South, which it sounds like you know yourself well enough to know that it's something that's very important to you, you may also want to apply for way more postdocs and maybe even some jobs outside of academia. Also, I totally understand how awful that feeling of anxiety can be no knowing what your future will be and not feeling like you have control over the situation. It's normal to feel stressed, but remember that whether or not you get the job is not a measure of your self-worth. This career path can be very rewarding, but it's not the only thing that can make you happy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I fucked up a conference talk. I love what I'm doing at the lab but I hate presenting my work. Can I avoid it? Title. This isn't the first talk I've messed up, even my bachelor's thesis defense presentation was pretty awful. I have my master's thesis coming up soon. My boss (ScD, about 12 years older than me) says to think of it like theater, with only one actor - me. And, well, rehearse a lot. I know I can't avoid stuff like the defenses, but can I avoid everything else? If not, what can I do? Preferably not involving mind-altering substances. But I'm open to any suggestions.
RESPONSE A: Not everyone is a born public speaker - but some degree of confidence speaking is probably necessary for most academics. Even if you do not end up speaking at large conferences you might have to speak at large meetings, etc... In STEM I feel like we often see people who are not really great speakers and they somehow muddle through (I have had a professor give a talk facing away from the audience (to the side) and it was most bizarre!). So being a bad public speaker is not going to break your career necessarily, but I think that it is avoidable to be bad at (unlike some other qualities that are a lot less trainable). I would recommend taking a class or course in public speaking (or if it part of an anxiety disorder getting some mental health help by seeing a psychologist). And also... it takes practice. So don't despair!
RESPONSE B: Is there a chance that you're being harder on yourself than others are? Honestly, the majority of the presentations I see at academic conferences are, at best, dull readings directly from a paper, or, at worst, unrehearsedly cringey. Or straight-up offensive-- like the time an Asian woman pretended to be a "Tiger Mom" in a skit, or when a presenter got visibly angry at a facilitator and repeatedly accused her of "stealing her time" when her presentation ran 10 minutes over. But even these I don't dwell on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: s thesis coming up soon. My boss (ScD, about 12 years older than me) says to think of it like theater, with only one actor - me. And, well, rehearse a lot. I know I can't avoid stuff like the defenses, but can I avoid everything else? If not, what can I do? Preferably not involving mind-altering substances. But I'm open to any suggestions.
RESPONSE A: Did you practice this particular presentation? That isn't clear from your post. I still run through mine anywhere from 3 - 7 times for even a 15 minute talk, and I don't start counting until the talk is "done" or in first draft state. Presentation is part of the game in academia. Presenting complex ideas simply and clearly is an art, and it requires both planning and practice. You might not be able to practice your way into being a smooth charismatic presenters, but you can give a competent presentation, and it gets easier the more of them you do.
RESPONSE B: You may be able to avoid giving conference talks, although doing so will likely put you at a significant disadvantage when it comes to networking. You likely won't be able to avoid job talks if you want to stay in academia, though (or other types of interviews that require you to explain your research if you go into industry), so this if presenting your work to others is a problem area, you should probably try to address that in some way. In relation to this particular incident, you mention that you forgot a bunch of details. Why did this happen? Maybe you need to prepare by making more detailed notes about what you plan to say and then rehearsing with those notes? In terms of going forward, does your institution have any sort of career center for graduate students? Perhaps they do workshops on public speaking and academic presentations? If not, does your department have anyone who helps with placement? Perhaps you can talk to them to get advice about presenting your work. Finally, you might consider something like a drama class or even singing lessons. Both of those will help you be more aware and in control of how you present yourself to others, which might help you build confidence and/or address the issues that you've encountered.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I fucked up a conference talk. I love what I'm doing at the lab but I hate presenting my work. Can I avoid it? Title. This isn't the first talk I've messed up, even my bachelor's thesis defense presentation was pretty awful. I have my master's thesis coming up soon. My boss (ScD, about 12 years older than me) says to think of it like theater, with only one actor - me. And, well, rehearse a lot. I know I can't avoid stuff like the defenses, but can I avoid everything else? If not, what can I do? Preferably not involving mind-altering substances. But I'm open to any suggestions.
RESPONSE A: Did you practice this particular presentation? That isn't clear from your post. I still run through mine anywhere from 3 - 7 times for even a 15 minute talk, and I don't start counting until the talk is "done" or in first draft state. Presentation is part of the game in academia. Presenting complex ideas simply and clearly is an art, and it requires both planning and practice. You might not be able to practice your way into being a smooth charismatic presenters, but you can give a competent presentation, and it gets easier the more of them you do.
RESPONSE B: You can use beta blockers, while technically a mind altering substance, it is safe and lots of people use them for performance anxiety, including professional musicians and state actors. http://www.anxieties.com/159/beta-blockers#.WSSSvM8zqUk Also yes practice makes perfect, make very body you know sit through it so you know it backwards and forwards and can improvise as you go through the data. The other option is just to focus on writing, you have to be able to communicate your thoughts, ideas and results.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: seems like a reasonable request to me. So my question is, how do i approach this when given an offer? Do I ask for a position for my spouse outright? Or do I ask for an opportunity to interview? Do I specifically state what their salary may be? Does all of this take place after receiving an offer?
RESPONSE A: It's uncommon. 1) They'd have to *really* want you, specifically, and prefer you leaps and bounds over the other candidates they were considering. 2) The department your SO would be employed in would need to have the money and be willing to make the deal with the department *you're* coming into. If that's your department, that could be better or worse. 3) Your SO actually would need to be desirable to fill a particular spot. And probably you would have to be willing to back off some other negotiations-- lower salary, lower startup funds, etc. And even then... Hires are a recurring cost. Committing to a spousal hire is making a major investment on a person they absolutely were not looking for. The university would have to be *really* wanting you as a faculty member. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but your SO would need to be major "value added" to be worth bringing him on.
RESPONSE B: This depends incredibly strongly on the specific department/school. In general, if they possibly could do a spousal hire it probably won't scare them off to be upfront about it assuming you're a good candidate. The problem with waiting until you get an offer is that they just went to bat for you with the dean/VPAA/whoever approves faculty hires to convince them you're a good fit and figure out a salary range, start-up funds, etc. before they called you, and now you're asking them to go back and ask for a second position they hadn't planned for. Regardless of what they thought of you, it makes more work for the chair at this point, which he won't appreciate, may make the dean dislike you enough to pull the offer, and may cause the department to have to make concessions to the dean in order to hire you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: demand for the departments I’m applying to. They’d be overqualified for an adjunct position, but starting as a visiting teaching prof with possibility to become permanent after 3 years seems like a reasonable request to me. So my question is, how do i approach this when given an offer? Do I ask for a position for my spouse outright? Or do I ask for an opportunity to interview? Do I specifically state what their salary may be? Does all of this take place after receiving an offer?
RESPONSE A: It's uncommon. 1) They'd have to *really* want you, specifically, and prefer you leaps and bounds over the other candidates they were considering. 2) The department your SO would be employed in would need to have the money and be willing to make the deal with the department *you're* coming into. If that's your department, that could be better or worse. 3) Your SO actually would need to be desirable to fill a particular spot. And probably you would have to be willing to back off some other negotiations-- lower salary, lower startup funds, etc. And even then... Hires are a recurring cost. Committing to a spousal hire is making a major investment on a person they absolutely were not looking for. The university would have to be *really* wanting you as a faculty member. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but your SO would need to be major "value added" to be worth bringing him on.
RESPONSE B: Frankly, I would be pissed if somebody tried this. First of all, we already have somebody doing our intro courses—what’s your plan for them? Second, we don’t have the funding, or even the permission, to create a VAP for the overqualified-to-adjunct spouse out of thin air—especially one expected to become permanent after x years (automatically? Without a nationwide search?). Finally, we can only bring in three or four finalists for a campus interview. If hiring you were fully contingent on an impossible spousal hire, you’d be wasting a spot. Sorry to sound harsh, but I think that a mandatory spousal hire is a very big ask.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you negotiate for a spousal hire? At many of the positions I’m applying to my spouse also obtaining a non-TT teaching position is often times the only way in which I can accept a position. My spouse has 10+ years of experience for all the basic intro classes that is typically required for majors/non-majors, they have developed courses, and wrote 2 lab manuals. In most schools they would be in high demand for the departments I’m applying to. They’d be overqualified for an adjunct position, but starting as a visiting teaching prof with possibility to become permanent after 3 years seems like a reasonable request to me. So my question is, how do i approach this when given an offer? Do I ask for a position for my spouse outright? Or do I ask for an opportunity to interview? Do I specifically state what their salary may be? Does all of this take place after receiving an offer?
RESPONSE A: It's uncommon. 1) They'd have to *really* want you, specifically, and prefer you leaps and bounds over the other candidates they were considering. 2) The department your SO would be employed in would need to have the money and be willing to make the deal with the department *you're* coming into. If that's your department, that could be better or worse. 3) Your SO actually would need to be desirable to fill a particular spot. And probably you would have to be willing to back off some other negotiations-- lower salary, lower startup funds, etc. And even then... Hires are a recurring cost. Committing to a spousal hire is making a major investment on a person they absolutely were not looking for. The university would have to be *really* wanting you as a faculty member. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but your SO would need to be major "value added" to be worth bringing him on.
RESPONSE B: https://chroniclevitae.com/news/224-the-professor-is-in-how-to-score-that-elusive-spousal-hire
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: spouse outright? Or do I ask for an opportunity to interview? Do I specifically state what their salary may be? Does all of this take place after receiving an offer?
RESPONSE A: The variety of answers here show that it really depends on each school and there is no single answer. In general, it is good to mention something to the chair at the end of the interview. This gives them time to try to get something together as they are preparing an offer. Of course, it helps to mention that your spouse is open to ideas. It is not great to not say anything and then bringing it up after the first offer. This puts the chair in a tight spot. The bottom line is that you need a job for your spouse. If the place is such a place that they would never think of hiring you if they knew about your spouse, then obviously they wouldn't be happy being "strong-armed" to making an accommodating offer at a later stage. While one can't generalize, bigger schools have easier time accommodating, more remote schools too (e.g., Cornell; they know they need to make something happen because there is no other options). FWIW, most top schools have explicit spousal program because they know that is what it takes to bring in top talent.
RESPONSE B: It's uncommon. 1) They'd have to *really* want you, specifically, and prefer you leaps and bounds over the other candidates they were considering. 2) The department your SO would be employed in would need to have the money and be willing to make the deal with the department *you're* coming into. If that's your department, that could be better or worse. 3) Your SO actually would need to be desirable to fill a particular spot. And probably you would have to be willing to back off some other negotiations-- lower salary, lower startup funds, etc. And even then... Hires are a recurring cost. Committing to a spousal hire is making a major investment on a person they absolutely were not looking for. The university would have to be *really* wanting you as a faculty member. That's not to say that it doesn't happen, but your SO would need to be major "value added" to be worth bringing him on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there an "easy" way to make a Forward/Backward Search for a literature Review? So just wanted to know if i have to indetify all citations/sources of each of the papers or if i can somehow search through a whole batch of them?
RESPONSE A: Connected Papers is the closest I've seen to what you're looking for. It's not perfect but can get you a start. https://www.connectedpapers.com/
RESPONSE B: Web of Science (www.webofknowledge.com) does this very easily. I usually send an email to myself containing all the backward or forward citations from a paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is there an "easy" way to make a Forward/Backward Search for a literature Review? So just wanted to know if i have to indetify all citations/sources of each of the papers or if i can somehow search through a whole batch of them?
RESPONSE A: Web of Science (www.webofknowledge.com) does this very easily. I usually send an email to myself containing all the backward or forward citations from a paper.
RESPONSE B: Google scholar sorts citing papers by citations count. For backward search, you can try crossing bibliographies to find core papers or surveys, and then check their citations/citing papers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there an "easy" way to make a Forward/Backward Search for a literature Review? So just wanted to know if i have to indetify all citations/sources of each of the papers or if i can somehow search through a whole batch of them?
RESPONSE A: If you have access to the Scopus database you can download both the references and the citing articles for a set of articles.
RESPONSE B: Web of Science (www.webofknowledge.com) does this very easily. I usually send an email to myself containing all the backward or forward citations from a paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is there an "easy" way to make a Forward/Backward Search for a literature Review? So just wanted to know if i have to indetify all citations/sources of each of the papers or if i can somehow search through a whole batch of them?
RESPONSE A: Web of Science (www.webofknowledge.com) does this very easily. I usually send an email to myself containing all the backward or forward citations from a paper.
RESPONSE B: I think in short the answer is no! At least in as much as responses to comments suggest you're using easy interchangeably with quick.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is there an "easy" way to make a Forward/Backward Search for a literature Review? So just wanted to know if i have to indetify all citations/sources of each of the papers or if i can somehow search through a whole batch of them?
RESPONSE A: Connected Papers is the closest I've seen to what you're looking for. It's not perfect but can get you a start. https://www.connectedpapers.com/
RESPONSE B: If you have access to the Scopus database you can download both the references and the citing articles for a set of articles.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are the red flags of low quality graduate programs? I'm reading an article about masters programs which serve as more of a trap rather than an opportunity. What stood out to me was how a seemingly reputable university (uChicago) preys on naive undergraduates and uses personal prestige to sell an expensive graduate program that has terrible market value. And yet, their marketing is so good that an average student - desperate to go to grad school - wouldn't even notice. So my question is: In your experience (e.g. after you've spent time at the school), which red flags did you notice (if any)? What advice can you give for students trying to wade through the marketing bs to find a good program? What are some things that are difficult to spot on the surface?
RESPONSE A: I want to second and emphasize - coming from a life sciences perspective: never pay for graduate school.
RESPONSE B: It should have some “vocational” element in the curriculum or program structure to be worthwhile. That means internship placements, skill training relevant to your intended career, etc. If it’s just PhD-level coursework in a particular subject, it ain’t worth it (unless subject matter expertise is essential for you)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are the red flags of low quality graduate programs? I'm reading an article about masters programs which serve as more of a trap rather than an opportunity. What stood out to me was how a seemingly reputable university (uChicago) preys on naive undergraduates and uses personal prestige to sell an expensive graduate program that has terrible market value. And yet, their marketing is so good that an average student - desperate to go to grad school - wouldn't even notice. So my question is: In your experience (e.g. after you've spent time at the school), which red flags did you notice (if any)? What advice can you give for students trying to wade through the marketing bs to find a good program? What are some things that are difficult to spot on the surface?
RESPONSE A: It should have some “vocational” element in the curriculum or program structure to be worthwhile. That means internship placements, skill training relevant to your intended career, etc. If it’s just PhD-level coursework in a particular subject, it ain’t worth it (unless subject matter expertise is essential for you)
RESPONSE B: With the exception of professional programs (med school, vet school, law school, social worker, MBA, etc), do not pay for grad school at either the MS or PhD levels. With professional programs, pay as little as possible. Masters programs are typically cash cows, and many schools try to make them look really enticing. For example, doing things like 3+2 undergrad + MS programs where they give you tuition discounts.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are the red flags of low quality graduate programs? I'm reading an article about masters programs which serve as more of a trap rather than an opportunity. What stood out to me was how a seemingly reputable university (uChicago) preys on naive undergraduates and uses personal prestige to sell an expensive graduate program that has terrible market value. And yet, their marketing is so good that an average student - desperate to go to grad school - wouldn't even notice. So my question is: In your experience (e.g. after you've spent time at the school), which red flags did you notice (if any)? What advice can you give for students trying to wade through the marketing bs to find a good program? What are some things that are difficult to spot on the surface?
RESPONSE A: Do not pay for a graduate degree. They should pay you.
RESPONSE B: M.S. programs red flags: programs that don't give students real access to faculty and/or opportunities to develop skills (no thesis, classes tacked on to undergrad or doc classes, lots of online and asynchronous material, no sense of community or dedication to the M.S. students).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are the red flags of low quality graduate programs? I'm reading an article about masters programs which serve as more of a trap rather than an opportunity. What stood out to me was how a seemingly reputable university (uChicago) preys on naive undergraduates and uses personal prestige to sell an expensive graduate program that has terrible market value. And yet, their marketing is so good that an average student - desperate to go to grad school - wouldn't even notice. So my question is: In your experience (e.g. after you've spent time at the school), which red flags did you notice (if any)? What advice can you give for students trying to wade through the marketing bs to find a good program? What are some things that are difficult to spot on the surface?
RESPONSE A: Do not pay for a graduate degree. They should pay you.
RESPONSE B: It should have some “vocational” element in the curriculum or program structure to be worthwhile. That means internship placements, skill training relevant to your intended career, etc. If it’s just PhD-level coursework in a particular subject, it ain’t worth it (unless subject matter expertise is essential for you)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST:
RESPONSE A: The MAPH program at UChicago has always struck me as being highly exploitative for many reasons but maybe one of the clearest is the short length of the program. They frame the program as being a stepping stone to PhD programs but one year is simply too short for most students to develop relationships with faculty for LORs, fine-tune a writing sample, etc. If you enter the MAPH program and want to apply to PhD programs for the next year, you basically have to submit an app with just one quarter of the program under your belt. My partner has a PhD in a STEM field and knows of programs in his field that are one-year long and marketed in a similar way. Faculty have basically admitted that these programs are cash cows to fund the PhD programs and other research. Basically, unless it's a professional program, you should never pay for an MA or PhD. If you want to go into academia, it's a terrible idea to saddle yourself with tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt before you even enter a PhD program. There are funded MAs out there. Source: Current PhD student in the humanities who only applied to funded programs. DM me if you'd like the names of the fully funded MAs I applied to and was accepted to!
RESPONSE B: If its primary market for prospective students is international, but local professionals avoid it like a bad smell. It’s a lot easier to trick/fleece naive or desperate foreigners than to persuade everyday locals of a program’s value. If they have an expansive catalog of courses, but keep cancelling the core courses due to lack of enrollment, forcing students to do Independent Study or take courses at another nearby university. If they “recommend” students do an internship, but don’t have an internship coordinator or provide any guidance on internships or job placement for masters students. If they switched to a fully-online format last year, and now have no intention of returning to in-person learning because they can’t afford to. If they admit 40 Ph.D. students per year, and only offer assistantships to a handful. If they admit more than 5-10 Ph.D. students per year.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: of wanting to keep as many doors open (including, in the worst-case scenario, exiting academia without a major time lag) as possible. I'd also appreciate any examples you have of where this did or didn't work. I'm really sorry if this comes off as uninformed or misguided: this decision is a while away so I'm still at an early stage in my thinking it through. Thank you for making it to the end of this post!
RESPONSE A: >Does doing a PhD in the UK preclude me from working as an academic in the US? It does not, but look around at the sorts of departments you're interested in working at. You'll see a few Oxbridge PhDs (plus other European universities), but mostly you'll see people who graduated from elite U.S. institutions.
RESPONSE B: I'm an Oxbridge grad in the humanities at a top US institution. My main considerations for traversing the pond were the following: \- better funding in the US, and for a longer duration of time (this depends on the institution of course, but here I get a generous stipend, conference and summer program funding that wouldn't have been available otherwise) \- the possibility of a US academic career (while your Oxbridge PhD might be OK, it will still be hard to move to the US without the additional training and teaching experience you get through the US system - a number of profs have corroborated this) \- the opportunity to live somewhere new and exciting! (this depends on the location of the university, but I was lucky enough to find a program that also opened up new travel opportunities and adventures for me) Coursework, however, is a big consideration. I cannot emphasize this more. Are you willing to dedicate an extra two or so years to taking courses? Personally, I have really enjoyed the opportunity to build and broaden my knowledge base (even having a Masters already) and have used the coursework to develop/refine my dissertation project, and to cultivate a network here. But not everyone will feel the same way. Of course, keep in touch with your UK network if you go to the US, especially if you're looking to go back.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: comes off as uninformed or misguided: this decision is a while away so I'm still at an early stage in my thinking it through. Thank you for making it to the end of this post!
RESPONSE A: I'm an Oxbridge grad in the humanities at a top US institution. My main considerations for traversing the pond were the following: \- better funding in the US, and for a longer duration of time (this depends on the institution of course, but here I get a generous stipend, conference and summer program funding that wouldn't have been available otherwise) \- the possibility of a US academic career (while your Oxbridge PhD might be OK, it will still be hard to move to the US without the additional training and teaching experience you get through the US system - a number of profs have corroborated this) \- the opportunity to live somewhere new and exciting! (this depends on the location of the university, but I was lucky enough to find a program that also opened up new travel opportunities and adventures for me) Coursework, however, is a big consideration. I cannot emphasize this more. Are you willing to dedicate an extra two or so years to taking courses? Personally, I have really enjoyed the opportunity to build and broaden my knowledge base (even having a Masters already) and have used the coursework to develop/refine my dissertation project, and to cultivate a network here. But not everyone will feel the same way. Of course, keep in touch with your UK network if you go to the US, especially if you're looking to go back.
RESPONSE B: I am by no means an expert on this, but I can pass on advice from a musicologist post-doc prof I had a couple years ago while I was spitballing ideas for grad programs. This is likely what you mean by “professional development,” but to be more specific he said he ultimately chose the US because it would grant him teaching experience despite the longer degree path. From what I understood, it was his impression that teaching experience was vital in competing in the job market, so he studied in the US. The UK unis, at least in his case, did not include or expect their fellows to teach.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do I get better sleep in grad school? I know this is a silly question for us overworked academics, but I am genuinely eager to develope better habits. I stay up due to anxiety/deadlines, and wake up early to exercise. intellectually, I'm braindead by 3pm. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: I don't keep myself up if I feel myself falling asleep. I had insomnia as a teenager, and melatonin can be super helpful for fixing your schedule or days you really need sleep.
RESPONSE B: Really quick naps have saved me a few times, just 20 mins, even if you're not really asleep just close your eyes and decompress a little. Do this before 5pm generally, otherwise you won't be able to sleep as early as you should. Find yourself some sweet nap locations, there are always a few good ones on campus!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do I get better sleep in grad school? I know this is a silly question for us overworked academics, but I am genuinely eager to develope better habits. I stay up due to anxiety/deadlines, and wake up early to exercise. intellectually, I'm braindead by 3pm. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: I'm a worrier - if something's not finished/perfect then I fixate on it. I also anticipate - in elementary school I never slept The night before standardized tests. The 3 months leading up to my defense were horrible. The most helpful thing I did was get out of bed and go do something to calm my brain down - staying in bed with nothing to do except worry is a recipe for disaster.
RESPONSE B: Really quick naps have saved me a few times, just 20 mins, even if you're not really asleep just close your eyes and decompress a little. Do this before 5pm generally, otherwise you won't be able to sleep as early as you should. Find yourself some sweet nap locations, there are always a few good ones on campus!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Resource for determining the legitimacy of journals? Is there some centralized resource where one can plug in a journal name/URL to find out if it is 1) legitimate and 2) respected in the field or not?
RESPONSE A: For business disciplines, the Australian business Dean’s Council (ABDC) List grades them from A to C.
RESPONSE B: Those indexes are all flawed in their own way, but try Scopus
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Resource for determining the legitimacy of journals? Is there some centralized resource where one can plug in a journal name/URL to find out if it is 1) legitimate and 2) respected in the field or not?
RESPONSE A: For business disciplines, the Australian business Dean’s Council (ABDC) List grades them from A to C.
RESPONSE B: Finnish Ministry of Education classifies journals in ranks 1 to 3 depending on their impact within their own field. This is done by Publication Forum (Julkaisufoorumi, JuFo). This ranking is used to make funding decisions for universities and RTOs. The search page is here. This is a whitelist. If the journal is not listed there, it doesn't necessarily mean there's anything wrong with it, but it doesn't count towards the fundable publication count. Journal impact factors can be found from Scopus or Web of Science. Again, this is a kind of a whitelist, so absence in this list does not imply illegitimacy. Cabells has an analytics service, but it's for a fee. The Directory of Open Access Journals, DOAJ, focuses on open access journal legitimacy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Resource for determining the legitimacy of journals? Is there some centralized resource where one can plug in a journal name/URL to find out if it is 1) legitimate and 2) respected in the field or not?
RESPONSE A: For business disciplines, the Australian business Dean’s Council (ABDC) List grades them from A to C.
RESPONSE B: Not being on Beall's list is a good start.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Resource for determining the legitimacy of journals? Is there some centralized resource where one can plug in a journal name/URL to find out if it is 1) legitimate and 2) respected in the field or not?
RESPONSE A: For my thesis I use Scimago to check the journals' ranks, it has international journals but local journals are more difficult. You can just type in the journal's name in the search bar and click on it, and then you can scroll down to see the Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 ranks listed by Scimago. It's allowed during my thesis writing and has helped me through it, but to be safe maybe consult with your supervisor first or a senior/alumni to see if there are other preferred methods for checking journal rankings at your university.
RESPONSE B: For business disciplines, the Australian business Dean’s Council (ABDC) List grades them from A to C.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Difficult group members - is it unprofessional to ask prof to put me in a different group? I'm in a group for a semester-long group project (worth 20%) and I am noticing that my group members are not willing to incorporate feedback and are really sensitive to constructive criticism. All of them are 2-3 years younger than me so there is a knowledge gap and gap in professionalism/experience in group work. The main issue is that my group members are not listening to my feedback and have a rude tone if I disagree with something. I try to be understanding, but it's hard when they write things that don't make sense/are incorrect ex. writing "The *X-axis* which is gene __ is the *dependent* variable", which is opposite of what's correct. They wouldn't understand me explaining that this is wrong and we need to switch the terminology and are very sensitive to criticism. I am worried for my grades as I am applying to grad schools this year. I am also worried about my mental health as I already have a lot going on at home right now due to a family member with mental illness and addictions and I don't want this to impact my performance in other courses as well. Is it unprofessional to ask my prof to be put in another group?
RESPONSE A: Yes, go and talk to your prof. But also think about it like a learning experience. You will encounter teams or groups that are not productive or do not listen.How will you handle this type of situation if you were in a job? This can also be a powerful tool for essay topics if you apply to medical/dental/other professional school.
RESPONSE B: I would absolutely ask your professor however, be sure to explain why you should be able to do this either alone or in a new group. Some professors will not care and keep you in the same group, other's may want to challenge you to develop skills that you will need to learn when working with difficult people in your career, and some may let you make the change.however, you will never know until you ask.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Difficult group members - is it unprofessional to ask prof to put me in a different group? I'm in a group for a semester-long group project (worth 20%) and I am noticing that my group members are not willing to incorporate feedback and are really sensitive to constructive criticism. All of them are 2-3 years younger than me so there is a knowledge gap and gap in professionalism/experience in group work. The main issue is that my group members are not listening to my feedback and have a rude tone if I disagree with something. I try to be understanding, but it's hard when they write things that don't make sense/are incorrect ex. writing "The *X-axis* which is gene __ is the *dependent* variable", which is opposite of what's correct. They wouldn't understand me explaining that this is wrong and we need to switch the terminology and are very sensitive to criticism. I am worried for my grades as I am applying to grad schools this year. I am also worried about my mental health as I already have a lot going on at home right now due to a family member with mental illness and addictions and I don't want this to impact my performance in other courses as well. Is it unprofessional to ask my prof to be put in another group?
RESPONSE A: Yes, go and talk to your prof. But also think about it like a learning experience. You will encounter teams or groups that are not productive or do not listen.How will you handle this type of situation if you were in a job? This can also be a powerful tool for essay topics if you apply to medical/dental/other professional school.
RESPONSE B: Definitely talk to the Prof. But instead of just asking to bail on the group,. Ask him/her to help your group work out it's internal issues. Group work is usually assigned to develop your teamwork skills.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: in professionalism/experience in group work. The main issue is that my group members are not listening to my feedback and have a rude tone if I disagree with something. I try to be understanding, but it's hard when they write things that don't make sense/are incorrect ex. writing "The *X-axis* which is gene __ is the *dependent* variable", which is opposite of what's correct. They wouldn't understand me explaining that this is wrong and we need to switch the terminology and are very sensitive to criticism. I am worried for my grades as I am applying to grad schools this year. I am also worried about my mental health as I already have a lot going on at home right now due to a family member with mental illness and addictions and I don't want this to impact my performance in other courses as well. Is it unprofessional to ask my prof to be put in another group?
RESPONSE A: Ask your prof if you can do it alone. But Be careful of consequences. There’s a reason why the prof asks you to do it in group. It is a double edge sword. It’s only a 20% value work that is worth long hours. Do you want to put 50 hours alone in this and have 19/20? Or you want to put 10-15 hours and be ready to have (at worst) 15/20? At the end it’s only 4 points of difference on your final grade. This happened to me once, where I corrected assignments where the student got 89% instead of the 82% his team got because he wanted to do the work alone. It was a very long math homework, that was only 15% worth of the final grade. In the end, all the hours he decided to put all alone gave him only 1% more on is final grade. He could have got the A anyway by staying with his team, and maybe more sleep and less stress.
RESPONSE B: Yes, go and talk to your prof. But also think about it like a learning experience. You will encounter teams or groups that are not productive or do not listen.How will you handle this type of situation if you were in a job? This can also be a powerful tool for essay topics if you apply to medical/dental/other professional school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ). Should I address the pregnancy at the interview? I'm thinking of not bringing it up at all unless someone else does, and I think it's actually illegal for them to ask, right? Or would it be better for me to address any fears they might have proactively? I have some other applications out that I'm really hoping will land me interviews, but I'm worried the interviews will be scheduled too close to my due date after I can no longer travel. These schools for the most part do not know I'm pregnant because it's not something you put on the application. It would really suck to lose out on a dream job for that reason. Has anyone had this kind of scheduling problem before? What did you do?
RESPONSE A: To clarify for all the people who will say it is illegal to ask, it isn't, it isn't illegal to ask anything. It is however illegal to discriminate based on the answer or because of any protected class whether they ask or not. But in the vast majority of cases you wouldn't be able to prove discrimination in a single case anyway, the law is designed to work on a statistical representation of who is employed (or evidence of wrongful actions, which asking could be one, but isn't illegal) and if you aren't employed they could just give any number of reasons why you weren't chosen for the job, which assuming they have some women with children working there will be deemed as perfectly valid. The purpose of not asking it to stop legal action due to you asking questions about protected classes whether or not you discriminated because of them, directly asking the question only opens that up as a reason to file a discrimination suit.
RESPONSE B: While they can't ask you about it directly, I'm a firm believer in transparency no matter what the case may be. It's perfectly acceptable to bring it up casually in the interview. Since your postdoc is still another 22 months long, by the time you'll be starting the professorship, it should no longer be an issue. If you want your interviewer to be sure that you've fully thought out the effect that your life, let them know that you've already looked into day care centers nearby (or something to that effect).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: else does, and I think it's actually illegal for them to ask, right? Or would it be better for me to address any fears they might have proactively? I have some other applications out that I'm really hoping will land me interviews, but I'm worried the interviews will be scheduled too close to my due date after I can no longer travel. These schools for the most part do not know I'm pregnant because it's not something you put on the application. It would really suck to lose out on a dream job for that reason. Has anyone had this kind of scheduling problem before? What did you do?
RESPONSE A: It is definitely illegal for them to ask (in the U.S. anyhow) but you should not be surprised if someone who doesn't know better brings it up. If someone does mention it, you could deflect the issue as gently as possible and the person asking will probably get the hint. The bigger picture is that a good department won't care, and if they do care it will only be to be supportive. If they care in a negative way then they are not very likely to be supportive of your needs going forward (and you will have them, with kids on the tenure track) and maybe that's not a place you want to work anyhow.
RESPONSE B: To clarify for all the people who will say it is illegal to ask, it isn't, it isn't illegal to ask anything. It is however illegal to discriminate based on the answer or because of any protected class whether they ask or not. But in the vast majority of cases you wouldn't be able to prove discrimination in a single case anyway, the law is designed to work on a statistical representation of who is employed (or evidence of wrongful actions, which asking could be one, but isn't illegal) and if you aren't employed they could just give any number of reasons why you weren't chosen for the job, which assuming they have some women with children working there will be deemed as perfectly valid. The purpose of not asking it to stop legal action due to you asking questions about protected classes whether or not you discriminated because of them, directly asking the question only opens that up as a reason to file a discrimination suit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: , and I think it's actually illegal for them to ask, right? Or would it be better for me to address any fears they might have proactively? I have some other applications out that I'm really hoping will land me interviews, but I'm worried the interviews will be scheduled too close to my due date after I can no longer travel. These schools for the most part do not know I'm pregnant because it's not something you put on the application. It would really suck to lose out on a dream job for that reason. Has anyone had this kind of scheduling problem before? What did you do?
RESPONSE A: It is definitely illegal for them to ask (in the U.S. anyhow) but you should not be surprised if someone who doesn't know better brings it up. If someone does mention it, you could deflect the issue as gently as possible and the person asking will probably get the hint. The bigger picture is that a good department won't care, and if they do care it will only be to be supportive. If they care in a negative way then they are not very likely to be supportive of your needs going forward (and you will have them, with kids on the tenure track) and maybe that's not a place you want to work anyhow.
RESPONSE B: You just started your post-doc and are already interviewing for faculty positions? That seems rather quick. Anyway, I think it would be best for you to bring it up first (in a light and social way) since they can't really ask you about it. However it actually should be a very important part of your interview (from your perspective). If they respond well, are supportive, and provide resources (which they should!) then they pass the test. If it doesn't come up organically, then ask about community resources for early childhood education and care, etc. If you are due in a few weeks, and you're post doc doesn't end for another year and 50 months, then I don't really see the concern about being pregnant now… They know that people start families and should be able to accommodate (within reason). Obviously in academia it is a bit easier if you aren't due during the middle of a semester, but hey life happens.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: men. I have a 2-year postdoc position right now that started 2 weeks ago, so I'm not desperate yet, but it would be nice to land a professor job! I have my first real faculty job interview in 2 weeks (eeeep) and I am obviously pregnant (will be 30 weeks). Should I address the pregnancy at the interview? I'm thinking of not bringing it up at all unless someone else does, and I think it's actually illegal for them to ask, right? Or would it be better for me to address any fears they might have proactively? I have some other applications out that I'm really hoping will land me interviews, but I'm worried the interviews will be scheduled too close to my due date after I can no longer travel. These schools for the most part do not know I'm pregnant because it's not something you put on the application. It would really suck to lose out on a dream job for that reason. Has anyone had this kind of scheduling problem before? What did you do?
RESPONSE A: It is definitely illegal for them to ask (in the U.S. anyhow) but you should not be surprised if someone who doesn't know better brings it up. If someone does mention it, you could deflect the issue as gently as possible and the person asking will probably get the hint. The bigger picture is that a good department won't care, and if they do care it will only be to be supportive. If they care in a negative way then they are not very likely to be supportive of your needs going forward (and you will have them, with kids on the tenure track) and maybe that's not a place you want to work anyhow.
RESPONSE B: While they can't ask you about it directly, I'm a firm believer in transparency no matter what the case may be. It's perfectly acceptable to bring it up casually in the interview. Since your postdoc is still another 22 months long, by the time you'll be starting the professorship, it should no longer be an issue. If you want your interviewer to be sure that you've fully thought out the effect that your life, let them know that you've already looked into day care centers nearby (or something to that effect).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: had this kind of scheduling problem before? What did you do?
RESPONSE A: I'm not in this position but my office buddy is - she's 35 weeks right now and just accepted an offer, after going on two campus interviews a couple of weeks ago. It was really good that she got this offer, because she's now in those last few weeks where out-of-state travel is not advised. I know that she did mention to the search committees that she was pregnant when they were making arrangements for her visit, and I think she feels this was a good decision - I mean, she's visibly pregnant so it's not like it was going to be a secret for long, and because she mentioned it, they were able to make some arrangements for her (e.g. they were originally going to take her on a walking tour and they changed it to a car tour instead). I don't believe she discussed the pregnancy much at the interviews, but I think she was prepared to talk about how she planned to finish her dissertation on time and show that she already has experience balancing work and motherhood (she has a toddler already and was able to publish articles and secure grant funding while pregnant and parenting, so she could point to that experience as a strength). I'm not sure what she would have done if she didn't get the offer and was no longer able to travel to interviews. I think she was prepared to delay graduating and stay here for another year (our program would have supported her with funding if necessary). Then she would just apply for jobs next hiring cycle.
RESPONSE B: It is definitely illegal for them to ask (in the U.S. anyhow) but you should not be surprised if someone who doesn't know better brings it up. If someone does mention it, you could deflect the issue as gently as possible and the person asking will probably get the hint. The bigger picture is that a good department won't care, and if they do care it will only be to be supportive. If they care in a negative way then they are not very likely to be supportive of your needs going forward (and you will have them, with kids on the tenure track) and maybe that's not a place you want to work anyhow.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is a doctorate of philosophy (PhD) related to philosophy in any manner? Is PhD in any field about understanding the philosophy of a given topic? Like having a knowledge of the depth of a philosopher but in their respective field Or is it just a name which stuck as philosophy means love of wisdom in Latin (according to Wikipedia)
RESPONSE A: The PhD originated in the Humboldt University of Berlin, founded in 1810, which became the model for our modern idea of a university (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldtian\_model\_of\_higher\_education). It had four faculties - Law, Medicine, Philosophy and Theology. Their Faculty of Philosophy covered everything that we now group under arts, sciences and humanities. That Faculty of Philosophy introduced the process where you earn a doctorate by producing an original piece of scholarship, then defending your thesis in a formal debate. The name PhD has stuck even though the name "philosophy" now covers a much narrower set of fields.
RESPONSE B: Since no one has mentioned it yet, I'll add that *doctor* means "teacher," so a *philosophiae doctor* is a "teacher of the love of wisdom."
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is a doctorate of philosophy (PhD) related to philosophy in any manner? Is PhD in any field about understanding the philosophy of a given topic? Like having a knowledge of the depth of a philosopher but in their respective field Or is it just a name which stuck as philosophy means love of wisdom in Latin (according to Wikipedia)
RESPONSE A: Since no one has mentioned it yet, I'll add that *doctor* means "teacher," so a *philosophiae doctor* is a "teacher of the love of wisdom."
RESPONSE B: The PhD is the original doctorate from when the academy was the academy of letters or whatever. It’s a research degree vs. a practice degree (like EdD or MD), so yes it’s about depth of knowledge.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is a doctorate of philosophy (PhD) related to philosophy in any manner? Is PhD in any field about understanding the philosophy of a given topic? Like having a knowledge of the depth of a philosopher but in their respective field Or is it just a name which stuck as philosophy means love of wisdom in Latin (according to Wikipedia)
RESPONSE A: The PhD is the original doctorate from when the academy was the academy of letters or whatever. It’s a research degree vs. a practice degree (like EdD or MD), so yes it’s about depth of knowledge.
RESPONSE B: The PhD originated in the Humboldt University of Berlin, founded in 1810, which became the model for our modern idea of a university (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldtian\_model\_of\_higher\_education). It had four faculties - Law, Medicine, Philosophy and Theology. Their Faculty of Philosophy covered everything that we now group under arts, sciences and humanities. That Faculty of Philosophy introduced the process where you earn a doctorate by producing an original piece of scholarship, then defending your thesis in a formal debate. The name PhD has stuck even though the name "philosophy" now covers a much narrower set of fields.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is a doctorate of philosophy (PhD) related to philosophy in any manner? Is PhD in any field about understanding the philosophy of a given topic? Like having a knowledge of the depth of a philosopher but in their respective field Or is it just a name which stuck as philosophy means love of wisdom in Latin (according to Wikipedia)
RESPONSE A: Great answers here. As someone with a PhD in biology, I often remind graduate students that the "Ph" part stands for philosophy and that we're meant to think about things and that it's about knowledge, not just pipetting and technical skills.
RESPONSE B: The PhD is the original doctorate from when the academy was the academy of letters or whatever. It’s a research degree vs. a practice degree (like EdD or MD), so yes it’s about depth of knowledge.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 't get granted. This is the second grant I got rejected this year and it's kinda frustrating. To me this is much worse than a paper rejection because I didn't get any kind of comment, review, or advice, which makes it hard for me to know the reasons I got rejected and to find out what to do next time to improve. Any advice on how to stay positive after failure and failure? Damn this really makes me sad and question my competence as scientist....
RESPONSE A: I’m sorry. Rejections always sting. Perhaps not the healthiest approach but my tradition whenever I submit a proposal is the buy a mini bottle of champagne and a mini bottle of tequila. When I hear about a proposal I allow myself to feel whatever emotion I am going to feel, from extreme annoying elation to miserable grumpy self-loathing for as long as it takes me to decide which bottle (or both!) I will consume. And then once I make my selection and drink it, then that’s it, time to move on and get back to work on the next grant. A few years ago I submitted 8 grants in a twelve month period (there were a LOT of little bottles all lined up on my window sill)! Some big and some small, some extramural and some internal, some I got a lot of feedback on and some I got none. It was brutal and I was drinking quite a bit of tequila at work. But I learned a LOT about how to write a (bad and eventually a good) grant and I hit on two internal grants that served as springboards to get the data I needed to get my triaged K01 proposal to funded last year. And I still do get pissed when my grants don’t get funded but the difference is that now, I am fuming mad for maybe 1-2 hours instead of 1-2 weeks when my brilliance is not appreciated ;) So I guess my tip is that it takes time and persistence, a lot of rejection and maybe a lot of mini bottles on the path to ‘yes’ but you will get there.
RESPONSE B: Ahhhh I have had.... four grants rejected so far this year! It’s Covid, not us.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: rejected and to find out what to do next time to improve. Any advice on how to stay positive after failure and failure? Damn this really makes me sad and question my competence as scientist....
RESPONSE A: I’m sorry. Rejections always sting. Perhaps not the healthiest approach but my tradition whenever I submit a proposal is the buy a mini bottle of champagne and a mini bottle of tequila. When I hear about a proposal I allow myself to feel whatever emotion I am going to feel, from extreme annoying elation to miserable grumpy self-loathing for as long as it takes me to decide which bottle (or both!) I will consume. And then once I make my selection and drink it, then that’s it, time to move on and get back to work on the next grant. A few years ago I submitted 8 grants in a twelve month period (there were a LOT of little bottles all lined up on my window sill)! Some big and some small, some extramural and some internal, some I got a lot of feedback on and some I got none. It was brutal and I was drinking quite a bit of tequila at work. But I learned a LOT about how to write a (bad and eventually a good) grant and I hit on two internal grants that served as springboards to get the data I needed to get my triaged K01 proposal to funded last year. And I still do get pissed when my grants don’t get funded but the difference is that now, I am fuming mad for maybe 1-2 hours instead of 1-2 weeks when my brilliance is not appreciated ;) So I guess my tip is that it takes time and persistence, a lot of rejection and maybe a lot of mini bottles on the path to ‘yes’ but you will get there.
RESPONSE B: I’m a PhD student, but our grant (for my postdoc!) got rejected too despite feedback that it was a great proposal and they’d like it resubmitted next year. It’s partly the effects of COVID-19 and so many funders committing to keep current projects running, partly that getting grants sometimes seems a bit of a toss-up.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: The second grant I didn't get this year I am a first year Postdoc and today I found out that my application didn't get granted. This is the second grant I got rejected this year and it's kinda frustrating. To me this is much worse than a paper rejection because I didn't get any kind of comment, review, or advice, which makes it hard for me to know the reasons I got rejected and to find out what to do next time to improve. Any advice on how to stay positive after failure and failure? Damn this really makes me sad and question my competence as scientist....
RESPONSE A: Most of us are on the same boat. I hear plenty of general grants getting rejected this year, probably rerouted to corona-related research. 2 of my grants were rejected at the start of this year. Take a day to drink away the negativity, get back to polishing the grant (in terms of preliminary data and or anything else that makes the grant application more attractive), wait for the deadline and submit it. Postdoc is the time where most of the grant applications are hit or miss. This is mostly due to the fact that we are not well established in our field yet and funding agencies are unsure if we are the right candidate. Amping up your CV with more publications related to the field of grant application helps.
RESPONSE B: Grant rejection always hurts. But you also have to temper your feelings with the acknowledgement that success rates on many grant systems are phenomenally low. For example, UK Research Council funding for natural sciences currently runs at about a 7% success rate, and grant applications have to go through an internal peer review process before they even get submitted. So that 7% rate is *after* a first filter to ensure your application is competitive. Look at the failure rate here: https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/how-to-deal-with-failure-rejection-academic-research-say-senior-scientists In short, you should go into a grant application assuming you will not get it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: The second grant I didn't get this year I am a first year Postdoc and today I found out that my application didn't get granted. This is the second grant I got rejected this year and it's kinda frustrating. To me this is much worse than a paper rejection because I didn't get any kind of comment, review, or advice, which makes it hard for me to know the reasons I got rejected and to find out what to do next time to improve. Any advice on how to stay positive after failure and failure? Damn this really makes me sad and question my competence as scientist....
RESPONSE A: Grant rejection always hurts. But you also have to temper your feelings with the acknowledgement that success rates on many grant systems are phenomenally low. For example, UK Research Council funding for natural sciences currently runs at about a 7% success rate, and grant applications have to go through an internal peer review process before they even get submitted. So that 7% rate is *after* a first filter to ensure your application is competitive. Look at the failure rate here: https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/how-to-deal-with-failure-rejection-academic-research-say-senior-scientists In short, you should go into a grant application assuming you will not get it.
RESPONSE B: Ahhhh I have had.... four grants rejected so far this year! It’s Covid, not us.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: From those of you who have reviewed grad school apps, what makes an applicant stand out? From an undergrad who is pretty certain about grad school and wants to increase her chances at a great program. Also, I’m applying for grad programs in a social science field, if that’s at all helpful.
RESPONSE A: I responded to a similar post earlier so I will paste here for you too: https://www.reddit.com/r/slp/comments/8nah80/comment/dzu8m3w?st=JHTTF0GS&sh=ecaa4540 Also, this is in reference to the personal statement. High GRE scores and GPA are always a huge part of stand-out applicants!
RESPONSE B: In my experience, good GPA and gre are not really necessary or sufficient conditions. Make the statement compelling, make sure your writing sample is excellent and that the two documents clearly illuminate each other.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: From those of you who have reviewed grad school apps, what makes an applicant stand out? From an undergrad who is pretty certain about grad school and wants to increase her chances at a great program. Also, I’m applying for grad programs in a social science field, if that’s at all helpful.
RESPONSE A: In my experience, good GPA and gre are not really necessary or sufficient conditions. Make the statement compelling, make sure your writing sample is excellent and that the two documents clearly illuminate each other.
RESPONSE B: Clear interest in and knowledge of (familiarity with) our program specifically (as opposed to general/vague references to grad school or the field at large). 1. Why do you want to go here? 2. Why would you be a good fit for this program? 3. Who would you want to work with and why? (This might be answered in response to Q1.)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: If a college student applied to a job and sent fake grades and the college found out, how deep in shit is he? Let say someone is in college and gave a transcript with fake grades to an employer and this employer seems to have found out. Is it the end of this person college education(for life)? how does the Academic world deal with this sort of things? How deep in the shit is the person? Thank you
RESPONSE A: I have no personal experience with this, but my inclination is to believe that 1) the job will fire him instantly and 2) his school would never find out unless the job reported the falsification to the school (which, for some reason, I feel like the job wouldn't care enough to follow-up with that). If the school did find out, I doubt this is the end of the students life, but I suspect they'll be placed on academic probation at the bare minimum.
RESPONSE B: Hypothetically
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: If a college student applied to a job and sent fake grades and the college found out, how deep in shit is he? Let say someone is in college and gave a transcript with fake grades to an employer and this employer seems to have found out. Is it the end of this person college education(for life)? how does the Academic world deal with this sort of things? How deep in the shit is the person? Thank you
RESPONSE A: You will be come a CEO and make millions then get fired.
RESPONSE B: Not the end of college (unless the school finds out, and then you could have other issues on your hands, depending on how seriously they take the issue, or if they even care).\ But kiss that job goodbye.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Transgender name changes and publication history I've got a lot of hurdles to get over before this really becomes an issue for me, but it's on my mind this morning and I can't focus on chemistry until I just ask the question. I'm a second year grad student who recently realized that I am transgender. I was wondering how name changes effect publication records. I've got a couple first author papers out already, and (as soon as I get some crystals) I'll be submitting another paper in a couple months. I don't know whether I should keep publishing under my given name or if/when I should switch to my chosen name. I am out with my lab peers, but haven't talked to my PI yet. I guess I'm just looking for some reassurance from someone who has thought about these things before. I'm really new to understanding myself as transgender and it is very confusing.
RESPONSE A: One of my trans colleagues cha he’s their name such that their initials didn’t change. You can also use an ORCID to link both of your names.
RESPONSE B: I just want to mention this amazing, sadly recently-dead neuroscientist Ben Barres who transitioned at 40 after starting his lab. He wrote several articles discussing trans issues and gender in science including this: https://www.nature.com/scitable/content/does-gender-matter-by-ben-a-barres-10602856/. He was also a huge name in neurobiology with a big lab in Stanford and a killer publication record despite switching his name (though he used the same initial, Barbara -> Ben).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Transgender name changes and publication history I've got a lot of hurdles to get over before this really becomes an issue for me, but it's on my mind this morning and I can't focus on chemistry until I just ask the question. I'm a second year grad student who recently realized that I am transgender. I was wondering how name changes effect publication records. I've got a couple first author papers out already, and (as soon as I get some crystals) I'll be submitting another paper in a couple months. I don't know whether I should keep publishing under my given name or if/when I should switch to my chosen name. I am out with my lab peers, but haven't talked to my PI yet. I guess I'm just looking for some reassurance from someone who has thought about these things before. I'm really new to understanding myself as transgender and it is very confusing.
RESPONSE A: One of my trans colleagues cha he’s their name such that their initials didn’t change. You can also use an ORCID to link both of your names.
RESPONSE B: Most name changes in academia (only women who have been married in my experience) are something the author decides to keep as the initial name as a matter of consistency. So they will be "Sarah Smith" on publications, but all colleagues know them as "Sarah Jones". Your case I would guess to be more sensitive to your feelings, so I'd say just change it for future publications. You can link your old papers to your Google Scholar and Research Gate, etc. profiles with the ORCID. Edit: did I say something offensive here? I didn't intend to if that is the case.....
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Looking back, what would you have done differently during your PhD? I just started my PhD this past semester in mechanical engineering. I know there are a bunch of blogs by people out there on how they balanced their work/life throughout their PhD but I wanted to hear from people here. What were some things that you would have dedicated more time to? Would you have focused more on your research/increased your productivity? Or would you have allocated more time to things such as leadership experience, education, side-projects? Any cool ideas that would be fun to try?
RESPONSE A: During my MS I would waste so much time trying to figure out what I needed to do that day. Since starting my PhD in Germany, I begin my day by drinking my coffee, replying to emails, and writing out my to-do list. Only takes about 30min. I never knew such a small change could greatly change my productivity. It was a huge guilt I held in my MS.
RESPONSE B: Put more effort into it. There, I said it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Looking back, what would you have done differently during your PhD? I just started my PhD this past semester in mechanical engineering. I know there are a bunch of blogs by people out there on how they balanced their work/life throughout their PhD but I wanted to hear from people here. What were some things that you would have dedicated more time to? Would you have focused more on your research/increased your productivity? Or would you have allocated more time to things such as leadership experience, education, side-projects? Any cool ideas that would be fun to try?
RESPONSE A: During my MS I would waste so much time trying to figure out what I needed to do that day. Since starting my PhD in Germany, I begin my day by drinking my coffee, replying to emails, and writing out my to-do list. Only takes about 30min. I never knew such a small change could greatly change my productivity. It was a huge guilt I held in my MS.
RESPONSE B: Not got into a subject none of the faculty in my lab study
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Advice needed for my TT offer vs spouse TT offer Today my spouse got a TT offer at a public research univ in a location A near a major city. We are very excited. I also got a TT offer today at a public research univ in a good location B near a major city. Double excitement. However. The two locations are not close to each other at all. We would like to try to approach both schools about the possibilities of TT spousal hires. What approach would you recommend? Do we mention that we are asking the other school for the same thing? Does it help for a spousal hire to mention that the spouse has receives a TT offer from another institution?
RESPONSE A: I would play them off each other, but in the US, there is no national spousal hire programme like in other countries (i.e. Germany). I would be willing to live apart if you're both serious.
RESPONSE B: Yes, tell the respective other school what the situation is. At least one of the two may come through with a spousal position. The fact that both of you have TT offers means you're competitive, and it may help with finding a position at the other place.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: x200B; This seems at least unprofessional and I don't know how to feel about it, or if there's anything I should do. I looked through the syllabus and other academic policies at my school and I couldn't find any relevant information. Thoughts?
RESPONSE A: Under FERPA, if there's no way to connect it to the student, it's fine, i.e. there's nothing actionable here. Stuff like that gets posted a lot on places like bored panda and buzzfeed. It's unkind and unprofessional, but it happens. For any job, there's a bit of frustration and venting that happens. It's best if it's kept private. On the other hand, how many dozens of subreddits are there where people gripe about their customers/patients/bosses/idiots-in-cars? It's a big part of what social media is for, and feelings will get hurt. The biggest error is having students on their social media, and that goes both ways.
RESPONSE B: I think most people would consider that unprofessional, although whether it rises to the level of forcing some kind of action in response, I don't know. (Professors don't get in trouble easily.) If you could be identified as the author of the excerpt then I think it would be clearly very inappropriate, but since it can't be traced to you, that makes it less clearly so. Your best bet is probably to make contact with someone in your school's administration, maybe some kind of student advisor or an ombuds office if there is one. They can help you clarify your options. Just because there's nothing relevant in your school's academic policies, that doesn't mean nothing can be done about this, but there's also no guarantee that you will be able to make anything happen. --- I do happen to agree with what another commenter said, that we all make meme-worthy mistakes which can be great learning opportunities for others, but that doesn't make it okay for a professor to take part of your work and share it (for a non-academic reason, especially) without your permission or even your knowledge.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do universities have insurance which reimburses COVID testing costs? I am a lowly peon on the university food chain, but getting a separate charge for my costs in the university's testing program seems odd to me. I am a fan of everyone getting tested, just to get that out of the way. Shouldn't the university's insurance cover testing? I had thought that there was a mandate that private insurers were required to reimburse for testing done in labs? (as you can tell I am confused) I am having difficulty finding relevant information from an institutional insurance perspective on the web.
RESPONSE A: Yes, they should! My sister works as an accounts receivables at a school district office. They're tested each week, every week and never charge their workers anything for these tests. I'm not sure about the insurance but regardless, you should NOT have to pay for that at all! If you tell them you are NOT getting tested because you can NOT afford to, see what they say. Or contact your Human Resources and tell them that as well. I don't think they are allowed to require testing for COVID, if you can't afford to pay for it! Please let me know how this turns out. Don't get yourself fired! I couldn't pay for testing either. Take care!
RESPONSE B: Do vaccinated people need to get tested? (I'm just going to assume that you're vaccinated, otherwise you can't really complain about having tonpay your tests IMO.)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you read full chapters or just what you consider important for your research? I would like to know whats your strategy while doing research. I rarely ever read full chapters if I think that I've already found what I was looking for. I don't know if this is a wrong approach so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
RESPONSE A: I rarely even read full papers.
RESPONSE B: It depends. If I know the topic well and I'm looking for something really specific, I'll just look for that. If I don't know the topic well enough to be sure I'm not taking something out of context, I'll read a lot more of the surrounding materials.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Do you read full chapters or just what you consider important for your research? I would like to know whats your strategy while doing research. I rarely ever read full chapters if I think that I've already found what I was looking for. I don't know if this is a wrong approach so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
RESPONSE A: I read the index and find whatever I am looking for there. Also like u/reversechinlock said, Search for the keyword you are looking for and go straight to the point. I don't tend to waste much time around chapters that do not contribute for my research!
RESPONSE B: I rarely even read full papers.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you read full chapters or just what you consider important for your research? I would like to know whats your strategy while doing research. I rarely ever read full chapters if I think that I've already found what I was looking for. I don't know if this is a wrong approach so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
RESPONSE A: I rarely even read full papers.
RESPONSE B: Most of the time I only read the chapters in which the relevant material appears.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Do you read full chapters or just what you consider important for your research? I would like to know whats your strategy while doing research. I rarely ever read full chapters if I think that I've already found what I was looking for. I don't know if this is a wrong approach so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
RESPONSE A: I rarely even read full papers.
RESPONSE B: Like many others have mentioned, it really depends on the context. If you're confident enough that the question you're trying to answer is precise and reflects the theme competently, then there is no reason why you cannot be selective in the reading. If however, there is some doubt in the question itself, then often I'd find that the text itself will refer to other chapters or may cite some other resource that will either be more relevant or simply interesting/within scope.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is your field's version of "...this has potential applications in cancer..." for grants?
RESPONSE A: Well, I do cancer research, sooo.... deep learning.
RESPONSE B: Anything to do with epigenetics - Biochemistry
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is your field's version of "...this has potential applications in cancer..." for grants?
RESPONSE A: 'reduce energy inputs and valorize waste streams' -process Chemistry
RESPONSE B: Saying that your research is a precursor for "Quantum <name of the thing you're doing>" whenever quantum computers arrive.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is your field's version of "...this has potential applications in cancer..." for grants?
RESPONSE A: Saying that your research is a precursor for "Quantum <name of the thing you're doing>" whenever quantum computers arrive.
RESPONSE B: "To identify potential new targets for anti-obesity drugs" blah blah...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is your field's version of "...this has potential applications in cancer..." for grants?
RESPONSE A: Better materials for.... Everything. Just throw as much in there as I can.
RESPONSE B: Plant science here - ‘May contribute to the breeding of superior crops and address the problem of food security’ If I had a penny...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is your field's version of "...this has potential applications in cancer..." for grants?
RESPONSE A: Microbiome -- microbial ecology or physiology, no matter how basic
RESPONSE B: Plant science here - ‘May contribute to the breeding of superior crops and address the problem of food security’ If I had a penny...
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: To what extent is incorrect or outdated popular non-fiction frustrating in your fields? For those working in academia, perhaps it's only in dealing with first-year undergrads? Or is general misinformation frustrating? What about in fields or posts where interfacing with the public is common? Which books (or documentaries) most annoy you in this respect? Interested in answers from academics, and graduates or former academics who might hear popular misconceptions and misinformation more.
RESPONSE A: General lack of understanding of statistics and probability. E.g. there have been several high profile studies showing that people born in winter have poorer life outcomes (educational attainment, health). Someone will respond, "Well, my cousin's birthday is in January, and he was the high school valedictorian, so I don't believe that."
RESPONSE B: Most popular books about Celtic Studies, but Ireland specifically are full of nonsense. The general misinformation tends to be frustrating, only because the fictions sold as reality end up being more interesting, and therefore more popular, than the truth. Most of the time, it's not an issue, but the most awkward situations are the ones involving small-talk: you're at a party, you tell someone what you do and they either try to clarify by asking a question based on misinformation, or they've read a lot of incorrect info and start talking extensively about false facts. Now you're stuck. Do you totally kill the mood and correct them, or let them ramble on, politely excuse yourself and avoid the topic in future? In terms of what is the most frustrating, at least for me, nearly everything popular about the druids or pre-Christian Celtic religions is pure nonsense. I recognise, of course, that there are many people who currently practice a form of Celtic-inspired neo-paganism and their beliefs are valid and true for them, but we cannot extend those beliefs and rituals to the historical druids, or the ancient Celts, despite what some people may insist.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: To what extent is incorrect or outdated popular non-fiction frustrating in your fields? For those working in academia, perhaps it's only in dealing with first-year undergrads? Or is general misinformation frustrating? What about in fields or posts where interfacing with the public is common? Which books (or documentaries) most annoy you in this respect? Interested in answers from academics, and graduates or former academics who might hear popular misconceptions and misinformation more.
RESPONSE A: I'm in health psychology. EVERYTHING in popular media regarding health is at least 50% bullshit, usually more. There are a few books I can recommend (e.g. *Secrets from the Eating Lab* by Traci Mann), but every Super Special Magic Diet book, any self-styled internet health guru, anyone who ever unironically utters the phrase "gut health" I just want to set on fire. (*Grain Brain* would be good kindling.)
RESPONSE B: General lack of understanding of statistics and probability. E.g. there have been several high profile studies showing that people born in winter have poorer life outcomes (educational attainment, health). Someone will respond, "Well, my cousin's birthday is in January, and he was the high school valedictorian, so I don't believe that."
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.