label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
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POST: To what extent is incorrect or outdated popular non-fiction frustrating in your fields?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: If another fucking person asks me about fucking interstellar imma esplodey all over the place
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
|
A
|
POST: 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 have some students who seem to be misinformed about the concept of learning styles. Sometimes they're just misinformed about the research and what it means. But in some cases I feel like it can contribute to a type of learned helplessness where a student will say something to me like, "I can't really learn that well from reading or hearing something explained to me because I'm a visual learner." I get the shortcomings of readings and lecture as teaching tools, and I get the benefits of providing information visually. I also get that some students have learning disabilities that make reading and auditory processing difficult. But I worry that some students are in danger of giving up on reading and lecture too readily because they have this inaccurate understanding of learning styles.
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: I have some students who seem to be misinformed about the concept of learning styles. Sometimes they're just misinformed about the research and what it means. But in some cases I feel like it can contribute to a type of learned helplessness where a student will say something to me like, "I can't really learn that well from reading or hearing something explained to me because I'm a visual learner." I get the shortcomings of readings and lecture as teaching tools, and I get the benefits of providing information visually. I also get that some students have learning disabilities that make reading and auditory processing difficult. But I worry that some students are in danger of giving up on reading and lecture too readily because they have this inaccurate understanding of learning styles.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Permanent job holders: What was more important to you? place? Or fit? I know the answer to this question is unique to each individual, but I’m curious what folks have thought about this. I’m 2 years post-PhD in a wonderful location for my postdoc. It’s close to family, affordable, beautiful, and my family loves it. But the chance of getting a permanent position as TT here or even regionally is very low. I am getting interviews, but not yet at unis or areas I want to live (too expensive, too rural, etc). This year’s job market is abysmal, and I’m starting to consider whether it’s worth it to try and stick out for the long term for a TT or non-Academic position here, or apply broadly and hope I get something anywhere before I run out of funding. No doubt others have grappled with this question as postdocs. What did you choose? Place or position? Were you happy? Did you regret it? Did you change your mind?
RESPONSE A: Fit first, because if you do well you can find a chance to seek both fit and place next. My next stop is soft money within my own institution, but with greater geographic flexibility to be closer to families and (when again possible to meet in person) agencies, collaborators, etc.
RESPONSE B: Fit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: , or apply broadly and hope I get something anywhere before I run out of funding. No doubt others have grappled with this question as postdocs. What did you choose? Place or position? Were you happy? Did you regret it? Did you change your mind?
RESPONSE A: Depends a bit how you define location. I am German and limited my search to Germany, Austria and Switzerland (with preference to Germany). By American standards that's probably a very local search, to me it felt like a very wide search. :) For background: I finished my PhD this year, so tenured positions aren't within reach for me. Generally, I was more interested in finding a permanent job where my scientific career wouldn't become completely useless (e.g. a recruiter sent me an offer for "Software developer: User-interface for kitchen machines" - hard no), but I wasn't willing to move just anywhere. In the end I found an industry offer that definitively satisfies both conditions: It's within 2 hours of my family and somewhat relevant to my studies. If the same job would have been located at the other end of Germany I probably also would have taken it. If it would have been outside of my desired countries I probably would have declined (but there I would anyways run into language barrier problems). I also had two (obviously non-permanent) postdoc offers in the States in two amazing labs, but in the end I decided I didn't want to move that far away. I *may* have taken them if these exact offers would have been located within Europe. I am quite sure it still would have been my last position in academia, since I recently started craving job security and wasn't willing to "gamble" my the next 10+ years, hoping that maybe one day I might score an tenured position (that then might be who-knows-where). For that reason I also didn't even try to find a similar offer within Europe, no need if I anyways want to leave academia. But the two labs are both amazing, so if they would have been closer to home, I might have made a single exception, just for the love of the science I could do there.
RESPONSE B: Fit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: folks have thought about this. I’m 2 years post-PhD in a wonderful location for my postdoc. It’s close to family, affordable, beautiful, and my family loves it. But the chance of getting a permanent position as TT here or even regionally is very low. I am getting interviews, but not yet at unis or areas I want to live (too expensive, too rural, etc). This year’s job market is abysmal, and I’m starting to consider whether it’s worth it to try and stick out for the long term for a TT or non-Academic position here, or apply broadly and hope I get something anywhere before I run out of funding. No doubt others have grappled with this question as postdocs. What did you choose? Place or position? Were you happy? Did you regret it? Did you change your mind?
RESPONSE A: Fit.
RESPONSE B: In the humanities most people I know are lucky to get a single TT offer in their careers, so the ones who held out for place usually left academia or ended up as permanent adjuncts or moved into profession staff lines in adminisitration. I ended up 2,500 miles from both my family and my partners, in a part of the country that near the bottom of our "tolerable" list. Lots of opportunity for growth, building interdisciplinary programs, funded travel, etc. made the job look great on paper-- and it has been. It's been 20+ years now, we raised our kids here, saw family when we could in summers, and at this point are starting to fantasize about retiring back "home" in another ten years or so. I love my job, my colleagues, most of my students, but if I'd have really understood in my 20s that having an academic career would mean living the best years of my life far away from the people and places I most cared about I might have made different choices. I feel fortunate that tenure and a two-professional-income family has made it possible for me to spend at least a month each year visiting the part of the country that I really want to live in, and since there are basically zero academic jobs there I suppose the alternative would have been an entirely different career path.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Permanent job holders: What was more important to you? place? Or fit? I know the answer to this question is unique to each individual, but I’m curious what folks have thought about this. I’m 2 years post-PhD in a wonderful location for my postdoc. It’s close to family, affordable, beautiful, and my family loves it. But the chance of getting a permanent position as TT here or even regionally is very low. I am getting interviews, but not yet at unis or areas I want to live (too expensive, too rural, etc). This year’s job market is abysmal, and I’m starting to consider whether it’s worth it to try and stick out for the long term for a TT or non-Academic position here, or apply broadly and hope I get something anywhere before I run out of funding. No doubt others have grappled with this question as postdocs. What did you choose? Place or position? Were you happy? Did you regret it? Did you change your mind?
RESPONSE A: i stayed where my kids were (and where their dad was) until they were (mostly) grown (job opportunities sub-optimal there) and then I moved where I wanted to go, and for the cool job, that is, for me.
RESPONSE B: Fit.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: not to mention it's more recent. Then again, I'm not really in a position to judge that which is why I decided to make this post. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: In my experience, I applied to law school after finishing my Masters in a field with no jobs. Law school heavily weighs your undergraduate GPA as an even playing- field simply because most people do not already have graduate degrees. I did not have the best UGPA and even with a 4.0 MGPA, I still did not get accepted at a few schools I should have. I'm at the top of my class at a great school now, who I interviewed with and explained my circumstances. It sucks, but its how they can evaluate a wide swath of people on some sort of consistent standard.
RESPONSE B: My guess: undergrad classes will fail students- you usually get a decent distribution of grades. Most classes shoot for at least an A-C distribution, with many falling into D-F for failing. Masters classes at many university are distributed A-B mostly, with low B’s being “you did pretty shit here.” That’s because at least in programs close to my field, a B average is required to stay in the program. If they went down to C-D too often, it would make decent chunks of grad students ineligible. They usually reserve that for when people are really bad. Additionally, people in grad school are often pretty good at their chosen field. It wouldn’t make sense to take people that got mostly A’s in these classes in undergrad, in a subject they have an aptitude for, and force an A-C or A-D curve. Professors expect you to excel at the topic, even if the material is harder to learn. They’re not penalizing you super hard for taking on more difficult challenges in a field this group of people is good at. The goal is for you to learn, not to kick you if you didn’t understand perfectly immediately. Therefore, a grad range of A-B isn’t a whole lot to go off of. Statistical errors are higher. A wider grade range among more people is more telling of you as a student, generally. Just my $0.02.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Regarding PhD admissions, what is the rationale behind weighting undergraduate GPA more than master's GPA? Hi. This post was inspired by a trending post here w.r.t. graduate school performance and undergraduate grades. I thought about posting in r/gradadmissions but get the impression that that subreddit wouldn't exactly provide any insightful answers to my question. Please remove if inappropriate. I just got done applying to my programs last weekend. I'm one of those cases where my UGPA is a bit mediocre (I switched from social sciences to CS and that caused my GPA to tank - CS-only GPA is 2.9/4.0) but I decided to give graduate school a shot, found a PI willing to give me a chance, and managed to maintain a 3.9/4.0 master's GPA and publish papers. Although I'm certain this varies from school to school and committee to committee, but I've been hearing quite a lot that admissions committees weigh UGPA higher than graduate GPA, and I'm just curious what the rationale behind that may be. My impression would be that graduate GPA should be a better indicator of success since it's (usually) related to what the student wants to specialize in, not to mention it's more recent. Then again, I'm not really in a position to judge that which is why I decided to make this post. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: What about undergrad taking grad classes? Are good grades also discounted?
RESPONSE B: It's kind of an open secret that GPA in masters programs are super inflated. Plus earning a 4.0 or close to it in that context is much simpler given that you're talking under 50 credit hours usually, plus faculty will bend over backwards to keep even the worst students engaged for the enrollment. Source: me when I taught in a master's program and was threatened by my chair after giving an A- instead of an A that should've been a D
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: work is incredibly interesting, and his interests are really close to mine. I was even able to talk to him via Skype thanks to my advisor, and he seemed to really like me as well. However, the PhD program in CS at this University is... OK. Don't get me wrong, this is a very good University nonetheless. Still, this professor seems to be one of the very few (like 2 or three) which are more into Theoretical CS (TCS), and there doesn't seem to be a group or lab about theory in CS. In other universities that I am applying to, such as CMU, the program is a lot more interesting. There is a strong TCS group, with seminars and workshops, a lot of very interesting theoretical courses, etc. If I get accepted in the program from the University of the professor I mentioned, and in another University with a very strong program in TCS, which you guys think would be a better choice? Having a good advisor is very good, but I do not know if chosing this in place of a very good program in a top 10 ranked University (where I do not have previous contact with any faculty) is worth it. What are your thoughts?
RESPONSE A: I did the latter. Would probably do the former if I had to do it over again.
RESPONSE B: The advice I received was to go for the advisor over the department, but I now disagree with that. As a person who has entered 2 PhD programs, one at an ivy and now one at an ok school with a well-known advisor, I'd say go for the best school (as long as there is research there that you want to do). The reason I say this is that the quality of the education was so much better at the better school. The work was much harder, but I learned a lot more. The department and facilities were much better organized. Furthermore, although both schools nominally required 20 h/week teaching in the 1st year, the way that played out was much better at the good school: well-organized courses taught by tenured professors, support for TAs, and no teaching required during the summer. Good luck with grad school whichever way you choose!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: this professor seems to be one of the very few (like 2 or three) which are more into Theoretical CS (TCS), and there doesn't seem to be a group or lab about theory in CS. In other universities that I am applying to, such as CMU, the program is a lot more interesting. There is a strong TCS group, with seminars and workshops, a lot of very interesting theoretical courses, etc. If I get accepted in the program from the University of the professor I mentioned, and in another University with a very strong program in TCS, which you guys think would be a better choice? Having a good advisor is very good, but I do not know if chosing this in place of a very good program in a top 10 ranked University (where I do not have previous contact with any faculty) is worth it. What are your thoughts?
RESPONSE A: Depends on what you want to do after, I suppose. Some companies only hire grads from certain universities, plus in general having a 'branded' university in your CV helps open a lot of doors. But if you're looking at academia, rankings don't matter as much as publications so maybe you'll be more productive in this area with the former since there's already a preexisting stream/relationship.
RESPONSE B: The advice I received was to go for the advisor over the department, but I now disagree with that. As a person who has entered 2 PhD programs, one at an ivy and now one at an ok school with a well-known advisor, I'd say go for the best school (as long as there is research there that you want to do). The reason I say this is that the quality of the education was so much better at the better school. The work was much harder, but I learned a lot more. The department and facilities were much better organized. Furthermore, although both schools nominally required 20 h/week teaching in the 1st year, the way that played out was much better at the good school: well-organized courses taught by tenured professors, support for TAs, and no teaching required during the summer. Good luck with grad school whichever way you choose!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How would you put an incomplete PhD in your CV? Spent 3.5 years on a 4-year PhD program only to be terminated a semester away. I have two first-author papers associated with it, and two second-author (one tagged with equal contribution), and I helped with a grant application and a review paper. I don't want to have a 3.5-year gap in my CV, so how should I put it in my CV? I have no interest in applying for academic programs after this entire kerfuffle. Field is Physics-ish Engineering.
RESPONSE A: At minimum, you can describe the past several years as working as a research assistant at the university and list your publications and other contributions.
RESPONSE B: Describe it as ABD all but dissertation
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How would you put an incomplete PhD in your CV? Spent 3.5 years on a 4-year PhD program only to be terminated a semester away. I have two first-author papers associated with it, and two second-author (one tagged with equal contribution), and I helped with a grant application and a review paper. I don't want to have a 3.5-year gap in my CV, so how should I put it in my CV? I have no interest in applying for academic programs after this entire kerfuffle. Field is Physics-ish Engineering.
RESPONSE A: At minimum, you can describe the past several years as working as a research assistant at the university and list your publications and other contributions.
RESPONSE B: First of all, I'm sorry you're dealing with this bullshit. If a person is firing several Ph.D. students (is there no due process for this that allows you to stay in the same program and move to another lab?), then that says everything about them and nothing about you. Under the education section of your CV, I would list that you completed 3.5 years worth of graduate work in a Ph.D. program in your field. Will that lead to some questions on interviews? Perhaps. But probably fewer than if you had a 3.5 year gap. Most people, at the very least, understand that a doctoral program is hard and can envision reasons why a person would leave a Ph.D. program (even if those aren't the reasons you left). If asked about this in an interview, you can always say something brief (e.g., the lab was not a good fit for you) that is truthful (I'm assuming that you would not consider a lab with a toxic PI to be a good fit) while not saying anything that might be interpreted in a bad light.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Using proofreading softwares such as Grammarly in academic writing I see some PhD students using grammerly as proofreading support. Is it okay to use such software? Any better advice there? Thanks in advance :)
RESPONSE A: I think it would be fine. I am not sure if there is any copyright transfer of text analysed with grammerly? As a user I don't see how it could be a problem otherwise?
RESPONSE B: I purchased the full Grammarly license when I was a 4th year Ph.D. student and never looked back (I use it to this day). It definitely has some bugs that are still being worked out (for example, it doesn't recognize that "faculty" can be both singular and plural, it wants to change it to faculties in the plural). My program actively encouraged the use of such editors, especially for students whose primary language was not English. Even though I am a native English speaker, it was a major help for me when writing my dissertation. My advisor was VERY nitpicky about grammar, and Grammarly let me focus on the content of my writing and not the grammar.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Using proofreading softwares such as Grammarly in academic writing I see some PhD students using grammerly as proofreading support. Is it okay to use such software? Any better advice there? Thanks in advance :)
RESPONSE A: I purchased the full Grammarly license when I was a 4th year Ph.D. student and never looked back (I use it to this day). It definitely has some bugs that are still being worked out (for example, it doesn't recognize that "faculty" can be both singular and plural, it wants to change it to faculties in the plural). My program actively encouraged the use of such editors, especially for students whose primary language was not English. Even though I am a native English speaker, it was a major help for me when writing my dissertation. My advisor was VERY nitpicky about grammar, and Grammarly let me focus on the content of my writing and not the grammar.
RESPONSE B: I would check with your institution. I know some (including my own) consider using these proofreading services/software to be academic dishonesty.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Using proofreading softwares such as Grammarly in academic writing I see some PhD students using grammerly as proofreading support. Is it okay to use such software? Any better advice there? Thanks in advance :)
RESPONSE A: I think it would be fine. I am not sure if there is any copyright transfer of text analysed with grammerly? As a user I don't see how it could be a problem otherwise?
RESPONSE B: It's fine, but Grammarly can be pretty prescriptive when it comes to writing style.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: If academia can be ideal, what would that look like? Academia has many flaws, from salaries to the promotion system, publish and perish, and others. If you had a magic wand to change things to the best, how would you do it?
RESPONSE A: The right to not be exposed to a pandemic as a job requirement is all I ask for
RESPONSE B: Definitely reign in administrative bloat. Stop creating new degrees—like higher Ed Admin, that one really burns my biscuits. Reinvest in the humanities. This one is a bit counter intuitive, but since it’s run as a business, business schools tend to get big donors, and this is late-stage capitalism—more integration of business and academic training. Less silo-ing. Less contingent faculty. Better financial packages for grad students. More funding opportunities for grad students instead of just TA or RA positions. Reign in recruitment and retention initiatives for undergrads, and build better support for grad students. It definitely feels like, as a grad student, you’ve been recruited and retained so nobody cares about you anymore. More clarity around professionalization opportunities while in a degree program. More flexibility with curriculum, especially at the grad level. More faculty training on current job market realities, and mentorship. More clear expectations for faculty regarding what to do for a mentee. Actually enact vision statements beyond the talk of it. Less idealism. More realism.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Weekly] Office hours As [suggested in the community consultation thread, this will be a new, weekly recurring post, intended to attract questions which may have short, closed answers or which don't necessarily require, or benefit from, lengthy discussion. As such, if you have any questions which aren't necessarily worth a full thread, but to which you'd like an answer, this is the place - please post below.
RESPONSE A: At the end of this semester, a class I'm taking in computational chemistry will give the students about a month to do an independent research project. Besides just pouring through a whole bunch of journal articles, is there a way I can try to start to prepare for my first research project? I'm sure as the project approaches, the instructor will mention strategies, but I'd like to get a headstart to look better on the summer research applications for this instructor's lab.
RESPONSE B: I've been accepted into a few MPH programs, these programs will involve internship placement and other professional opportunities. **How on earth do I dress to attend my lectures?** I'm used to casual clothing (not pajamas, but certainly jeans, tennis shoes, and t-shirts) from undergrad, but feel I should "step it up" for a Masters. But I also don't want to be overdressed compared to my peers. Since I shop very frugally in thrift shops I need to start making any wardrobe transition now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Ask/Academia: Check out this site for searching academic journal impact factors. It's useful for all who read journal articles. http://www.impactfactorsearch.com
RESPONSE A: The tyranny of the impact factor (handy tool though). One part of me thinks that its reasonable to require people to publish papers that are cited a lot (why else publish it if no one reads it?), but the other part of me thinks it completely skews the kind of science that we pursue. A lot of postdocs lives are spent chasing high impact projects and spending months upon months submitting to the slow high impact journals. Is it just a function of low funding/few positions? Do journal editors have too much power? I don't think there is one boogeyman, but it is frustrating when you have awesome idea x but you are unsure whether it will be just cool and useful science or "big splash" science. Any other thoughts?
RESPONSE B: Thanks for sharing. This is much easier than using the JCR database system.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: [Science] How long does it take to actually understand papers and journals. I'm a second year undergraduate student in Biomedical sciences. On my course, we are constantly told to read papers in journals like Nature and Cell to expand our knowledge. The issue is, I feel like they're in a different language. I'm not sure whether its common for us not to comprehensively understand these papers, or whether I am a poor student. Any ideas? I am hoping its that these papers are just categorically more advanced then people at my stage of education are ready for.
RESPONSE A: My senior year of undergrad I comprehended maybe a dozen relatively simple papers after intense reading. I read many other papers that i didn't fully understand. It wasn't until my second or third year in grad school that I could understand a paper after a single read-through, and that's just in my narrow field of bacterial genetics. Papers from related fields like immunology or computational biology still take me a long time to digest, and I'm getting a Ph.D. in a few months. Basically, don't give up!
RESPONSE B: Don't have much experience, but I've been reading some papers for my Master's thesis and it's definitely not easy. I seldom understand them right away. I generally read the abstract + intro and conclusions first and then skim the rest. Then I read all of it, taking notes, until I understand the idea(or think I do). I've found it helps me to discuss it with someone.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is something you wish you'd known before when writing essays/dissertations/articles? I realised, after 4 years of undergrad and one year into my Masters, that when I'm copying and pasting information from an article to a google docs sheet to gather material, I should also copy the page of where I took that information from. It saves a lot of time if I'm going to quote that information later.
RESPONSE A: (1) Use Scrivener. I write articles 30% faster with Scrivener because everything... my research, drafts, notes, etc. are all in one place and can be viewed at the same time. (2) Research and then outline and THEN write. This seems obvious, but until I became strict about not starting to write an article/chapter/etc. until I was 95% done with my research and had a strong and detailed outline I was not an efficient writer. Writing is SO much easier and so much quicker now that I work in discrete phases. My work is stronger, too. (3) Always include a full citation with every quote I pull during my research. Every single one. (4) Orienting my daily writing goals around words, not time. There have been some interesting studies that have shown that word goals (“I must write 500 words every day this week.”) rather than time goals (“I will write for 30 minutes every day this week.”) lead to far greater productivity. That has DEFINITELY been the case for me. It’s surprising how quickly the words add up when you hold yourself to a certain amount each day.
RESPONSE B: The results of my research! Would save a lot of time with Lit Review and Theory re-writing!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is something you wish you'd known before when writing essays/dissertations/articles? I realised, after 4 years of undergrad and one year into my Masters, that when I'm copying and pasting information from an article to a google docs sheet to gather material, I should also copy the page of where I took that information from. It saves a lot of time if I'm going to quote that information later.
RESPONSE A: (1) Use Scrivener. I write articles 30% faster with Scrivener because everything... my research, drafts, notes, etc. are all in one place and can be viewed at the same time. (2) Research and then outline and THEN write. This seems obvious, but until I became strict about not starting to write an article/chapter/etc. until I was 95% done with my research and had a strong and detailed outline I was not an efficient writer. Writing is SO much easier and so much quicker now that I work in discrete phases. My work is stronger, too. (3) Always include a full citation with every quote I pull during my research. Every single one. (4) Orienting my daily writing goals around words, not time. There have been some interesting studies that have shown that word goals (“I must write 500 words every day this week.”) rather than time goals (“I will write for 30 minutes every day this week.”) lead to far greater productivity. That has DEFINITELY been the case for me. It’s surprising how quickly the words add up when you hold yourself to a certain amount each day.
RESPONSE B: Always start earlier than you think you’ll need?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is something you wish you'd known before when writing essays/dissertations/articles? I realised, after 4 years of undergrad and one year into my Masters, that when I'm copying and pasting information from an article to a google docs sheet to gather material, I should also copy the page of where I took that information from. It saves a lot of time if I'm going to quote that information later.
RESPONSE A: Keeping a doc of citations in the correct format will save you a few hours of searching and googling in case you misplace the article or want to follow up on it for another chapter. Adding meta-tag notes to the top of each PDF article will help identify aligned topics if you find new lines of research or deviate from your expected argument into new territory. Keep your mind open to analogical associations between unlike articles. Even if two articles are from different disciplines, they may be used together as evidence for a piece of your argument.
RESPONSE B: (1) Use Scrivener. I write articles 30% faster with Scrivener because everything... my research, drafts, notes, etc. are all in one place and can be viewed at the same time. (2) Research and then outline and THEN write. This seems obvious, but until I became strict about not starting to write an article/chapter/etc. until I was 95% done with my research and had a strong and detailed outline I was not an efficient writer. Writing is SO much easier and so much quicker now that I work in discrete phases. My work is stronger, too. (3) Always include a full citation with every quote I pull during my research. Every single one. (4) Orienting my daily writing goals around words, not time. There have been some interesting studies that have shown that word goals (“I must write 500 words every day this week.”) rather than time goals (“I will write for 30 minutes every day this week.”) lead to far greater productivity. That has DEFINITELY been the case for me. It’s surprising how quickly the words add up when you hold yourself to a certain amount each day.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is something you wish you'd known before when writing essays/dissertations/articles? I realised, after 4 years of undergrad and one year into my Masters, that when I'm copying and pasting information from an article to a google docs sheet to gather material, I should also copy the page of where I took that information from. It saves a lot of time if I'm going to quote that information later.
RESPONSE A: (1) Use Scrivener. I write articles 30% faster with Scrivener because everything... my research, drafts, notes, etc. are all in one place and can be viewed at the same time. (2) Research and then outline and THEN write. This seems obvious, but until I became strict about not starting to write an article/chapter/etc. until I was 95% done with my research and had a strong and detailed outline I was not an efficient writer. Writing is SO much easier and so much quicker now that I work in discrete phases. My work is stronger, too. (3) Always include a full citation with every quote I pull during my research. Every single one. (4) Orienting my daily writing goals around words, not time. There have been some interesting studies that have shown that word goals (“I must write 500 words every day this week.”) rather than time goals (“I will write for 30 minutes every day this week.”) lead to far greater productivity. That has DEFINITELY been the case for me. It’s surprising how quickly the words add up when you hold yourself to a certain amount each day.
RESPONSE B: If you copy and paste something into Microsoft's OneNote, it will automatically format it with the link to place you copied it from. Of course it is only a hypertext link, so not a full reference, but still, pretty neat if you want to go back to it later.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is it you wish you'd known when you started research?
RESPONSE A: It's ok to leave at 5 and take the weekends off. Your works not that important.
RESPONSE B: That this flow chart accurately describes how research really goes: http://weknowmemes.com/2012/06/public-perception-of-science-vs-science-in-reality/ I guess I always thought research would provide definitive answers. I was surprised to learn how different interpretations of the same results can lead to widely different conclusions. I was also surprised that it’s okay to not know a whole lot about your topic at first. You think you know a bit when you start, but you learn way more along the way through reading and experimenting. That’s how you really become the expert!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is it you wish you'd known when you started research?
RESPONSE A: It's ok to leave at 5 and take the weekends off. Your works not that important.
RESPONSE B: Experiments RARELY work the first time you try them. Troubleshooting is part of the learning process and it’s assumed that you’ll have to take some time doing it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is it you wish you'd known when you started research?
RESPONSE A: That the government in my country believes research is futile and it is ok to keep cutting its budget.
RESPONSE B: "Get it written, don't get it right." It's so easy to fall into the trap of thinking there is always more to be done. You need clearly defined projects/goals and to focus on getting it done.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What is it you wish you'd known when you started research?
RESPONSE A: Treat your research like a job. Work 9-5, or 10-6, or whatever, and take the weekend off. Don't work nights. Don't let your life and your work intermingle, or else both will suffer. It's a job. Treat it like one. Everyone in Phd programmes are always "so tired" from "working all the time." What they're doing is mixing their work and their life. PhD research is mostly about basic competency, time management, and organization. Be organized, and that also means strong, stark bifurcation. Keep shabbos. Really. Take at least a day a week to not work at all. Avoid pork and light a couple candles with a glass of wine if you want to make it more, uh, authentic. Keep your work away from your life, and your time away from your work.
RESPONSE B: that doing so would be extremely rewarding and would give me skills that I use all the time. But also, that getting a PhD would be the single most downwardly mobile decision I would ever make.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: /seminars/etc covered. However, it's a generally-accepted truth that taking vacations improves worker productivity. Hence, I find it hard to believe that professors have *no* option for taking time off whatsoever. If a professor wanted to go to a beach or camping trip for long weekend, or occasionally a week, is that possible? Or are y'all just super-humans who need no rest?
RESPONSE A: It varies a lot by field. Besides obligations like teaching, being a professor is very much being in charge of your own time and if you get what you need done, no one cares. I'm in STEM and run a lab, so the summers are more focused on research. But it is more flexible so I do take about 2 weeks off. I don't have to really request it, just make sure my students in the lab know what they are doing for 2 weeks. I do have fantasies of taking a whole summer off (it would be unpaid), but my lab is too young for that right now. When we use to travel for conferences, I'd routinely pair conference travel with visiting friends/family nearby and take an extra few days. As long as I'm not missing teaching, that is fine, I work enough to make up for it. Academics tend to be workaholics. For me, I love what I do, so it doesn't feel like a grind (most of the time), but time totally away is important.
RESPONSE B: For professors in the US, the limit on time off comes from your own workload, not from any administrative rule about how many vacation days you get or a supervisor who must approve leave. Essentially, you have unlimited leave combined with unlimited work. So, you just take time off as your schedule allows. For example, you probably shouldn’t skip teaching or abandon your students or flake out on meetings, but it’s very possible to take vacations that fit your schedule. On the flip side, most professors who I know work for at least some part of their vacations. But with remote work being so common now, it’s fairly easy to work for an hour or two and then close your computer to enjoy your long weekend at the beach.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are professors able to take time off? I've been out of school for a few years now, but was wondering --- what does time off/vacation look like for a professor? I know that the common misconception of "you have the whole summer off!" is nonsense, and the responses to that generally consist of professors laughing at the concept of free time. I'm also guessing that professors can't just submit a request to take a week off mid-semester like one could do in industry, since they'd have to get classes/seminars/etc covered. However, it's a generally-accepted truth that taking vacations improves worker productivity. Hence, I find it hard to believe that professors have *no* option for taking time off whatsoever. If a professor wanted to go to a beach or camping trip for long weekend, or occasionally a week, is that possible? Or are y'all just super-humans who need no rest?
RESPONSE A: In my experience, no one cares if you take miss a class here and there for your own time, as long as that is clearly communicated to the students and they know what they are supposed to be doing. I would never miss more than one day per class though just so the students don't get the sense I'm not taking their time seriously.
RESPONSE B: For professors in the US, the limit on time off comes from your own workload, not from any administrative rule about how many vacation days you get or a supervisor who must approve leave. Essentially, you have unlimited leave combined with unlimited work. So, you just take time off as your schedule allows. For example, you probably shouldn’t skip teaching or abandon your students or flake out on meetings, but it’s very possible to take vacations that fit your schedule. On the flip side, most professors who I know work for at least some part of their vacations. But with remote work being so common now, it’s fairly easy to work for an hour or two and then close your computer to enjoy your long weekend at the beach.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are professors able to take time off? I've been out of school for a few years now, but was wondering --- what does time off/vacation look like for a professor? I know that the common misconception of "you have the whole summer off!" is nonsense, and the responses to that generally consist of professors laughing at the concept of free time. I'm also guessing that professors can't just submit a request to take a week off mid-semester like one could do in industry, since they'd have to get classes/seminars/etc covered. However, it's a generally-accepted truth that taking vacations improves worker productivity. Hence, I find it hard to believe that professors have *no* option for taking time off whatsoever. If a professor wanted to go to a beach or camping trip for long weekend, or occasionally a week, is that possible? Or are y'all just super-humans who need no rest?
RESPONSE A: In my experience, no one cares if you take miss a class here and there for your own time, as long as that is clearly communicated to the students and they know what they are supposed to be doing. I would never miss more than one day per class though just so the students don't get the sense I'm not taking their time seriously.
RESPONSE B: Professors have some hard obligations (teaching), some firm obligations that we can miss occasionally (meetings) and lots of soft obligations (esp. research) that are important and sometimes deadline-driven (e.g., paper and proposal deadlines), but otherwise can be done when we choose. We don’t get vacation like most people do, but school holidays and the summer break are technically times when we can do what we want. However, those soft obligations are so big and so important that our actual free time is limited. The result is that we *can* take time off at those times, but actually doing so is difficult.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Are professors able to take time off? I've been out of school for a few years now, but was wondering --- what does time off/vacation look like for a professor? I know that the common misconception of "you have the whole summer off!" is nonsense, and the responses to that generally consist of professors laughing at the concept of free time. I'm also guessing that professors can't just submit a request to take a week off mid-semester like one could do in industry, since they'd have to get classes/seminars/etc covered. However, it's a generally-accepted truth that taking vacations improves worker productivity. Hence, I find it hard to believe that professors have *no* option for taking time off whatsoever. If a professor wanted to go to a beach or camping trip for long weekend, or occasionally a week, is that possible? Or are y'all just super-humans who need no rest?
RESPONSE A: In my experience most academics don't take anywhere near as much time off as they should. If it's not teaching commitments there is always research that needs doing, papers that need writing, or new grants that need writing, or admin work, or about a million other things! I tend to think of academics as self employed, no one forces us to work long hours but it's only detrimental to ourselves not to.
RESPONSE B: Professors have some hard obligations (teaching), some firm obligations that we can miss occasionally (meetings) and lots of soft obligations (esp. research) that are important and sometimes deadline-driven (e.g., paper and proposal deadlines), but otherwise can be done when we choose. We don’t get vacation like most people do, but school holidays and the summer break are technically times when we can do what we want. However, those soft obligations are so big and so important that our actual free time is limited. The result is that we *can* take time off at those times, but actually doing so is difficult.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'm considering assigning 'Edit Wikipedia' assignments to students. Do any of you have experience with this? What are some things to keep in mind? I'm not aware of any instructors at my University who have had their students do Wikipedia assignments (e.g. add content from the weekly readings to a relevant Wikipedia page), so I have no one to consult with on this except you guys! I'm a bit wary about having the students do unorthodox assignments. I foresee a bunch of complaints and hassle, although I do think the majority of the students will find the assignments way more rewarding than just doing papers and exams. Do any of you have experience with assigning (as instructors) or doing (as students) Wikipedia assignments? How did it turn out? How did you structure the assignments? What are some things to keep in mind?
RESPONSE A: When I was a student in a history class for my major we had to create a Wikipedia page for a historical figure that didn't already have their own wiki article. My professor was really into alternative assignments but this one just didn't land for me personally. It was a huge time suck to learn how to create and edit in Wikipedia and I didn't really get much out of it. It was frustrating to make a page then have someone else come in and change it, even though we printed it out for posterity, because there were multiple pieces due over time. So you'd turn in one piece and when you went back to work on the next piece it'd be different.
RESPONSE B: I have been doing this for years, but design and support is critical, and you do *not* want to make it a casual side assignment if you want to get the most out of it. It's an excellent way to teach sourced writing and secondary research skills, but I recommend building a whole unit around it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'm considering assigning 'Edit Wikipedia' assignments to students. Do any of you have experience with this? What are some things to keep in mind? I'm not aware of any instructors at my University who have had their students do Wikipedia assignments (e.g. add content from the weekly readings to a relevant Wikipedia page), so I have no one to consult with on this except you guys! I'm a bit wary about having the students do unorthodox assignments. I foresee a bunch of complaints and hassle, although I do think the majority of the students will find the assignments way more rewarding than just doing papers and exams. Do any of you have experience with assigning (as instructors) or doing (as students) Wikipedia assignments? How did it turn out? How did you structure the assignments? What are some things to keep in mind?
RESPONSE A: You should talk to your library. Many have Wikipedia projects to include information from and links to their digital collections in their particular areas of focus. There's likely an in-house Wikipedia expert who can help out.
RESPONSE B: When I was a student in a history class for my major we had to create a Wikipedia page for a historical figure that didn't already have their own wiki article. My professor was really into alternative assignments but this one just didn't land for me personally. It was a huge time suck to learn how to create and edit in Wikipedia and I didn't really get much out of it. It was frustrating to make a page then have someone else come in and change it, even though we printed it out for posterity, because there were multiple pieces due over time. So you'd turn in one piece and when you went back to work on the next piece it'd be different.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'm considering assigning 'Edit Wikipedia' assignments to students. Do any of you have experience with this? What are some things to keep in mind? I'm not aware of any instructors at my University who have had their students do Wikipedia assignments (e.g. add content from the weekly readings to a relevant Wikipedia page), so I have no one to consult with on this except you guys! I'm a bit wary about having the students do unorthodox assignments. I foresee a bunch of complaints and hassle, although I do think the majority of the students will find the assignments way more rewarding than just doing papers and exams. Do any of you have experience with assigning (as instructors) or doing (as students) Wikipedia assignments? How did it turn out? How did you structure the assignments? What are some things to keep in mind?
RESPONSE A: You should talk to your library. Many have Wikipedia projects to include information from and links to their digital collections in their particular areas of focus. There's likely an in-house Wikipedia expert who can help out.
RESPONSE B: Be very wary about *where* you get them to edit on Wikipedia. You need to think of it like a continent - many bits are modern and pleasant and other bit are failed nation states and if your students go there they will get (metaphorically) shot or attacked. Many people treat wikipedia as a large free RPG - where you get points for beating down new editors by citing rules at them. I've heard nothing but hassle from doing this sort of stuff.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'm considering assigning 'Edit Wikipedia' assignments to students. Do any of you have experience with this? What are some things to keep in mind? I'm not aware of any instructors at my University who have had their students do Wikipedia assignments (e.g. add content from the weekly readings to a relevant Wikipedia page), so I have no one to consult with on this except you guys! I'm a bit wary about having the students do unorthodox assignments. I foresee a bunch of complaints and hassle, although I do think the majority of the students will find the assignments way more rewarding than just doing papers and exams. Do any of you have experience with assigning (as instructors) or doing (as students) Wikipedia assignments? How did it turn out? How did you structure the assignments? What are some things to keep in mind?
RESPONSE A: You should talk to your library. Many have Wikipedia projects to include information from and links to their digital collections in their particular areas of focus. There's likely an in-house Wikipedia expert who can help out.
RESPONSE B: This might be useful: Wiki Education Foundation, Case Studies: How Instructors Are Teaching with Wikipedia
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I'm considering assigning 'Edit Wikipedia' assignments to students. Do any of you have experience with this? What are some things to keep in mind? I'm not aware of any instructors at my University who have had their students do Wikipedia assignments (e.g. add content from the weekly readings to a relevant Wikipedia page), so I have no one to consult with on this except you guys! I'm a bit wary about having the students do unorthodox assignments. I foresee a bunch of complaints and hassle, although I do think the majority of the students will find the assignments way more rewarding than just doing papers and exams. Do any of you have experience with assigning (as instructors) or doing (as students) Wikipedia assignments? How did it turn out? How did you structure the assignments? What are some things to keep in mind?
RESPONSE A: Hi, smurfyjenkins. I work at the Wiki Education Foundation, where we support instructors running assignments like the one you reference above. We're working with nearly 350 courses this term, and more than 90% of our instructors report an interest in participating again, so most people do have a meaningful experience. We are a grant-funded non-profit that offers free resources for you and your students, and we'd be happy to help you design an assignment that meets your student learning objectives. Send us an email at [email protected], and we can get you started.
RESPONSE B: You should talk to your library. Many have Wikipedia projects to include information from and links to their digital collections in their particular areas of focus. There's likely an in-house Wikipedia expert who can help out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are some very impressive things (style/structure) etc that you've seen in a scientific presentation? Animations and graphics are really cool in humanities and scientific presentations are often termed dull. How do we bypass them?
RESPONSE A: I once saw a hand drawn PowerPoint presentation. Definitely made it interesting.
RESPONSE B: I think the most impressive thing I've seen was in a PhD defense where someone was outlining the number of possibilities in an experimental parametric study (7 parameters, over a million different combinations). He organized all that in what looked like a tree with different branches (one for each parameter) and would gradually shrink it by making assumptions and simplifications. Ultimately, he ended up with a smaller tree with fewer combinations (over 1000) which outlined the number of experiments he did in 3 years of research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are some very impressive things (style/structure) etc that you've seen in a scientific presentation? Animations and graphics are really cool in humanities and scientific presentations are often termed dull. How do we bypass them?
RESPONSE A: I think graphics are important but also make sure you are thinking about your audiences when you design your structure. Is your story going to have an impact with them? Less is more, most of the time. A cohesive story will often be the most impactful option. The style I feel in love with and now use in my talks is a style I stole from a professor I really liked. She always had slides that were blank except a question. She would pose it with a pause. Then the title of the next slide would be the answer to the question and showed you why she came to that conclusion. I feel like this style really engages the audience. And it is simple. It doesn’t require added graphics.
RESPONSE B: Not a intensely academic presentation; but at a science teachers convention one of the speakers was talking about the World Wildlife Foundation, and all the things he does. He first got up, cleared his throat a bit and apologized for his slight cold. Then he loosened his tie and started speaking. A few minutes in, he took his jacket off, and then tie. He was clearly uncomfortable and fighting his cold (THis was waaayyy pre-Covid). Then he started talking about how the WWF helps reptiles....stopped and apologized again, and took off his dress shirt....revealing his undershirt that had reptiles on it. Then he talked specifically about the birds in Europe that they are helping and took off his shirt to reveal another one with a stork on it. Throughout the talk, every time he would go into a new subject he would take off a shirt to reveal the next one and topic. He had 8-10 black t-shirts in total all with the different topics and animals he was talking about. It was a amusing, entertaining and dramatic effect that I remember 30 years later.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What are some very impressive things (style/structure) etc that you've seen in a scientific presentation? Animations and graphics are really cool in humanities and scientific presentations are often termed dull. How do we bypass them?
RESPONSE A: As a humanities major graduate who loves professional presentation hacks, I would recommend that you take a powerpoint presentation course. I took one in a training center in my country and it transformed my understanding of PowerPoint potential in grabbing audience attention even if your topic is not very interesting to them. For instance, I have this course on my wishlist. The maker of this course already has few creative free PowerPoint templates on his website and when I used them, they made people say “Wow!”. Here is his website
RESPONSE B: Not a intensely academic presentation; but at a science teachers convention one of the speakers was talking about the World Wildlife Foundation, and all the things he does. He first got up, cleared his throat a bit and apologized for his slight cold. Then he loosened his tie and started speaking. A few minutes in, he took his jacket off, and then tie. He was clearly uncomfortable and fighting his cold (THis was waaayyy pre-Covid). Then he started talking about how the WWF helps reptiles....stopped and apologized again, and took off his dress shirt....revealing his undershirt that had reptiles on it. Then he talked specifically about the birds in Europe that they are helping and took off his shirt to reveal another one with a stork on it. Throughout the talk, every time he would go into a new subject he would take off a shirt to reveal the next one and topic. He had 8-10 black t-shirts in total all with the different topics and animals he was talking about. It was a amusing, entertaining and dramatic effect that I remember 30 years later.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: researchers - what are some things that impress you while dealing with undergrads/interns in the lab? what are some of the things that really impress you, or makes someone stand out? i just started working in a plant research lab for my university, and i really want to make a great impression and get everything i can out of this opportunity - but i have no experience working in this sort of environment. is there anything you recommend that i should know before i show up, like specific lab procedures or anything? any sort of insight or advice is appreciated. thanks!
RESPONSE A: If the undergrad/intern is well-versed or even making an attempt to be familiar with the literature dealing with his/her research project. This will naturally lead to him/her asking *genuine* questions based on the papers/articles that he/she has read. In my book, asking genuine questions is a very positive sign (however silly you may think the question might be) that one is engaged in the project... and to me, this is impressive.
RESPONSE B: Sometimes they impress us by fucking up things that we thought were un-fuckable :P
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: researchers - what are some things that impress you while dealing with undergrads/interns in the lab? what are some of the things that really impress you, or makes someone stand out? i just started working in a plant research lab for my university, and i really want to make a great impression and get everything i can out of this opportunity - but i have no experience working in this sort of environment. is there anything you recommend that i should know before i show up, like specific lab procedures or anything? any sort of insight or advice is appreciated. thanks!
RESPONSE A: Sometimes they impress us by fucking up things that we thought were un-fuckable :P
RESPONSE B: Their own side projects/research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: researchers - what are some things that impress you while dealing with undergrads/interns in the lab? what are some of the things that really impress you, or makes someone stand out? i just started working in a plant research lab for my university, and i really want to make a great impression and get everything i can out of this opportunity - but i have no experience working in this sort of environment. is there anything you recommend that i should know before i show up, like specific lab procedures or anything? any sort of insight or advice is appreciated. thanks!
RESPONSE A: That they find and read related articles without my asking them to
RESPONSE B: Sometimes they impress us by fucking up things that we thought were un-fuckable :P
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Will I ever be good enough? Supervisor keeps continually criticising every single piece of written work I produce and it starts to gradually wear me down. I feel like even through I’m 2 years into my 3 year phd I’m still miles behind and I’m not gaining the knowledge I’m supposed to. I put my back into this work and faced some very difficult situations and all I get is a barrage of criticism. I know what I’m producing may not be up to her standard but would it really hurt just to pick one tiny thing and give me a compliment. She’s full of the, for her other student, he can’t do anything wrong... I feel like I’m also being excluded from the group, I don’t get invited to anything and they all do stuff without me. Will it even improve if I stick it out?
RESPONSE A: Maybe? Seek concrete advice on how to improve. Ask what are your strengths and how you can get even better.
RESPONSE B: Would you rather hear the criticism from your professor or from a set of anonymous peer reviewers that don't even have to look you in the eye when they deliver the criticism? If you require affirmations and praise to succeed, maybe a PhD isn't worth the damage to your mental health.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Will I ever be good enough? Supervisor keeps continually criticising every single piece of written work I produce and it starts to gradually wear me down. I feel like even through I’m 2 years into my 3 year phd I’m still miles behind and I’m not gaining the knowledge I’m supposed to. I put my back into this work and faced some very difficult situations and all I get is a barrage of criticism. I know what I’m producing may not be up to her standard but would it really hurt just to pick one tiny thing and give me a compliment. She’s full of the, for her other student, he can’t do anything wrong... I feel like I’m also being excluded from the group, I don’t get invited to anything and they all do stuff without me. Will it even improve if I stick it out?
RESPONSE A: Maybe? Seek concrete advice on how to improve. Ask what are your strengths and how you can get even better.
RESPONSE B: I got such trauma from my PhD, it basically ruined me psychologically. I did everything on my own because no one would give me feedback, when they did, it was so horrible. Eventually I finished and examiners were so impressed. One of my advisors even apologized for how he treated me at my defense meeting when he saw the praise I was getting from the committee. I'm still trying to piece together my psyche and my self-esteem. Academia can be toxic. If nothing else, let proving them wrong be your motivator, it might carry you through the dark days until you feel better again. *Hugs*
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How many PhD's use marijuana I'm curious about marijuana use among PhD's, especially of the prolifically productive. How did it affect your productivity and ability to critically apply knowledge? What are the trade offs between thought perspective and productivity?
RESPONSE A: In the uk, in earth sciences, in my experience, far less than 5%, possibly less than 1%. And whenever anyone I know has talked about pot enabling deeper thought then in my experience what they've actually meant is an ability to talk like Deepak rather than make any actual contribution.
RESPONSE B: I'm an ABD PhD student in Evolution and Ecology. Basically everyone I know smokes on occasion. Only a few smoke very regularly, though some of them are actually fairly productive. Honestly, if you're getting high with your friends on a Friday night occasionally and/or getting a little high on a Sunday afternoon and pondering your research for while, that's probably fine. It's something you do for fun though. It's not going to have a major positive impact on your productivity. The important thing I think is actually just that if you do smoke, make sure you don't get dependent on it as a means to escape from/cope with the anxiety/pressure of grad school, because eventually it will fail you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How many PhD's use marijuana I'm curious about marijuana use among PhD's, especially of the prolifically productive. How did it affect your productivity and ability to critically apply knowledge? What are the trade offs between thought perspective and productivity?
RESPONSE A: I smoke 1 bowl per day after work. I have not noticed it effecting my productivity other than stopping me working when I get home. Sometimes I smoke, get an idea and try to program it on the spot but I generally give up and write it the next day at work.
RESPONSE B: I suspect that claims that drug use can increase creativity or ability are overblown, and mostly stem from people who want to pretend they are Feynman. I think marijuana is mostly harmless, but I won't use it because I have security clearance that depends on me not using it. I think a drinking habit would be far more damaging, but of course the clearance form never asked about it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it acceptable to indicate that your spouse position in your motivation letter? Hello, A friend is applying for a research funding in Germany from abroad. One of the requirement of the funding is that you are expected to continue your research career after the funding period in Germany, and you are supposed to write a letter to explain how and why. His wife is working toward her habilitation in an other university, so they plan to stay in Germany permanently. Is it acceptable to mention this fact as an additional argument to why he will stay in Germany? If yes, how would you suggest it to be formulated? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: I don't know German norms, but I have some experience of the German-speaking part of Switzerland, although never hiring, and I feel that the argument about the wife is very convincing because it is a specific, concrete reason they have to stay. I guess in the paragraph in which he will be writing why he is a good fit/ is excited about the program, he can say something like "Additionally, my family has long term plans to stay in Germany, as my wife is pursuing a Habilitation in XXYY. I am excited in investing deeply in the University and collaborations, and this grant will allow me to take the first steps towards this goal".
RESPONSE B: There's probably no definite answer for such a question, as it's highly subjective. My view is that it's better to keep it as focused on his own work and professional plans as possible. If his wife studying / job contributes to his plans in some direct way (maybe facilitates him getting a visa or she'd provide financial support while he works on the research) that could be mentioned, otherwise, if the word limit is not a problem, he could just briefly say that he and his wife have plans to settle down in Germany.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it acceptable to indicate that your spouse position in your motivation letter? Hello, A friend is applying for a research funding in Germany from abroad. One of the requirement of the funding is that you are expected to continue your research career after the funding period in Germany, and you are supposed to write a letter to explain how and why. His wife is working toward her habilitation in an other university, so they plan to stay in Germany permanently. Is it acceptable to mention this fact as an additional argument to why he will stay in Germany? If yes, how would you suggest it to be formulated? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: There's probably no definite answer for such a question, as it's highly subjective. My view is that it's better to keep it as focused on his own work and professional plans as possible. If his wife studying / job contributes to his plans in some direct way (maybe facilitates him getting a visa or she'd provide financial support while he works on the research) that could be mentioned, otherwise, if the word limit is not a problem, he could just briefly say that he and his wife have plans to settle down in Germany.
RESPONSE B: I think you need to be very careful about how you phrase it, if you do it. It's all too easy to come across as "my wife has a job here, so I decided to apply to you" aka "I'm not really applying because I think this exactly where I want to be in my career or I think you're the best, I'm applying because it would be really convenient to me personally and you don't mind, no?". I personally would probably leave it to the interview stage where you're all getting to know each other a bit more and they will want to know your personal situation a bit more. I would probably just say you are committed to staying in germany for the foreseeable future, in the letter.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it acceptable to indicate that your spouse position in your motivation letter? Hello, A friend is applying for a research funding in Germany from abroad. One of the requirement of the funding is that you are expected to continue your research career after the funding period in Germany, and you are supposed to write a letter to explain how and why. His wife is working toward her habilitation in an other university, so they plan to stay in Germany permanently. Is it acceptable to mention this fact as an additional argument to why he will stay in Germany? If yes, how would you suggest it to be formulated? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: There's probably no definite answer for such a question, as it's highly subjective. My view is that it's better to keep it as focused on his own work and professional plans as possible. If his wife studying / job contributes to his plans in some direct way (maybe facilitates him getting a visa or she'd provide financial support while he works on the research) that could be mentioned, otherwise, if the word limit is not a problem, he could just briefly say that he and his wife have plans to settle down in Germany.
RESPONSE B: I assume from your description that the application is an Emmy Noether? If yes, I'd mention this during the interview stage, since the discussions there typically also ask more pointed questions about your motivation to apply. The first (proposal) stage review is mainly on the scientific merits of the proposal and personal motivation for coming to Germany is less of importance during that stage. Your friend is probably aware of this, but in general the German university system is unfortunately much less set up to dual career hires than, e.g., the US system.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: When does my bachelor's degree "expire"? I earned a bachelor's of science in neuroscience in 2013. For 2 years as an undergrad and 2 years post-grad I worked in academic wet labs. Since about 2015 I've been working in an unrelated non-academic job (at a humane society for dogs/cats and briefly as a vet tech) because I wanted to explore other interests. I'm having a quarter- life crisis. I can't afford to go to graduate school right now. But at what point will my undergrad degree just not count anymore? Do I have a chance at being accepted into a grad/PhD program in my 30s, or starting some kind of academic research career? Edit - spelling
RESPONSE A: Never. It's an award, not a licence.
RESPONSE B: Never.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: When does my bachelor's degree "expire"? I earned a bachelor's of science in neuroscience in 2013. For 2 years as an undergrad and 2 years post-grad I worked in academic wet labs. Since about 2015 I've been working in an unrelated non-academic job (at a humane society for dogs/cats and briefly as a vet tech) because I wanted to explore other interests. I'm having a quarter- life crisis. I can't afford to go to graduate school right now. But at what point will my undergrad degree just not count anymore? Do I have a chance at being accepted into a grad/PhD program in my 30s, or starting some kind of academic research career? Edit - spelling
RESPONSE A: Never.
RESPONSE B: Don't worry about it. People return to grad school 10, 15 years after their bachelors easily.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: When does my bachelor's degree "expire"? I earned a bachelor's of science in neuroscience in 2013. For 2 years as an undergrad and 2 years post-grad I worked in academic wet labs. Since about 2015 I've been working in an unrelated non-academic job (at a humane society for dogs/cats and briefly as a vet tech) because I wanted to explore other interests. I'm having a quarter- life crisis. I can't afford to go to graduate school right now. But at what point will my undergrad degree just not count anymore? Do I have a chance at being accepted into a grad/PhD program in my 30s, or starting some kind of academic research career? Edit - spelling
RESPONSE A: Never.
RESPONSE B: The foundations of STEM dont change, and with a BS that's what you have. A PhD can get a bit stale after several years out of the field because you missed certain things in your field making it hard to reenter a research career after leaving academia for some time, but it's still not impossible, and sometimes people do actually go back.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: When does my bachelor's degree "expire"? I earned a bachelor's of science in neuroscience in 2013. For 2 years as an undergrad and 2 years post-grad I worked in academic wet labs. Since about 2015 I've been working in an unrelated non-academic job (at a humane society for dogs/cats and briefly as a vet tech) because I wanted to explore other interests. I'm having a quarter- life crisis. I can't afford to go to graduate school right now. But at what point will my undergrad degree just not count anymore? Do I have a chance at being accepted into a grad/PhD program in my 30s, or starting some kind of academic research career? Edit - spelling
RESPONSE A: Never.
RESPONSE B: Hmm, consensus seems to be that grad school is always an option. Piggybacking on this, then, how does the application process change after time away? For instance, are undergrad grades less important after gaining work experience? Professors won't remember a student from 10 years ago asking for a recommendation letter, so what's the best practice for recs? Is it recommended to retake some classes at a community college?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: When does my bachelor's degree "expire"? I earned a bachelor's of science in neuroscience in 2013. For 2 years as an undergrad and 2 years post-grad I worked in academic wet labs. Since about 2015 I've been working in an unrelated non-academic job (at a humane society for dogs/cats and briefly as a vet tech) because I wanted to explore other interests. I'm having a quarter- life crisis. I can't afford to go to graduate school right now. But at what point will my undergrad degree just not count anymore? Do I have a chance at being accepted into a grad/PhD program in my 30s, or starting some kind of academic research career? Edit - spelling
RESPONSE A: It won't expire. But if you want to advance your academic career further perhaps you could consider European Universities? Many offer an integrated masters/PhD type course. It would be a lot cheaper, allow you to travel, and get a doctorate earlier.
RESPONSE B: Hmm, consensus seems to be that grad school is always an option. Piggybacking on this, then, how does the application process change after time away? For instance, are undergrad grades less important after gaining work experience? Professors won't remember a student from 10 years ago asking for a recommendation letter, so what's the best practice for recs? Is it recommended to retake some classes at a community college?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is the point of a fellowship postdoc? I’m a few months in to my fully-funded two-year postdoctoral fellowship. The administration and faculty are nice, I’m given a (shared) office/a computer/software, I’m working on a few different projects with different faculty, etc. However, I just can’t shake that the feeling that this is just an extension of my PhD. I’ll get a few papers out, but I can’t do anything PI-level and then my time runs out and I’m back on the market. Does a completed postdoc really improve your chances of a faculty position? Because, productivity-wise, this doesn’t really seem different than a 7-8 year PhD. Thoughts?
RESPONSE A: It depends on the field, but if you are productive while in a postdoc you can look very competitive against ABDs. It shows you can function independent from your advisor, if nothing else.
RESPONSE B: Probably field dependent, but in astronomy it's essentially unthinkable you'd get a permanent job without doing at least one postdoc. Establish a bigger network, prove you can lead, apply for grants. It'll make you a surer bet.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What is the point of a fellowship postdoc? I’m a few months in to my fully-funded two-year postdoctoral fellowship. The administration and faculty are nice, I’m given a (shared) office/a computer/software, I’m working on a few different projects with different faculty, etc. However, I just can’t shake that the feeling that this is just an extension of my PhD. I’ll get a few papers out, but I can’t do anything PI-level and then my time runs out and I’m back on the market. Does a completed postdoc really improve your chances of a faculty position? Because, productivity-wise, this doesn’t really seem different than a 7-8 year PhD. Thoughts?
RESPONSE A: There are quite a few good comments so far but none have mentioned the pay difference. All other things equal, postdocs get paid a lot more. My pay more than tripled between the two. So the difference between a 2 year postdoc and 2 more years of grad school is at the least 60-80k.
RESPONSE B: My postdoc was a useful time for me to establish myself more as an independent scholar and to redefine my research interests. The way I marketed myself before and after the postdoc was massively different and I believe it helped me get a great job (as opposed to any job). What I wish I had done more of was networking, so go and chat with everyone possibly related to your research area. It will payoff down the road!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: a postdoc?
RESPONSE A: I just finished up my first year of a three year stint with a situation similar to this. I'm only 4 years younger than my prof. I left a visiting faculty position to post-doc under her. I don't think of us as co-collaborators. I respect her seniority and the fact that she is tenured going up for full. She is rare in her success at our age in my field, but I think respecting her achievement is important. Socially we get along well. I enjoy our professional and social interactions immensely, but for me - I think it is important to acknowledge that there is a hierarchy. I think the comment from /u/ampanmdagaba is spot on. I am expected to be independent, and PI awards / bring in money where ever I can. I have heavily modified my writing style to suite her preferences, and frankly have been more successful for it. A big part of my job is easing my faculty member's award load by PI'ing or Co-PI'ing money where ever I can, easing the writing load, and having training in a different suite of analyses than her. I think this has been a good strategy so far. I hope your experience is as positive as mine. This has been great for me professionally and I learned quite a bit about working environments that I excel in.
RESPONSE B: Don't think so. I've supervised two Ph.D. students at some point (and at the same time). Both were one year older than I am. One had a very similar career path and worked as university faculty (w/o Ph.D.) in his home country for about the same number of years as I had taught, before coming over. At the end of the day, your relationship with your advisor/PI/supervisor is what the two of you make it to be. Just because I had a great time with my advisees, does not mean that everyone else in a similar situation will have the same experience. But I do not think being of the same age is necessarily a big distraction unless you personally ("I am just a postdoc, but this guy is my age and he is tenure-track already!") let it be one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Why did you go into your field? If you could go back would you rather go into a different area? I'm a first year undergrad in materials science. I chose to study it because I heard it was a very fast growing field and utilized aspects of both physics and chemistry. Why did you choose your academic path, and if you could is there some other field you feel you would have preferred to have gone into?
RESPONSE A: I am an academic materials science - focussed on metallurgy and microscopy - and it is awesome. Lots of paths and link to the real world is strong which is a great motivator.
RESPONSE B: * I applied for film and media * I didn't have the grades so went on the advice 'get into a humanities subject then change once you arrive' * 'Change course? What? No.' * Undergraduate Psychology it is! * That was alright; masters in neuroscience? * That was alright; PhD in genetics/brain MRI? Okay! Postdoc in epidemiology/genetics after applying for film and media. And no I wouldn't change; it's ace, fun, and the pay's sufficient, I think.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Why did you go into your field? If you could go back would you rather go into a different area? I'm a first year undergrad in materials science. I chose to study it because I heard it was a very fast growing field and utilized aspects of both physics and chemistry. Why did you choose your academic path, and if you could is there some other field you feel you would have preferred to have gone into?
RESPONSE A: * I applied for film and media * I didn't have the grades so went on the advice 'get into a humanities subject then change once you arrive' * 'Change course? What? No.' * Undergraduate Psychology it is! * That was alright; masters in neuroscience? * That was alright; PhD in genetics/brain MRI? Okay! Postdoc in epidemiology/genetics after applying for film and media. And no I wouldn't change; it's ace, fun, and the pay's sufficient, I think.
RESPONSE B: thats a good question - I am in interaction design and HCI, but I originally figured I wanted to study history. However I figured, back then, that I would never get a job studying history. Well I am a little unsure, but I still love history so much it hurts :) But on other hand, this means that I can have history as a hobby and just do the fun parts, like hang out on /r/askhistorians
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you/did you engage in self-care during grad school? I am currently finishing up my MA degree and moving on the the PhD program in the same department. Given that I am in a psychology program, our department as a whole encourages discussions around self-care and being self-compassionate. I really appreciate this as I know not all departments/supervisors are as supportive and understanding. However, while these discussions do happen, they tend to be intellectualized and do not focus on what we can actually do about it. Personally, I have been feeling overwhelmed, overworked, and like nothing I do is ever good enough. I struggle with finding a balance in keeping up with course deadlines, managing clients, doing side readings for client cases, and advancing my research. I was wondering if anyone has any coping strategies or self-care rituals that they have found really effective? I would also be interested in knowing whether this is something that tends to improve over time (in your experience)?
RESPONSE A: Find a hobby that has tangible results. There are so many possibilities: painting, pottery, woodwork, knitting, whatever. So much of an academic lifestyle exists in our minds. It's hard to see progress when you're writing, waiting for a review, working with clients/patients, teaching, or even just learning new things. I've found it's really worthwhile to have something where I can say: "I made that."
RESPONSE B: You’re human, do the sorts of things humans do to recreate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is copying a format plagiarism in thesis? I'm currently writing my thesis and my supervisor gave me a copy of one of his previous students thesis to use as a guide, who worked on a very similar topic. My question relates to the introduction to thesis part, where I discuss the problems I am trying to solve. Basically I discuss the same problems he did (they are very generic to the field and we both worked on the same thing, just addressing the issues in different ways), but completely in my own way. However the format of the discussion is similar. For example: Intro paragraph to problem: (1) sub heading discussion of problem 1 (2) sub heading discussion of problem 2 (3) sub heading discussion of problem 3 (4) sub heading discussion of problem 4 (5) sub heading discussion of problem 5 ​ Is it okay to have the same format, even discussing the same problems, if the words are 100% my own? Nothing other than the sub headings are the same. The rest of the thesis has completely different content as I solve the problems in different ways. It is just the formatting that I am wondering about.
RESPONSE A: If you worry about the sub-headings being identical, couldn't you just change them?
RESPONSE B: No lol
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is copying a format plagiarism in thesis? I'm currently writing my thesis and my supervisor gave me a copy of one of his previous students thesis to use as a guide, who worked on a very similar topic. My question relates to the introduction to thesis part, where I discuss the problems I am trying to solve. Basically I discuss the same problems he did (they are very generic to the field and we both worked on the same thing, just addressing the issues in different ways), but completely in my own way. However the format of the discussion is similar. For example: Intro paragraph to problem: (1) sub heading discussion of problem 1 (2) sub heading discussion of problem 2 (3) sub heading discussion of problem 3 (4) sub heading discussion of problem 4 (5) sub heading discussion of problem 5 ​ Is it okay to have the same format, even discussing the same problems, if the words are 100% my own? Nothing other than the sub headings are the same. The rest of the thesis has completely different content as I solve the problems in different ways. It is just the formatting that I am wondering about.
RESPONSE A: No lol
RESPONSE B: This is fine. In fact, I tell students to look at good papers or dissertations as examples of how to organize their writing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is copying a format plagiarism in thesis? I'm currently writing my thesis and my supervisor gave me a copy of one of his previous students thesis to use as a guide, who worked on a very similar topic. My question relates to the introduction to thesis part, where I discuss the problems I am trying to solve. Basically I discuss the same problems he did (they are very generic to the field and we both worked on the same thing, just addressing the issues in different ways), but completely in my own way. However the format of the discussion is similar. For example: Intro paragraph to problem: (1) sub heading discussion of problem 1 (2) sub heading discussion of problem 2 (3) sub heading discussion of problem 3 (4) sub heading discussion of problem 4 (5) sub heading discussion of problem 5 ​ Is it okay to have the same format, even discussing the same problems, if the words are 100% my own? Nothing other than the sub headings are the same. The rest of the thesis has completely different content as I solve the problems in different ways. It is just the formatting that I am wondering about.
RESPONSE A: No lol
RESPONSE B: I would not use the same subheadings particularly is you are using them in the same order. That is just inviting accusations of plagiarism. Get creative; write your own subheadings.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is copying a format plagiarism in thesis? I'm currently writing my thesis and my supervisor gave me a copy of one of his previous students thesis to use as a guide, who worked on a very similar topic. My question relates to the introduction to thesis part, where I discuss the problems I am trying to solve. Basically I discuss the same problems he did (they are very generic to the field and we both worked on the same thing, just addressing the issues in different ways), but completely in my own way. However the format of the discussion is similar. For example: Intro paragraph to problem: (1) sub heading discussion of problem 1 (2) sub heading discussion of problem 2 (3) sub heading discussion of problem 3 (4) sub heading discussion of problem 4 (5) sub heading discussion of problem 5 ​ Is it okay to have the same format, even discussing the same problems, if the words are 100% my own? Nothing other than the sub headings are the same. The rest of the thesis has completely different content as I solve the problems in different ways. It is just the formatting that I am wondering about.
RESPONSE A: My thesis advisor insisted I give a copy of my format (the Word computer file so they could erase my text and replace it with theirs) to another graduate student of theirs, because they were “struggling” with APA style. I know it wasn’t plagiarism, but it 100% felt like cheating. I spent days nailing the thesis file format and making sure it matched up with not only APA, but the university style guide as well. Another couple of days to learn what writing style and chapter/paragraph organization APA style worked best with. Another couple of days going through my citations. This other student basically used my work free of charge, with no credit.
RESPONSE B: No
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is copying a format plagiarism in thesis? I'm currently writing my thesis and my supervisor gave me a copy of one of his previous students thesis to use as a guide, who worked on a very similar topic. My question relates to the introduction to thesis part, where I discuss the problems I am trying to solve. Basically I discuss the same problems he did (they are very generic to the field and we both worked on the same thing, just addressing the issues in different ways), but completely in my own way. However the format of the discussion is similar. For example: Intro paragraph to problem: (1) sub heading discussion of problem 1 (2) sub heading discussion of problem 2 (3) sub heading discussion of problem 3 (4) sub heading discussion of problem 4 (5) sub heading discussion of problem 5 ​ Is it okay to have the same format, even discussing the same problems, if the words are 100% my own? Nothing other than the sub headings are the same. The rest of the thesis has completely different content as I solve the problems in different ways. It is just the formatting that I am wondering about.
RESPONSE A: There are style guides for a reason. Follow a format that works!
RESPONSE B: You say you're copying a format, but then you also say you're discussing the same problems within the format. Plagiarism is when you pass off the work of someone else as your own. Creating a format for discussing specific problems is work. It would be *easy* to make a case for why this could be considered plagiarism, and you don't want to deal with that problem whether it's judged to be proper plagiarism or not. When in doubt, cite. Source: Dealt with the exact same (non-)issue in a part of my graduation thesis. The solution was ~60 seconds of work, citing the original work's format/setup for the discussion as your startoff point. Like so.^[1] --- [1] As a startoff point for my discussion on topics 1-6, I follow the format of [x], who discusses the same topics but from the perspective of [*whatever their focus was*].
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Dealing with poor email etiquette from students Does anyone have any strategies for dealing with student emails that lack a salutation, that come days late, or are overly informal? Emails that just "I need to set up an advising meeting" frustrate me. Should I just ignore that feeling, ask the student to be more professional, or what? Any tips or suggestions?
RESPONSE A: I silently judge them, but mostly don't care. I'm not their email mom.
RESPONSE B: I am constantly getting this behavior from some professors I work with. What I dislike the most is not replying by a 'thank you" or "received" after sending them a document or material to read. Many know the value of a greeting, most don't care because ego.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Dealing with poor email etiquette from students Does anyone have any strategies for dealing with student emails that lack a salutation, that come days late, or are overly informal? Emails that just "I need to set up an advising meeting" frustrate me. Should I just ignore that feeling, ask the student to be more professional, or what? Any tips or suggestions?
RESPONSE A: I am constantly getting this behavior from some professors I work with. What I dislike the most is not replying by a 'thank you" or "received" after sending them a document or material to read. Many know the value of a greeting, most don't care because ego.
RESPONSE B: I have a page on my website that is a general letter to students abotu email etiquette and professionalism in general. When I get an email like those, I simply reply to them with the link. The letter also says at the bottom that they are advised to re-write their email to me using the criteria above and I will respond promptly.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Dealing with poor email etiquette from students Does anyone have any strategies for dealing with student emails that lack a salutation, that come days late, or are overly informal? Emails that just "I need to set up an advising meeting" frustrate me. Should I just ignore that feeling, ask the student to be more professional, or what? Any tips or suggestions?
RESPONSE A: I am constantly getting this behavior from some professors I work with. What I dislike the most is not replying by a 'thank you" or "received" after sending them a document or material to read. Many know the value of a greeting, most don't care because ego.
RESPONSE B: I actually prefer informal emails. Formal emails that I get are usually something like *"Professor, having completed the third year of my study in <University X on another continent> allow me to introduce myself to you as the most eager aspirant for a position in your prestigious lab."* After that, an informal email from an actual student asking if I am available for a meeting, or asking a class-related question sounds quite refreshing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: or not it’s worth it. Right now I rent a studio apartment near my University for around $2,100 a month which leaves me with almost no money :(. I’m thinking about moving to a much cheaper apartment (like over $1,000 less a month) but it would require about 3 hours of round trip commuting a day (on trains). I know I could be saving a lot of money but I’m not sure if the time spent commuting is worth it. So for those of you who have long commutes how much do you commute to save how much on rent and do you think it’s worth it?
RESPONSE A: I'm not exactly in the demographic you're asking opinions from, my commute is M - F but only 40-50 minutes each way and I drive. I chose to commute because living on campus is too expensive. If I had to make a 2-3 hour commute by car daily I'd never do it. But if it was by train(s) and I'm saving money, I would. But I know plenty who wouldn't, it all depends on how much you hate commutes. Is the time spent commuting worth the money? Can you keep yourself occupied during the commute? Are you willing to do it for an extended period of time? Those are your 3 most important questions to answer. I'd suggest, if you're able to, give it a test run and take the commute a few days in a row, or simulate it at least.
RESPONSE B: I remember about some research that showed people are happier when they spend more to live closer to work, rather than living farther away in a bigger place but having a shorter commute. That said, train commutes are totally different. You can get a *lot* of reading done on the train, and these days a lot of trains have Wi-Fi. I had a summer internship in grad school and I had to take two trains to make a four-hour round trip commute every day. I actually didn't mind it - like I said, I got a lot of reading done. I also lived in a city in which it was just the norm for people to have 1+ hour commutes on the train.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How much of a commute is too much? I’m hoping to get some perspective from people who commute over an hour to their school about whether or not it’s worth it. Right now I rent a studio apartment near my University for around $2,100 a month which leaves me with almost no money :(. I’m thinking about moving to a much cheaper apartment (like over $1,000 less a month) but it would require about 3 hours of round trip commuting a day (on trains). I know I could be saving a lot of money but I’m not sure if the time spent commuting is worth it. So for those of you who have long commutes how much do you commute to save how much on rent and do you think it’s worth it?
RESPONSE A: I take the train to work, takes just over an hour one way. I can work on the train (hotspot on the phone) and count that as working hours, and it is great. Would not be worth it at all if I couldn't get stuff done during that time.
RESPONSE B: I remember about some research that showed people are happier when they spend more to live closer to work, rather than living farther away in a bigger place but having a shorter commute. That said, train commutes are totally different. You can get a *lot* of reading done on the train, and these days a lot of trains have Wi-Fi. I had a summer internship in grad school and I had to take two trains to make a four-hour round trip commute every day. I actually didn't mind it - like I said, I got a lot of reading done. I also lived in a city in which it was just the norm for people to have 1+ hour commutes on the train.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How much of a commute is too much? I’m hoping to get some perspective from people who commute over an hour to their school about whether or not it’s worth it. Right now I rent a studio apartment near my University for around $2,100 a month which leaves me with almost no money :(. I’m thinking about moving to a much cheaper apartment (like over $1,000 less a month) but it would require about 3 hours of round trip commuting a day (on trains). I know I could be saving a lot of money but I’m not sure if the time spent commuting is worth it. So for those of you who have long commutes how much do you commute to save how much on rent and do you think it’s worth it?
RESPONSE A: Consider getting a roommate?
RESPONSE B: I take the train to work, takes just over an hour one way. I can work on the train (hotspot on the phone) and count that as working hours, and it is great. Would not be worth it at all if I couldn't get stuff done during that time.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PUI Professors: Does grading get better? Hello, PhD Student at a R1 here. I would be interested in a teaching career in the future. I love teaching, but as a TA, everytime I have to grade exams I feel like I'm working in a sweat shop. Long hours looking for key words to give marks for with no real feedback for students. How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? You just deal with it?
RESPONSE A: > How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? Well, I'm at a PUI and have TAs. They're undergraduates, but can still mark test responses. Get good at making detailed marking keys.
RESPONSE B: I assign things that I can tolerate grading. It's easier when you have complete control over the course content than when you're a TA.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: PUI Professors: Does grading get better? Hello, PhD Student at a R1 here. I would be interested in a teaching career in the future. I love teaching, but as a TA, everytime I have to grade exams I feel like I'm working in a sweat shop. Long hours looking for key words to give marks for with no real feedback for students. How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? You just deal with it?
RESPONSE A: I assign things that I can tolerate grading. It's easier when you have complete control over the course content than when you're a TA.
RESPONSE B: How much leeway you have on exam design depends on what kind of institution and department and job you go into. You can design tests that are very easy to grade such as multiple choice. The trade off is how crappy these tests are as learning tools. The more students have to think and create knowledge and write, the harder the tests are to grade. The equation is usually some maximizing function on the effort reward curve. Don't assume you have intellectual freedom to make this decision as a professor or instructor because these things may be determined by the course coordinator or the department chair, so be sure to ask when you are interviewing,
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: for with no real feedback for students. How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? You just deal with it?
RESPONSE A: You will probably never *enjoy* grading but as others have said you generally have tremendous freedom to design your assignments and (depending on the topic) smaller classes than at an R1. One of the "perks" of PUI is that you can actually embrace pedagogy and get serious about teaching as a craft. I've found tremendous enjoyment in coming up with assignments that are fun both for the students and for me (this often requires more work to set up but is worth it on the far side). I also get to be much more mindful about my goals in terms of assessment than I ever got to be as a TA. Sometimes a class doesn't *need* an essay. Just because you're R1 classes always had a big final doesn't mean its sacrosanct. You get to decide, and that is fun! You also develop coping strategies. For instance you'll learn to pay attention to when each class (you will almost always have multiple classes running at the same time) has assignments due so as not to overload yourself in any one week. You will probably want to do less rigorous feedback for lower div / gen ed classes than for your seniors/major classes. You might do presentations or peer assessments or another "alternate grading" assignment for one class and a standard mid term for another. There are all kinds of interesting ways to manage grading. Also... booze, but that one you've probably already figured out!
RESPONSE B: How much leeway you have on exam design depends on what kind of institution and department and job you go into. You can design tests that are very easy to grade such as multiple choice. The trade off is how crappy these tests are as learning tools. The more students have to think and create knowledge and write, the harder the tests are to grade. The equation is usually some maximizing function on the effort reward curve. Don't assume you have intellectual freedom to make this decision as a professor or instructor because these things may be determined by the course coordinator or the department chair, so be sure to ask when you are interviewing,
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PUI Professors: Does grading get better? Hello, PhD Student at a R1 here. I would be interested in a teaching career in the future. I love teaching, but as a TA, everytime I have to grade exams I feel like I'm working in a sweat shop. Long hours looking for key words to give marks for with no real feedback for students. How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? You just deal with it?
RESPONSE A: I tell students I reserve the right to grade **part** of their answers/work and use this grade for assessment. For h/w or recitation, I do things like assign 12 questions on 4 topics and grade just 3 of them for 75% of the grade, then glance to see if a good effort was made on the other 9 for 25%. Sometimes I simply award "100%" for participation if I'm late in grading. But then that allows me leeway with the above. Often the key is intense feedback on early class assignments (e.g a style of lab report they have never seen before) .....so students know your expectations.
RESPONSE B: what is PUI ?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: PUI Professors: Does grading get better? Hello, PhD Student at a R1 here. I would be interested in a teaching career in the future. I love teaching, but as a TA, everytime I have to grade exams I feel like I'm working in a sweat shop. Long hours looking for key words to give marks for with no real feedback for students. How do professors in PUIs do it without any TAs? You just deal with it?
RESPONSE A: The big thing: when you are the prof you decide what you are going to grade. The downside: at the beginning of the semester you will overestimate your ability/willingness to grade what you assigned.
RESPONSE B: It sucks. I wander around the house like a demented homeless person in sweatpants clutching pieces of paper and accosting my family "Look at this. Is this even a sentence? Is that even a word? "No, it isn't." "you are damn right it isn't. This is an abomination, that is what it is" Seriously. Get a really defined rubric. Look for key features and criteria if content is really important. I make the first assignment have like 50% of the grade for some semblance of logical thought and legibility, which they can get back if they go to the writing center and submit a better thing. This is a one time only deal. Thereafter, if they don't go to the writing center first and they hand in crap, they just lose a whole grade . Don't take off points - add points/ grades. They start with 0 points. If they followed the instructions, have a reasonable quality writing remotely answer what I asked that is a D. Then I look for specific things (if I said 2 examples, compare and contrast, 5 sources, etc) and those are somewhat there but with issues C, all there but low level analysis B. Actual application and synthesis A. I grade blind.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: a paper) I then worked in marketing for over 3 years after graduation. I did some projects and created 2 brands that own by myself, one is domestic and the other is international. They are small brands but they both running well. Questions: 1. My undergraduate GPA is low, and the major “English” is less related to “marketing”. Will it influence too much in applying for a Ph.D. programme? 2. I don’t have experience in publishing papers, Will my work experience help to add some points? 3. Should I pursue another Master’s degree in Marketing, and try my best to publish papers, to lift myself to be qualified in applying for further Ph.D.? 4. Will I have a chance to get admitted to a Ph.D. in Top 150–300 (worldwide) universities? In The US, Canada, UK, Germany - all the above countries are perfect. All answers/advice will be appreciated.
RESPONSE A: I’m a tenured prof in Marketing so I can definitely talk to this topic! 1. A low GPA in undergrad will not automatically disqualify you but you need something else to balance it out. High GPA in a Masters program, high GMAT, practical experience. 2. Most incoming PhDs in Marketing don’t have publishing experience. Your work experience will help because many schools look for this practical experience in their faculty. 3. I wouldn’t necessarily get another Masters at this point. You may need to convince program coordinators that your work experience is relevant though. Even if you have conducted surveys would be relevant. 4. I can’t say without knowing your GMAT. If you’ve done well on your GMAT, you will have success. If you haven’t, it will become trickier. Finally, there are plenty of Marketing prof jobs, even this year! MBA enrollments are actually up. MBA students are the cash cow for business PhDs because someone has to teach them. Also, AACSB standards require a relatively high number of PhDs in a business school faculty. Good luck!
RESPONSE B: There's a question you aren't asking here and I hope you have the answer to it before you worry about anything else. What opportunities would you find with a PhD in marketing that you don't already have available to you?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: thing as the other TAs?
RESPONSE A: I think you're misidentifying the root of your anxiety here. The problem is not your fellow TAs, it's the power imbalance between you all and the institution you work for. If grading according to the criteria given to you is too burdensome on your time, you should all talk to the supervising professor. If the professor is themselves constrained by a burdensome teaching load, then you should work with them to lobby for more manageable enrollments. Teachers should not be forced to choose between doing a good job and having enough time to live. That being said, grading carefully is teaching well. You're not a sucker because you're doing better work than your peers. But when you have the breathing room, you should all get together and figure out if what is being asked of you is reasonable. Putting off resisting unreasonable demands just makes them reproduce. And putting off the resistance until you're done just spreads the demands to people in the future who will have even less breathing room. Good luck.
RESPONSE B: Dude, it's good to know that I am not the only TA who (1) actually reads each student's response and (2) docks exact points, if necessary. I see a beneficial side to it, though. For the students who are actually trying/care about doing their best, I believe that some of them also care about the instructor reading their work. I don't know if every student is aware that sometimes professors hand off assignments to be graded by others, or that the others grading the assignments aren't even reading them. I've come across too many students who wrote notes to the professor on assignments or who clearly put in lots of work only to go unrealized. I would be willing to bet that I spend hours and hours more of my time grading and sending personal feedback on assignments compared to my TA colleagues (it can be miserable because they are out having fun while I am grading). But it is rewarding in the end, and I feel closer to each student because I have gained greater understanding of their interests and strengths. I think if you provide encouraging/fair feedback for the points docked, the students will respect it. Keep doing you!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: My fellow TAs just give students full points to get grading done faster, ignoring the rubric I am a TA for a lab course at a large university. There are several TAs teaching this large freshman course. The professor makes a detailed rubric for each homework assignment that is not open to interpretation. It's not a question of interpretation, if anyone looks at the rubric while grading it is extremely clear. But it seems that all of the other TAs just give the students full points on the assignments. I feel incredibly stupid, because: 1. I feel like an idiot because I spend time and effort going through what the students write, when I could just mark it as perfect and be done with it. 2. I don't want the students to hate me and think that I am trying to begrudge them points. What should I do? Should I just ignore any feelings of discomfort and do the same thing as the other TAs?
RESPONSE A: Don't do the same as the other TAs! Follow the rubric! Hopefully grading goes by quicker for you once you get through a few (happens to me a lot).
RESPONSE B: I think you're misidentifying the root of your anxiety here. The problem is not your fellow TAs, it's the power imbalance between you all and the institution you work for. If grading according to the criteria given to you is too burdensome on your time, you should all talk to the supervising professor. If the professor is themselves constrained by a burdensome teaching load, then you should work with them to lobby for more manageable enrollments. Teachers should not be forced to choose between doing a good job and having enough time to live. That being said, grading carefully is teaching well. You're not a sucker because you're doing better work than your peers. But when you have the breathing room, you should all get together and figure out if what is being asked of you is reasonable. Putting off resisting unreasonable demands just makes them reproduce. And putting off the resistance until you're done just spreads the demands to people in the future who will have even less breathing room. Good luck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: A software or an app to create a timeline for tracking scientific articles? Hello, I couldn't explain myself in title, but what I want a software or an app that I can create timelines for the scientific articles. For instance there are six articles A, B, C, D, E, F. F and E cites B, and C and D cites A. B cites A, too. Very primitively, something like that. -----------------D ----------C A --- B -------E ----------------F I want to see all the relation on a program or an app or whatever with their dates and in historical order. Has any of you used or seen such a thing?
RESPONSE A: I believe if you store the cites in Zotero, it will actually generate a timeline for you. https://www.zotero.org/support/timelines Zotero's great if you don't already use it.
RESPONSE B: For arxiv papers you can make such diagrams on [1]. Not sure if it is open source if you want to try apply it elsewhere. [1] http://my.paperscape.org/
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: A software or an app to create a timeline for tracking scientific articles? Hello, I couldn't explain myself in title, but what I want a software or an app that I can create timelines for the scientific articles. For instance there are six articles A, B, C, D, E, F. F and E cites B, and C and D cites A. B cites A, too. Very primitively, something like that. -----------------D ----------C A --- B -------E ----------------F I want to see all the relation on a program or an app or whatever with their dates and in historical order. Has any of you used or seen such a thing?
RESPONSE A: I believe if you store the cites in Zotero, it will actually generate a timeline for you. https://www.zotero.org/support/timelines Zotero's great if you don't already use it.
RESPONSE B: webofknowledge.com has some features that might help with this. Can't access it from home, though, so not sure at the moment.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Quality of life vs. prestige of university If given the choice, would you accept a tenure-track position at a large, important research university in a location you strongly dislike, or one at a relatively small and unknown university with far less research capacity in the perfect location? This would be where you live until retirement.
RESPONSE A: Option 2. I know I'm not enough of a shark to become a renowned academic at the expense of my sanity and general well-being.
RESPONSE B: Definitely option two.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Quality of life vs. prestige of university If given the choice, would you accept a tenure-track position at a large, important research university in a location you strongly dislike, or one at a relatively small and unknown university with far less research capacity in the perfect location? This would be where you live until retirement.
RESPONSE A: The latter. I made that choice for grad school, made it in where I went when I finished, and will continue to do so. I think it's important to be happy where you are throughout more so than something that gives you an infinitesimally increased chance of success at the cost of a great deal of your life and sanity.
RESPONSE B: Option 2 all day but it depends on a few things. Do you like research and publishing? If you do, make sure the teaching load at #2 isn't prohibitive. What's the difference in salary (R1s will be higher with more growth) and cost of housing? The good thing about option 2 is if you are decently motivated and can secure some funding (and publish moderately), you can be a big fish in a small pond, plus enjoy a much less stressful time getting tenure, etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Quality of life vs. prestige of university If given the choice, would you accept a tenure-track position at a large, important research university in a location you strongly dislike, or one at a relatively small and unknown university with far less research capacity in the perfect location? This would be where you live until retirement.
RESPONSE A: Option 2 all day but it depends on a few things. Do you like research and publishing? If you do, make sure the teaching load at #2 isn't prohibitive. What's the difference in salary (R1s will be higher with more growth) and cost of housing? The good thing about option 2 is if you are decently motivated and can secure some funding (and publish moderately), you can be a big fish in a small pond, plus enjoy a much less stressful time getting tenure, etc.
RESPONSE B: Definitely option two.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Quality of life vs. prestige of university If given the choice, would you accept a tenure-track position at a large, important research university in a location you strongly dislike, or one at a relatively small and unknown university with far less research capacity in the perfect location? This would be where you live until retirement.
RESPONSE A: most people dont get option 1. the competition is rather fierce.
RESPONSE B: Definitely option two.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: I'm just about to graduate with my PhD. What should I give my committee members as a token of gratitude? I'm graduating with my PhD in Sociology this term. I've defended and am submitting my dissertation to the graduate school this week. I want to get my committee members a gift as a token of my gratitude for their hard work; in particular my chair. I don't want to get them something they won't use. **So, professors of reddit who served on PhD committees, what are some gifts your newly-minted PhDs have given you that you appreciated and liked?** I was considering a gift card to a large, local bookstore, but it seems like professors don't really need assistance buying books. **Other useful info:** * My dissertation was on physicians and their activism for universal healthcare. * My chair is very active in the Jewish community. Thanks in advance
RESPONSE A: I got my committee hardcover copies of my thesis and wrote personalized notes on the cover page. My thought was maybe down the line if another student needed style inspiration or some crap that the professor would have an approved example they could loan out.
RESPONSE B: Everyone should get a bound copy of your dissertation. For me, what I got my committee members in addition: - For my advisor: a very expensive bottle of scotch. - For two of the remaining three committee members: a nice digital desk clock/calendar. - For the fourth guy who shook my hand at the end of my defense and admitted he never got around to reading my dissertation: zip-ola.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: much contact with the other students due to their needing help, and he doesn't want me to be at a disadvantage because I don't need the help - so he checks on my progress, comes over to talk and compliments my work at regular intervals. His presence is distracting, I get a typical physical reaction when he is near (fluttering heart, feeling flustered etc) and I'm afraid it will affect my performance. I'm also afraid I might be coming across as very rude, since I keep my distance to some extent and don't respond to his friendliness. How can I deal with this? I have this lab for the entire year, not just a semester, and I'm already dreading it. Does anyone have any experience to share? Also, and this is less important but still important - I am very embarrassed, since I have always had a very good relationship with all faculty and I am generally known to be a serious and "professional" student, and I fear this may tarnish my reputation if anyone would know/realize. Do lecturers/etc. generally know when a student has a crush on them, even if they try to keep their distance?
RESPONSE A: I can only tell when it's fairly obvious. I may not know if the student is making an effort to avoid me. I'm only concerned when it gets to the level that *other people* start to talk and wonder, because the academy is a hive of gossipers and busybodies - more than any other industry I've worked in. Even if nothing is going on, they'll start asking questions, and then it gets awkward for everyone, and then people you haven't even seen in months will ask about it because the "grapevine" gossip train will have spread it around. When it's just the student being engaged more than the usual apathetic slacker, and coming to officer hours more, and asking all sorts of questions about the field, and staring at you like you're some icon of knowledge - that's cool, and it makes me excited for my field in new ways.
RESPONSE B: Yes, they can tell. And it's not a big deal.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How are Open Access Journals Viewed by the Academic Community? I don't have access to proprietary journals save for what I can get from /r/Scholar so I read a lot of papers from open access journals, usually through databases such as DOAJ. Is there a consensus in the Academic Community as to the quality of these journals compared to traditionally published ones? I'm speaking in generalities of course since the quality of any journal will vary on a case by case basis but are they, on average, equal to paid journals?
RESPONSE A: The PLoS journals are excellent. It was founded by Harold Varmus, so you know their standards are up to par.
RESPONSE B: Anecdotally, I find that opnion varies depending on how long the opinion-giver has been involved in academia. I suspect that's a proxy for how much time they've had to get indoctrinated into traditional publishing vs how much time they've spent on the open web. In general, opinion seems positive about PLoS no matter what the field. However, in some fields it's a total non-issue: all the real work is based on papers uploaded to repositories, and you only cite the official journal article out of necessity. It probably won't matter anymore as people realize that you don't need journals to do peer review or find papers anymore.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Standing up for Qualitative Research A bit of background: our Dean in the Psychology department is what is called as a research purist. He always prefers quantitative dissertations over qualitative. The problem now is that I have been exposed to qualitative research since I was in my undergrad in Psychology. Generally, the psychology topic should delve more into qualitative research, specifically because our country is knee-deep into complex issues that need in-depth study. I want to convince him that qualitative research is okay through presenting my own research. But the previous cohorts said HE DOES NOT APPROVE topics like this. I want to be able to do this, so I am collecting opinions from researchers and psych professionals as well. Please let me know what you think.
RESPONSE A: It could be worth looking into literature from sociology and social work on the value of qualitative research. I’m in social work myself, where qualitative is the norm, particularly as many social work researchers are concerned with the complexity of the human experience which may not be adequately represented in quantitative work.
RESPONSE B: I recommend looking into Dr. Clara Hill's CQR method. It's a systematic qualitative review method that has been developed over time and appeals to many quant people because of the structured nature of it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Standing up for Qualitative Research A bit of background: our Dean in the Psychology department is what is called as a research purist. He always prefers quantitative dissertations over qualitative. The problem now is that I have been exposed to qualitative research since I was in my undergrad in Psychology. Generally, the psychology topic should delve more into qualitative research, specifically because our country is knee-deep into complex issues that need in-depth study. I want to convince him that qualitative research is okay through presenting my own research. But the previous cohorts said HE DOES NOT APPROVE topics like this. I want to be able to do this, so I am collecting opinions from researchers and psych professionals as well. Please let me know what you think.
RESPONSE A: I find mixed methods work also helps demonstrate the value too (and makes things a little less scary for people with less knowledge of qualitative research). I'm in the process of finishing up my mixed methods dissertation in psychology and have presented other mixed methods studies to my department, and I think it can make it more palatable when the qualitative research is consistent with the quant (so people are convinced it's trustworthy) and also adds something more (so people know it's necessary)! I'm not sure how feasible this would be for your topic, but it could be a nice compromise.
RESPONSE B: There's good quantitative research, and there's bad quantitative research. There's good qualitative research, and there's bad qualitative research. Quantitative doesn't imply better (or even good) - there's plenty of ways you can measure something with numbers and end up with misleading nonsense. To be slightly less glib, even if quantitative methods are superior, not all important questions can be addressed using quantitative approaches. Just because it's difficult to get high quality evidence to address a research question doesn't make the research question less important. Evidence quality is important, but sometimes, you can't answer a research question in an ideal way - and so you have to compromise the methodology ("be creative with the methodology" sounds better) to get a meaningful answer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Standing up for Qualitative Research A bit of background: our Dean in the Psychology department is what is called as a research purist. He always prefers quantitative dissertations over qualitative. The problem now is that I have been exposed to qualitative research since I was in my undergrad in Psychology. Generally, the psychology topic should delve more into qualitative research, specifically because our country is knee-deep into complex issues that need in-depth study. I want to convince him that qualitative research is okay through presenting my own research. But the previous cohorts said HE DOES NOT APPROVE topics like this. I want to be able to do this, so I am collecting opinions from researchers and psych professionals as well. Please let me know what you think.
RESPONSE A: I find mixed methods work also helps demonstrate the value too (and makes things a little less scary for people with less knowledge of qualitative research). I'm in the process of finishing up my mixed methods dissertation in psychology and have presented other mixed methods studies to my department, and I think it can make it more palatable when the qualitative research is consistent with the quant (so people are convinced it's trustworthy) and also adds something more (so people know it's necessary)! I'm not sure how feasible this would be for your topic, but it could be a nice compromise.
RESPONSE B: It could be worth looking into literature from sociology and social work on the value of qualitative research. I’m in social work myself, where qualitative is the norm, particularly as many social work researchers are concerned with the complexity of the human experience which may not be adequately represented in quantitative work.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there any science education literature written more like a novel than a textbook? I would like to learn more about chemistry and biology but don't have the patience or energy to read textbooks in my free time. I am a physics major who wants to learn more about other types of science (I don't have time to minor in them alongside my main degree). Are there any engaging, more conversational books that I can read to improve the breadth of my science knowledge?
RESPONSE A: I wish there were books like that on ALL subjects!
RESPONSE B: Gödel, Escher, Bach is a fun read that touches on a lot of subjects related to self reference and recursion, you might enjoy the section on molecular biology.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there any science education literature written more like a novel than a textbook? I would like to learn more about chemistry and biology but don't have the patience or energy to read textbooks in my free time. I am a physics major who wants to learn more about other types of science (I don't have time to minor in them alongside my main degree). Are there any engaging, more conversational books that I can read to improve the breadth of my science knowledge?
RESPONSE A: I wish there were books like that on ALL subjects!
RESPONSE B: If you're interested in neuro at all, Oliver Sacks can be a lovely leisurely read. And for psych/behavioural economics (not what you asked about), Daniel Kahneman is very readable. You might also try something like this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there any science education literature written more like a novel than a textbook? I would like to learn more about chemistry and biology but don't have the patience or energy to read textbooks in my free time. I am a physics major who wants to learn more about other types of science (I don't have time to minor in them alongside my main degree). Are there any engaging, more conversational books that I can read to improve the breadth of my science knowledge?
RESPONSE A: I wish there were books like that on ALL subjects!
RESPONSE B: Not sure if it's exactly what you're looking for but "A History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson is very readable and is pretty heavy on the history of science, covering a lot of fields at a surface level. Might be a good start for figuring out what other fields you're interested in diving deeper into.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is there any science education literature written more like a novel than a textbook? I would like to learn more about chemistry and biology but don't have the patience or energy to read textbooks in my free time. I am a physics major who wants to learn more about other types of science (I don't have time to minor in them alongside my main degree). Are there any engaging, more conversational books that I can read to improve the breadth of my science knowledge?
RESPONSE A: If you're interested in chemistry and history, check out The Disappearing Spoon by Sam Kean. It has some cool stories about chemists and the periodic table.
RESPONSE B: I wish there were books like that on ALL subjects!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is there any science education literature written more like a novel than a textbook? I would like to learn more about chemistry and biology but don't have the patience or energy to read textbooks in my free time. I am a physics major who wants to learn more about other types of science (I don't have time to minor in them alongside my main degree). Are there any engaging, more conversational books that I can read to improve the breadth of my science knowledge?
RESPONSE A: The Cartoon Guide to Chemistry and The Cartoon Guide to Genetics. There are a bunch of variations for other fields. I personally really enjoyed *The Physics of Superheros*. If you want something mathy *How Not to be Wrong* or *Numbers* might be interesting. *edit*: I also just finished reading Predictive Analytics by Siegel and that was a great layman's introduction to machine learning.
RESPONSE B: If you're interested in chemistry and history, check out The Disappearing Spoon by Sam Kean. It has some cool stories about chemists and the periodic table.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Overwork is expected and burnout is inevitable. There’s a conversation happening and I know that there are people working to improve things. I think the pandemic has also laid bare some issues and possibly spurred some changes for the long run. And I want things to get better. We all deserve better. So, I’m thinking of joining a DEI committee at my institution. BUT I’m cynical about actually making a change. I feel like there’s so much bureaucracy and so many institutional problems that all of the things that we could get done, won’t. So here’s my question: has any of it worked? All the DEI committees, papers published about mental health in academia, grad student unions etc. Has the academic environment improved? Are we seeing a change? If so, what has worked? If not– what needs to be done so that change can happen?
RESPONSE A: I’m sure I’ll get downvoted for this, but it always surprises me when people say these things. Part of the reason I chose academia was *for* the work-life balance. Sure, if you’re at an Ivy League university, trying to make full there, you’re going to be putting in a lot of work. But for most of us, it seems like the demand are significantly lower than in the non-academic world.
RESPONSE B: Probably an unpopular opinion, but: all the wellness, DEI, student development, faculty development, assessment, strategic planning, whatever initiatives are window dressing. No one is interested in tackling problems like: * Too many people enrolling in college who simply aren't academically ready for it. * Institutional financial dependence on tuition and room/board revenue. * Too many doctoral programs that don't train people in the skills that are needed for an academic career, or, in some fields, any career. * A prestige economy where completely unproductive outcomes are incentivized/rewarded. Edited to add: to answer your question, I haven't seen a damn thing improve in twenty-two years, except for the increase in online education. Now half my teaching load is online, which means I don't have to spend as much time on campus.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: s a conversation happening and I know that there are people working to improve things. I think the pandemic has also laid bare some issues and possibly spurred some changes for the long run. And I want things to get better. We all deserve better. So, I’m thinking of joining a DEI committee at my institution. BUT I’m cynical about actually making a change. I feel like there’s so much bureaucracy and so many institutional problems that all of the things that we could get done, won’t. So here’s my question: has any of it worked? All the DEI committees, papers published about mental health in academia, grad student unions etc. Has the academic environment improved? Are we seeing a change? If so, what has worked? If not– what needs to be done so that change can happen?
RESPONSE A: Probably an unpopular opinion, but: all the wellness, DEI, student development, faculty development, assessment, strategic planning, whatever initiatives are window dressing. No one is interested in tackling problems like: * Too many people enrolling in college who simply aren't academically ready for it. * Institutional financial dependence on tuition and room/board revenue. * Too many doctoral programs that don't train people in the skills that are needed for an academic career, or, in some fields, any career. * A prestige economy where completely unproductive outcomes are incentivized/rewarded. Edited to add: to answer your question, I haven't seen a damn thing improve in twenty-two years, except for the increase in online education. Now half my teaching load is online, which means I don't have to spend as much time on campus.
RESPONSE B: Can’t speak for anyone else. I haven’t been in academia all that long. About a decade. But I will say that for me the only really tangible difference I have seen is when we’d get a new dean. On dean 4 now and each one makes a huge difference in the environment. So for me that’s the only thing I’ve noticed that really makes a big change. Not to say that others don’t just it might be happening in the background and I can’t tell.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Have you seen academia improve? We all know academia’s failings. It’s toxic, everyone’s mental health is awful, what even is work-life balance? Overwork is expected and burnout is inevitable. There’s a conversation happening and I know that there are people working to improve things. I think the pandemic has also laid bare some issues and possibly spurred some changes for the long run. And I want things to get better. We all deserve better. So, I’m thinking of joining a DEI committee at my institution. BUT I’m cynical about actually making a change. I feel like there’s so much bureaucracy and so many institutional problems that all of the things that we could get done, won’t. So here’s my question: has any of it worked? All the DEI committees, papers published about mental health in academia, grad student unions etc. Has the academic environment improved? Are we seeing a change? If so, what has worked? If not– what needs to be done so that change can happen?
RESPONSE A: What's DEI?
RESPONSE B: Probably an unpopular opinion, but: all the wellness, DEI, student development, faculty development, assessment, strategic planning, whatever initiatives are window dressing. No one is interested in tackling problems like: * Too many people enrolling in college who simply aren't academically ready for it. * Institutional financial dependence on tuition and room/board revenue. * Too many doctoral programs that don't train people in the skills that are needed for an academic career, or, in some fields, any career. * A prestige economy where completely unproductive outcomes are incentivized/rewarded. Edited to add: to answer your question, I haven't seen a damn thing improve in twenty-two years, except for the increase in online education. Now half my teaching load is online, which means I don't have to spend as much time on campus.
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.