label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
A
|
POST: Fear before even starting a PhD My PhD position is intended to start next month and I am super interested in my field (medical imaging). I already requested my supervisor to give me some material to get started so I can get familiar with my topic. I am a little scared now as I do not understand a thing from the first paper I read. I have an electrical engineering background and I have never come across terms like microlocal analysis, distribution theory, wave front sets etc. It looks like it is very mathematical in the pure mathematical sense. What would be the best strategy to tackle topics that looks so overwhelming? So that I do not waste too much time reading on things that is not necessary. Because if I start reading on those, the literature is almost endless. What are some of the best practices an experienced researcher develops so that he extracts as much relevant information as possible?
RESPONSE A: Take what you can from your reading, but don’t stress over not knowing everything. I’m halfway through 2nd year of my PhD (medical imaging too). My background is actually psychology, but I am now working on things in signal processing, electromagnetism, machine learning. As you can imagine that was a big leap, and I started out like you - stressing over every detail I didn’t understand. It’s not necessary, and everyone I’ve spoken to -including full professors- very rarely understand every detail in a paper. When you get a real feel for your project (which may take a year or so) it will become apparent which methods (mathematical or otherwise) that you need to have an intricate knowledge of. Until then, don’t be afraid to treat things as a ‘black box’ tool - as long as you get a feel for the bigger picture, and how your project fits in. Everything else will come in time :)
RESPONSE B: Read the paper and look up everything you don't understand. Do it every time. After 6-12 months you won't need to do it very often. But it is an essential skill which you will need for the rest of your career.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: start next month and I am super interested in my field (medical imaging). I already requested my supervisor to give me some material to get started so I can get familiar with my topic. I am a little scared now as I do not understand a thing from the first paper I read. I have an electrical engineering background and I have never come across terms like microlocal analysis, distribution theory, wave front sets etc. It looks like it is very mathematical in the pure mathematical sense. What would be the best strategy to tackle topics that looks so overwhelming? So that I do not waste too much time reading on things that is not necessary. Because if I start reading on those, the literature is almost endless. What are some of the best practices an experienced researcher develops so that he extracts as much relevant information as possible?
RESPONSE A: For some stuff, like if I read a paper mentioning a technique I am unfamiliar with, I actually like Wikipedia. If I just google the technique I tend to get papers that used it, but assume you are already familiar with it. For more of a broad background in your area maybe see if you can find a textbook? My undergrad was very inline with my grad school field so I had a lot of relevant background from my undergrad classes.
RESPONSE B: Take what you can from your reading, but don’t stress over not knowing everything. I’m halfway through 2nd year of my PhD (medical imaging too). My background is actually psychology, but I am now working on things in signal processing, electromagnetism, machine learning. As you can imagine that was a big leap, and I started out like you - stressing over every detail I didn’t understand. It’s not necessary, and everyone I’ve spoken to -including full professors- very rarely understand every detail in a paper. When you get a real feel for your project (which may take a year or so) it will become apparent which methods (mathematical or otherwise) that you need to have an intricate knowledge of. Until then, don’t be afraid to treat things as a ‘black box’ tool - as long as you get a feel for the bigger picture, and how your project fits in. Everything else will come in time :)
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Fear before even starting a PhD My PhD position is intended to start next month and I am super interested in my field (medical imaging). I already requested my supervisor to give me some material to get started so I can get familiar with my topic. I am a little scared now as I do not understand a thing from the first paper I read. I have an electrical engineering background and I have never come across terms like microlocal analysis, distribution theory, wave front sets etc. It looks like it is very mathematical in the pure mathematical sense. What would be the best strategy to tackle topics that looks so overwhelming? So that I do not waste too much time reading on things that is not necessary. Because if I start reading on those, the literature is almost endless. What are some of the best practices an experienced researcher develops so that he extracts as much relevant information as possible?
RESPONSE A: Relax. Be willing to be a beginner again.
RESPONSE B: I didn't understand the first 3 papers my advisor gave me. They were very technical and theoretical, but after a while in the program, starting a few projects, and talking with my advisor and fellow students on a daily basis I picked things up. I went back and read the papers again when I studied for my comp exams and was surprised how I didn't understand it to begin with. Then I realized how much I had learned. You got this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Fear before even starting a PhD My PhD position is intended to start next month and I am super interested in my field (medical imaging). I already requested my supervisor to give me some material to get started so I can get familiar with my topic. I am a little scared now as I do not understand a thing from the first paper I read. I have an electrical engineering background and I have never come across terms like microlocal analysis, distribution theory, wave front sets etc. It looks like it is very mathematical in the pure mathematical sense. What would be the best strategy to tackle topics that looks so overwhelming? So that I do not waste too much time reading on things that is not necessary. Because if I start reading on those, the literature is almost endless. What are some of the best practices an experienced researcher develops so that he extracts as much relevant information as possible?
RESPONSE A: I am very much not in medical imaging (instead I’m in social science/education) but I did switch fields between masters and PhD... I think it’s pretty common to have some amount of a learning curve especially if you switch fields... as for me being only a quantitative social scientist created a big learning curve when I had to learn qualitative research methods in my PhD. As for advice, I’d say to clearly communicate early on to superiors that you are changing fields and to listen to older students and faculty as some may have made that change before you. If they have they may better understand the challenges you are going through and may help. As for having a different background in general, don’t discount it, it may give you unique insights on your topic!
RESPONSE B: Relax. Be willing to be a beginner again.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting a PhD alone...advice? Has anyone here been an incoming PhD moving to a new city all on their own (ie. no significant other, no family)? Now that the initial excitement has worn off, I am quite worried about starting an intense program and moving to a brand new city (Toronto), let alone trying to meet someone during my time there. Any words of wisdom or similar experiences re: how this situation worked out for you? TLDR: I really want a PhD but I also really don't want to die alone.
RESPONSE A: I went by myself. I was lonely for a couple months, but became pretty close with the other students in my cohort, and I think a few will be lifelong friends.
RESPONSE B: I think most people do it that way. I did, and of the 15-ish number of people in my cohort, I think one had a SO they moved with and one had some family in the area.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: starting an intense program and moving to a brand new city (Toronto), let alone trying to meet someone during my time there. Any words of wisdom or similar experiences re: how this situation worked out for you? TLDR: I really want a PhD but I also really don't want to die alone.
RESPONSE A: I moved 2,000 miles away. I was engaged when I left and within a month that disintegrated (he hadn't come with me, thank goodness.) So I was in that situation, alone and heartbroken. Luckily my grad program really encourages socialization. We have a lot of social events, barbecues and happy hours and holiday parties and whatnot. Early on I made my cohort a group chat on facebook and we use that to organize cohort-specific events. I'd recommend doing this - don't wait for someone else to organize things, take the initiative. Chances are most people are in the same boat. We get together a few times a term now to just play games, maybe visit a winery, and just get to know each other better.
RESPONSE B: I moved 800 miles from my boyfriend and 1200 from my parents and was alone for the better part of 5 months before my boyfriend got hired near where I go to school. Personally, I had a really hard time with it because I'm not a super social person and meeting new people freaks me out. But my cohort was super easy to get to know, and they are a great bunch of people. I spent a lot of time with them and at the departmental events when I first came to school and was very busy with school work. Even though I was still sad, there was a lot to keep me busy. Toronto is a big place! I'm attending school and commuting from a smaller area of Ohio, so you have an advantage there! There will be a lot to do there and a ton to see! Force yourself out of your comfort zone and explore the city, go to local events and department/college events - keep yourself busy, explore, and don't take a moment for granted. When you get lonely, call your cohort or call home - you still have a community around you!! Best of luck!!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting a PhD alone...advice? Has anyone here been an incoming PhD moving to a new city all on their own (ie. no significant other, no family)? Now that the initial excitement has worn off, I am quite worried about starting an intense program and moving to a brand new city (Toronto), let alone trying to meet someone during my time there. Any words of wisdom or similar experiences re: how this situation worked out for you? TLDR: I really want a PhD but I also really don't want to die alone.
RESPONSE A: Toronto is a great city - I'm sure you'll do just fine :) I did my PhD at UofT and I'm a tenure track professor living and working in Toronto now. Meetup groups (meetup.com) are a great way to make friends. I think also look at campus groups. I was part of a LGBT+ grad student group when I was a PhD student there - met once every couple weeks for beer at the grad pub. Also I briefly got into the dragon boat rowing team on campus. It was nice to chat with other students outside your program/lab group. Give me a shout if you want more info or chat about Toronto in general!
RESPONSE B: I moved 2,000 miles away. I was engaged when I left and within a month that disintegrated (he hadn't come with me, thank goodness.) So I was in that situation, alone and heartbroken. Luckily my grad program really encourages socialization. We have a lot of social events, barbecues and happy hours and holiday parties and whatnot. Early on I made my cohort a group chat on facebook and we use that to organize cohort-specific events. I'd recommend doing this - don't wait for someone else to organize things, take the initiative. Chances are most people are in the same boat. We get together a few times a term now to just play games, maybe visit a winery, and just get to know each other better.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Starting a PhD alone...advice? Has anyone here been an incoming PhD moving to a new city all on their own (ie. no significant other, no family)? Now that the initial excitement has worn off, I am quite worried about starting an intense program and moving to a brand new city (Toronto), let alone trying to meet someone during my time there. Any words of wisdom or similar experiences re: how this situation worked out for you? TLDR: I really want a PhD but I also really don't want to die alone.
RESPONSE A: I moved a thousand miles from family to do my PhD, and as a bonus had a huge falling out with my best friend right before I moved. What got me through was hanging out with the people who seemed cool and continuing to hang out with those who were actually cool (and who are still my "crew" today). It's a bit like high school all over again, you want to get to be liked but have to find your kind of people. The grad student organizations are a help, and try to join some community groups outside of the university. Accept all those invitations to go to the movies, the bar, the coffee shop. You will survive!
RESPONSE B: I moved 2,000 miles away. I was engaged when I left and within a month that disintegrated (he hadn't come with me, thank goodness.) So I was in that situation, alone and heartbroken. Luckily my grad program really encourages socialization. We have a lot of social events, barbecues and happy hours and holiday parties and whatnot. Early on I made my cohort a group chat on facebook and we use that to organize cohort-specific events. I'd recommend doing this - don't wait for someone else to organize things, take the initiative. Chances are most people are in the same boat. We get together a few times a term now to just play games, maybe visit a winery, and just get to know each other better.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Starting a PhD alone...advice? Has anyone here been an incoming PhD moving to a new city all on their own (ie. no significant other, no family)? Now that the initial excitement has worn off, I am quite worried about starting an intense program and moving to a brand new city (Toronto), let alone trying to meet someone during my time there. Any words of wisdom or similar experiences re: how this situation worked out for you? TLDR: I really want a PhD but I also really don't want to die alone.
RESPONSE A: I moved 2,000 miles away. I was engaged when I left and within a month that disintegrated (he hadn't come with me, thank goodness.) So I was in that situation, alone and heartbroken. Luckily my grad program really encourages socialization. We have a lot of social events, barbecues and happy hours and holiday parties and whatnot. Early on I made my cohort a group chat on facebook and we use that to organize cohort-specific events. I'd recommend doing this - don't wait for someone else to organize things, take the initiative. Chances are most people are in the same boat. We get together a few times a term now to just play games, maybe visit a winery, and just get to know each other better.
RESPONSE B: Toronto is so big and diverse, it has a community for anything. Pick a hobby and find a community that does it through facebook or meetup :) If you're truly worried PM me and tell me a little about yourself, I live in Montreal but I have some friends in Toronto who might have something in common with you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: , think-tanks or non-profits. I also am pretty handy with statistics, so public-sector data science/analytics wouldn't be out of the question. 3. Are there any other programs to consider? 4. Would it pay to get 1-2 more years of work experience after my MPA before applying? Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Your approach seems to be "I wonder what careers are available to someone with the PhD I want to get." A different approach (which I recommend) would be to decide on the *career* first, and only then figure out the educational or other path to get there. I happen to know someone with a stellar resume and top PhD who is having a hard time getting a job in policy. I think that his ethnicity is not working in his favor. Figure out the job you want, and look really critically at who has those jobs. If you don't look like them, there's reason to think you'll be at a disadvantage when you apply.
RESPONSE B: I think it depends on what you want to do. I spent 28 years in government and had an MPA and wanted to teach others to provide good government, or good organization administration. You can work in think tanks and on policy issues, but one of my mentors told me that unless I wanted to teach and do research that advances the field, then I should not do a PHD. If you get accepted depends on what your goals are and if you would make a good fit in the program you apply to. You will be teaching and contributing to the program with research and service not just be a student. Like the other response says above, a PA PHD is not just an Uber MPA. The PA phd field is also a small field relative to other disciplines, so your reputation as a scholar and potential colleague will be on high display. Should you start now, or get more experience…depends on your circumstances and how much work you put into your PhD program and do you want to do it now or later. I’ve seen very successful PhD candidates with years of work experience, and then also candidates straight out of MPA programs with no work experience who were rock stars. Probably the best place to get advise are your current MPA professors. Good luck on your decision.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: a very bad point, I am finally considering taking intermission as I cannot physically function at work. Even sending out an e-mail takes all my energy. My psychiatrist is willing to file in all the paper work regarding the application for my intermission so that won't be too much of a problem. However, I am petrified of bringing this up with my PI. He has known that I have had to deal with some hardships this year. But at one point when I was asking him to take leave of absence for a couple of days due to my severe anxiety, he said something that really struck with me: "Do not let your emotions get in the way of work". Because of that, I really don't know how to broach this topic with my PI. Does anyone have any recommendations on how to professionally tell my PI that I need to take intermission from my studies, primarily because I need to focus on getting treatment for my mental health?
RESPONSE A: I have two thoughts for you. First, if you need to take a leave of absence to get well, take it. It doesn’t matter what your advisor thinks or said. If you need it, you need it. Second, while you can take a leave from your program, it can impact your research project and your funding. If, for example, you are funded on a research grant from a funding agency, then the project has a fixed time window and must continue while you are away. That can affect whether or not you will have funding when you return, or if it will continue for the same number of years, or if you will be able to work on the same project. That is worth investigating before you take the leave.
RESPONSE B: Was his saying "don't let your emotions get in the way" malicious in its tone or more of a "don't give up & power through" sort of thing? I am sure that he is unaware of the severity of what you are experiencing, and he should not hold that against you. I would maybe explain that your new knowledge about yourself has led you to make an educated decision not only for your mental health but also for the sake of your performance, and that it is not a decision that has been made on a whim.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I have ended up at this point brief - its a very endless list. In summary, I have had an extremely rough year from being a victim of domestic violence and having a family member pass away. Prior to all this, I am also diagnosed with two mental disorders which predisposes me to not handling stress very well. Additionally, the past couple of weeks I have gotten to a point where going into work has made me very suicidal (I am seeking treatment currently). Today I sat in my car for an hour before I managed to step out and enter the building. As its getting to a very bad point, I am finally considering taking intermission as I cannot physically function at work. Even sending out an e-mail takes all my energy. My psychiatrist is willing to file in all the paper work regarding the application for my intermission so that won't be too much of a problem. However, I am petrified of bringing this up with my PI. He has known that I have had to deal with some hardships this year. But at one point when I was asking him to take leave of absence for a couple of days due to my severe anxiety, he said something that really struck with me: "Do not let your emotions get in the way of work". Because of that, I really don't know how to broach this topic with my PI. Does anyone have any recommendations on how to professionally tell my PI that I need to take intermission from my studies, primarily because I need to focus on getting treatment for my mental health?
RESPONSE A: Students do it all the time. Just tell the admin staff that you are taking a leave of absence and you want to fill out the appropriate paperwork. Are you in the USA? You have legal rights (unless you don't, I don't know and shouldn't assume). I would do the paperwork and tell the PI after everything is planned and done. Also, fuck that guy. I'm sorry he wasn't understanding when you first brought it up. Maybe he'll be more receptive later, but also, fuck him.
RESPONSE B: Take time if you need it. Don’t feel bad about it. It is specifically what leave of absence is meant for.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: half of this decade, it has done wonders for software. The abundance of constantly improving open source libraries has allowed for application development to accelerate and become more accessible to the general public. My thinking is that it would be wonderful to have something similar for academic research. A site that acts as a central repository for open source research projects. Instead of just storing the published papers, it can also contain the raw data collected by the researcher(s) along with other related materials such as lab notes. This could aid with collaboration between researchers and also make studies more easily reviewable/reproducible. Another bonus would be the transparency added to scientific research which may help to chip away at the public's distrust. Admittedly, I am not the first person to have this idea. A quick search brings up this article from Slate as well as a few blog posts going back to 2013. So my question is why doesn't something like this exist? Is it just that nobody has built it or is there a broader implication that would prevent this idea from working?
RESPONSE A: osf.io may be close to what you’re looking for. Not sure how much traction it has in the broader community though.
RESPONSE B: Not until there's a fundamental shift in the way universities reckon things like tenure and promotion. I'm all for sharing data, but I need to get publications out of the data I produce before I just start sharing it. **edit:** To clarify, I know that some fields already do something like this. But many don't. And there remains an expectation in some fields (in terms of journal publication) that articles should contribute something novel. If my data-- which are novel when I first get / develop them-- are set loose on an open sharing platform, there's no guarantee that I'll be able to produce the work *I* want to produce before someone else starts using them, or even produces the same things I plan to do. So I'm going to hang onto those data and, once I've managed to publish enough to make it worth the years of effort and sweat I put into the research... **then** I'll post my data on open sharing platforms. I simply don't see another way to do it until there are some big changes in academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: s for software. The abundance of constantly improving open source libraries has allowed for application development to accelerate and become more accessible to the general public. My thinking is that it would be wonderful to have something similar for academic research. A site that acts as a central repository for open source research projects. Instead of just storing the published papers, it can also contain the raw data collected by the researcher(s) along with other related materials such as lab notes. This could aid with collaboration between researchers and also make studies more easily reviewable/reproducible. Another bonus would be the transparency added to scientific research which may help to chip away at the public's distrust. Admittedly, I am not the first person to have this idea. A quick search brings up this article from Slate as well as a few blog posts going back to 2013. So my question is why doesn't something like this exist? Is it just that nobody has built it or is there a broader implication that would prevent this idea from working?
RESPONSE A: The Gin project is exactly this. I'm using it for my own research, and it has been great! Fully reccomend! https://web.gin.g-node.org
RESPONSE B: Not until there's a fundamental shift in the way universities reckon things like tenure and promotion. I'm all for sharing data, but I need to get publications out of the data I produce before I just start sharing it. **edit:** To clarify, I know that some fields already do something like this. But many don't. And there remains an expectation in some fields (in terms of journal publication) that articles should contribute something novel. If my data-- which are novel when I first get / develop them-- are set loose on an open sharing platform, there's no guarantee that I'll be able to produce the work *I* want to produce before someone else starts using them, or even produces the same things I plan to do. So I'm going to hang onto those data and, once I've managed to publish enough to make it worth the years of effort and sweat I put into the research... **then** I'll post my data on open sharing platforms. I simply don't see another way to do it until there are some big changes in academia.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Anyone ever enter Grad School with their partner/spouse also starting grad school? Currently dating someone who wants to do a Masters (2-3 yrs) and I’m interested in doing a PhD (5-6 yrs). Has anyone successfully managed a relationship while you and your partner BOTH completed graduate study?
RESPONSE A: I'd imagine it would make certain difficult aspects of a relationship easier. Such as one partner not understanding how much time a graduate degree takes. Just make sure you set time aside together on most days, and always have a full on date night as least once a week.
RESPONSE B: It's fairly common. My wife (then fiance) and I moved across the US to start grad school (same university, different fields). We met several other couples doing the same thing. We both did PhDs and luckily we finished at about the same time. With the flexible, but unpredictable, schedules and the unique stresses that grad students experience, it was nice to go through it together. For your situation the trickiest part might be making sure the person getting the Masters works on lining up a position for when he/she finishes since you'll need another ~3 years. Once you are done with classes it's basically just a job.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Anyone ever enter Grad School with their partner/spouse also starting grad school? Currently dating someone who wants to do a Masters (2-3 yrs) and I’m interested in doing a PhD (5-6 yrs). Has anyone successfully managed a relationship while you and your partner BOTH completed graduate study?
RESPONSE A: We didn't enter together, but my wife started her PhD a year behind me, and then we were in school for years together. It has benefits- as mentioned, you understand the other persons stress better. It also has drawbacks- you're both tired, frustrated and stressed a lot more of the time, and our "date nights" turned into "go to sleep early" a lot more frequently.
RESPONSE B: I'd imagine it would make certain difficult aspects of a relationship easier. Such as one partner not understanding how much time a graduate degree takes. Just make sure you set time aside together on most days, and always have a full on date night as least once a week.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Anyone ever enter Grad School with their partner/spouse also starting grad school? Currently dating someone who wants to do a Masters (2-3 yrs) and I’m interested in doing a PhD (5-6 yrs). Has anyone successfully managed a relationship while you and your partner BOTH completed graduate study?
RESPONSE A: Lots of people do this. Met my partner in grad school. Graduated and still together, over a decade now. The support we have for each other was key. That and also laughing about applying to the same jobs (and thinking about co-applying/job-share but we haven't made that leap yet). Navigating the job market will be the next challenge, and solving the 2-body problem, etc...
RESPONSE B: My spouse and I were offset by about a year in our pursuit of a graduate education. After an MS, I continued on to a PhD, my spouse did not. My spouse regrets mightily that she did not keep going because the field we’re in is extremely difficult for both members of a couple to find employment in the same place. Her work is less gratifying but we’re stuck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: I am nervous to ask my mentor if I am being published I was a summer intern in a lab during the summer. I worked a lot on the project i.e. I did imaging and data analysis. I was told before leaving in August that I would likely be a third author on the paper and was always motivated with the idea of authorship by my mentor. My PI also echoed the same sentiment of me being a third author. However, my mentor, despite being a lovely lady at heart, makes me powerfully nervous. I am afraid of emailing her and asking about if we are published and if I am an author because I feel like I'm going to come off as an asshole. So, this is the e-mail I am planning on posting, what do you guys think? (We had a pretty casual relationship and I saw her everyday, so the language is pretty relaxed. ) Dear Post Doc Person, I hope this e-mail finds you well! How has your research been this semester? My semester has been going well, and I even signed up for a developmental neurobiology class because of all the cool neuron related work I saw during my time in the lab. Currently I am in the middle of my graduate school applications and trying to make sure everything is as good as it can be. So, I wanted to follow up on the status of your paper i.e. is it currently in review? Or is it still being worked on? Sincerely, Undergrad Dude
RESPONSE A: See also http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1047
RESPONSE B: Authorships are currency. In my research group we swapped authorships on each others' work in exchange for help on the papers. She won't be put off at all that you're asking.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: 'd have to wait till next autumn, would have to pay my scholarship back (which would suck, but be doable), don't really have a place to stay or anything else to do, but... I'm really not having a great time, I feel like my interests are being stiffled for the sake of making me a multiple-choice-machine and I'm worried that I'm wasting my time here. BUT: This is the field of psychology I'd be interested in doing my philosophy PhD in and there is a big chance for me to be co-supervised by one of the big names in this subfield of philosophy next year during my master's thesis. So... What is the best way to go, assuming I would like to get back into philosophy? Clench my teeth together and make it through this year to hopefully have a more supportive experience next year during my thesis? Drop out, earn some money and give the philosophy-scholarship-lottery another whirl? Realise that philosophy is an overfilled field and come to terms that if I want to work in this area, staying in the psychology tracks of things is a lot more promising anyways? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: user name checks out...
RESPONSE B: I’d say switch to philosophy only if you feel intellectually stifled in psychology—if it’s just not quite your jam. I myself started an MA in psychology out of undergrad, partly because I was super curious about it, partly because I didn’t get into any philosophy programs. But a couple months in, I was feeling like the questions I wanted to ask and the ways I wanted to try to answer them weren’t possible in psychology. They were distinctly philosophical questions. So I applied to philosophy MAs that year, and now I have an MA and PhD in philosophy. The job market in philosophy seems—to me anyway—to be a lot worse. So that’s why I’m saying only switch if it’s really not, in some way, what you most deeply want to do. Stuff like feeling useless can happen in *any* grad program—there’s going to be a period of adjustment, and they can all feel awkward or wrong for those kinds of reasons.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: and for someone preparing to apply to PhD programs this fall, how do you deal with this?
RESPONSE A: For my field, our schedule lets us stay home more than a lot of other careers would. Last year, my Dean had a talk with a departmental colleague of mine about grass-cutting behavior. Seems a mutual neighbor had made an off-handed comment to the Dean about the faculty member cutting his grass in the middle of a weekday. My colleague was encouraged to cut his grass on weekends like everyone else instead of looking like he's "off" on Wednesdays.
RESPONSE B: 1. It's intellectual. Intellectual work is often not seen as 'real' work, regardless of how difficult it really is. To many people, so long as you sit on a chair, you're not doing 'real' work. 2. It's not quantifiable. At the end of the day, you can't say that you built a chair, or nailed a project, or finished the job for one client. Academic work is constant, long-term, and rarely has a clear start or finish, which makes it unrelateable to most professions. 3. It's something that takes place in 'school', a place that people associate with something that they did a good enough job in, and that people have to grow out of. So long as school is seen as something you are forced to survive for a while, the people working inside one are going to be viewed negatively. 4. Everyone thinks that their job is harder than everyone else's. As to how you deal with it, you just don't. Smile, nod, and move on. Anti-intellectualism is a huge problem, but it is not one that you will solve on your own. Take the opportunity to detach from your worklife and talk about other things. It can be immensely hurtful when people casually denounce your raison d'etre, but it will happen regardless, so you might as well get used to it. I just hope you're in a STEM field; otherwise, be prepared to have everyone explain how their truthist platitudes are more valid than your research. It can definitely break a few friendships.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: really "work?" For example, I have had two family members flat out tell me that academics do not know what true work is. Additionally, they say that academics just teach and sit in their office. Where does this come from, and for someone preparing to apply to PhD programs this fall, how do you deal with this?
RESPONSE A: The whole "academics don't do work" thing with regards to getting their hands dirty doesn't even apply at all to all fields. Like, a scientist who's building experimental devices and working with electronics is de facto getting his hands dirty.
RESPONSE B: 1. It's intellectual. Intellectual work is often not seen as 'real' work, regardless of how difficult it really is. To many people, so long as you sit on a chair, you're not doing 'real' work. 2. It's not quantifiable. At the end of the day, you can't say that you built a chair, or nailed a project, or finished the job for one client. Academic work is constant, long-term, and rarely has a clear start or finish, which makes it unrelateable to most professions. 3. It's something that takes place in 'school', a place that people associate with something that they did a good enough job in, and that people have to grow out of. So long as school is seen as something you are forced to survive for a while, the people working inside one are going to be viewed negatively. 4. Everyone thinks that their job is harder than everyone else's. As to how you deal with it, you just don't. Smile, nod, and move on. Anti-intellectualism is a huge problem, but it is not one that you will solve on your own. Take the opportunity to detach from your worklife and talk about other things. It can be immensely hurtful when people casually denounce your raison d'etre, but it will happen regardless, so you might as well get used to it. I just hope you're in a STEM field; otherwise, be prepared to have everyone explain how their truthist platitudes are more valid than your research. It can definitely break a few friendships.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: tell me that academics do not know what true work is. Additionally, they say that academics just teach and sit in their office. Where does this come from, and for someone preparing to apply to PhD programs this fall, how do you deal with this?
RESPONSE A: >Where does this come from, and for someone preparing to apply to PhD programs this fall, how do you deal with this? 1) It's an old misconception. 2) Speaking as someone who came from outside of academia and now has an academic position: it doesn't feel like work. At least, not compared to what I used to do. Then again, that's partly just the difference between enjoying what you do versus... not. But your family members are basically just parroting shit they've heard. Ignore it. Or show them the stats on the academic job market. Or ask them if they think a CEO just goes to a couple meetings and then goes golfing.
RESPONSE B: I am doing a PhD and I admit I have never truly worked in my life and do not know what true work is. Before starting PhD I told that to my prospective PhD advisor (I was already his MSc thesis advisee, and I was expressing my worries that I may not be ready for PhD) and he smiled and said "me too" (indeed he never worked outside academia). Then again, I am receiving a very livable stipend for doing my PhD, so whatever I am doing must have some value as someone is willing to pay for it. And my PhD advisor (now a tenured professor) is receiving an even much bigger salary with all benefits, so some authority also decided that what he is doing is considered work. And he works at it much more than most people at their real jobs and is the very opposite of lazy. So, if you get into a funded PhD, you can point out to your family members that it's work (and not their concern) because you are legally getting paid livable money (my family members agreed, even these who have just primary school and worked manual labor their whole lives). If you get into a PhD without sufficient funding and expect your family to help pay for it, your family members have the right to disagree and refuse.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: everyone. I am a Korean undergrad studying biotech in Korea (although I am doing my mandatory military service at the moment). As soon as I finish my undergrad programme, I'm planning on studyimg abroad (somewhere between US, Switzerland, and Japan) because to be honest this country is a horrible place to pursue a career in academia. What I'm concerned about is that I think I won't be accepted to anywhere without some research background if I were to jump right into PhD. Some of you might ask why don't I just get some experience, but here in Korea professors rarely provide meaningful research opportunities to undergrad students as they somehow believe "undergrads aren't just smart enough to do research". My professors recommend me to finish up to masters here and then apply to PhD programs abroad so that I'll have some research experience from my masters. However, I think thats a complete waste of time, doing a masters and PhD separately when you can just go straight to PhD. So what looks like the best option for me? Should I stay for couple more years and get the masters? Or should I jump right in without some meaningful research background? (I do have decent GPA, GRE, etc etc though)
RESPONSE A: Having some research experience and, more importantly, great letters of recommendation that can speak to your potential to do great research, can improve your competitiveness for admissions to top programs, but in the US it is not unusual for people to go straight into Ph.D. programs from their undergraduate program, often without research experience. I would recommend applying to Ph.D. programs abroad and MS programs locally and then deciding once you see what your options are.
RESPONSE B: You absolutely have to have research experience to be accepted into a PhD program - and you should have some to be certain a PhD is what you want to pursue! I knew too many people in my grad school program who came in with little research experience and ended up hating it. You owe it more to yourself than the programs to have some experience, but also it will be extremely difficult to get into a PhD program without experience. Get the masters if it’ll give you experience. Get the experience you need and then apply for the PhD. Best of luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Jumping straight into PhD without research experience. Hi everyone. I am a Korean undergrad studying biotech in Korea (although I am doing my mandatory military service at the moment). As soon as I finish my undergrad programme, I'm planning on studyimg abroad (somewhere between US, Switzerland, and Japan) because to be honest this country is a horrible place to pursue a career in academia. What I'm concerned about is that I think I won't be accepted to anywhere without some research background if I were to jump right into PhD. Some of you might ask why don't I just get some experience, but here in Korea professors rarely provide meaningful research opportunities to undergrad students as they somehow believe "undergrads aren't just smart enough to do research". My professors recommend me to finish up to masters here and then apply to PhD programs abroad so that I'll have some research experience from my masters. However, I think thats a complete waste of time, doing a masters and PhD separately when you can just go straight to PhD. So what looks like the best option for me? Should I stay for couple more years and get the masters? Or should I jump right in without some meaningful research background? (I do have decent GPA, GRE, etc etc though)
RESPONSE A: I understand it seems counter-productive to do a masters, but with no research experience: (1) you will struggle to get into a PhD program abroad and (2) you may do your masters and find out that you may not want to do a PhD (I'm doing my masters now and I know students that did want to do a PhD but do not anymore).
RESPONSE B: Having some research experience and, more importantly, great letters of recommendation that can speak to your potential to do great research, can improve your competitiveness for admissions to top programs, but in the US it is not unusual for people to go straight into Ph.D. programs from their undergraduate program, often without research experience. I would recommend applying to Ph.D. programs abroad and MS programs locally and then deciding once you see what your options are.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Jumping straight into PhD without research experience. Hi everyone. I am a Korean undergrad studying biotech in Korea (although I am doing my mandatory military service at the moment). As soon as I finish my undergrad programme, I'm planning on studyimg abroad (somewhere between US, Switzerland, and Japan) because to be honest this country is a horrible place to pursue a career in academia. What I'm concerned about is that I think I won't be accepted to anywhere without some research background if I were to jump right into PhD. Some of you might ask why don't I just get some experience, but here in Korea professors rarely provide meaningful research opportunities to undergrad students as they somehow believe "undergrads aren't just smart enough to do research". My professors recommend me to finish up to masters here and then apply to PhD programs abroad so that I'll have some research experience from my masters. However, I think thats a complete waste of time, doing a masters and PhD separately when you can just go straight to PhD. So what looks like the best option for me? Should I stay for couple more years and get the masters? Or should I jump right in without some meaningful research background? (I do have decent GPA, GRE, etc etc though)
RESPONSE A: You'll really struggle (if not find it simply impossible) to be accepted for PhD study in Europe without a Masters, so I agree with your professors.
RESPONSE B: I understand it seems counter-productive to do a masters, but with no research experience: (1) you will struggle to get into a PhD program abroad and (2) you may do your masters and find out that you may not want to do a PhD (I'm doing my masters now and I know students that did want to do a PhD but do not anymore).
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do I organize old articles on which I've highlighted and taken notes? I just started working on my master's degree, and realized that I'm going to have a lot of journal articles printed out, highlighted all over, with my notes and comments all over them. I write better on a computer but learn better with printed materials where I can flip back and forth, underline/highlight, write and doodle in the margins, etc. This essentially means that at the end of every week I'll have an average of 200 pages of academic articles. I could just toss them out and keep a list of the articles to look up online again later, but that would be discarding all the highlighting of key points and many of thoughts I've already had on the material. Not to mention that I hate to just waste all that paper. Anybody else faced this issue? How do you recommend organizing all those old articles? Should I keep a file cabinet with the articles alphabetized within broad topics, or what? Thanks in advance.
RESPONSE A: I'm the same way and printed everything. I bought a cheap, used filing cabinet online and stored everything I had printed by chapter/ author's surname. After finishing the PhD there was a celebratory "burning of the articles" bonfire. You can probably get a filing cabinet for about $25 used.
RESPONSE B: Like you, I find that I work much better with printed articles that I can annotate. More than a couple of my professors actually require that we have them printed, and don't allow us to have only digital copies. I keep them all in folders organized by topic. I tried doing it by author, but that wasn't efficient when I could remember broadly what an article was about, but not the author's name, so I had no clue what folder it was in. Try not to be concerned about wasting paper. Yeah, it sucks, but trying to force yourself to go digital if it's just not how you're able to best process information is going to cause you much more stress than you need to deal with.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it unethical to invest in industry that my research is going to impact in a major way? Throwaway for obvious reasons. I'm a PhD candidate in the U.S. conducting research that will have quite a large impact on a particular industry once it gets published. There's been jokes made about investing in the industry by the PI, as our findings will make the industry a lot of money once our research is made public. I think it's unethical for me to personally invest in this industry knowing what I know and, if I were to invest, others critical of my work could suggest that I altered the results to line my own pockets. But I also like to talk about my research to my S.O., family, and friends. Would it be unethical for me to suggest they invest in this industry? What if I'm just talking about my research and whoever I'm talking to puts two and two together; it wouldn't be hard to figure out that there's money to be made. Should I refrain from talking about my research altogether because of this?
RESPONSE A: Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
RESPONSE B: Maybe, at least let us all know first so we can drop $$.. haha
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it unethical to invest in industry that my research is going to impact in a major way? Throwaway for obvious reasons. I'm a PhD candidate in the U.S. conducting research that will have quite a large impact on a particular industry once it gets published. There's been jokes made about investing in the industry by the PI, as our findings will make the industry a lot of money once our research is made public. I think it's unethical for me to personally invest in this industry knowing what I know and, if I were to invest, others critical of my work could suggest that I altered the results to line my own pockets. But I also like to talk about my research to my S.O., family, and friends. Would it be unethical for me to suggest they invest in this industry? What if I'm just talking about my research and whoever I'm talking to puts two and two together; it wouldn't be hard to figure out that there's money to be made. Should I refrain from talking about my research altogether because of this?
RESPONSE A: Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
RESPONSE B: How certain are you that your work will be so significant as to alter the course of an industry?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Is it unethical to invest in industry that my research is going to impact in a major way? Throwaway for obvious reasons. I'm a PhD candidate in the U.S. conducting research that will have quite a large impact on a particular industry once it gets published. There's been jokes made about investing in the industry by the PI, as our findings will make the industry a lot of money once our research is made public. I think it's unethical for me to personally invest in this industry knowing what I know and, if I were to invest, others critical of my work could suggest that I altered the results to line my own pockets. But I also like to talk about my research to my S.O., family, and friends. Would it be unethical for me to suggest they invest in this industry? What if I'm just talking about my research and whoever I'm talking to puts two and two together; it wouldn't be hard to figure out that there's money to be made. Should I refrain from talking about my research altogether because of this?
RESPONSE A: Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
RESPONSE B: I don't have black and white answers for you, but I think access to data counts for a lot here. I'm a researcher for the Federal Government in Canada and I can get access to a wide variety of data from surveys, the census, etc. Our protocol is before you use any data pertaining to a specific company, you must divest any holdings in that company and cannot have any holdings of that company during your period of data access. That said, in matters of ethics, sometimes you just have to listen to what your gut is telling you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Is it unethical to invest in industry that my research is going to impact in a major way? Throwaway for obvious reasons. I'm a PhD candidate in the U.S. conducting research that will have quite a large impact on a particular industry once it gets published. There's been jokes made about investing in the industry by the PI, as our findings will make the industry a lot of money once our research is made public. I think it's unethical for me to personally invest in this industry knowing what I know and, if I were to invest, others critical of my work could suggest that I altered the results to line my own pockets. But I also like to talk about my research to my S.O., family, and friends. Would it be unethical for me to suggest they invest in this industry? What if I'm just talking about my research and whoever I'm talking to puts two and two together; it wouldn't be hard to figure out that there's money to be made. Should I refrain from talking about my research altogether because of this?
RESPONSE A: How certain are you that your work will be so significant as to alter the course of an industry?
RESPONSE B: Mmm...dat hubris
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: . I think it's unethical for me to personally invest in this industry knowing what I know and, if I were to invest, others critical of my work could suggest that I altered the results to line my own pockets. But I also like to talk about my research to my S.O., family, and friends. Would it be unethical for me to suggest they invest in this industry? What if I'm just talking about my research and whoever I'm talking to puts two and two together; it wouldn't be hard to figure out that there's money to be made. Should I refrain from talking about my research altogether because of this?
RESPONSE A: If I can give my opinion as someone who has worked in portfolio management and has been confronted with these questions, then I'd say that there's nothing inherently wrong from an ethical standpoint as long as you disclose this information. If you feel like disclosing this information in your papers would have a negative impact on your reputation or the perception of your work, simply don't do it. Moreover, in order for your research to be meaningful for an industry, the industry must be in a position where it has both the organizational power to adapt your research for their operations (which can take years) and have access to specific sources of financing that are suited for the risk profile of such projects. In other words, if the industry is mature and consolidated and has a high risk aversion, your idea might simply be burried for a few decades. Now I don't want to be too negative, but valuing the impact of new R&D on an industry is highly complex and dependent on many factors that you are likely not aware of and while it might be impactful in the sense that industry professionals might talk about your work, it might not translate in equity valuations. Edit : never ever make investment proposals to your family. Even as a professional you learn not to do that or at the very least you learn not to recommend specific securities and just limit yourself to giving broad asset class recommendations / you generally ask a colleague (investment professional) to do it for you.
RESPONSE B: Depending upon how you do it, it can absolutely be done ethically. Talk with the Chair of your campus Conflict of Interest committee about it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you announce/publicise your accepted papers? Just wondering how everyone else announces and publicises their accepted papers? I just had a paper accepted, and I'm still overcoming some imposter syndrome to announce it. What ways do you guys use?
RESPONSE A: I have twitter and insta accounts for science things and I just post about them on there
RESPONSE B: Have a journal reveal party?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you announce/publicise your accepted papers? Just wondering how everyone else announces and publicises their accepted papers? I just had a paper accepted, and I'm still overcoming some imposter syndrome to announce it. What ways do you guys use?
RESPONSE A: Wait, people announce their papers?
RESPONSE B: Have a journal reveal party?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you announce/publicise your accepted papers? Just wondering how everyone else announces and publicises their accepted papers? I just had a paper accepted, and I'm still overcoming some imposter syndrome to announce it. What ways do you guys use?
RESPONSE A: Have a journal reveal party?
RESPONSE B: The best way to “announce” your paper is to cite the works of relevant people in your field. Citing people is the equivalent to tagging them in social media. They will likely get a google scholar alert and will feel flattered. They may even return the favour.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you announce/publicise your accepted papers? Just wondering how everyone else announces and publicises their accepted papers? I just had a paper accepted, and I'm still overcoming some imposter syndrome to announce it. What ways do you guys use?
RESPONSE A: There is a subreddit for that. Well, I started it but it hasn't gained much traction yet... r/ArticleInPress Otherwise, start with your department newsletter, your university library depository, your research group homepage, at the next conference or talk you give, twitter, researchgate or academia profile. If it is a high profile journal or a good quality article you could even do a press release.
RESPONSE B: Have a journal reveal party?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you announce/publicise your accepted papers? Just wondering how everyone else announces and publicises their accepted papers? I just had a paper accepted, and I'm still overcoming some imposter syndrome to announce it. What ways do you guys use?
RESPONSE A: I tweeted out my first paper and made a thread summarizing the main points. I posted it on Facebook too. I have no shame. I was proud to finally get published!
RESPONSE B: There is a subreddit for that. Well, I started it but it hasn't gained much traction yet... r/ArticleInPress Otherwise, start with your department newsletter, your university library depository, your research group homepage, at the next conference or talk you give, twitter, researchgate or academia profile. If it is a high profile journal or a good quality article you could even do a press release.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Should I Accept an Unfunded PhD Offer as an International Student? Hi all, I've got an unfunded PhD offer in political science at a middle-to-lower ranked school in the US. There's a chance of getting funding later on aside from some supplementary earning options. I am an international student from a "developing" country with some savings to fund my first year. Yes, I know it is considered nothing short of a crime to pay for your PhD in US. Still, I want to take up this opportunity as I want to escape the things here at home. I can manage the first year somehow but will need funding later on. I can also theoretically apply to another higher-ranked school with fully funded offer during the next cycle. With the existing global political situation, I don't know whether student visas will come easily next year for students of my home country. I am also aware of the unforeseen costs and what if the funding doesn't come the second year, among other possibilities. I am in a desperate situation right now and would appreciate any sound advice.
RESPONSE A: It will be very difficult to get approval on a Visa unless you can show you have savings to support you. (I believe it's 20-30k).
RESPONSE B: Honestly, you probably shouldn't accept an unfunded PhD offer at all, international or not. That said, if you're just looking for a way to get in on a visa, perhaps you could find a partially funded masters that might be a better option?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Should I Accept an Unfunded PhD Offer as an International Student? Hi all, I've got an unfunded PhD offer in political science at a middle-to-lower ranked school in the US. There's a chance of getting funding later on aside from some supplementary earning options. I am an international student from a "developing" country with some savings to fund my first year. Yes, I know it is considered nothing short of a crime to pay for your PhD in US. Still, I want to take up this opportunity as I want to escape the things here at home. I can manage the first year somehow but will need funding later on. I can also theoretically apply to another higher-ranked school with fully funded offer during the next cycle. With the existing global political situation, I don't know whether student visas will come easily next year for students of my home country. I am also aware of the unforeseen costs and what if the funding doesn't come the second year, among other possibilities. I am in a desperate situation right now and would appreciate any sound advice.
RESPONSE A: It's a gamble as things may turn out just fine or not, USA is very very expensive especially if you are from a developing country. I have seen students come here with no funding but they find it while on campus, I have also seen students come here with full funding only to lose it an year later because they didnt perform well in their classes or PhD qualifying exams.
RESPONSE B: Honestly, you probably shouldn't accept an unfunded PhD offer at all, international or not. That said, if you're just looking for a way to get in on a visa, perhaps you could find a partially funded masters that might be a better option?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: considered nothing short of a crime to pay for your PhD in US. Still, I want to take up this opportunity as I want to escape the things here at home. I can manage the first year somehow but will need funding later on. I can also theoretically apply to another higher-ranked school with fully funded offer during the next cycle. With the existing global political situation, I don't know whether student visas will come easily next year for students of my home country. I am also aware of the unforeseen costs and what if the funding doesn't come the second year, among other possibilities. I am in a desperate situation right now and would appreciate any sound advice.
RESPONSE A: It's a gamble as things may turn out just fine or not, USA is very very expensive especially if you are from a developing country. I have seen students come here with no funding but they find it while on campus, I have also seen students come here with full funding only to lose it an year later because they didnt perform well in their classes or PhD qualifying exams.
RESPONSE B: People are going to tell you not to do it, and they're probably right. If you're considering going for it anyway (which is your own choice, and no one else can possibly know your personal situation intimately enough to make it for you) then it would probably be best to ask the school to let you know what proportion of students have less than complete funding by the beginning of their second year. Then ask to be connected with some current students, and ask them for a very clear and frank explanation of the funding situation. If you do get funding for your second year, what are the chances that it'll be through a mechanism that continues for the rest of your program, and that isn't disruptive to your training (e.g. the opportunity to TA multiple classes per semester is probably not your best option, and is in no way equal to being put on a grant that pays your tuition plus a stipend). Basically, you need to figure out what the truth of the funding situation is. It sounds like you have some other applications you haven't heard back on yet. It's still pretty early, so don't get yourself in a mindset where this is your only option. It may not be.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: and what if the funding doesn't come the second year, among other possibilities. I am in a desperate situation right now and would appreciate any sound advice.
RESPONSE A: though i certainly understand the temptation to accept the offer, and though, as an international phd student for whom school was one way to “escape ... things ... at home,” i sympathize with your situation, i would emphatically recommend against this. a phd, as you know, is a massive undertaking, and one that is extremely challenging even under ideal conditions. i am lucky enough to be attending an r1 institution, and even that experience is one that i would be hesitant to recommend. i could certainly not imagine, nor would i even consider, doing this in the absence of full (material) institutional support. really, an unfunded phd “offer” is little more than an invitation to perform free labor. my advice is to wait for the next admission cycle. best of luck, op
RESPONSE B: People are going to tell you not to do it, and they're probably right. If you're considering going for it anyway (which is your own choice, and no one else can possibly know your personal situation intimately enough to make it for you) then it would probably be best to ask the school to let you know what proportion of students have less than complete funding by the beginning of their second year. Then ask to be connected with some current students, and ask them for a very clear and frank explanation of the funding situation. If you do get funding for your second year, what are the chances that it'll be through a mechanism that continues for the rest of your program, and that isn't disruptive to your training (e.g. the opportunity to TA multiple classes per semester is probably not your best option, and is in no way equal to being put on a grant that pays your tuition plus a stipend). Basically, you need to figure out what the truth of the funding situation is. It sounds like you have some other applications you haven't heard back on yet. It's still pretty early, so don't get yourself in a mindset where this is your only option. It may not be.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: the first year somehow but will need funding later on. I can also theoretically apply to another higher-ranked school with fully funded offer during the next cycle. With the existing global political situation, I don't know whether student visas will come easily next year for students of my home country. I am also aware of the unforeseen costs and what if the funding doesn't come the second year, among other possibilities. I am in a desperate situation right now and would appreciate any sound advice.
RESPONSE A: If you do well in your first year, I think you have an excellent chance of funding for the second and following years, so I say, yes, do it. I teach at a MS level institution. Some of our MS graduates (mostly international) have gone on to PhD programs at very good and good institutions, without funding - every one got picked up for funding, all (if I recall correctly) in the second SEMESTER of their PhD study. Just make sure you have enough funding to do really well your first semester, so you impress the faculty members.
RESPONSE B: People are going to tell you not to do it, and they're probably right. If you're considering going for it anyway (which is your own choice, and no one else can possibly know your personal situation intimately enough to make it for you) then it would probably be best to ask the school to let you know what proportion of students have less than complete funding by the beginning of their second year. Then ask to be connected with some current students, and ask them for a very clear and frank explanation of the funding situation. If you do get funding for your second year, what are the chances that it'll be through a mechanism that continues for the rest of your program, and that isn't disruptive to your training (e.g. the opportunity to TA multiple classes per semester is probably not your best option, and is in no way equal to being put on a grant that pays your tuition plus a stipend). Basically, you need to figure out what the truth of the funding situation is. It sounds like you have some other applications you haven't heard back on yet. It's still pretty early, so don't get yourself in a mindset where this is your only option. It may not be.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Ended class early since it was the first day. By the end of the day I am down to 11 credits plus advising time (I am only supposed to have 9 as a first time teacher). So I have a manageable schedule, but now I am having second thoughts about if I made the right decision. The other faculty were professional and supportive, and definitely looked out for me. What is really messing me up is the fact that they even had me for that many hours in the first place. Now that the dust has settled and I can think about the situation, I am pretty pissed off that it even happened. Its amateur hour! I was excited to start this job, but now I have this awful taste in my mouth I cant get rid of.
RESPONSE A: Are you teaching as an adjunct or graduate student (you said you took a university job, but that's ambiguous). If you're a member of a union, changing your courses at the last minute without your knowledge or consent might be a grievance (depending on your contract). In that case, you might want to talk to your union rep. Alternatively, is your department head a reasonable person? Do you think that simply asking him/her to change your courses would be something they would do? Just from hearing your story it sounds like somebody in the bureaucracy isn't doing their fucking job and that some last minute decisions had to be made. It could be that the head was the person who fucked up, in which case he/she is responsible for putting you in a tough spot. It could be someone higher up. In either case, it's hard to tell if they'll accommodate you depending on how they handle blame/responsibility. Some people get defensive about their own inadequacy and pass the blame onto others. Regardless, if you can't teach the class, you can't teach the class. You need to do something about this ASAP. You also might consider talking to a colleague you trust who knows more about the details.
RESPONSE B: How the fuck do people get hired into TT positions with absolutely no clue about how to teach (especially what appears to be the rough equivalent of a 4-4 load)?
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: ing me up is the fact that they even had me for that many hours in the first place. Now that the dust has settled and I can think about the situation, I am pretty pissed off that it even happened. Its amateur hour! I was excited to start this job, but now I have this awful taste in my mouth I cant get rid of.
RESPONSE A: I am sure you will have lots to read this year, but if you have time for this book, give it a shot: Teaching What You Don't Know, by Therese Huston I won't claim that it saved my life my first year, but it definitely made it _much easier_. It is very helpful, very well written, and also has a somewhat therapeutic effect on an anxious mind. Maybe give it a try in the evenings, when you feel exhausted? Basically, it is a survival guide, and a great one at that.
RESPONSE B: Are you teaching as an adjunct or graduate student (you said you took a university job, but that's ambiguous). If you're a member of a union, changing your courses at the last minute without your knowledge or consent might be a grievance (depending on your contract). In that case, you might want to talk to your union rep. Alternatively, is your department head a reasonable person? Do you think that simply asking him/her to change your courses would be something they would do? Just from hearing your story it sounds like somebody in the bureaucracy isn't doing their fucking job and that some last minute decisions had to be made. It could be that the head was the person who fucked up, in which case he/she is responsible for putting you in a tough spot. It could be someone higher up. In either case, it's hard to tell if they'll accommodate you depending on how they handle blame/responsibility. Some people get defensive about their own inadequacy and pass the blame onto others. Regardless, if you can't teach the class, you can't teach the class. You need to do something about this ASAP. You also might consider talking to a colleague you trust who knows more about the details.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Made a mistake in my research Hi everyone, This is a throwaway account. I made a minor fuckup recently in my research. I am a PhD student. My supervisor is a very strict man and I am very afraid of him. He is very harsh whenever I make a mistake even during the midst of covid and I was struggling with mental health. Therefore, I am very afraid of being honest to him. I discovered that I have made a mistake in my calculations. The software I use has several versions. The numbers are different(very slightly) in the data from the previous version. And I have combined it with new data from the current version. I am noticing it just now. As a result, everything I have done so far is a complete waste. This is something I can fix in a couple of weeks. But, I am terribly afraid of him shouting at me. I am thinking of quitting. I am sitting here panicking badly. I do not know what to do.
RESPONSE A: Please do yourself a favor and find a new advisor that treats you with respect.
RESPONSE B: First of all, remember that you are human and make mistakes. Sometimes, no matter how easy the task, we all mess up. The best thing you could do in my opinion is just to own up to it. Yes, your supervisor may not be exactly happy with your mishap, but the most important thing is that you don't lose your self-confidence. High self efficacy even in the midst of our not so promising moments is what creates that drive that all supervisors look for. Just take a moment and relax. Assess what went wrong and make a plan on how you can minimize the risks of that happening again. If you present what went wrong, and steps you are taking to ensure that it won't happen again, then it may help your supervisor have a better outlook on the situation. ​ Good Luck!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: am terribly afraid of him shouting at me. I am thinking of quitting. I am sitting here panicking badly. I do not know what to do.
RESPONSE A: Please do yourself a favor and find a new advisor that treats you with respect.
RESPONSE B: It might depend on the specifics of the software, but things might not be a complete waste! If it's something like R, for example, (the change from 3.xx to 4.xx is what I'm thinking), and it hasn't broken completely, than the models and trends should all be in the same direction and all but the most borderline results aren't compromised at all. You should be able to present your data with a note about the version change where appropriate. Rerunning everything in the newest version will have to be done at some point, and will take time, but it's not a thing where you have to drop everything RIGHT NOW and go back to the beginning, losing your current momentum and risking your supervisor's wrath. There are arguments to be made for using the most current version of software, and arguments to be made for sticking with legacy versions, but ultimately if they show the same thing and you are clear about when and how each one was used, it's fine. To be honest, it might not even be necessary to tell your supervisor directly, and certainly you don't need to frame it as a major fuck-up. Only you know the relationship, but if it's something that will be fixed in a future draft you can just make a note that you identified a problem, and are going back to implement the solution, it has/will be fixed soon. Or if you think it's best to let them know (it's possible they have a tip for what to do in this case that makes versioning easier, for example), just sending an email directly telling them that you've had a set-back due to this, without dwelling too much on how bad you feel about it, should be fine. Then don't check your email for the rest of the day and treat yourself to something nice for Doing that Hard Thing. Stuff like this happens a lot. Take a deep breath. It will be okay.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: fuckup recently in my research. I am a PhD student. My supervisor is a very strict man and I am very afraid of him. He is very harsh whenever I make a mistake even during the midst of covid and I was struggling with mental health. Therefore, I am very afraid of being honest to him. I discovered that I have made a mistake in my calculations. The software I use has several versions. The numbers are different(very slightly) in the data from the previous version. And I have combined it with new data from the current version. I am noticing it just now. As a result, everything I have done so far is a complete waste. This is something I can fix in a couple of weeks. But, I am terribly afraid of him shouting at me. I am thinking of quitting. I am sitting here panicking badly. I do not know what to do.
RESPONSE A: Please do yourself a favor and find a new advisor that treats you with respect.
RESPONSE B: I would definitely do what you have to do to correct the mistake, including telling your supervisor. From the sounds of it, it's going to be difficult and uncomfortable, but worth it in the long run. Foremost, it's not worth risking your scientific integrity. But also, it's not worth cringing at the products (paper, poster?) that will come out of this data years down the road when you look at your CV, or having to walk on eggshells when explaining the project in the future, which might be an important part of your professional journey on grant applications or job talks. I assume he'll be mad, but can't kick you out of your program for this. Hell, even if he would or could, it's still not risking the things stated above, and you deserve a better mentor anyway. If it's any comfort: I submitted my masters thesis to a good journal, got a promising R&R asking for only minor revisions, and found an error in my data that changed results (like, changed which findings were significant. Worst case scenario, IMHO). I called my mentor and he thanked me for doing the right thing even though it was scary, and the journal still accepted my paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: it with new data from the current version. I am noticing it just now. As a result, everything I have done so far is a complete waste. This is something I can fix in a couple of weeks. But, I am terribly afraid of him shouting at me. I am thinking of quitting. I am sitting here panicking badly. I do not know what to do.
RESPONSE A: First of all, remember that you are human and make mistakes. Sometimes, no matter how easy the task, we all mess up. The best thing you could do in my opinion is just to own up to it. Yes, your supervisor may not be exactly happy with your mishap, but the most important thing is that you don't lose your self-confidence. High self efficacy even in the midst of our not so promising moments is what creates that drive that all supervisors look for. Just take a moment and relax. Assess what went wrong and make a plan on how you can minimize the risks of that happening again. If you present what went wrong, and steps you are taking to ensure that it won't happen again, then it may help your supervisor have a better outlook on the situation. ​ Good Luck!
RESPONSE B: I’ve done this. I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone hadn’t experienced this to some degree. What I did, and what I hope a supervisee would do when reporting to me, is to provide a clear explanation, with documented examples, of the problem, a summary of the consequences, and a plan (with timeline) for correction. No excuses, just facts. As for being afraid of your advisor, are there other students in the same boat? Does he have a history of harsh or unfair treatment of students? You should consider a confidential conference with your institution’s ombudsperson to lay out your concerns and examine your options. I switched labs as a grad student almost two years in, because I just couldn’t work comfortably with my advisor. Yes, it was a difficult decision, and a bunch of heartache lost time, but I was able to find a new position with someone who was a much better fit, and who remains a good friend twenty years on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: . I am thinking of quitting. I am sitting here panicking badly. I do not know what to do.
RESPONSE A: It might depend on the specifics of the software, but things might not be a complete waste! If it's something like R, for example, (the change from 3.xx to 4.xx is what I'm thinking), and it hasn't broken completely, than the models and trends should all be in the same direction and all but the most borderline results aren't compromised at all. You should be able to present your data with a note about the version change where appropriate. Rerunning everything in the newest version will have to be done at some point, and will take time, but it's not a thing where you have to drop everything RIGHT NOW and go back to the beginning, losing your current momentum and risking your supervisor's wrath. There are arguments to be made for using the most current version of software, and arguments to be made for sticking with legacy versions, but ultimately if they show the same thing and you are clear about when and how each one was used, it's fine. To be honest, it might not even be necessary to tell your supervisor directly, and certainly you don't need to frame it as a major fuck-up. Only you know the relationship, but if it's something that will be fixed in a future draft you can just make a note that you identified a problem, and are going back to implement the solution, it has/will be fixed soon. Or if you think it's best to let them know (it's possible they have a tip for what to do in this case that makes versioning easier, for example), just sending an email directly telling them that you've had a set-back due to this, without dwelling too much on how bad you feel about it, should be fine. Then don't check your email for the rest of the day and treat yourself to something nice for Doing that Hard Thing. Stuff like this happens a lot. Take a deep breath. It will be okay.
RESPONSE B: "I've spotted an error and I know how to fix it" Great! Awesome! That's a good thing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Does anyone else have experience with this type of situation? I can't tell if its a good thing or a bad thing. The older guy is pretty much my ideal advisor in terms of the research, his reputation, and his track record. The younger guy seems fine but if the older prof were not involved, then I would probably go elsewhere. Is this an approach universities use to attract students? (include an older "superstar" in the offer to make the situation look very attractive, but then that professor's involvement with the student is actually pretty minimal). Just looking for some input from any current or former grad students that have seen these types of situations before because I'm not really sure what to make of it. (I posted this in r/GradSchool as well)
RESPONSE A: what lottery numbers should I play tonight?
RESPONSE B: The specifics of your situation will matter a lot. I wouldn't think of it as a thing that the university does to attract students (though that may be technically true), but instead as a thing professors and students do to get as much utility out of people with limited resources. It's possible that the older professor is only doing this so you can put his name on your resume, but he doesn't actually plan to put much time into you. Which, if true, is still nice of him, he doesn't have to give you the name recognition. It's also possible that he doesn't think he has enough time but when it comes down to it he'll put the time in because he enjoys helping students. The university might know which of these is likely to happen, they might not. It might depend on you. It's also possible that the younger professor is worried that he won't be a good mentor on his first try and wants the older professor to pick up the slack. He might be right about this, he might be underestimating himself. If you're not sure, talk to both professors about what they expect from you and what you can expect from them (communication is key, standard advice that no one ever follows). If you're worried they're trying to con you, talk to their former students, not strangers on the internet.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: many amateur mistakes in presentation, because I am an amateur. I fix the problems and resubmit to a new journal. More months go by. Slowly the papers become more polished, but I feel there must be a better way than this. Collaboration or direct professional advice would prevent many of these amateur mistakes, anticipate reviewer concerns, or even identify ideal journals or forums for presenting these ideas. Conversely, some reviewers have remarked very positively on my theories but instead of recommending article publication have instead recommended I pursue an academic book or a monograph as they feel the article format is too confining to properly elaborate on some of my arguments and theses. I do not have the credentials to do this. As a result, my manuscripts gather dust on shelves. Finally, a recent manuscript was nearly accepted after 18 months of peer review by multiple reviewers with recommendations for a couple of changes to references, but I do not have access to the references they recommend since I am an independent investigator. So am stuck in a Catch-22: I cannot publish without credibility, but I cannot get credibility without being published. What is there to be done? Thank you for any suggestions.
RESPONSE A: As an academic it is on YOU to back up your claims. If you can't get the needed reference then you will need to pony up and purchase a copy. As far as presentation, you should be copying the journals you are publishing in for what to do. If revieweRs contradict each other, then you need to be able to sufficiently answer each of them as to why you do or do not agree with them. This isn't a catch-22, this is you not knowing how to play the game.
RESPONSE B: Think about going an alternate route then. Submit your work to conferences instead of journals. If accepted at the conference you can directly engage with your audience, get feedback, and meet the people who do peer reviews. You can start local or regional and then build to national/international conferences. Many publish proceedings, anyway. Are you affiliated with a University? If so, talk to your department or the research librarian that serves your college to get ideas for where to submit. Best of luck! Also, maybe repost this question as a "meta" to /r/AskHistorians
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: other institutions. Even though I don't start until July, I've already received invitations from my future colleagues for lunch and get-togethers. I've been out when I was in industry and it was no big deal, but I generally spent a lot less time interacting with those colleagues than I expect to spend with my new ones. I'd ask the folks over in /r/LGBT but I don't get the sense there are a lot of academics in that subreddit. Does anyone here have any experience, personal or through observation, with gay colleagues? How does it work with departmental functions and other work events? Thanks, in advance, for any advice you might be able to offer.
RESPONSE A: The reactions really depend on the country and institution you're in. Studying theology in theeran, well, I wouldn't advise coming out, but biology in San Francisco, get a flag! ahah, now I'm being prejudice... Anyway, I really think folks at /r/lgbt would be more helpful. They have come out in all sorts of different environments. Here you'll find a great disparity, depending, again, on where and what you're studying. My experience (in Europe, even in a country traditionally religious conservative), in the place where I work (social sciences) it's the other way around. You'll get scolded for any homophobic remarks. With my girlfriend, in her lab (biochemistry), maybe half the people there are openly gay. But in the fields of engineering, I have some friends who had some problems for being gay.
RESPONSE B: It honestly just depends on where you are. In my department (located in SoCal), no one cares about what your sexual orientation is. But there was a post on /r/gradschool of someone doing a PhD in the midwest facing a TON of homophobia that the department did nothing about. I don't think you should hide who you are, because that's discrediting your identity and what you went through to come to terms with that identity. If you're in a department where this identity has your colleagues treat you differently, then you know you're in the wrong department.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: new PhD in a business-related field about to start on the tenure track. I am joining a large but close-knit department at an R1 and I'm looking for advice about coming out at work (I'm a 30ish gay man). I've gone through my entire PhD program without it ever coming up in my PhD department despite being out to a number of my peers at other institutions. Even though I don't start until July, I've already received invitations from my future colleagues for lunch and get-togethers. I've been out when I was in industry and it was no big deal, but I generally spent a lot less time interacting with those colleagues than I expect to spend with my new ones. I'd ask the folks over in /r/LGBT but I don't get the sense there are a lot of academics in that subreddit. Does anyone here have any experience, personal or through observation, with gay colleagues? How does it work with departmental functions and other work events? Thanks, in advance, for any advice you might be able to offer.
RESPONSE A: It honestly just depends on where you are. In my department (located in SoCal), no one cares about what your sexual orientation is. But there was a post on /r/gradschool of someone doing a PhD in the midwest facing a TON of homophobia that the department did nothing about. I don't think you should hide who you are, because that's discrediting your identity and what you went through to come to terms with that identity. If you're in a department where this identity has your colleagues treat you differently, then you know you're in the wrong department.
RESPONSE B: We have gay and transgender faculty members at my university, and nobody cares (or if they do, they don't say anything about it). We're a pretty young faculty in general, though, especially in my department, so that may have something to do with it. I think the advice to lay low at first is good. Don't lie to anybody, but if it doesn't come up, wait until you get a sense for everybody's attitudes (if possible) before bringing it up yourself.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: of academics in that subreddit. Does anyone here have any experience, personal or through observation, with gay colleagues? How does it work with departmental functions and other work events? Thanks, in advance, for any advice you might be able to offer.
RESPONSE A: Speaking as a straight male in a 30-ish member department (mathematics) at a 25K-student Midwestern university: If you were in my department, your orientation would not matter in the slightest. What does matter is whether your teaching is excellent, your research is active, and you work well with students and on service assignments. I am not aware if any of my current departmental colleagues is gay, although I know there were a few openly gay members in the past, and I've worked in other institutions with gay colleagues, and seriously, it's the teaching + scholarship + service that matters. OTOH, it's important to understand your colleagues' mindsets, and to engage in moderation. For example I am a Catholic and a political conservative. There are members of my department who I know, because I follow them on Facebook and see their posts every day, are not just liberals or atheists but who have strong positions against religion and conservatism. Therefore although Catholicism is a defining aspect of my life and my work, I don't go on about it at work with others unless they want to talk about it with me. Some might say I'm stifling my beliefs but I tend to see it more as, I'm focusing on doing excellent work first, and helping my students and colleagues as best I can, and those other important facets of my life will make more sense to my colleagues in that context.
RESPONSE B: We have gay and transgender faculty members at my university, and nobody cares (or if they do, they don't say anything about it). We're a pretty young faculty in general, though, especially in my department, so that may have something to do with it. I think the advice to lay low at first is good. Don't lie to anybody, but if it doesn't come up, wait until you get a sense for everybody's attitudes (if possible) before bringing it up yourself.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How would you respond to these vague negative journal review comments? I shouldn't be surprised about vague negative journal paper review comments at this point in my career, but they still drive me crazy. Just received this set of comments from a reviewer on a journal paper: *"My comments:* * *Abstract must be rewritten. It does not read like an abstract in a research paper should.* * *Introduction must be rewritten completely.* * *Background must be rewritten completely.* * *Methods must be rewritten completely. I do not understand that the author is talking about.* * *Results have informative figures, but the text must be rewritten completely.* * *Discussion must be reformulated and made more relevant.* * *Recommendation: Reject, since the paper must be rewritten completely to be acceptable for publication."* That was the entirety of their review. Comments like these drive me nuts because there's like no good way to respond to them. Also this person has a penchant for wanting things "rewritten completely" but no guidance on towards what end. Finally, discussion must be "made more relevant" to whom or what exactly? Fortunately there was a second reviewer who was very positive, so we got a major revision decision from the editor. How would you approach responding to these comments in the revision?
RESPONSE A: I'd write back to the editor. You should have more than one reviewer for an engineering journal.
RESPONSE B: We once responded to a review by saying “Reviewer 2 needs to up his dose.” And nothing else! In this case, I’d just say, “Unfortunately, Reviewer Two’s comments are not specific enough to be actionable” and leave it at that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How would you respond to these vague negative journal review comments? I shouldn't be surprised about vague negative journal paper review comments at this point in my career, but they still drive me crazy. Just received this set of comments from a reviewer on a journal paper: *"My comments:* * *Abstract must be rewritten. It does not read like an abstract in a research paper should.* * *Introduction must be rewritten completely.* * *Background must be rewritten completely.* * *Methods must be rewritten completely. I do not understand that the author is talking about.* * *Results have informative figures, but the text must be rewritten completely.* * *Discussion must be reformulated and made more relevant.* * *Recommendation: Reject, since the paper must be rewritten completely to be acceptable for publication."* That was the entirety of their review. Comments like these drive me nuts because there's like no good way to respond to them. Also this person has a penchant for wanting things "rewritten completely" but no guidance on towards what end. Finally, discussion must be "made more relevant" to whom or what exactly? Fortunately there was a second reviewer who was very positive, so we got a major revision decision from the editor. How would you approach responding to these comments in the revision?
RESPONSE A: By any chance, is English your second language? If not, this reviewer is probably just being a lazy jerk.
RESPONSE B: We once responded to a review by saying “Reviewer 2 needs to up his dose.” And nothing else! In this case, I’d just say, “Unfortunately, Reviewer Two’s comments are not specific enough to be actionable” and leave it at that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How would you respond to these vague negative journal review comments? I shouldn't be surprised about vague negative journal paper review comments at this point in my career, but they still drive me crazy. Just received this set of comments from a reviewer on a journal paper: *"My comments:* * *Abstract must be rewritten. It does not read like an abstract in a research paper should.* * *Introduction must be rewritten completely.* * *Background must be rewritten completely.* * *Methods must be rewritten completely. I do not understand that the author is talking about.* * *Results have informative figures, but the text must be rewritten completely.* * *Discussion must be reformulated and made more relevant.* * *Recommendation: Reject, since the paper must be rewritten completely to be acceptable for publication."* That was the entirety of their review. Comments like these drive me nuts because there's like no good way to respond to them. Also this person has a penchant for wanting things "rewritten completely" but no guidance on towards what end. Finally, discussion must be "made more relevant" to whom or what exactly? Fortunately there was a second reviewer who was very positive, so we got a major revision decision from the editor. How would you approach responding to these comments in the revision?
RESPONSE A: By any chance, is English your second language? If not, this reviewer is probably just being a lazy jerk.
RESPONSE B: Rewrite it completely in your handwriting and submit scanned pages of handwritten text. Problem solved
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How would you respond to these vague negative journal review comments? I shouldn't be surprised about vague negative journal paper review comments at this point in my career, but they still drive me crazy. Just received this set of comments from a reviewer on a journal paper: *"My comments:* * *Abstract must be rewritten. It does not read like an abstract in a research paper should.* * *Introduction must be rewritten completely.* * *Background must be rewritten completely.* * *Methods must be rewritten completely. I do not understand that the author is talking about.* * *Results have informative figures, but the text must be rewritten completely.* * *Discussion must be reformulated and made more relevant.* * *Recommendation: Reject, since the paper must be rewritten completely to be acceptable for publication."* That was the entirety of their review. Comments like these drive me nuts because there's like no good way to respond to them. Also this person has a penchant for wanting things "rewritten completely" but no guidance on towards what end. Finally, discussion must be "made more relevant" to whom or what exactly? Fortunately there was a second reviewer who was very positive, so we got a major revision decision from the editor. How would you approach responding to these comments in the revision?
RESPONSE A: I'd write back to the editor. You should have more than one reviewer for an engineering journal.
RESPONSE B: By any chance, is English your second language? If not, this reviewer is probably just being a lazy jerk.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How would you respond to these vague negative journal review comments? I shouldn't be surprised about vague negative journal paper review comments at this point in my career, but they still drive me crazy. Just received this set of comments from a reviewer on a journal paper: *"My comments:* * *Abstract must be rewritten. It does not read like an abstract in a research paper should.* * *Introduction must be rewritten completely.* * *Background must be rewritten completely.* * *Methods must be rewritten completely. I do not understand that the author is talking about.* * *Results have informative figures, but the text must be rewritten completely.* * *Discussion must be reformulated and made more relevant.* * *Recommendation: Reject, since the paper must be rewritten completely to be acceptable for publication."* That was the entirety of their review. Comments like these drive me nuts because there's like no good way to respond to them. Also this person has a penchant for wanting things "rewritten completely" but no guidance on towards what end. Finally, discussion must be "made more relevant" to whom or what exactly? Fortunately there was a second reviewer who was very positive, so we got a major revision decision from the editor. How would you approach responding to these comments in the revision?
RESPONSE A: Call the editor and ask what major revisions they expect given that the reviewer is clearly a bellend who obviously has either a personal vendetta or a conflict of interest in wanting your MS rejected. Also if you have a trusted peer or mentor run it by them to see if they think your writing style is acceptable or not.
RESPONSE B: By any chance, is English your second language? If not, this reviewer is probably just being a lazy jerk.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: told my wife she failed the final and was kicked out of the program. She asked the director why, as it seemed like more was going on. Director stated she can't follow the chain of command (implying she went above her head and filed a complaint, which my wife was no part of). My wife said she didn't say anything about her, to which her response was "I can smell a rat." The lab professor heard the commotion from outside and talked to the director in private. The students heard her yell "My word is FINAL" and that was it. Lab professor apologized to my wife, said she was a great student, and left. For me, this seems like evidence of bad faith from the director, either to attack the lab professor or as a retaliation from the previous complaint. She is the director of the program and has been there for 20 years. She has multiple complaints from other classes as well. The issue is, if an appeal was filed and she (and perhaps the other students with similar situations) got back in, they would have the same director for the summer session and clinicals. It seems like the director already retaliated against the last complaint, so she could easily do it again, perhaps more carefully. These students don't want to waste another 16 weeks just to be kicked out at the last minute and have to start over. But it's either that or wait until next year and start the program over anyway. Or go to a different school. Is it worth it to try to appeal this decision? There are plenty of witnesses, including the lab instructor. There are clear discrepancies from what is posted in the syllabus to what has actually occurred as well.
RESPONSE A: Professor Retaliation would be a great wrestling name.
RESPONSE B: if this person was suspended for over a week, then there's clearly someone above her who's already beyond critical of what she's doing. I would take the hint and fight tooth and nails. and not just to be "reintegrated" in the program, I'd fight to get that person fired for the obvious unethical behavior. every, single, appeal. and make it clear from the beginning that you'll escalate this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: been there for 20 years. She has multiple complaints from other classes as well. The issue is, if an appeal was filed and she (and perhaps the other students with similar situations) got back in, they would have the same director for the summer session and clinicals. It seems like the director already retaliated against the last complaint, so she could easily do it again, perhaps more carefully. These students don't want to waste another 16 weeks just to be kicked out at the last minute and have to start over. But it's either that or wait until next year and start the program over anyway. Or go to a different school. Is it worth it to try to appeal this decision? There are plenty of witnesses, including the lab instructor. There are clear discrepancies from what is posted in the syllabus to what has actually occurred as well.
RESPONSE A: Professor Retaliation would be a great wrestling name.
RESPONSE B: It's hard to see the downside to a grade appeal since she has already been kicked out of the program. It's not obvious to me what else they could do to her - and anything they did do would obviously be retaliation. Unless the program is quite peculiar, the program director is beholden to some kind of Dean or other higher up. Even schools with flexible curricula recognize the need for students to be treated equally within a course, so having an exam administrated by two different people within a class is already a concern (at least it would be where I teach). Since instructors are generally free to write their courses however they wish, consistency is a key test in grade appeals. The bind, as you describe it, is that the work in question is totally undocumented (you say the video was off). Presentations are difficult to re-assess when they aren't taped, so a lot will ride on whether or not the professor did something unfair by failing to document that part. Further, a lot rides on whether or not the professor *consistently* failed to document. In some ways it would be worse for her if the professor did this to everyone. So, your wife should read up on the grade appeal processes and see how the school understands them.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Committee Members: What percentage of our theses and dissertations do you actually read?
RESPONSE A: For others's students: every one, thoroughly. But I refuse to schedule a defense until I've had the written document for at least 2 weeks (so I can ascertain likely pass/fail and, if the latter, call it off before I get into a bad situation**). For my students: every one, every word, usually multiple times. Related to above, I won't let the student schedule a date until they've given the final document to each committee member and have heard back that it's OK to proceed. ** = I've been kicked off one committee because I refused to pass someone, and I've failed two students because they gave junk-documents and junk-presentations but I was forced into having the defense because someone was more faithful to a calendar than to quality science.
RESPONSE B: I don't teach graduate students, but I sit on undergraduate honors thesis committees every year. Their projects are shorter-- 100-150 pages typically in the fields in which I work --but we read multiple drafts and provide written feedback each time. It would be extremely unprofessional for anyone to approve/disapprove a thesis that had not read carefully, at any level of degree.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Committee Members: What percentage of our theses and dissertations do you actually read?
RESPONSE A: For others's students: every one, thoroughly. But I refuse to schedule a defense until I've had the written document for at least 2 weeks (so I can ascertain likely pass/fail and, if the latter, call it off before I get into a bad situation**). For my students: every one, every word, usually multiple times. Related to above, I won't let the student schedule a date until they've given the final document to each committee member and have heard back that it's OK to proceed. ** = I've been kicked off one committee because I refused to pass someone, and I've failed two students because they gave junk-documents and junk-presentations but I was forced into having the defense because someone was more faithful to a calendar than to quality science.
RESPONSE B: Just the good parts. I kid - I kid. I'll read the whole thing each time I get a draft, but obviously my comprehension varies by section. I won't offer nearly as many comments and suggestions on portions of literature or methods I'm not an expert on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Committee Members: What percentage of our theses and dissertations do you actually read?
RESPONSE A: For others's students: every one, thoroughly. But I refuse to schedule a defense until I've had the written document for at least 2 weeks (so I can ascertain likely pass/fail and, if the latter, call it off before I get into a bad situation**). For my students: every one, every word, usually multiple times. Related to above, I won't let the student schedule a date until they've given the final document to each committee member and have heard back that it's OK to proceed. ** = I've been kicked off one committee because I refused to pass someone, and I've failed two students because they gave junk-documents and junk-presentations but I was forced into having the defense because someone was more faithful to a calendar than to quality science.
RESPONSE B: In my experience with "stapler" theses, committee members don't read carefully published chapters. They offer most feedback on the in-progress chapters.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Committee Members: What percentage of our theses and dissertations do you actually read?
RESPONSE A: I don't teach graduate students, but I sit on undergraduate honors thesis committees every year. Their projects are shorter-- 100-150 pages typically in the fields in which I work --but we read multiple drafts and provide written feedback each time. It would be extremely unprofessional for anyone to approve/disapprove a thesis that had not read carefully, at any level of degree.
RESPONSE B: Just the good parts. I kid - I kid. I'll read the whole thing each time I get a draft, but obviously my comprehension varies by section. I won't offer nearly as many comments and suggestions on portions of literature or methods I'm not an expert on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Will a PhD leave me starving and unemployed? People in the know: Will I make it? I'm strongly considering a PhD in entomology/systematics next year. However I understand the academic job market is horrendous, and only the really good survive. The problem is, I have no idea what such a'really good' standard involves. I'd be completing it at a decent uni in Sydney with a good evolution and ecology research centre. My potential supervisor I've known for a while, and we get along well. I published my first paper with him a little while back. So far I have two 1st-author publications (one in Scientific Reports), one conference presentation and two more publications in preparation (one 1st, one 2nd author. Is this a starting point that will help me get funding and an academic job later on, all things being equal? Most of my supervisors seem to have done postgrad study in the US, will I be shooting myself in the foot if I don't try and get into a prestigious program overseas? I am a little anxious about taking the plunge given I will be 29-30 by the time I finish, and I don't want to have to move to eastern Tajikistan in order to find work. Any thoughts would be incredibly helpful!
RESPONSE A: I know you're joking, but Central Asia, except for Afghanistan, of course, is actually pretty livable.
RESPONSE B: Remember that a lot of what is said on here is US-centric. The academic job market is actually somewhat better in Australia than the US (although this varies a lot by domain). Some people are not very mobile and for them academia is a shitty choice as one must truly be a mercenary. One thing about Sydney is the very high cost of living, making it very hard to live on a base stipend (A$25k-range) so make sure you apply for APA, etc. as well as any top-ups that might come along.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How do you organize what scientific journals you browse through everyday? I'm trying to find an easy way to organize journals that I would like browse through periodically. I currently have an excel sheet that goes Mon-Fri with a list a separate journals for each day but that can get a little bit tiresome to keep track of everything. I was also wondering if there was something where you make a list of journals and it simply notifies you when the newest issue of the journal has come out. If anyone has a good method of doing this, I'd love to hear it!
RESPONSE A: Email alerts
RESPONSE B: I don't do it everyday because publication schedules are often weekly or less frequent. I set up automated emails from the journal to send me the table of contents. From that list I find articles I might like to read. I go through these emails once a week or so.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What's your pet peeve in Academia?
RESPONSE A: That "popular" articles with 1000s of viewers are way less important than scholarly articles that 10 people might read, maybe.
RESPONSE B: I'm an adjunct, so nearly everything!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What's your pet peeve in Academia?
RESPONSE A: That everyone always finds something to bitch about and prioritise: "Oh I have a grant due", "Ugh why do I have to waste my time doing that I have more important things" etc. To a certain extent this is true just generally of humanity, but it gets my back up when academics complain about all the things they have to do, how inundated they are when a lot of the time it appears to be down to poor time management (at least in grad school, early faculty). I understand the need for meetings but do we really have to waste 2 hrs talking about our weekends, let's keep it business and schedule a fun things time at a non-productive hour. Clearly i've just gone on a rant here! Not unique to academica but I notice a lot more in academics than other professions.
RESPONSE B: I'm an adjunct, so nearly everything!
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What's your pet peeve in Academia?
RESPONSE A: The haughty attitude of some of the people.
RESPONSE B: Write a cover letter explaining why you want to be a faculty member at University of Southwestern Delware suburban campus. And don't say "Well, you have a job, and I need a job."
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What's your pet peeve in Academia?
RESPONSE A: That some profs don't give a damn about other people's time. *Meetings can only happen at a time that fits my schedule and I'll still be 20 min late.* dude, everyone's time is valuable. Also the high-school-like cliques that develop in some departments, and the petty bullying and manipulation that can happen because of them.
RESPONSE B: The haughty attitude of some of the people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: What's your pet peeve in Academia?
RESPONSE A: The haughty attitude of some of the people.
RESPONSE B: From the perspective of an undergrad, the prevalence of unpaid internships or working for "course credit" that I don't need to graduate and thus is essentially meaningless Edit: Also, people above you in the academic hierarchy ignoring emails, resulting in a cycle of uncertainty about whether you offended them somehow, are emailing too frequently, or should re-send the email in case it was overlooked
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How many of you guys came from community college? Sometimes I feel like I'm incredibly behind when it comes to building a decent application for grad school, because I'm attending a CC with less opportunities outside class than my peers in four-years. I want to go to grad school, but I’m not sure if I'm behind or if this is all in my head. How many of you came from a community college, and did you feel like you had to play catch up to make yourself seem more competitive? Do you feel like you had a harder time accessing opportunities or do you feel like it’s about the same as everyone else?
RESPONSE A: It's in your head. I went to a local CC, transferred to a liberal arts school with a strong philosophy department, won department awards and scholarships, and then got a full ride and stipend to a master's program at Yale. Was going to do a PhD but wife got pregnant with kiddo #4, so I took a pause on the academic track. You'll be extremely fine -- just transfer to a solid institution, and do well.
RESPONSE B: 1st year PhD here. I went to CC and am extremely greatful I did. I was an average student for the first 2 yrs in college because CC had a way of making me feel like I was left behind. I got a couple C's during that period. HOWEVER when I did get my act together after the transfer to university, my GPA was not affected by the C's. I got a clean slate while my colleagues that started at the 4-year had to deal with their freshman grades. I also found I had plenty of time to build my CV after the transfer. Try not to worry about it and take advantage of any opportunities you do have. You're already doing better than I was at your stage thinking about these things so early.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How many of you guys came from community college? Sometimes I feel like I'm incredibly behind when it comes to building a decent application for grad school, because I'm attending a CC with less opportunities outside class than my peers in four-years. I want to go to grad school, but I’m not sure if I'm behind or if this is all in my head. How many of you came from a community college, and did you feel like you had to play catch up to make yourself seem more competitive? Do you feel like you had a harder time accessing opportunities or do you feel like it’s about the same as everyone else?
RESPONSE A: I started at a community college and finished my PhD last year. The only time it came up was one time when my advisor mentioned in front of me that the undergrads who transferred to the department from CC were the weakest ones. That made me feel very small, and I didn't say anything, but I still got him a bunch of publications so I guess the joke is on him. Edit: I didn't feel like I had to play catch up. You can do your first two years at a CC and for lots of "core" classes like math, physics, english, etc. the instruction quality and material can't really change much. If anything, the class sizes at CC will be smaller and you probably have higher odds that the professors actually care about teaching.
RESPONSE B: It's in your head. I went to a local CC, transferred to a liberal arts school with a strong philosophy department, won department awards and scholarships, and then got a full ride and stipend to a master's program at Yale. Was going to do a PhD but wife got pregnant with kiddo #4, so I took a pause on the academic track. You'll be extremely fine -- just transfer to a solid institution, and do well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: need to do 6 more months of research. But this is too much for me. I can't handle even considering doing more work, even making a plan causes me to sob for hours. If I forced myself to do this work I would do a lot of damage to myself. To sum up, I want to leave with a Masters. I'm NOT asking if I should do a PhD, Masters, or leave without qualification. Instead, I want to know what steps I can take to ensure I get what I want (The Masters qualification) even if my supervisors continue to be a problem. I am not enthused about the prospect of spending months waiting for this process only to be rejected because of my supervisors. What can I do?
RESPONSE A: In the end it's your degree, do what you want. If you only want masters then do it. Your supervisors have a duty of care to support you, providing you have valid arguments for why.
RESPONSE B: Holy Cow! Some of the conspiracy theories expressed here seem really overboard. While there are shitty advisors, *most* advisors really are trying look out for the interests of the student. What the OP describes here does not seem to be one of those nth year PHD where the advisor trying to milk out as much as he/she can and not letting the student graduate. Rather, the OPs has put in significant time investment and the advisors are *properly advising* that enduring a bit more would be in the best interests of the OP. I had a MD/PHD student who after the PHD part, she did not want to go back to the MD program. We talked to her for several months to convince her that she would really benefit from finishing her MD after all this time. She eventually did complete her MD and now thanks me for the best decision she made. If you have made up your mind and you clearly communicate that to your advisors, I am sure they will support your decision and help you receive your MS. FWIW, though I concur with those that suggest you just take a break and then decide again. I think it is never a good thing to make major life's decisions under state of duress, if you can help it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: 6 more months of research. But this is too much for me. I can't handle even considering doing more work, even making a plan causes me to sob for hours. If I forced myself to do this work I would do a lot of damage to myself. To sum up, I want to leave with a Masters. I'm NOT asking if I should do a PhD, Masters, or leave without qualification. Instead, I want to know what steps I can take to ensure I get what I want (The Masters qualification) even if my supervisors continue to be a problem. I am not enthused about the prospect of spending months waiting for this process only to be rejected because of my supervisors. What can I do?
RESPONSE A: I'm in a similar situation. I don't have a solution, but I wanted you to know that there are other grad students that can relate. You are far from being alone in feeling completely over it all.
RESPONSE B: Holy Cow! Some of the conspiracy theories expressed here seem really overboard. While there are shitty advisors, *most* advisors really are trying look out for the interests of the student. What the OP describes here does not seem to be one of those nth year PHD where the advisor trying to milk out as much as he/she can and not letting the student graduate. Rather, the OPs has put in significant time investment and the advisors are *properly advising* that enduring a bit more would be in the best interests of the OP. I had a MD/PHD student who after the PHD part, she did not want to go back to the MD program. We talked to her for several months to convince her that she would really benefit from finishing her MD after all this time. She eventually did complete her MD and now thanks me for the best decision she made. If you have made up your mind and you clearly communicate that to your advisors, I am sure they will support your decision and help you receive your MS. FWIW, though I concur with those that suggest you just take a break and then decide again. I think it is never a good thing to make major life's decisions under state of duress, if you can help it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How much of a role does your undergrad GPA play when applying for grad programs? Hey there - I graduated college a few months ago. The job market has been stale to say the least, and I'm thinking of heading off to grad school. How much does your GPA determine acceptance? I realize it probably varies by program - I am looking at journalism programs. I've done a lot outside of college - lots of freelance, started a local news project, and continue to produce radio in public and for-profit settings - I am working in my field, but i am not getting much out of it anymore and i feel its a combo of the town I'm in and the market. TLDR - i want to go to grad school, but my undergrad GPA was not great - how much does that matter?
RESPONSE A: A good GPA is necessary but not sufficient.
RESPONSE B: If the only reason you are looking at grad school is because of a stale job market you probably should not go to grad school at all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How much of a role does your undergrad GPA play when applying for grad programs? Hey there - I graduated college a few months ago. The job market has been stale to say the least, and I'm thinking of heading off to grad school. How much does your GPA determine acceptance? I realize it probably varies by program - I am looking at journalism programs. I've done a lot outside of college - lots of freelance, started a local news project, and continue to produce radio in public and for-profit settings - I am working in my field, but i am not getting much out of it anymore and i feel its a combo of the town I'm in and the market. TLDR - i want to go to grad school, but my undergrad GPA was not great - how much does that matter?
RESPONSE A: If the only reason you are looking at grad school is because of a stale job market you probably should not go to grad school at all.
RESPONSE B: I think you need to look at what program you are trying to apply to, and what schools you want to go to. From there, look at what the school values and requires from its students. The first person you should speak with is somebody at an institution you are interested in. You can from there see about taking a course with one of the professors who also teaches graduate level studies. Or work with him/her. From there they could see how capable you are and maybe offer you a conditional offer based on what they have seen. I know somebody at UCLA who did this with his MBA, but he was already getting a masters in urban development. Also, how bad was your GPA? If you get a good GRE score (don't know if that pertains to journalism, I'm in sciences) and most schools want a 3.0+ I believe.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How much of a role does your undergrad GPA play when applying for grad programs? Hey there - I graduated college a few months ago. The job market has been stale to say the least, and I'm thinking of heading off to grad school. How much does your GPA determine acceptance? I realize it probably varies by program - I am looking at journalism programs. I've done a lot outside of college - lots of freelance, started a local news project, and continue to produce radio in public and for-profit settings - I am working in my field, but i am not getting much out of it anymore and i feel its a combo of the town I'm in and the market. TLDR - i want to go to grad school, but my undergrad GPA was not great - how much does that matter?
RESPONSE A: If the only reason you are looking at grad school is because of a stale job market you probably should not go to grad school at all.
RESPONSE B: From what I've heard, 3.0+ seems to be the standard. Even if you're amazing and the department that you're applying to wants you, the graduate school might have certain minimums that could keep you out. With that being said, I'm not in journalism and your best bet is to speak with a former professor or recent journalism graduate.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How much of a role does your undergrad GPA play when applying for grad programs? Hey there - I graduated college a few months ago. The job market has been stale to say the least, and I'm thinking of heading off to grad school. How much does your GPA determine acceptance? I realize it probably varies by program - I am looking at journalism programs. I've done a lot outside of college - lots of freelance, started a local news project, and continue to produce radio in public and for-profit settings - I am working in my field, but i am not getting much out of it anymore and i feel its a combo of the town I'm in and the market. TLDR - i want to go to grad school, but my undergrad GPA was not great - how much does that matter?
RESPONSE A: Check with specific schools and programs. Ask graduate admissions.
RESPONSE B: If the only reason you are looking at grad school is because of a stale job market you probably should not go to grad school at all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How much of a role does your undergrad GPA play when applying for grad programs? Hey there - I graduated college a few months ago. The job market has been stale to say the least, and I'm thinking of heading off to grad school. How much does your GPA determine acceptance? I realize it probably varies by program - I am looking at journalism programs. I've done a lot outside of college - lots of freelance, started a local news project, and continue to produce radio in public and for-profit settings - I am working in my field, but i am not getting much out of it anymore and i feel its a combo of the town I'm in and the market. TLDR - i want to go to grad school, but my undergrad GPA was not great - how much does that matter?
RESPONSE A: I think you need to look at what program you are trying to apply to, and what schools you want to go to. From there, look at what the school values and requires from its students. The first person you should speak with is somebody at an institution you are interested in. You can from there see about taking a course with one of the professors who also teaches graduate level studies. Or work with him/her. From there they could see how capable you are and maybe offer you a conditional offer based on what they have seen. I know somebody at UCLA who did this with his MBA, but he was already getting a masters in urban development. Also, how bad was your GPA? If you get a good GRE score (don't know if that pertains to journalism, I'm in sciences) and most schools want a 3.0+ I believe.
RESPONSE B: A good GPA is necessary but not sufficient.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How do you suggest a person with very basic programming skills get ready for graduate level required skills? I asked the same sort of thing on AskCS. But thought I should give Academia a shot, too. I'm applying to a PhD in CS with a BSc in Math. I have limited programming skills: A D and a C in the two programming courses I took. (I should have failed the D one. ) I have not used programming much since then. I have taken courses online, but most cover the very basics or are only suitable for industry. Not many cover academic programming: what is needed to be able to survive a PhD. I want to get ready. I have limited time, but I want it bad enough that I'm willing to work much harder. I just don't know how to start, where to start and how long to devote to this. My plan so far is to find a CS curriculum and find courses online and work through those, and skip the ones that are unrelated to what I want to pursue. I just feel like this is not going to be enough, because most programmers have reached advanced level through time and experience. There's no way to do that in 2 months.
RESPONSE A: Which languages have you tried to learn? Programming courses can be boring. I've found that the best way to learn programming is by doing. E.g. I want to solve problem X, how can I do that programmatically?
RESPONSE B: Where do your research interests lie? Start with the ideas that you want to research, then look into the kinds of programming used to deal with those problems, and try to learn programming as a tool to help with those problems. If you're saying "I need to learn to program," it might be harder to maintain motivation than if you say "I want to research X, and programming will help with that."
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: So... how many UK academics are seriously thinking of leaving Britain? Context: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/brexit-latest-news-exodus-eu-academics-professors-leave-uk-universities-dr-jo-beall-british-council-a7545741.html
RESPONSE A: Almost all of the PhD students and early career researchers I know of are planing to leave the UK or are doubtful whether they should stay. It's of course a major issue right now for people from the EU and internationals outside the EU, but this also includes people from the UK. It's not just funding or job opportunities or the likely increased difficulty to get a visa in case of a 'hard' Brexit. It's the feeling of not being welcome and the highly conservative government that gets to a lot of people.
RESPONSE B: As an Italian, I can confirm that lots of my former colleagues are still now emigrating to the UK to continue research there. The Outlook for every kind of job, let alone research, still looks better there :(
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: So... how many UK academics are seriously thinking of leaving Britain? Context: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/brexit-latest-news-exodus-eu-academics-professors-leave-uk-universities-dr-jo-beall-british-council-a7545741.html
RESPONSE A: Almost all of the PhD students and early career researchers I know of are planing to leave the UK or are doubtful whether they should stay. It's of course a major issue right now for people from the EU and internationals outside the EU, but this also includes people from the UK. It's not just funding or job opportunities or the likely increased difficulty to get a visa in case of a 'hard' Brexit. It's the feeling of not being welcome and the highly conservative government that gets to a lot of people.
RESPONSE B: I'm in the last few months of my PhD at the University of Manchester, I'm a dual British/Canadian citizen of mixed ethnic origin from an immigrant family and Brexit has seriously impacted my desire to stay in the UK. Admittedly this is more a matter of principle and less out of economic necessity. The prospects in my field are roughly equal between Canada and the UK, and I am now working under the assumption I will return to Canada unless I can land a permanent (non-contract) position here. Previously this was not the case and I had been open to staying in the UK, potentially permanently. However, I think this article is right to cite undergraduate enrolment as the real concern for British Universities. Anything that makes your country less appealing to foreign undergraduate students (EU or otherwise) is going to have a huge impact on university finances. Hits to major sources of tuition money, in addition to whatever EU grants were available (which varies between schools and departments), are going to be felt by everyone at all levels of a university.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: So... how many UK academics are seriously thinking of leaving Britain? Context: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/brexit-latest-news-exodus-eu-academics-professors-leave-uk-universities-dr-jo-beall-british-council-a7545741.html
RESPONSE A: Subquestion: does it appear that, in the event of flight to the continent, it will be easier for Americans to find employment in the UK?
RESPONSE B: Almost all of the PhD students and early career researchers I know of are planing to leave the UK or are doubtful whether they should stay. It's of course a major issue right now for people from the EU and internationals outside the EU, but this also includes people from the UK. It's not just funding or job opportunities or the likely increased difficulty to get a visa in case of a 'hard' Brexit. It's the feeling of not being welcome and the highly conservative government that gets to a lot of people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: So... how many UK academics are seriously thinking of leaving Britain? Context: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/brexit-latest-news-exodus-eu-academics-professors-leave-uk-universities-dr-jo-beall-british-council-a7545741.html
RESPONSE A: Almost all of the PhD students and early career researchers I know of are planing to leave the UK or are doubtful whether they should stay. It's of course a major issue right now for people from the EU and internationals outside the EU, but this also includes people from the UK. It's not just funding or job opportunities or the likely increased difficulty to get a visa in case of a 'hard' Brexit. It's the feeling of not being welcome and the highly conservative government that gets to a lot of people.
RESPONSE B: Nope. Just got a permanent position, I'm going to build my C.V. up and then see how brexit is going.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: So... how many UK academics are seriously thinking of leaving Britain? Context: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/brexit-latest-news-exodus-eu-academics-professors-leave-uk-universities-dr-jo-beall-british-council-a7545741.html
RESPONSE A: Not personally, but recruitment has seemed to be harder recently. However with recent developments (DJT), maybe there will be a tranche of Iranian etc academics looking for a new home soon.
RESPONSE B: Almost all of the PhD students and early career researchers I know of are planing to leave the UK or are doubtful whether they should stay. It's of course a major issue right now for people from the EU and internationals outside the EU, but this also includes people from the UK. It's not just funding or job opportunities or the likely increased difficulty to get a visa in case of a 'hard' Brexit. It's the feeling of not being welcome and the highly conservative government that gets to a lot of people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to get past journal article paywalls while working at home? Like many of you, I'm working at home as best I can (displaced from basic science lab). Every now and then I come across an interesting and relevant paper that I cannot access due to paywall. Normally, I'd have institutional access while at the lab. Furthermore, these papers are not accessible with s-hub. How have you guys dealt with this problem? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: sci-hub.se Perfectly legal <.<
RESPONSE B: Only a very bad person would go to google and look up the latest scihub mirror to download articles paid for with public money. Personally, I never go to google, type in scihub, and then enter in the DOI of the article I want to download. Never ever.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: How to get past journal article paywalls while working at home? Like many of you, I'm working at home as best I can (displaced from basic science lab). Every now and then I come across an interesting and relevant paper that I cannot access due to paywall. Normally, I'd have institutional access while at the lab. Furthermore, these papers are not accessible with s-hub. How have you guys dealt with this problem? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Sci-hub. In fact I’ve heard the big publishing journals don’t even care if individuals use it as long as the university’s and research institutions keep paying. Keeps the status quo and everyone happy that way.
RESPONSE B: Check with the library, there'll be a way to access anything you can get on campus remotely. A VPN would probably be the easiest. If that doesn't work, check author's websites and researchgate. Anything more than a year old and funded by NIH should be on PMC too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to get past journal article paywalls while working at home? Like many of you, I'm working at home as best I can (displaced from basic science lab). Every now and then I come across an interesting and relevant paper that I cannot access due to paywall. Normally, I'd have institutional access while at the lab. Furthermore, these papers are not accessible with s-hub. How have you guys dealt with this problem? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: Sign in to your library and access it as usual. I haven't heard of a library that didn't work this way for 20 years.
RESPONSE B: Sci-hub. In fact I’ve heard the big publishing journals don’t even care if individuals use it as long as the university’s and research institutions keep paying. Keeps the status quo and everyone happy that way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to get past journal article paywalls while working at home? Like many of you, I'm working at home as best I can (displaced from basic science lab). Every now and then I come across an interesting and relevant paper that I cannot access due to paywall. Normally, I'd have institutional access while at the lab. Furthermore, these papers are not accessible with s-hub. How have you guys dealt with this problem? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: You should have institutional access through the journal's hosting website if you input your university's login.
RESPONSE B: Sci-hub. In fact I’ve heard the big publishing journals don’t even care if individuals use it as long as the university’s and research institutions keep paying. Keeps the status quo and everyone happy that way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: How to get past journal article paywalls while working at home? Like many of you, I'm working at home as best I can (displaced from basic science lab). Every now and then I come across an interesting and relevant paper that I cannot access due to paywall. Normally, I'd have institutional access while at the lab. Furthermore, these papers are not accessible with s-hub. How have you guys dealt with this problem? Thank you.
RESPONSE A: I think we should sticky this post as evidence that Academics rarely read the whole article.
RESPONSE B: Sci-hub. In fact I’ve heard the big publishing journals don’t even care if individuals use it as long as the university’s and research institutions keep paying. Keeps the status quo and everyone happy that way.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Does university ranking matter? I'm going to get a master's degree and planning for a PhD and a career in academia later. I would like to ask if the university ranking (for my MS study) matter when comparing between offers from universities that are not top 20? And if so, how much? And would it only affect me until I finish my PhD ot it would also affect my future even if I got the PhD from a university with better ranking? I have recieved offers from 2 universities that are ranked nationally as follows: The first one: Times: 54. USnews: 153. Shanghai: 95-114. The second one: Times: 45. USnews: 97. Shanghai 42-56. The topic of the research project that I can work on in the first university is 100% perfect to me and it is exactly what I want to work on. In the second university (with better ranking) I can find reaearch topics that I am interested in but not as perfect as the the first one. I am also expecting to get an offer from a third university with the following ranking: Times: 51. USnews: 30. Shanghai: 37 But regarding the research topic it is the same as the second university (interesting topic but not as perfect for me as the first) I'd appreciate any opinion or advice regarding this.
RESPONSE A: Hiring committees notice differences between Harvard and Podunk College that is ranked #2314. We do not notice or care about the difference between #70 and #50.
RESPONSE B: Nobody cares about ranking except uni PR folks. Whatever metrics US news (who reads reads them anyway) uses is very unlikely, even in aggregate, to impact you nearly as much as your relationship with your PI and several other factors unique to you.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Does corresponding author matter? Trying to settle a debate in the lab. A PhD student recently submitted a paper (lead author), and a postdoc in the lab was surprised that our PI got corresponding author. They felt it undermined the PhD student. Does this really matter? The PhD might not stay in academia so I guess it's safer but it is her work
RESPONSE A: I'm assuming this is STEM based on your mention of the lab. PIs are pretty much always corresponding author in STEM because it's their lab and all the work that goes into having a lab plus they're considered ultimately responsible for the work in the lab, especially when it's a PhD student.
RESPONSE B: The PI is almost always the corresponding author in many fields. If it is that PhD's work, they should be first author and that is their credit. Corresponding author with student affiliations is a bit difficult at they change in a few years, so PI as corresponding author is common.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Does corresponding author matter? Trying to settle a debate in the lab. A PhD student recently submitted a paper (lead author), and a postdoc in the lab was surprised that our PI got corresponding author. They felt it undermined the PhD student. Does this really matter? The PhD might not stay in academia so I guess it's safer but it is her work
RESPONSE A: That's absolutely fine and very common. No worries about it.
RESPONSE B: The PI is almost always the corresponding author in many fields. If it is that PhD's work, they should be first author and that is their credit. Corresponding author with student affiliations is a bit difficult at they change in a few years, so PI as corresponding author is common.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Does corresponding author matter? Trying to settle a debate in the lab. A PhD student recently submitted a paper (lead author), and a postdoc in the lab was surprised that our PI got corresponding author. They felt it undermined the PhD student. Does this really matter? The PhD might not stay in academia so I guess it's safer but it is her work
RESPONSE A: The PI is almost always the corresponding author in many fields. If it is that PhD's work, they should be first author and that is their credit. Corresponding author with student affiliations is a bit difficult at they change in a few years, so PI as corresponding author is common.
RESPONSE B: Since nobody else has said it yet, it should be pointed out that there isn't any prestige involved in being the corresponding author. This is just the person who submits the paper and receives the referee reports. TBH any time you find yourself not the corresponding author its a good day since this role carries with it (a minor amount of) inconvenience and nobody honestly wants to do it. Its not something to be concerned about.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
B
|
POST: Does corresponding author matter? Trying to settle a debate in the lab. A PhD student recently submitted a paper (lead author), and a postdoc in the lab was surprised that our PI got corresponding author. They felt it undermined the PhD student. Does this really matter? The PhD might not stay in academia so I guess it's safer but it is her work
RESPONSE A: In my experience (STEM), the last author is typically the PI who runs the lab and is ultimately responsible for the project, so they typically take corresponding. This is particularly true, if as you mentioned, the PhD is not sure they will stay in academia. However, it is also not uncommon for a PI to give the first author corresponding. For example, my PI typically lets me take corresponding, but likely wouldn't do the same for an masters or undergraduate student who may not stay in academia or pursue a PhD. I don't think it really undermines the student though, I wouldn't have any issues if my PI wanted to take corresponding on my paper. I feel like it may have been more important in the past, but now if you need to contact any of the authors, it's pretty easy to fine their contact information.
RESPONSE B: The PI is almost always the corresponding author in many fields. If it is that PhD's work, they should be first author and that is their credit. Corresponding author with student affiliations is a bit difficult at they change in a few years, so PI as corresponding author is common.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: Does corresponding author matter? Trying to settle a debate in the lab. A PhD student recently submitted a paper (lead author), and a postdoc in the lab was surprised that our PI got corresponding author. They felt it undermined the PhD student. Does this really matter? The PhD might not stay in academia so I guess it's safer but it is her work
RESPONSE A: The PI is almost always the corresponding author in many fields. If it is that PhD's work, they should be first author and that is their credit. Corresponding author with student affiliations is a bit difficult at they change in a few years, so PI as corresponding author is common.
RESPONSE B: I have also heard about some "tensions" based on this, but on any of my work (STEM), senior author is always corresponding author UNLESS the lead author is leading a big project and are likely to keep publishing based on the same data etc. But no, I wouldn't think it was undermining the PhD student at all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: leaving is kind of a irreversible process, but I feel like I need new challenges in a more dynamic environment. Thanks in advance.
RESPONSE A: I did something similar after a postdoc. Faculty jobs are insanely scarce, and I’m not competitive in the ways they seek in 2020. Also, I saw firsthand what that tenure-track treadmill does to people’s lives. Teaching and community service are noble roles, but not valued in the modern system. I found a job in grant management that allows me to keep ties with research (and publish a few times a year), while also establishing a lasting career in academic administration. It’s a nice happy middle that suits my personality and skills. And it wasn’t that hard to let go of the tenure track once I got past a postdoc and saw how abusive and empty that life can really be.
RESPONSE B: So I had a bit of a crisis of confidence after my PhD ended and looked into a lot of alt ac jobs. I even signed up for a job coaching service. I think the important things to do /consider are 1. What are you interested in? If you’re not sure, then you really need to go and talk to people who have jobs that might be in areas you’re interested in, until you figure out what it is you want to do. Do informational interviews, reach out to alumni , make use of the career center in your university. Do some exploring first 2. Network and network some more. Just like in academia, jobs outside academia are more open to you if you know someone who knows someone who’s hiring. The informational interview is a good chance to network, and then once you figure out what you want to do you can do more focused networking 3. Think about what skills you have that are transferable. After all you have been working all this time and have lots of skills. You definitely need to figure out how to convey that to potential employers and rewrite hour CV into a resume. I’d strongly suggest talking to others before jumping into another certification or degree. We all know more people than we think and there’s lot of ways to network now even in the time of pandemic. PM me if you want some specific sites/suggestions. Good luck !
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: question. I do believe that my path in the humanities did allow me to develop some skills that could be valuable outside academia. What I fear is that to re orient my career I would probably need to "certify" and reshaping them to be valuable in the job market. I have been considering enrolling in a Master in management or doing an MBA. Do you people have some advice/stories to share in this regard? I know leaving is kind of a irreversible process, but I feel like I need new challenges in a more dynamic environment. Thanks in advance.
RESPONSE A: If you like teaching, I’m not sure about the Belgian laws, but you might be able to go into teaching high school and eventually become a school administrator with your PhD. I would discourage you from doing any more degrees at this point, especially any you have to pay for.
RESPONSE B: So I had a bit of a crisis of confidence after my PhD ended and looked into a lot of alt ac jobs. I even signed up for a job coaching service. I think the important things to do /consider are 1. What are you interested in? If you’re not sure, then you really need to go and talk to people who have jobs that might be in areas you’re interested in, until you figure out what it is you want to do. Do informational interviews, reach out to alumni , make use of the career center in your university. Do some exploring first 2. Network and network some more. Just like in academia, jobs outside academia are more open to you if you know someone who knows someone who’s hiring. The informational interview is a good chance to network, and then once you figure out what you want to do you can do more focused networking 3. Think about what skills you have that are transferable. After all you have been working all this time and have lots of skills. You definitely need to figure out how to convey that to potential employers and rewrite hour CV into a resume. I’d strongly suggest talking to others before jumping into another certification or degree. We all know more people than we think and there’s lot of ways to network now even in the time of pandemic. PM me if you want some specific sites/suggestions. Good luck !
Which response is better? RESPONSE
|
A
|
POST: What are some good social media sites or accounts for academia? (e.g., the Robert Scoble or TechCrunch of academia) When I was in industry, I stayed informed by following tech blogs and Twitter accounts. Now that I switched over to academia, I feel unaware of what's going on in the larger world of academia outside my field because I'm not sure where to get academic news. (Is "academic news" even a thing?) Even within my field, I tried searching for Twitter and G+ accounts and got nothing. Are there sites out there that could be considered the HN or TechCrunch of academia, or is there some guy that's the Scoble of academia? I know of academia.edu and recently signed up there but that seems to be specific to sharing and discussing research papers, which is cool and will be useful when I start publishing, though not really what I'm looking for now.
RESPONSE A: Maybe [The Chronicle of Higher Education] (http://chronicle.com)? It has acadmic news and stuff, plus if you're looking for a new job, it's certainly one of your go-to places. Maybe not as cutting edge as what you're looking for, but academia is a slower placed institution in general where things are (or should be) pondered, and "real-time" is when you practice caution and double check your findings before you actually go and put things in writing. Dunno... that's how I see it!
RESPONSE B: Moshe Vardi is an indefagitable poster of generalized academia news on his G+ feed: https://plus.google.com/104488217075635760621/posts For your specific subfield, however, you'll probably need to ask your colleages about it.
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.