label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
A | POST: PIs -- how are you dealing with the Great Resignation? Support staff, postdocs, and grad students are hard to recruit and retain these days, due to the relatively poor wages in academia and the red hot private sector job market. I've seen many job postings go unfilled for months (and even years), and PIs eventually returning to teaching or leaving academia altogether due to their inability to staff. How are the PIs on this sub doing? I have turned towards more computational, less labor intensive research for the time being, but I am unsure of the future of grant-based research, if universities demand federal funding, but the feds won't increase award amounts.
RESPONSE A: I'm a tenured PI at a university that people often associate with scientific breakthroughs. This doesn't have as much to do with the Great Resignation, but I'm a little burnt out from the big lab + big grants game. So I've been just doing research myself, rather than: working my ass off to get grants, recruit students and staff, then train them to do work that I can do myself. The downside is less advising and mentorship which I genuinely enjoy, but the upside is way way fewer complications, less stress dealing with personnel situations, and I no longer feel like I'm paying money to give myself more advising work. If I were not tenured, I might have a different attitude, but now I'm totally happy being a "small lab" until things become more favorable to run a big lab again.
RESPONSE B: By leaving my postdoc for industry..
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories.
RESPONSE A: College is for you if the career path you have in mind requires a college degree. A bad experience at one college does not mean you will have a bad experience at another, so don't let a bad experience stop you from following your professional dream. I say this from experience. School and department cultures vary widely, and the surrounding community can also be a big factor. Personally, I'm only happy in big cities (as a student and as a professor), but others prefer a different environment. The major could also be the problem. I have seen some people change majors and find themselves much happier. That said, there are some people who hate school, don't see themselves in any career that requires a bachelor's degree or higher, and have interests and skills that would lend well to a trade (like mechanic, plumber, electrician...). There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but I would strongly encourage the large majority of people to pursue some sort of higher education, be it college, community college, trade school...it's just really hard (though not impossible) to succeed professionally without some sort of degree or credential...And don't let hating school stop you from pursuing a professional dream that requires it.
RESPONSE B: The title is true. Also the other questions in your post are also true. these are not 'either/or' questions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories.
RESPONSE A: The title is true. Also the other questions in your post are also true. these are not 'either/or' questions.
RESPONSE B: >Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Broadly speaking; most colleges and universities are more similar to each other than they are different, and there is a subset of the population that will not be successful in college. >Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Granted, it's entirely possible that people grow up or change, such that college actually *is* realistic at a later time, but at the same time the economic and financial reality of most people is such that college has to happen at a certain time in people's lives. Many can't just put their lives on hold to go back to college later on in life. Same problem broadly applies to grad school.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories.
RESPONSE A: Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?
RESPONSE B: Sometimes. For instance, an adult with a sub-par level of intelligence probably will not do too well studying mathematics (or anything else) at the college level. Your question depends on the individual, with important aspects being capabilities, ambitions, objectives, personality, etc. So there’s no simple answer to your question. That college or that program may have not been the ideal fit for you, or it may be college itself that was the problem.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories.
RESPONSE A: Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?
RESPONSE B: Yes & yes. For some people, college doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit their interests, goals, or talents. For some people, college at a certain place or time is a bad fit and they'll thrive somewhere/time else. Lots of life paths.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories.
RESPONSE A: I don't think it's a question of whether college is for everyone. I think it's a question is "what are workforce needs" and "what standard of general knowledge and skills should be formally attainable and normalized in our social fabric"? Then the question becomes does our k-12 system meet those needs. If not, then post k-12 education must be for everyone.
RESPONSE B: Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks!
RESPONSE A: I have a PhD in psychology (social/personality) and I found that people tended to take notice of who was on campus and who was not. I was able to get involved on a few projects largely because I was around. Then, as people learned I was reliable, I was able to get involved in a lot more collaborations. Some people couldn’t care less if students are around or not, but for those that do care about it, showing up can do a lot for their perception of you. As much as networking at conferences was invaluable, I think the networking within my department gave me a good jumping off point for when I networked elsewhere. Academic communities are small and people talk to each other more than you might think. Sometimes impressing a professor in an adjacent field can mean that people at conferences have already heard good things about you. I also found that being around was helpful whenever I needed another perspective or some help on my work. Sometimes I would explain my reasoning to other grad students just to have them poke holes in it. Overall, I think those perspectives made my thesis stronger and helped prepare me for my defense.
RESPONSE B: I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks!
RESPONSE A: Once the world goes back to normal, there will be a class of networking you won't be able to do if you're constantly away from campus. Interfacing with visiting faculty, with other members of your cohort and in your program, developing secondary contacts through them, etc. Depending on how important that is for you, it can make a difference. A lot of my networking happens through fellow grads or faculty introducing me to people. Additionally, as a historian, I'm not sure I could be anywhere where I don't have reliable access to a trove of books. Meaning I can't work without a library. My University's library doesn't just allow me access to their own books, but is also the institution I'd work with to procure books and items such as microfilm records that my own doesn't possess through systems such as Interlibrary loans. Without access to that, I'm not convinced I'd be nearly as competent as a writer. So for me, being close to the library is absolutely critical to my work. Now the thing about history is that a lot of stuff isn't digitized. Old microfilm records for instance. If you can manage with digital sources entirely for your work, then this isn't such a consideration for you.
RESPONSE B: I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks!
RESPONSE A: I'm in the humanities. I spent five year in town/on campus, teaching for four of those. Then I took a full time job 1,500 miles away and wrote my dissertation in the evenings/weekends. I missed my friends but many of them took similar paths anyway. The only real problem with not being in town was library access, and since I took a faculty position when I left I still had a local library. There was no value at all to "networking" on my home campus because nobody was working in my particular area; I could easily call up or email my committee members (and it would be far easier today to zoom) if I needed something. My intellectual community really ended up being at the university where I worked, not the one where I was still enrolled as a grad student. Once classes were done (three years in my program) the only reason to stay in town was to gain TA experience. My cohort was large and the average time to degree was close to ten years...very few people stayed in town more than five unless they had a partner who was working there or tied to a lab or something. When I left in year five (I finished in eight) we were among the first from my cohort to leave, but almost nobody was left in town when I went back to defend three years later.
RESPONSE B: I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks!
RESPONSE A: Also in the social sciences. While a lot of my research technically never required me to be on campus during grad school, showing your face and being a good citizen in the department — going to seminars, attending reading groups, etc. — matter a *lot* more than many PhD students realize. Faculty definitely notice if you disappear. Besides that, some of the friendships I made with people in my program are among the best I’ve ever found, and that wouldn’t have been possible without the random coffee breaks and the hours spent leaning in each other’s office doorways to complain about how awful everything is. :)
RESPONSE B: İt totally depends on your school, your department, you supervisor, etc, etc. Being on campus during my masters -- which happened to be in Canada (I'm not sure if that is the reason) was very important. A bunch of grad students and occasionally profs would go to the pub after classes every Thursday. Some of the greatest times in my life and wonderful 'networking'. I did my PhD at a Catholic university in the states and the atmosphere was totally different. You go to school to do your stuff and then go home. İ had known one of the profs since we were in undergrad together (i took time off while he went straight through, we are both in our 40s)-- İ was directly told not to call him by his first name when on campus. The unstated rule is that school was not a social environment. As for getting future jobs, i think conferences are the most important thing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks!
RESPONSE A: Also in the social sciences. While a lot of my research technically never required me to be on campus during grad school, showing your face and being a good citizen in the department — going to seminars, attending reading groups, etc. — matter a *lot* more than many PhD students realize. Faculty definitely notice if you disappear. Besides that, some of the friendships I made with people in my program are among the best I’ve ever found, and that wouldn’t have been possible without the random coffee breaks and the hours spent leaning in each other’s office doorways to complain about how awful everything is. :)
RESPONSE B: I have an arts PhD and spent a fair chunk away from campus, as did quite a few others, including my supervisor. I think some things could have been better by being on campus but on that specific campus there was not a lot of potential in terms of networking. I think networking really is useful, there might be future contacts and your dissertation is not the endgame, a job is and that comes through networking. In my case, there were two other PhD students who made life for other students hard, as they were very arrogant. I think I was not the only one who got fed up and decided to work from home. Again, a specific circumstance. My Masters was more useful in networking perspective as I forged more friendships there. Have you considered going one week a month or every two months to campus so you can keep in touch? That way when you come to campus, everything gets more intense and you really use the week to network and all things you could not do off-campus.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings
RESPONSE B: I suggest going as well, but don't stay long. One way to get through it is to just let other people talk about themselves until it's time to leave.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: . lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings
RESPONSE B: >Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. Then don't go. ​ >My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. I am assuming you are in your mid-20s - do you plan to spend decades bending the knee to people ? Is that worth your sense of self-worth?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: I would come up with an excuse and not go. A family issue or other commitment. You don't owe anyone a long explanation. Just say you are happy for the invitation but are not available to attend and wish everyone the best. That stays professional but gets you out of attending the event.
RESPONSE B: It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: Suck it up and go.
RESPONSE B: It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions?
RESPONSE A: Well, you're in the US now. Are you actually going to pay for an expensive plane ticket and go on a 7h+ flight to meet some former colleagues? I wouldn't even do that for colleagues I adored
RESPONSE B: I suggest going as well, but don't stay long. One way to get through it is to just let other people talk about themselves until it's time to leave.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How to leave without screwing yourself over Straight to the point: I'm really not enjoying academia as much as I thought I would. I'm currently in a postdoc position many would dream. The only caveat to the position is that you must publish as much as possible in 2 years. I'm now 1.5 years into it and have not published enough to my standard and likely the uni (1 journal 3 submitted - under review). I have many days of anxiety fuelled thoughts and have had thoughts of depression which were mostly addressed in therapy. However the underlying pressure is obviously still there. I just want out. The thought of applying for grants for the rest of my life with the added pressure of writing papers is just silly to me. I don't think this is a lifestyle for me. I'm pretty entrenched in the faculty now. How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. I'm sorry I couldn't be a better academic.
RESPONSE A: I'm not sure I understand the problem. You have a 2-year position which has almost ended, and you say you don't enjoy the work. So just apply to jobs elsewhere and leave academia. A majority of postdocs don't continue in academia so nobody will be surprised or outraged by this kind of career decision.
RESPONSE B: Yo just go this is a working relationship you do not owe the people anything. I left academia too after my postdoctoral and my PI totally understood. If they don’t it’s still not your problem. I have now an industry job and no one cares about who I did my postdoc with and why I left. Be polite but firm do not let yourself be guilt tripped into staying. Edit: plus not staying (surviving) in academia does make you second class scientist or anything like that! Do not let yourself being told that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: to leave without screwing yourself over Straight to the point: I'm really not enjoying academia as much as I thought I would. I'm currently in a postdoc position many would dream. The only caveat to the position is that you must publish as much as possible in 2 years. I'm now 1.5 years into it and have not published enough to my standard and likely the uni (1 journal 3 submitted - under review). I have many days of anxiety fuelled thoughts and have had thoughts of depression which were mostly addressed in therapy. However the underlying pressure is obviously still there. I just want out. The thought of applying for grants for the rest of my life with the added pressure of writing papers is just silly to me. I don't think this is a lifestyle for me. I'm pretty entrenched in the faculty now. How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. I'm sorry I couldn't be a better academic.
RESPONSE A: I’m in a similar position but at an earlier stage than you. The post doc rouge made me realise these things. Upon reflection I realised that sometimes ties are severed but this does not mean anything negative. There’s a lot of personal growth and positivity in being elegant about your goodbyes. Hard factual truth makes a reality worth living. Be open, be honest, and stand by your words - that you have enjoyed building relationships around those you find yourself with, but for now, your navigating your life toward another direction. This isn’t offensive, it’s powerful. There are far too many academics I interact with who are miserable and you can simply tell they didn’t want to end up where they are. I don’t want to be like that. Also there’s an inherent toxic side to how it works in academia so I don’t find any confusion to how you feel.
RESPONSE B: I'm not sure I understand the problem. You have a 2-year position which has almost ended, and you say you don't enjoy the work. So just apply to jobs elsewhere and leave academia. A majority of postdocs don't continue in academia so nobody will be surprised or outraged by this kind of career decision.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: is that you must publish as much as possible in 2 years. I'm now 1.5 years into it and have not published enough to my standard and likely the uni (1 journal 3 submitted - under review). I have many days of anxiety fuelled thoughts and have had thoughts of depression which were mostly addressed in therapy. However the underlying pressure is obviously still there. I just want out. The thought of applying for grants for the rest of my life with the added pressure of writing papers is just silly to me. I don't think this is a lifestyle for me. I'm pretty entrenched in the faculty now. How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. I'm sorry I couldn't be a better academic.
RESPONSE A: I’m in a similar position but at an earlier stage than you. The post doc rouge made me realise these things. Upon reflection I realised that sometimes ties are severed but this does not mean anything negative. There’s a lot of personal growth and positivity in being elegant about your goodbyes. Hard factual truth makes a reality worth living. Be open, be honest, and stand by your words - that you have enjoyed building relationships around those you find yourself with, but for now, your navigating your life toward another direction. This isn’t offensive, it’s powerful. There are far too many academics I interact with who are miserable and you can simply tell they didn’t want to end up where they are. I don’t want to be like that. Also there’s an inherent toxic side to how it works in academia so I don’t find any confusion to how you feel.
RESPONSE B: Yo just go this is a working relationship you do not owe the people anything. I left academia too after my postdoctoral and my PI totally understood. If they don’t it’s still not your problem. I have now an industry job and no one cares about who I did my postdoc with and why I left. Be polite but firm do not let yourself be guilt tripped into staying. Edit: plus not staying (surviving) in academia does make you second class scientist or anything like that! Do not let yourself being told that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How to leave without screwing yourself over Straight to the point: I'm really not enjoying academia as much as I thought I would. I'm currently in a postdoc position many would dream. The only caveat to the position is that you must publish as much as possible in 2 years. I'm now 1.5 years into it and have not published enough to my standard and likely the uni (1 journal 3 submitted - under review). I have many days of anxiety fuelled thoughts and have had thoughts of depression which were mostly addressed in therapy. However the underlying pressure is obviously still there. I just want out. The thought of applying for grants for the rest of my life with the added pressure of writing papers is just silly to me. I don't think this is a lifestyle for me. I'm pretty entrenched in the faculty now. How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. I'm sorry I couldn't be a better academic.
RESPONSE A: I’m in a similar position but at an earlier stage than you. The post doc rouge made me realise these things. Upon reflection I realised that sometimes ties are severed but this does not mean anything negative. There’s a lot of personal growth and positivity in being elegant about your goodbyes. Hard factual truth makes a reality worth living. Be open, be honest, and stand by your words - that you have enjoyed building relationships around those you find yourself with, but for now, your navigating your life toward another direction. This isn’t offensive, it’s powerful. There are far too many academics I interact with who are miserable and you can simply tell they didn’t want to end up where they are. I don’t want to be like that. Also there’s an inherent toxic side to how it works in academia so I don’t find any confusion to how you feel.
RESPONSE B: You've got six months paid to cover you while you look for a new job. :)
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: to the position is that you must publish as much as possible in 2 years. I'm now 1.5 years into it and have not published enough to my standard and likely the uni (1 journal 3 submitted - under review). I have many days of anxiety fuelled thoughts and have had thoughts of depression which were mostly addressed in therapy. However the underlying pressure is obviously still there. I just want out. The thought of applying for grants for the rest of my life with the added pressure of writing papers is just silly to me. I don't think this is a lifestyle for me. I'm pretty entrenched in the faculty now. How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. I'm sorry I couldn't be a better academic.
RESPONSE A: I’m in a similar position but at an earlier stage than you. The post doc rouge made me realise these things. Upon reflection I realised that sometimes ties are severed but this does not mean anything negative. There’s a lot of personal growth and positivity in being elegant about your goodbyes. Hard factual truth makes a reality worth living. Be open, be honest, and stand by your words - that you have enjoyed building relationships around those you find yourself with, but for now, your navigating your life toward another direction. This isn’t offensive, it’s powerful. There are far too many academics I interact with who are miserable and you can simply tell they didn’t want to end up where they are. I don’t want to be like that. Also there’s an inherent toxic side to how it works in academia so I don’t find any confusion to how you feel.
RESPONSE B: > How do I leave without pissing off my chain of command and without saying I wasn't grateful for this opportunity. By doing it politely and professionally. Start applying for other jobs now. Then when you get one and hand in your notice, tell them you were very grateful for the opportunity, enjoyed working with them, you've learned a lot, etc., but have decided that it's a better fit for you to take your career in a different direction. People leave jobs all the time; they'll understand.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: cademia success stories I hear so many graduate school horror stories and I feel like those are the majority. Are there people who enjoyed their PhD experience? Had a good work life balance? Did not overwork themselves to exhaustion? Took most weekends off? Had good, supportive PIs? I started a PhD in 2014 but quit after 2 years and left with my masters because of mental health problems. I’ve been working in industry/ government since then, and I love it but I realized that my true passion is research and I am happiest doing experiments, and want to get back to grad school and apply to PhD programs. I sorely miss being in the lab doing experiments. I’ll be quite a bit older (30-31 when I start) but I’m not too concerned about that, in fact I think my experiences and perspective will help. My scientific skills are better than they were too so I feel ready. However, I’m concerned about the transition to life back in academia, in terms of the lifestyle. Also long term, I’m more inclined to an academic career although most don’t recommend it - I have an open mind for sure but I’ve realised in the 4 years of working in industry that it’s not my thing. I’m in USA and my field is biophysics/biochemistry. Many of my friends in Europe enjoyed their PhD experience but I know it’s different in USA. I’d love to hear about some good experiences! TLDR: looking to go back to get my PhD after 4 years in industry, want to hear about positive PhD experiences.
RESPONSE A: I had a wonderful PhD experience. I did really cool science that helps makes the world a better place, I lived somewhere beautiful with lots of things to do plus I got to travel pretty often to wonderful places. My lab was full of fun and brilliant people that I loved spending time with and my advisor is someone I really look up to. I would repeat those years in a heartbeat.
RESPONSE B: 90% of the time I worked 10am-4pm. I graduated on time despite taking leave to have a baby and am about to be TT faculty at a university you have certainly heard of. Most of grad school was good. The hard times were REALLY hard though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Enjoyable PhD/academia success stories I hear so many graduate school horror stories and I feel like those are the majority. Are there people who enjoyed their PhD experience? Had a good work life balance? Did not overwork themselves to exhaustion? Took most weekends off? Had good, supportive PIs? I started a PhD in 2014 but quit after 2 years and left with my masters because of mental health problems. I’ve been working in industry/ government since then, and I love it but I realized that my true passion is research and I am happiest doing experiments, and want to get back to grad school and apply to PhD programs. I sorely miss being in the lab doing experiments. I’ll be quite a bit older (30-31 when I start) but I’m not too concerned about that, in fact I think my experiences and perspective will help. My scientific skills are better than they were too so I feel ready. However, I’m concerned about the transition to life back in academia, in terms of the lifestyle. Also long term, I’m more inclined to an academic career although most don’t recommend it - I have an open mind for sure but I’ve realised in the 4 years of working in industry that it’s not my thing. I’m in USA and my field is biophysics/biochemistry. Many of my friends in Europe enjoyed their PhD experience but I know it’s different in USA. I’d love to hear about some good experiences! TLDR: looking to go back to get my PhD after 4 years in industry, want to hear about positive PhD experiences.
RESPONSE A: I had a great PhD experience! Four of the best years of my life.
RESPONSE B: 90% of the time I worked 10am-4pm. I graduated on time despite taking leave to have a baby and am about to be TT faculty at a university you have certainly heard of. Most of grad school was good. The hard times were REALLY hard though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: ? Did not overwork themselves to exhaustion? Took most weekends off? Had good, supportive PIs? I started a PhD in 2014 but quit after 2 years and left with my masters because of mental health problems. I’ve been working in industry/ government since then, and I love it but I realized that my true passion is research and I am happiest doing experiments, and want to get back to grad school and apply to PhD programs. I sorely miss being in the lab doing experiments. I’ll be quite a bit older (30-31 when I start) but I’m not too concerned about that, in fact I think my experiences and perspective will help. My scientific skills are better than they were too so I feel ready. However, I’m concerned about the transition to life back in academia, in terms of the lifestyle. Also long term, I’m more inclined to an academic career although most don’t recommend it - I have an open mind for sure but I’ve realised in the 4 years of working in industry that it’s not my thing. I’m in USA and my field is biophysics/biochemistry. Many of my friends in Europe enjoyed their PhD experience but I know it’s different in USA. I’d love to hear about some good experiences! TLDR: looking to go back to get my PhD after 4 years in industry, want to hear about positive PhD experiences.
RESPONSE A: 90% of the time I worked 10am-4pm. I graduated on time despite taking leave to have a baby and am about to be TT faculty at a university you have certainly heard of. Most of grad school was good. The hard times were REALLY hard though.
RESPONSE B: I just finished mine and had the time of my life. I met so many incredible people - colleagues and mentors - who I now call my friends. I truly feel like I’ve found my calling. I started grad school at 32 and was very sure of what I wanted, even though I had no idea how much I’d grow throughout the period of my studies. I had an incredible supervisor who treated me with respect and shared his networks and knowledge with me. I know others who also had a great experience. It’s important to hear the positive stories too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: (30-31 when I start) but I’m not too concerned about that, in fact I think my experiences and perspective will help. My scientific skills are better than they were too so I feel ready. However, I’m concerned about the transition to life back in academia, in terms of the lifestyle. Also long term, I’m more inclined to an academic career although most don’t recommend it - I have an open mind for sure but I’ve realised in the 4 years of working in industry that it’s not my thing. I’m in USA and my field is biophysics/biochemistry. Many of my friends in Europe enjoyed their PhD experience but I know it’s different in USA. I’d love to hear about some good experiences! TLDR: looking to go back to get my PhD after 4 years in industry, want to hear about positive PhD experiences.
RESPONSE A: Hi! I'm currently a final year PhD student in the UK and, as much as I do complain sometimes, I do really enjoy it. I think the most important thing is a good, understanding and experienced supervisor who you can be open with. My supervisor has been great and although she pushes us to succeed, there are no crazy deadlines or expectations as she recognises that our mental health is important. She often says that in the end we are here to learn, so it's natural to make mistakes. I personally keep a work life balance by doing the same hours as my partner. He also has a job with long hours so it works. I'm working longer now as I am writing up but exercise is keeping me sane through lockdowns! Also (sounds obvious) but do something you love! It makes it so much easier to self motivate. I've met a lot of PhDs that slog through 4 years because they think the topic is important but the people that are genuinely excited by the area seem to happiest! Good luck, wish you all the best on your PhD journey!
RESPONSE B: 90% of the time I worked 10am-4pm. I graduated on time despite taking leave to have a baby and am about to be TT faculty at a university you have certainly heard of. Most of grad school was good. The hard times were REALLY hard though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: ion? Took most weekends off? Had good, supportive PIs? I started a PhD in 2014 but quit after 2 years and left with my masters because of mental health problems. I’ve been working in industry/ government since then, and I love it but I realized that my true passion is research and I am happiest doing experiments, and want to get back to grad school and apply to PhD programs. I sorely miss being in the lab doing experiments. I’ll be quite a bit older (30-31 when I start) but I’m not too concerned about that, in fact I think my experiences and perspective will help. My scientific skills are better than they were too so I feel ready. However, I’m concerned about the transition to life back in academia, in terms of the lifestyle. Also long term, I’m more inclined to an academic career although most don’t recommend it - I have an open mind for sure but I’ve realised in the 4 years of working in industry that it’s not my thing. I’m in USA and my field is biophysics/biochemistry. Many of my friends in Europe enjoyed their PhD experience but I know it’s different in USA. I’d love to hear about some good experiences! TLDR: looking to go back to get my PhD after 4 years in industry, want to hear about positive PhD experiences.
RESPONSE A: I'm doing my PhD in the UK, year 2 of 3, and I love it! I actually am not looking forward to graduating because it will mean leaving, though I'm sure a postdoc will be fun too. I take most weekends off, my supervisors are wonderful and supportive, the culture is positive, the city is quaint and adorable, and my department actively encourages us to take time off. Things are a bit different with covid but I would always make evening and weekend time for non academic things, and have a non academic friendship group which keeps me sane and grounded.
RESPONSE B: 90% of the time I worked 10am-4pm. I graduated on time despite taking leave to have a baby and am about to be TT faculty at a university you have certainly heard of. Most of grad school was good. The hard times were REALLY hard though.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: application after I missed the true deadline. Do I have options?" **Update to previous post regarding a program that had posted the wrong PhD application deadline: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/a7d269/a_phd_program_posted_the_wrong_deadline_on_their/ ​ After hearing from you all and talking with a mentor, I ended up sending my application materials to the two faculty members I was applying to work with, explaining my situation, and asking for their help. It appeared to work at first--a professor responded sympathetically and said he would do what he could, as I must not have been the only applicant to miss the deadline. The head of the graduate college (who had been ignoring all emails until this point) then got in touch with me to apologize for being out of the country and that he would make a decision after the holidays. So, I was hopeful someone was working on my behalf behind the scenes. But I got the final word a few days ago: the university says they have to treat the true deadline as final, and won't accept my application. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, especially since this was my top program and applying to others without being considered at my top choice feels a little empty at this point. But I'm tired of fighting it. Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone for their responses and advice. Here's to new things in the new year...!
RESPONSE A: Fucking ridiculous. I'd drop a line to the professor who you've been in contact with: "Dear Professor XYZ, Thank you for your help with this matter. Unfortunately, ABC of the Graduate College has just informed me that my application will not be considered after all. I was very disappointed to hear this as I was hoping to work with you." Let them know that the grad college is fucking up the admissions process to their department.
RESPONSE B: what dicks. name and shame.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: hd_program_posted_the_wrong_deadline_on_their/ ​ After hearing from you all and talking with a mentor, I ended up sending my application materials to the two faculty members I was applying to work with, explaining my situation, and asking for their help. It appeared to work at first--a professor responded sympathetically and said he would do what he could, as I must not have been the only applicant to miss the deadline. The head of the graduate college (who had been ignoring all emails until this point) then got in touch with me to apologize for being out of the country and that he would make a decision after the holidays. So, I was hopeful someone was working on my behalf behind the scenes. But I got the final word a few days ago: the university says they have to treat the true deadline as final, and won't accept my application. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, especially since this was my top program and applying to others without being considered at my top choice feels a little empty at this point. But I'm tired of fighting it. Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone for their responses and advice. Here's to new things in the new year...!
RESPONSE A: Do you really want to go to a program that won’t properly resolve their mistakes?
RESPONSE B: > Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Word of advice: if this is enough to turn you off of grad school, don't go. There are many setbacks and frustrations ahead if you do. I'd only recommend grad school to people who are completely sure it's what they want, who know what it entails, and who know the job prospects afterwards. :) But unlike others on this thread, I wouldn't recommend naming and shaming unless you're 100% sure it either would never be linked to you or that you don't want to try again in the future. Sorry you had this experience. :(
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: only applicant to miss the deadline. The head of the graduate college (who had been ignoring all emails until this point) then got in touch with me to apologize for being out of the country and that he would make a decision after the holidays. So, I was hopeful someone was working on my behalf behind the scenes. But I got the final word a few days ago: the university says they have to treat the true deadline as final, and won't accept my application. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, especially since this was my top program and applying to others without being considered at my top choice feels a little empty at this point. But I'm tired of fighting it. Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone for their responses and advice. Here's to new things in the new year...!
RESPONSE A: I'm really sorry for you and I'm sure that you will find a better opportunity somewhere else. Also, while this might have been your top program, I think that what happened made you reevaluate the program and you might have been giving them credit and expectations that they don't deserve. Being a graduate student myself, let me assure you that you don't want to join a program with such bureaucracy. Lack of flexibility is one of the big hurdles that could lead you to quit med way. All in all, best of luck with your career/academia journey!
RESPONSE B: > Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Word of advice: if this is enough to turn you off of grad school, don't go. There are many setbacks and frustrations ahead if you do. I'd only recommend grad school to people who are completely sure it's what they want, who know what it entails, and who know the job prospects afterwards. :) But unlike others on this thread, I wouldn't recommend naming and shaming unless you're 100% sure it either would never be linked to you or that you don't want to try again in the future. Sorry you had this experience. :(
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Update: "A PhD program posted the wrong deadline on their website. They won't consider my application after I missed the true deadline. Do I have options?" **Update to previous post regarding a program that had posted the wrong PhD application deadline: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/a7d269/a_phd_program_posted_the_wrong_deadline_on_their/ ​ After hearing from you all and talking with a mentor, I ended up sending my application materials to the two faculty members I was applying to work with, explaining my situation, and asking for their help. It appeared to work at first--a professor responded sympathetically and said he would do what he could, as I must not have been the only applicant to miss the deadline. The head of the graduate college (who had been ignoring all emails until this point) then got in touch with me to apologize for being out of the country and that he would make a decision after the holidays. So, I was hopeful someone was working on my behalf behind the scenes. But I got the final word a few days ago: the university says they have to treat the true deadline as final, and won't accept my application. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, especially since this was my top program and applying to others without being considered at my top choice feels a little empty at this point. But I'm tired of fighting it. Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone for their responses and advice. Here's to new things in the new year...!
RESPONSE A: Welcome to academia where a low level admin is having a power trip (I assure you, no dean likely saw your complaint). Contact your potential PI and let them deal with the stupidity.
RESPONSE B: Do you really want to go to a program that won’t properly resolve their mistakes?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Update: "A PhD program posted the wrong deadline on their website. They won't consider my application after I missed the true deadline. Do I have options?" **Update to previous post regarding a program that had posted the wrong PhD application deadline: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAcademia/comments/a7d269/a_phd_program_posted_the_wrong_deadline_on_their/ ​ After hearing from you all and talking with a mentor, I ended up sending my application materials to the two faculty members I was applying to work with, explaining my situation, and asking for their help. It appeared to work at first--a professor responded sympathetically and said he would do what he could, as I must not have been the only applicant to miss the deadline. The head of the graduate college (who had been ignoring all emails until this point) then got in touch with me to apologize for being out of the country and that he would make a decision after the holidays. So, I was hopeful someone was working on my behalf behind the scenes. But I got the final word a few days ago: the university says they have to treat the true deadline as final, and won't accept my application. To say I'm disappointed is an understatement, especially since this was my top program and applying to others without being considered at my top choice feels a little empty at this point. But I'm tired of fighting it. Hard not to feel completely turned off by academia after all this, too, so also considering applying to other jobs. Anyway, I wanted to thank everyone for their responses and advice. Here's to new things in the new year...!
RESPONSE A: Get the department chair for the program you were applying for involved as well. This is absolutely unacceptable.
RESPONSE B: Welcome to academia where a low level admin is having a power trip (I assure you, no dean likely saw your complaint). Contact your potential PI and let them deal with the stupidity.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: during their shifts, and I let them once, which I know I probably shouldn't have. However, they have now asked to take every quiz remotely for the rest of the semester, and keep telling me that they need the shifts and want to miss every class for the rest of the semester as they have been offered shifts at this time. It's an afternoon class so not at an unreasonable time. They're a high B/low A grade student, so they are keeping up, but I'm just reluctant to allow this as I don't think it's fair that they miss every class when others have to come, as this isn't a legit excuse, but when I try to broach the issue with them, they tell me that they need to work. I understand that they are in a difficult situation, but I don't want them to miss every single class, as we have group and project work coming up, too?
RESPONSE A: You made what you thought would be an exception (unwise in hindsight), and now they're asking for it to become the norm. You can say no to that. Especially if participation (via physical presence) is a part of the requirements for the class. But also you're the TA, not the instructor, surely you can kick this question up to the instructor in charge of the class and let them make the call. I'm sympathetic to the needs of some students to work while in school. However you don't know how many of the other students actually coming to the class also need to work, but who have made the decision to prioritise/schedule their time to make it to the class. As you say, it is unfair to them that you would bend the rules for this one student.
RESPONSE B: I've been dealing with this more among pre nursing students who are working at a hospital. I understand students need to work but they do need to attend their classes. In most healthcare fields right now there is a shortage and therefore they should be able to find an alternative shift. The money is really good in many positions and they are getting bombarded with pleas to help out, but I talk with them about their long term goals and the consequences of not being able to attend or pass their classes.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: , but when I try to broach the issue with them, they tell me that they need to work. I understand that they are in a difficult situation, but I don't want them to miss every single class, as we have group and project work coming up, too?
RESPONSE A: You made what you thought would be an exception (unwise in hindsight), and now they're asking for it to become the norm. You can say no to that. Especially if participation (via physical presence) is a part of the requirements for the class. But also you're the TA, not the instructor, surely you can kick this question up to the instructor in charge of the class and let them make the call. I'm sympathetic to the needs of some students to work while in school. However you don't know how many of the other students actually coming to the class also need to work, but who have made the decision to prioritise/schedule their time to make it to the class. As you say, it is unfair to them that you would bend the rules for this one student.
RESPONSE B: As someone who works full-time and goes to school full time, this is something I can definitely relate to. No one wants to work while they are a student but sometimes life isn't perfect. Everyone's situation is different for me I would work my school schedule around work and not the other way around. As much as I want to power through school and graduate this isn't an option because I have to pay the bills somehow. Profs who have understood this have been the best and profs who didn't I would avoid. It's not easy and not fun but I urge you to be understanding. If something can be done remotely what's the point of making them come in? At the same time, You do have to put your foot down if it's something you cannot allow being done remotely and you need them in the class. I think one thing the pandemic has taught us is that remote work in this day and age should be available. If the work is getting done that's all that matters. I understand if you say no because that creates more work for you again you have the power and you should be able to say no when you want to.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: keeps asking to miss class for extra shifts as they have stated that they need the hours. They keep begging to take the quizzes remotely during their shifts, and I let them once, which I know I probably shouldn't have. However, they have now asked to take every quiz remotely for the rest of the semester, and keep telling me that they need the shifts and want to miss every class for the rest of the semester as they have been offered shifts at this time. It's an afternoon class so not at an unreasonable time. They're a high B/low A grade student, so they are keeping up, but I'm just reluctant to allow this as I don't think it's fair that they miss every class when others have to come, as this isn't a legit excuse, but when I try to broach the issue with them, they tell me that they need to work. I understand that they are in a difficult situation, but I don't want them to miss every single class, as we have group and project work coming up, too?
RESPONSE A: The answer from the beginning should have been no. If they choose to work during class, that's their choice. But it comes at the cost of not being part of the class and not being able to complete the in-laws activities (quizzes or otherwise). They signed up for the class. Not for a remote independent study on their schedule.
RESPONSE B: You made what you thought would be an exception (unwise in hindsight), and now they're asking for it to become the norm. You can say no to that. Especially if participation (via physical presence) is a part of the requirements for the class. But also you're the TA, not the instructor, surely you can kick this question up to the instructor in charge of the class and let them make the call. I'm sympathetic to the needs of some students to work while in school. However you don't know how many of the other students actually coming to the class also need to work, but who have made the decision to prioritise/schedule their time to make it to the class. As you say, it is unfair to them that you would bend the rules for this one student.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: the students in my section has a job in healthcare, and keeps asking to miss class for extra shifts as they have stated that they need the hours. They keep begging to take the quizzes remotely during their shifts, and I let them once, which I know I probably shouldn't have. However, they have now asked to take every quiz remotely for the rest of the semester, and keep telling me that they need the shifts and want to miss every class for the rest of the semester as they have been offered shifts at this time. It's an afternoon class so not at an unreasonable time. They're a high B/low A grade student, so they are keeping up, but I'm just reluctant to allow this as I don't think it's fair that they miss every class when others have to come, as this isn't a legit excuse, but when I try to broach the issue with them, they tell me that they need to work. I understand that they are in a difficult situation, but I don't want them to miss every single class, as we have group and project work coming up, too?
RESPONSE A: You made what you thought would be an exception (unwise in hindsight), and now they're asking for it to become the norm. You can say no to that. Especially if participation (via physical presence) is a part of the requirements for the class. But also you're the TA, not the instructor, surely you can kick this question up to the instructor in charge of the class and let them make the call. I'm sympathetic to the needs of some students to work while in school. However you don't know how many of the other students actually coming to the class also need to work, but who have made the decision to prioritise/schedule their time to make it to the class. As you say, it is unfair to them that you would bend the rules for this one student.
RESPONSE B: Not sure why a university class would require attendance to a lecture. I get wanting them to show up for testing or whatever. But if they paid to be there, can't they choose to show up to lecture or not? If they don't get their class work done, they fail.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: and keep telling me that they need the shifts and want to miss every class for the rest of the semester as they have been offered shifts at this time. It's an afternoon class so not at an unreasonable time. They're a high B/low A grade student, so they are keeping up, but I'm just reluctant to allow this as I don't think it's fair that they miss every class when others have to come, as this isn't a legit excuse, but when I try to broach the issue with them, they tell me that they need to work. I understand that they are in a difficult situation, but I don't want them to miss every single class, as we have group and project work coming up, too?
RESPONSE A: You made what you thought would be an exception (unwise in hindsight), and now they're asking for it to become the norm. You can say no to that. Especially if participation (via physical presence) is a part of the requirements for the class. But also you're the TA, not the instructor, surely you can kick this question up to the instructor in charge of the class and let them make the call. I'm sympathetic to the needs of some students to work while in school. However you don't know how many of the other students actually coming to the class also need to work, but who have made the decision to prioritise/schedule their time to make it to the class. As you say, it is unfair to them that you would bend the rules for this one student.
RESPONSE B: I would tell them that it’s ultimately up to them to decide whether to prioritize the class or work but that they need to deal with the consequences of that decision. Making up a quiz once can happen based on the TA or professor’s discretion, but it’s not an accommodation that can be made repeatedly because it’s unfair to the class as a whole. If they can still pass the class while receiving zeroes on all future quizzes, that’s an option. Dropping the class is also an option. Taking fewer shots is also an option. It’s their choice, but you can’t get “the best of each option with no consequences.”
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Why aren’t phd students paid more? This certainly isn’t for all disciplines, but I recently commented on another post and drew a correlation between STEM PhD students and college athletes... at some schools which receive grant money, this seems to hold valid parallels. The value of the grants these labs pull in is very much so like college football players/teams pulling in vast streams of revenue for big ten schools during their sports season through games merchandise etc... are discussions ever had about what’s fair?
RESPONSE A: I often wonder this too, because phds can be 6-7 years too. That’s a long time to be paid minimum wage. I’m assuming you’re referring to US stipends? I think it’s because we’re technically students, I don’t know any students who get paid well. Edit: I just knew saying minimum wage would start a whole thing. A bunch of my grad school friends just had a whole discussion about it😂 not sure what we ended on
RESPONSE B: Because at existing wages they get a surplus of applicants.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Why aren’t phd students paid more? This certainly isn’t for all disciplines, but I recently commented on another post and drew a correlation between STEM PhD students and college athletes... at some schools which receive grant money, this seems to hold valid parallels. The value of the grants these labs pull in is very much so like college football players/teams pulling in vast streams of revenue for big ten schools during their sports season through games merchandise etc... are discussions ever had about what’s fair?
RESPONSE A: Because they agree to it.
RESPONSE B: Because at existing wages they get a surplus of applicants.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Why aren’t phd students paid more? This certainly isn’t for all disciplines, but I recently commented on another post and drew a correlation between STEM PhD students and college athletes... at some schools which receive grant money, this seems to hold valid parallels. The value of the grants these labs pull in is very much so like college football players/teams pulling in vast streams of revenue for big ten schools during their sports season through games merchandise etc... are discussions ever had about what’s fair?
RESPONSE A: Because at existing wages they get a surplus of applicants.
RESPONSE B: some schools have grad student unions to negotiate marginally better wages, and which definitely aim to get livable wages for grad students. it’s disappointing to say the least that students have to sacrifice financial security for several years in order to pursue higher ed. not to mention the usual added costs of insurance, student fees, etc.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: a correlation between STEM PhD students and college athletes... at some schools which receive grant money, this seems to hold valid parallels. The value of the grants these labs pull in is very much so like college football players/teams pulling in vast streams of revenue for big ten schools during their sports season through games merchandise etc... are discussions ever had about what’s fair?
RESPONSE A: Because they agree to it.
RESPONSE B: Grants aren't given because you're employing/training students (most of the time). They're given to make progress on a scientific endeavor. Given the cost of tuition (which many times needs to be paid for by grant funds as a behind-the-scenes tuition waiver) it can be more expensive to pay a graduate student the current stipend than to hire a full time professional researcher (post-doc, research technician). Also, for what it's worth, I only make double my PhD stipend as a faculty member, and it's not that uncommon for folks to have to take a salary cut moving from a well-compensated post-doc to a faculty position, especially if they're not at a top university. ::edit:: Thought of two more points to add: That said, the major reason stipends haven't increased is because they're paid off of grants which... haven't increased. I know a ton of faculty who are having to take cuts to their own salary (not paying themselves summer salary from grants) to afford the budget for a graduate stipend as is. It used to be a major NIH or NSF grant could fund multiple students, now it can barely fund the stipend and research supplies for one student. Finally I think you're vastly overestimating the "vast streams of revenue" that grad students or even research as a whole pull in for most schools. Chances are, the school pulls in more revenue from tuition in a section of Intro Philosophy than they do for a whole research lab's grants. This is especially true because (depending on contract) the majority of grant money doesn't go to the school: it's spent by the school and goes to other people.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: 26% of Cambridge's PhDs are fully self-funded This is from this infographic from the University of Cambridge's 2020/21 funding site. As an overall percentage, I suppose is not unheard of. But what I find astonishing is that on average 43% of the Humanities PhDs are fully self-funded. Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? Also, the job market for the Humanities can be tricky as it is so there's no guarantee this will pay off. Because, at least in STEM, the person could specialise and switch directly to industry.
RESPONSE A: >Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? International students, who sometimes account for 25-30% of all students at many Western Unis, spend tens of thousands per year for tuition at subpar universities, subpar programs and get ZERO for experience. Spending tens of thousands at one of the worlds best universities and getting world class PhD experience will produce a very good return on investment.
RESPONSE B: I don't know the figures but I am pretty sure self-funded would be the norm and not the exception at my university in Australia. There are national and school stipends but the candidates way outnumber what is available. I was self-funded for a time and earned plenty to survive through tutoring (TA) and marking.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: 26% of Cambridge's PhDs are fully self-funded This is from this infographic from the University of Cambridge's 2020/21 funding site. As an overall percentage, I suppose is not unheard of. But what I find astonishing is that on average 43% of the Humanities PhDs are fully self-funded. Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? Also, the job market for the Humanities can be tricky as it is so there's no guarantee this will pay off. Because, at least in STEM, the person could specialise and switch directly to industry.
RESPONSE A: This blew my mind. I’m at a different major institution and we have 0 self funded PhDs.
RESPONSE B: I did a half a year of self funded study at a Russell group school. Turned down Cambridge (also a self funded offer) to work with an amazing supervisor. After not getting the very competitive funding for international students about 6 months in, I realized it was a mistake and returned home. I don't regret taking the chance and pursuing a dream but I was right to call it and don't regret that either. I just felt extremely underappreciated by the institution and knew I wouldn't make back what I was going to go into debt for.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: 26% of Cambridge's PhDs are fully self-funded This is from this infographic from the University of Cambridge's 2020/21 funding site. As an overall percentage, I suppose is not unheard of. But what I find astonishing is that on average 43% of the Humanities PhDs are fully self-funded. Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? Also, the job market for the Humanities can be tricky as it is so there's no guarantee this will pay off. Because, at least in STEM, the person could specialise and switch directly to industry.
RESPONSE A: I don't know the figures but I am pretty sure self-funded would be the norm and not the exception at my university in Australia. There are national and school stipends but the candidates way outnumber what is available. I was self-funded for a time and earned plenty to survive through tutoring (TA) and marking.
RESPONSE B: I did a half a year of self funded study at a Russell group school. Turned down Cambridge (also a self funded offer) to work with an amazing supervisor. After not getting the very competitive funding for international students about 6 months in, I realized it was a mistake and returned home. I don't regret taking the chance and pursuing a dream but I was right to call it and don't regret that either. I just felt extremely underappreciated by the institution and knew I wouldn't make back what I was going to go into debt for.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: 26% of Cambridge's PhDs are fully self-funded This is from this infographic from the University of Cambridge's 2020/21 funding site. As an overall percentage, I suppose is not unheard of. But what I find astonishing is that on average 43% of the Humanities PhDs are fully self-funded. Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? Also, the job market for the Humanities can be tricky as it is so there's no guarantee this will pay off. Because, at least in STEM, the person could specialise and switch directly to industry.
RESPONSE A: I don't know the figures but I am pretty sure self-funded would be the norm and not the exception at my university in Australia. There are national and school stipends but the candidates way outnumber what is available. I was self-funded for a time and earned plenty to survive through tutoring (TA) and marking.
RESPONSE B: It is super hard to tell from this infographic where the "self-funded" students are in their degrees. Like, are these people who had scholarships but have run out and are now funding the final stages of their degree (common at my university in Canada, where we have 3 years of guaranteed funding, but students may not finish within the time). It makes quite a difference if this is a snapshot of "what's your funding this year" vs "what was the funding for your entire degree".
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: 26% of Cambridge's PhDs are fully self-funded This is from this infographic from the University of Cambridge's 2020/21 funding site. As an overall percentage, I suppose is not unheard of. But what I find astonishing is that on average 43% of the Humanities PhDs are fully self-funded. Unless someone is independently very wealthy, isn't this a big financial risk to take? Not to mention paying to work? Also, the job market for the Humanities can be tricky as it is so there's no guarantee this will pay off. Because, at least in STEM, the person could specialise and switch directly to industry.
RESPONSE A: I don't know the figures but I am pretty sure self-funded would be the norm and not the exception at my university in Australia. There are national and school stipends but the candidates way outnumber what is available. I was self-funded for a time and earned plenty to survive through tutoring (TA) and marking.
RESPONSE B: This blew my mind. I’m at a different major institution and we have 0 self funded PhDs.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How do researchers stay up to date on all the literature in the STEM field? There is so much to read and all the papers are soooo long. I don't get how you can digest all those papers without spending a significant amount of time parsing through it.
RESPONSE A: We don't digest them all. I have alerts set up on PubMed for certain topics. I also rely on my colleagues, Twitter, journal clubs, conferences to keep up with the latest in my field. What comes through those filters gets triaged by reading the abstract and then I only drill into the subset that is most relevant to my personal research goals, which by necessity are narrow.
RESPONSE B: Nobody reads every paper. What people do is browse preprint archives like arxiv.org for papers that have just come out. Usually you will only read the abstract and maybe also a bit of the introduction and conclusion and look at the figures. If it looks especially interesting people may look into a paper in more detail, but that's only a handful of papers per month, tops. Aside from that, seminars, workshops and conferences and talking to the people there are good ways of keeping track of what's happening.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How do researchers stay up to date on all the literature in the STEM field? There is so much to read and all the papers are soooo long. I don't get how you can digest all those papers without spending a significant amount of time parsing through it.
RESPONSE A: Well you have the wrong idea, you are saying “all the literature in the stem field” obviously no human can do that. You only read the papers that have to do with your specific field. Also, many people do in fact “spend a significant amount of time parsing through it”. Literature reviews are part of graduate school for a reason. Also no one is going through memorizing every aspect of a paper, you get wat u need from it and move on.
RESPONSE B: We don't digest them all. I have alerts set up on PubMed for certain topics. I also rely on my colleagues, Twitter, journal clubs, conferences to keep up with the latest in my field. What comes through those filters gets triaged by reading the abstract and then I only drill into the subset that is most relevant to my personal research goals, which by necessity are narrow.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How do researchers stay up to date on all the literature in the STEM field? There is so much to read and all the papers are soooo long. I don't get how you can digest all those papers without spending a significant amount of time parsing through it.
RESPONSE A: I honestly, don't think I've read more than 5 papers to completion..ever? I have a good pulse on the work that emerges in my immediate subdiscipline, but in reality, there's no reason to keep up to date with the *wholeee* STEM field! That would be counterproductive and wasteful IMO. Reading papers: Intros/abstracts/conclusions (digging deeper when necessary) Attending conferences, colloquiums, talks, collaborations
RESPONSE B: People by and large don't actually read the literature.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How do researchers stay up to date on all the literature in the STEM field? There is so much to read and all the papers are soooo long. I don't get how you can digest all those papers without spending a significant amount of time parsing through it.
RESPONSE A: People by and large don't actually read the literature.
RESPONSE B: Well you have the wrong idea, you are saying “all the literature in the stem field” obviously no human can do that. You only read the papers that have to do with your specific field. Also, many people do in fact “spend a significant amount of time parsing through it”. Literature reviews are part of graduate school for a reason. Also no one is going through memorizing every aspect of a paper, you get wat u need from it and move on.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How do researchers stay up to date on all the literature in the STEM field? There is so much to read and all the papers are soooo long. I don't get how you can digest all those papers without spending a significant amount of time parsing through it.
RESPONSE A: People by and large don't actually read the literature.
RESPONSE B: No one actually does. Most people only deeply read things that are directly relevant to whatever they're working on. Those are easy because you probably already know the techniques and a lot of the cited papers. Then you get a more surface level gist of what's going on in other parts of the field through talks and conferences.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Have your academic pursuits ever cost you relationships? Context: Recently left a 2 year relationship because distance couldn't keep working (I'm studying for a masters and she worked a lot, so were seeing eachother less frequently). The final straw was my accepting a PhD at the end of this course, which she'd supported my intention to do throughout, but the prospect of several more years of long-distance was too much. Have any of you had similar experiences? How did you move past them?
RESPONSE A: Doing LDR to start my PhD 10 years into my relationship made things rocky, but we pulled through.
RESPONSE B: Yes. My 15 month relationship ended a month ago. I just couldn’t do both. I was exhausted. I started neglecting his needs in order to satisfy my own - things like needing a night to myself after a long week, etc. It just created issues because it started to seem like I was always making excuses not to see him, but I honestly was just so fucking tired from school that I had nothing left in me to make someone else as happy as they deserve.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Have your academic pursuits ever cost you relationships? Context: Recently left a 2 year relationship because distance couldn't keep working (I'm studying for a masters and she worked a lot, so were seeing eachother less frequently). The final straw was my accepting a PhD at the end of this course, which she'd supported my intention to do throughout, but the prospect of several more years of long-distance was too much. Have any of you had similar experiences? How did you move past them?
RESPONSE A: We pursued MS on opposite sides of the country. Tried to make it work but couldn't. It sucked at first, but I doubled down on my research, got into some new activities in what little free time I had, and had friends to lean on when it was tough. I think time is the biggest factor. Keep your head up! It gets better!
RESPONSE B: Yes. My 15 month relationship ended a month ago. I just couldn’t do both. I was exhausted. I started neglecting his needs in order to satisfy my own - things like needing a night to myself after a long week, etc. It just created issues because it started to seem like I was always making excuses not to see him, but I honestly was just so fucking tired from school that I had nothing left in me to make someone else as happy as they deserve.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Have your academic pursuits ever cost you relationships? Context: Recently left a 2 year relationship because distance couldn't keep working (I'm studying for a masters and she worked a lot, so were seeing eachother less frequently). The final straw was my accepting a PhD at the end of this course, which she'd supported my intention to do throughout, but the prospect of several more years of long-distance was too much. Have any of you had similar experiences? How did you move past them?
RESPONSE A: Gods, the lack of roots you have while pursuing postgrad opportunities is oftentimes brutal. My MA and PhD are certainly partially to blame for the ending of my marriage, which, ultimately I was very glad for because she turned out to be an awful human. My academic pursuits meant my attention was no longer on her fully, which she disliked, and I think she resented my drive and success (if you could call it that) some as well. That, combined with serious mental illness and a shitty character led to her to cheat for almost two years before I found out and ended it. It was she who pushed me to move over 600 miles away to start my PhD. I thought it was because she cared, but really it was because it would make it a lot easier to continue to cheat and have a spouse who financially supported her. It wasn't easy at all, but I'm so glad I was able to figure out what a horrible person she was sooner rather than later. So I guess...academia can cost you relationships, but I'd like to think it's for the best most times.
RESPONSE B: Doing LDR to start my PhD 10 years into my relationship made things rocky, but we pulled through.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Have your academic pursuits ever cost you relationships? Context: Recently left a 2 year relationship because distance couldn't keep working (I'm studying for a masters and she worked a lot, so were seeing eachother less frequently). The final straw was my accepting a PhD at the end of this course, which she'd supported my intention to do throughout, but the prospect of several more years of long-distance was too much. Have any of you had similar experiences? How did you move past them?
RESPONSE A: Gods, the lack of roots you have while pursuing postgrad opportunities is oftentimes brutal. My MA and PhD are certainly partially to blame for the ending of my marriage, which, ultimately I was very glad for because she turned out to be an awful human. My academic pursuits meant my attention was no longer on her fully, which she disliked, and I think she resented my drive and success (if you could call it that) some as well. That, combined with serious mental illness and a shitty character led to her to cheat for almost two years before I found out and ended it. It was she who pushed me to move over 600 miles away to start my PhD. I thought it was because she cared, but really it was because it would make it a lot easier to continue to cheat and have a spouse who financially supported her. It wasn't easy at all, but I'm so glad I was able to figure out what a horrible person she was sooner rather than later. So I guess...academia can cost you relationships, but I'd like to think it's for the best most times.
RESPONSE B: In my experience romantic relationships tend not to survive PhDs. Everyone thinks they'll be the 5% to get a tenured job, and everybody thinks that their relationship will last.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Have your academic pursuits ever cost you relationships? Context: Recently left a 2 year relationship because distance couldn't keep working (I'm studying for a masters and she worked a lot, so were seeing eachother less frequently). The final straw was my accepting a PhD at the end of this course, which she'd supported my intention to do throughout, but the prospect of several more years of long-distance was too much. Have any of you had similar experiences? How did you move past them?
RESPONSE A: We pursued MS on opposite sides of the country. Tried to make it work but couldn't. It sucked at first, but I doubled down on my research, got into some new activities in what little free time I had, and had friends to lean on when it was tough. I think time is the biggest factor. Keep your head up! It gets better!
RESPONSE B: Gods, the lack of roots you have while pursuing postgrad opportunities is oftentimes brutal. My MA and PhD are certainly partially to blame for the ending of my marriage, which, ultimately I was very glad for because she turned out to be an awful human. My academic pursuits meant my attention was no longer on her fully, which she disliked, and I think she resented my drive and success (if you could call it that) some as well. That, combined with serious mental illness and a shitty character led to her to cheat for almost two years before I found out and ended it. It was she who pushed me to move over 600 miles away to start my PhD. I thought it was because she cared, but really it was because it would make it a lot easier to continue to cheat and have a spouse who financially supported her. It wasn't easy at all, but I'm so glad I was able to figure out what a horrible person she was sooner rather than later. So I guess...academia can cost you relationships, but I'd like to think it's for the best most times.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I am struggling with my thesis writing, please suggests sentence starters. I am currently writing my engineering Ph.D. thesis. One of the challenges I am facing is, I ran out of sentence starters. I have used 'In addition', 'Additionally', 'Moreover', 'Furthermore', 'Therefore', 'as is evident above' and 'However' a lot. I mean, really a lot to the point where everything looks cliche and uninteresting or even annoying. So, can you please suggest to me some interesting/unique sentence starters alternative to these words? ​ Thanks.
RESPONSE A: No. Stop using those transition words. Leave them out and your writing will improve immensely. It will go from a meandering walk through an overgrown path to a straight shot down a clear highway. Trust me. They are really only useful in a few situations. Most of the time they are rhetorical fluff or signs of a poorly structured argument, making the sentences longer while adding nothing. A much better solution is to structure your writing more. If you have three points, say so, and then use words like “First, ...” “Second...” etc. That gives your readers waypoints so they know where they are in your argument and makes your writing much clearer and easier to follow.
RESPONSE B: This is a weird tip, but it’s helped me. Just say out loud what you want to communicate and record yourself. Then write that. Most of us think a lot less about talking than writing (and put less pressure on ourselves), so that can help you get started. We also don’t use as many conjunctions when we speak, we just say what we want to say.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I am struggling with my thesis writing, please suggests sentence starters. I am currently writing my engineering Ph.D. thesis. One of the challenges I am facing is, I ran out of sentence starters. I have used 'In addition', 'Additionally', 'Moreover', 'Furthermore', 'Therefore', 'as is evident above' and 'However' a lot. I mean, really a lot to the point where everything looks cliche and uninteresting or even annoying. So, can you please suggest to me some interesting/unique sentence starters alternative to these words? ​ Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Be careful not to overuse transition words or phrases in general.
RESPONSE B: No. Stop using those transition words. Leave them out and your writing will improve immensely. It will go from a meandering walk through an overgrown path to a straight shot down a clear highway. Trust me. They are really only useful in a few situations. Most of the time they are rhetorical fluff or signs of a poorly structured argument, making the sentences longer while adding nothing. A much better solution is to structure your writing more. If you have three points, say so, and then use words like “First, ...” “Second...” etc. That gives your readers waypoints so they know where they are in your argument and makes your writing much clearer and easier to follow.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I am struggling with my thesis writing, please suggests sentence starters. I am currently writing my engineering Ph.D. thesis. One of the challenges I am facing is, I ran out of sentence starters. I have used 'In addition', 'Additionally', 'Moreover', 'Furthermore', 'Therefore', 'as is evident above' and 'However' a lot. I mean, really a lot to the point where everything looks cliche and uninteresting or even annoying. So, can you please suggest to me some interesting/unique sentence starters alternative to these words? ​ Thanks.
RESPONSE A: No. Stop using those transition words. Leave them out and your writing will improve immensely. It will go from a meandering walk through an overgrown path to a straight shot down a clear highway. Trust me. They are really only useful in a few situations. Most of the time they are rhetorical fluff or signs of a poorly structured argument, making the sentences longer while adding nothing. A much better solution is to structure your writing more. If you have three points, say so, and then use words like “First, ...” “Second...” etc. That gives your readers waypoints so they know where they are in your argument and makes your writing much clearer and easier to follow.
RESPONSE B: Sentences for STEM should be precise. The focus is on nouns and facts, so they should be at the start of the sentence. Minimize the use of I or We, science is not about us, it is about the science. Your sentence starters should be avoided and only used when absolutely necessary. Strunk and White Elements of Style is an old classic about writing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I am struggling with my thesis writing, please suggests sentence starters. I am currently writing my engineering Ph.D. thesis. One of the challenges I am facing is, I ran out of sentence starters. I have used 'In addition', 'Additionally', 'Moreover', 'Furthermore', 'Therefore', 'as is evident above' and 'However' a lot. I mean, really a lot to the point where everything looks cliche and uninteresting or even annoying. So, can you please suggest to me some interesting/unique sentence starters alternative to these words? ​ Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I am new here in Reddit, so I don't know if it is possible to send a file here or not. I guess I have a interesting book that help you with that. How could I send it for you?
RESPONSE B: No. Stop using those transition words. Leave them out and your writing will improve immensely. It will go from a meandering walk through an overgrown path to a straight shot down a clear highway. Trust me. They are really only useful in a few situations. Most of the time they are rhetorical fluff or signs of a poorly structured argument, making the sentences longer while adding nothing. A much better solution is to structure your writing more. If you have three points, say so, and then use words like “First, ...” “Second...” etc. That gives your readers waypoints so they know where they are in your argument and makes your writing much clearer and easier to follow.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I am struggling with my thesis writing, please suggests sentence starters. I am currently writing my engineering Ph.D. thesis. One of the challenges I am facing is, I ran out of sentence starters. I have used 'In addition', 'Additionally', 'Moreover', 'Furthermore', 'Therefore', 'as is evident above' and 'However' a lot. I mean, really a lot to the point where everything looks cliche and uninteresting or even annoying. So, can you please suggest to me some interesting/unique sentence starters alternative to these words? ​ Thanks.
RESPONSE A: No. Stop using those transition words. Leave them out and your writing will improve immensely. It will go from a meandering walk through an overgrown path to a straight shot down a clear highway. Trust me. They are really only useful in a few situations. Most of the time they are rhetorical fluff or signs of a poorly structured argument, making the sentences longer while adding nothing. A much better solution is to structure your writing more. If you have three points, say so, and then use words like “First, ...” “Second...” etc. That gives your readers waypoints so they know where they are in your argument and makes your writing much clearer and easier to follow.
RESPONSE B: Google transitional phrases
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: or "ethical" but who am I to say no to a kind gesture). I'm not originally from my current major (CS) and I did a double major in undergrad. My grades suffered because of my unfamiliarity and, to be honest, immaturity. My advisor mentioned it in the letter and said something like (from memory): >Although I admittedly had concerns as to whether Joe would be able to keep up with graduate courses and conduct research due to his unconventional background and his undergraduate record, he immediately proved that my concerns were silly as he was able to maintain a near-perfect GPA and was able to successfully participate in research. I'm honestly extremely flattered that my advisor thinks so highly of me (he's not the expressive type), but at the same time am conflicted because I've heard that anything critical or mediocre on a letter is going to be viewed negatively. This has led me to wonder if I should bring it up and suggest that leaving out the part about concerns may be best. I don't really have anyone around me who's experienced higher education (my school doesn't really receive international students/faculty and no one really goes abroad either, I'm also the only one of my friends or family to have went to college) and so I decided I'd try to make a post here. Thanks for any feedback.
RESPONSE A: It may well be a wise approach of your advisor. Your undergrad record will presumably be looked at in any case, the LoR won't change that whatever you do. So if it's not great then the best thing is to address it and remove concerns, which is what this is doing. I think there's a good chance it'd be considered quite rude to ask to remove it too - your advisor probably knows better than you, no? Not to always trust them, but in this case he's clearly being strategic.
RESPONSE B: Part of the purpose of LoR is to address things on your CV that an admissions committee might find questionable, such as poor undergraduate performance. It’s good that your advisor brought it up and - this is key - said how it did not negatively impact your higher-level academic success.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: if not appropriate. Thanks. I'm an international MS student looking to apply for PhD programs in the US this round. My advisor called me in and showed me what he wrote for my LoR and asked me if I wanted to change anything (I don't think this is normal or "ethical" but who am I to say no to a kind gesture). I'm not originally from my current major (CS) and I did a double major in undergrad. My grades suffered because of my unfamiliarity and, to be honest, immaturity. My advisor mentioned it in the letter and said something like (from memory): >Although I admittedly had concerns as to whether Joe would be able to keep up with graduate courses and conduct research due to his unconventional background and his undergraduate record, he immediately proved that my concerns were silly as he was able to maintain a near-perfect GPA and was able to successfully participate in research. I'm honestly extremely flattered that my advisor thinks so highly of me (he's not the expressive type), but at the same time am conflicted because I've heard that anything critical or mediocre on a letter is going to be viewed negatively. This has led me to wonder if I should bring it up and suggest that leaving out the part about concerns may be best. I don't really have anyone around me who's experienced higher education (my school doesn't really receive international students/faculty and no one really goes abroad either, I'm also the only one of my friends or family to have went to college) and so I decided I'd try to make a post here. Thanks for any feedback.
RESPONSE A: Two points here: 1. There's nothing unethical about sharing the contents of the letter. It's expected that you will know what is in the letter, even up to the point that some professors will have the student draft the original letter. 2. I personally would definitely not remove that part. The application committee will see your undergrad grades (I assume) so they will need this addressed and it's much better for them to hear it from your professor.
RESPONSE B: better to have the poor grades addressed then just sitting there. they will absolutely be seen and taken into account.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: letter and said something like (from memory): >Although I admittedly had concerns as to whether Joe would be able to keep up with graduate courses and conduct research due to his unconventional background and his undergraduate record, he immediately proved that my concerns were silly as he was able to maintain a near-perfect GPA and was able to successfully participate in research. I'm honestly extremely flattered that my advisor thinks so highly of me (he's not the expressive type), but at the same time am conflicted because I've heard that anything critical or mediocre on a letter is going to be viewed negatively. This has led me to wonder if I should bring it up and suggest that leaving out the part about concerns may be best. I don't really have anyone around me who's experienced higher education (my school doesn't really receive international students/faculty and no one really goes abroad either, I'm also the only one of my friends or family to have went to college) and so I decided I'd try to make a post here. Thanks for any feedback.
RESPONSE A: Two points here: 1. There's nothing unethical about sharing the contents of the letter. It's expected that you will know what is in the letter, even up to the point that some professors will have the student draft the original letter. 2. I personally would definitely not remove that part. The application committee will see your undergrad grades (I assume) so they will need this addressed and it's much better for them to hear it from your professor.
RESPONSE B: Hi, It's common practice for PIs to show students their LoR if the PI feels they would like the student's input. Sometimes there are specific criteria for awards that PI want to ensure they have addressed to your satisfaction. Your PI can also add or dismiss your recommendations that you add, so don't over think it. Revisions on work is common place in academia, this is all part of the process. Regarding the "negative wording", suggest a change. You have been mauling this over to the point where you have asked reddit for help, it clearly is bothering you. This is why your PI showed you the letter. Cheers Hope that helps
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I don't think this is normal or "ethical" but who am I to say no to a kind gesture). I'm not originally from my current major (CS) and I did a double major in undergrad. My grades suffered because of my unfamiliarity and, to be honest, immaturity. My advisor mentioned it in the letter and said something like (from memory): >Although I admittedly had concerns as to whether Joe would be able to keep up with graduate courses and conduct research due to his unconventional background and his undergraduate record, he immediately proved that my concerns were silly as he was able to maintain a near-perfect GPA and was able to successfully participate in research. I'm honestly extremely flattered that my advisor thinks so highly of me (he's not the expressive type), but at the same time am conflicted because I've heard that anything critical or mediocre on a letter is going to be viewed negatively. This has led me to wonder if I should bring it up and suggest that leaving out the part about concerns may be best. I don't really have anyone around me who's experienced higher education (my school doesn't really receive international students/faculty and no one really goes abroad either, I'm also the only one of my friends or family to have went to college) and so I decided I'd try to make a post here. Thanks for any feedback.
RESPONSE A: Hi, It's common practice for PIs to show students their LoR if the PI feels they would like the student's input. Sometimes there are specific criteria for awards that PI want to ensure they have addressed to your satisfaction. Your PI can also add or dismiss your recommendations that you add, so don't over think it. Revisions on work is common place in academia, this is all part of the process. Regarding the "negative wording", suggest a change. You have been mauling this over to the point where you have asked reddit for help, it clearly is bothering you. This is why your PI showed you the letter. Cheers Hope that helps
RESPONSE B: Proactively providing a potential counterpoint to apparent past poor performance should be perceived as pretty positive.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: mentioned it in the letter and said something like (from memory): >Although I admittedly had concerns as to whether Joe would be able to keep up with graduate courses and conduct research due to his unconventional background and his undergraduate record, he immediately proved that my concerns were silly as he was able to maintain a near-perfect GPA and was able to successfully participate in research. I'm honestly extremely flattered that my advisor thinks so highly of me (he's not the expressive type), but at the same time am conflicted because I've heard that anything critical or mediocre on a letter is going to be viewed negatively. This has led me to wonder if I should bring it up and suggest that leaving out the part about concerns may be best. I don't really have anyone around me who's experienced higher education (my school doesn't really receive international students/faculty and no one really goes abroad either, I'm also the only one of my friends or family to have went to college) and so I decided I'd try to make a post here. Thanks for any feedback.
RESPONSE A: Hi, It's common practice for PIs to show students their LoR if the PI feels they would like the student's input. Sometimes there are specific criteria for awards that PI want to ensure they have addressed to your satisfaction. Your PI can also add or dismiss your recommendations that you add, so don't over think it. Revisions on work is common place in academia, this is all part of the process. Regarding the "negative wording", suggest a change. You have been mauling this over to the point where you have asked reddit for help, it clearly is bothering you. This is why your PI showed you the letter. Cheers Hope that helps
RESPONSE B: Honestly, if your undergrad grades are weak, the committee **will certainly** know that. Your professor mentioning it won't change anything. If it were some minor flaw, sure, don't draw attention to it, but grades are kind of the #1 easy criteria here; they know. I think it's a great recommendation that would absolutely encourage me to admit you if I were in the committee's position.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I like research, I don't like teaching. Should I be a postdoc forever? Hello, My field is cognitive psychology. I like my field and I run lab experiments. I also like being in the academia. However, I don't like teaching. As you may know, there are no enough positions in private sector and post-doc is not a stable position in academia and there is no chance for promotion (a step further is an assistant professorship that requires teaching). I would like to hear your experience. What should I do? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: Postdocs were never intended to be permanent, so don’t do it permanently! That’s the equivalent of an adjunct professorship, which was never intended to be a permanent career for anyone. The difference is that at least as a postdoc, you’re paid reasonably. For permanent research and non-teaching positions, look for Research Assistant Professor jobs; these are non-tenure track, research-based jobs with little to no teaching responsibilities. Salary and funding is usually dependent on grants, so they are called “soft money positions”, as opposed to “hard money” positions funded by the university’s general operating budget. If the grant dries up, you need a new job. Many of these positions are hard to find — they are not often advertised and usually professors offer them to long-term postdocs before their contract is up to keep them employed.
RESPONSE B: There are such things as research assistant professors, though I know less about the pipeline for those. There's also contracting research companies. You don't have much time for "your" research, but most I've been with support their people publishing on things related to their contracts. There's also .gov positions, like at NSF, DoD, etc. Can be heavy on paperwork and admin, but some positions still get to do quite a bit of research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I like research, I don't like teaching. Should I be a postdoc forever? Hello, My field is cognitive psychology. I like my field and I run lab experiments. I also like being in the academia. However, I don't like teaching. As you may know, there are no enough positions in private sector and post-doc is not a stable position in academia and there is no chance for promotion (a step further is an assistant professorship that requires teaching). I would like to hear your experience. What should I do? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: Some Belgian universities have a "research professor" (BOFZAP) category if that's an option
RESPONSE B: There are such things as research assistant professors, though I know less about the pipeline for those. There's also contracting research companies. You don't have much time for "your" research, but most I've been with support their people publishing on things related to their contracts. There's also .gov positions, like at NSF, DoD, etc. Can be heavy on paperwork and admin, but some positions still get to do quite a bit of research.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I like research, I don't like teaching. Should I be a postdoc forever? Hello, My field is cognitive psychology. I like my field and I run lab experiments. I also like being in the academia. However, I don't like teaching. As you may know, there are no enough positions in private sector and post-doc is not a stable position in academia and there is no chance for promotion (a step further is an assistant professorship that requires teaching). I would like to hear your experience. What should I do? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: You are not alone. I loved teaching until 2009 when the public schools started declining rapidly. And we only teach upper level- seniors- and grad students. Now that there is no standardized testing even grad students are woefully unprepared. Sigh.
RESPONSE B: I'm a psyc professor at a school that is R2 (e.g., my department has PhD programs, but we don't have enough throughout the university to qualify as R1). Even though my teaching load is a 2-3 (some of our faculty are on 2-2, 2-1, or 1-1 loads depending on grant support), it's extremely easy. The trick is to get the same classes each semester. If you can swing this, then there is practically no prep after the first couple years. At this point, I have all my lectures essentially memorized down to the individual jokes. I periodically change things around to keep it interesting, but I could basically teach the same classes for the rest of my career if I was that unmotivated. The point is that I have plenty of time for research (or whatever else I want to do).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I like research, I don't like teaching. Should I be a postdoc forever? Hello, My field is cognitive psychology. I like my field and I run lab experiments. I also like being in the academia. However, I don't like teaching. As you may know, there are no enough positions in private sector and post-doc is not a stable position in academia and there is no chance for promotion (a step further is an assistant professorship that requires teaching). I would like to hear your experience. What should I do? Thanks in advance!
RESPONSE A: You are not alone. I loved teaching until 2009 when the public schools started declining rapidly. And we only teach upper level- seniors- and grad students. Now that there is no standardized testing even grad students are woefully unprepared. Sigh.
RESPONSE B: I'm full time research. Whether you can have a full time research post depends on your institution. It's a thing that exists here in the UK but you (and by extension your research group) need to bring in enough grant money to cover your salary. You need to be constantly bringing grants in if you want to be permanent and full time. It's not as idealistic as you may think. If a more steady faculty position came along within my group with some extra teaching attached, you bet your ass I would go for it. I would advise caution as to the pick and choose approach to what you want to do in academia. Getting jobs is hard enough already. If teaching really bogs you down, move to industry. Otherwise just see you teaching as paying your way to really getting stuck into your research during the summer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: student in STEM who has some professional experience working for the university. My university has a system where professors will review one another, which includes auditing lectures, and provide a report to the university. I have been told that they usually write two versions, one for the university, and an off-the-books version for the person being reviewed. They usually reserve their criticism for the latter report, I believe to limit the influence of an overly financially-motivated administration. We also have some faculty who seem to be in the state I described, which has me wondering why situations like this occur, and how they can be prevented.
RESPONSE A: When I was in undergrad I had a year long course that was team-taught, but one of the profs had a stroke the summer before. He was at retirement age but a brilliant man with many teaching awards, so their solution was to switch around the order everything was taught in with the hope he would recover enough to teach in winter, instead of teaching in the fall like usual. In theory this was fine because the order of the material didn't matter. But it was already renowned as one of the more difficult classes you could take and he didn't end up teaching well at all. Sometimes he told us the wrong stuff, sometimes he just forgot what he was going to say entirely and just sadly stood their awkwardly smiling and apologizing. The entire class did very poorly on that exam and most of them were pre-med and extremely bitter about their GPA going down. He was basically forced into retirement after that. I feel like on the whole it was handled poorly for everyone involved. Maybe if he had more time to recover he could have kept teaching? Maybe he only should have done some lectures? I had another class, a core class, taught by someone in his late seventies who had taught it since the 1980s. He unexpectedly died the following year and they were left scrambling
RESPONSE B: I feel like the majority of cases are due directly or indirectly due to old age, and those faculty members are already emeritus and semi-retired if they are still around. Just give them minimal to no responsibilities (or students to supervise, or classes) and let them show up and sit in their office if they want.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: a system where professors will review one another, which includes auditing lectures, and provide a report to the university. I have been told that they usually write two versions, one for the university, and an off-the-books version for the person being reviewed. They usually reserve their criticism for the latter report, I believe to limit the influence of an overly financially-motivated administration. We also have some faculty who seem to be in the state I described, which has me wondering why situations like this occur, and how they can be prevented.
RESPONSE A: Insiders reviewing each other has rarely worked. The academic world is insular and people protect each other. Additionally, many faculty members have no proper training in psychological and biological assessments. The tenure systems make the problem worse. The end result is that many faculty members continue to function through cognitive decline. They continue to teach, make admission decisions and pull salaries. A sea change is needed to hold members of academia accountable to the public.
RESPONSE B: When I was in undergrad I had a year long course that was team-taught, but one of the profs had a stroke the summer before. He was at retirement age but a brilliant man with many teaching awards, so their solution was to switch around the order everything was taught in with the hope he would recover enough to teach in winter, instead of teaching in the fall like usual. In theory this was fine because the order of the material didn't matter. But it was already renowned as one of the more difficult classes you could take and he didn't end up teaching well at all. Sometimes he told us the wrong stuff, sometimes he just forgot what he was going to say entirely and just sadly stood their awkwardly smiling and apologizing. The entire class did very poorly on that exam and most of them were pre-med and extremely bitter about their GPA going down. He was basically forced into retirement after that. I feel like on the whole it was handled poorly for everyone involved. Maybe if he had more time to recover he could have kept teaching? Maybe he only should have done some lectures? I had another class, a core class, taught by someone in his late seventies who had taught it since the 1980s. He unexpectedly died the following year and they were left scrambling
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: , and an off-the-books version for the person being reviewed. They usually reserve their criticism for the latter report, I believe to limit the influence of an overly financially-motivated administration. We also have some faculty who seem to be in the state I described, which has me wondering why situations like this occur, and how they can be prevented.
RESPONSE A: I LIVED THIS. My grad school PI had early onset familial dementia. They were frequently confused by very simple aspects of the projects we were working on. Funding essentially dried up and we had to scrape by on fumes. Current grad students must either get fellowships to cover everything or TA every quarter (most students in my program only TA for one quarter). They were pretty good at masking it, either coming off as quirky, naive to a specific area of research, or (frankly) drunk if there was alcohol at the event. They tried to include an extremely offensive statement in a paper that I was co-first author on, and got mad when I told them that if they weren't willing to change it I'd have to withdraw my name from it. I had sent some articles about why the statement was offensive, and they responded by saying we should go to Ombuds to discuss my professionalism. In private I told the ombudsperson everything, and she was very concerned and said we needed to "plan an intervention with as much documentation as possible." I told her that jeopardizing my LOR was career suicide and declined to participate further. The median time to graduation in this lab is around 8.5 years (normal for the program is \~6.5). The PI was recently appointed to a lower level administrative position, and is openly trying to get a higher level administrative position (e.g. along the lines of an associate dean).
RESPONSE B: Insiders reviewing each other has rarely worked. The academic world is insular and people protect each other. Additionally, many faculty members have no proper training in psychological and biological assessments. The tenure systems make the problem worse. The end result is that many faculty members continue to function through cognitive decline. They continue to teach, make admission decisions and pull salaries. A sea change is needed to hold members of academia accountable to the public.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: We also have some faculty who seem to be in the state I described, which has me wondering why situations like this occur, and how they can be prevented.
RESPONSE A: I LIVED THIS. My grad school PI had early onset familial dementia. They were frequently confused by very simple aspects of the projects we were working on. Funding essentially dried up and we had to scrape by on fumes. Current grad students must either get fellowships to cover everything or TA every quarter (most students in my program only TA for one quarter). They were pretty good at masking it, either coming off as quirky, naive to a specific area of research, or (frankly) drunk if there was alcohol at the event. They tried to include an extremely offensive statement in a paper that I was co-first author on, and got mad when I told them that if they weren't willing to change it I'd have to withdraw my name from it. I had sent some articles about why the statement was offensive, and they responded by saying we should go to Ombuds to discuss my professionalism. In private I told the ombudsperson everything, and she was very concerned and said we needed to "plan an intervention with as much documentation as possible." I told her that jeopardizing my LOR was career suicide and declined to participate further. The median time to graduation in this lab is around 8.5 years (normal for the program is \~6.5). The PI was recently appointed to a lower level administrative position, and is openly trying to get a higher level administrative position (e.g. along the lines of an associate dean).
RESPONSE B: Generally, nothing. In the case of someone at the uni where I work, they are looking into medical retirement for one specific colleague who has been causing a lot of trouble due to some health problems that are also becoming mental health problems. He has caused so much trouble this past semester that he was almost fired (and he is fully tenured with 20+ years of service). One more major f’up or complaint for harrassment and he’s out. I only know this because I have been asked if I am ready to step into his position when it inevitably happens.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: , and provide a report to the university. I have been told that they usually write two versions, one for the university, and an off-the-books version for the person being reviewed. They usually reserve their criticism for the latter report, I believe to limit the influence of an overly financially-motivated administration. We also have some faculty who seem to be in the state I described, which has me wondering why situations like this occur, and how they can be prevented.
RESPONSE A: I LIVED THIS. My grad school PI had early onset familial dementia. They were frequently confused by very simple aspects of the projects we were working on. Funding essentially dried up and we had to scrape by on fumes. Current grad students must either get fellowships to cover everything or TA every quarter (most students in my program only TA for one quarter). They were pretty good at masking it, either coming off as quirky, naive to a specific area of research, or (frankly) drunk if there was alcohol at the event. They tried to include an extremely offensive statement in a paper that I was co-first author on, and got mad when I told them that if they weren't willing to change it I'd have to withdraw my name from it. I had sent some articles about why the statement was offensive, and they responded by saying we should go to Ombuds to discuss my professionalism. In private I told the ombudsperson everything, and she was very concerned and said we needed to "plan an intervention with as much documentation as possible." I told her that jeopardizing my LOR was career suicide and declined to participate further. The median time to graduation in this lab is around 8.5 years (normal for the program is \~6.5). The PI was recently appointed to a lower level administrative position, and is openly trying to get a higher level administrative position (e.g. along the lines of an associate dean).
RESPONSE B: We have this problem at my institution. A senior faculty member seems to be declining quickly. Terrible memory, confusion, and MEAN. Like, absolutely ferocious to students and faculty. Other senior faculty say this person took a sharp turn recently. We don't know what to do.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What is the best scientific article you have ever read purely based on it’s readability, taxonomic levels, structure and overall design? I’m looking for some good inspiration on how to structure my own article.
RESPONSE A: !RemindMe 1 week
RESPONSE B: Miller's 1956 classic on working memory capacity "The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two" is one of my favorites (although just a heads up, our understanding of working memory has advanced a bit since then).
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What is the best scientific article you have ever read purely based on it’s readability, taxonomic levels, structure and overall design? I’m looking for some good inspiration on how to structure my own article.
RESPONSE A: Hutchinson's Homage to Santa Rosalia, or Why Are There So Many Kinds of Animals? It's like prose.
RESPONSE B: > good inspiration on how to structure my own article Can you tell us a little more about what you're writing? You would want to structure a review differently to a research paper, and there would be an obvious difference in readability and structure between them too. It's far easier to be readable and well structured in a review since you're speaking more generally and synthesizing and summarizing material in a way that is understandable rather than creating it anew.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What is the best scientific article you have ever read purely based on it’s readability, taxonomic levels, structure and overall design? I’m looking for some good inspiration on how to structure my own article.
RESPONSE A: Hutchinson's Homage to Santa Rosalia, or Why Are There So Many Kinds of Animals? It's like prose.
RESPONSE B: !RemindMe 1 week
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What is the best scientific article you have ever read purely based on it’s readability, taxonomic levels, structure and overall design? I’m looking for some good inspiration on how to structure my own article.
RESPONSE A: > good inspiration on how to structure my own article Can you tell us a little more about what you're writing? You would want to structure a review differently to a research paper, and there would be an obvious difference in readability and structure between them too. It's far easier to be readable and well structured in a review since you're speaking more generally and synthesizing and summarizing material in a way that is understandable rather than creating it anew.
RESPONSE B: I think for rigour and pure intellectual stimulation you can't go past the teaspoon study. https://www.bmj.com/content/331/7531/1498
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What is the best scientific article you have ever read purely based on it’s readability, taxonomic levels, structure and overall design? I’m looking for some good inspiration on how to structure my own article.
RESPONSE A: I think for rigour and pure intellectual stimulation you can't go past the teaspoon study. https://www.bmj.com/content/331/7531/1498
RESPONSE B: Perhaps I've just become cynical, but keep in mind that what the ivy league elite are allowed to publish is not necessarily what *you're* allowed to publish. Peer review works very differently for the high prestige scholars; if you used simple language it might get rejected for not showing sufficient sophistication. But when a big name does it, it's celebrated as a show of clarity.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does online teaching make you tired? I am a first time professor and while I taught a couple of classes in person before the pandemic, this is my first time teaching this many hours. I found that attending conferences online is much more energy draining if compared to attending them in person. I started teaching after earning my PhD in 2020, so you can imagine that I've only experienced online professoring for the time being. What I realized is that teaching for hours online is incredibly exhausting. Given what I experienced with conferences, I can imagine that if the similarity holds, teaching in person should be somewhat less exhausting. Is this true? Do you think that online teaching is more exhausting than in person teaching?
RESPONSE A: Yes, the same concept takes double the time to teach !!!
RESPONSE B: I teach online, primarily asynchronous. In an average year, I don’t find it more tiring. However, the pandemic has made everything tiring. If you are teaching live on Zoom, I can imagine it’s exhausting. After a day on Zoom, I am physically and mentally drained. I’m tired of looking at myself, I’m tired of not being able to read cues. It’s tiring. I do find in person teaching to be both exhilarating (while it’s happening) and exhausting (after), but I am an introvert.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does online teaching make you tired? I am a first time professor and while I taught a couple of classes in person before the pandemic, this is my first time teaching this many hours. I found that attending conferences online is much more energy draining if compared to attending them in person. I started teaching after earning my PhD in 2020, so you can imagine that I've only experienced online professoring for the time being. What I realized is that teaching for hours online is incredibly exhausting. Given what I experienced with conferences, I can imagine that if the similarity holds, teaching in person should be somewhat less exhausting. Is this true? Do you think that online teaching is more exhausting than in person teaching?
RESPONSE A: I taught on Zoom for the past two semesters, it was a whole different level of exhaustion from teaching in person. My brain was literally mush after a full day teaching classes and having meetings on Zoom. For me, teaching in person isn’t as exhausting because you aren’t constantly trying to manage a million different things on Zoom, your PowerPoint, connectivity issues, teach, and try to engage with students who don’t even have their cameras on. I also found that my social anxiety was worse on zoom. Since I couldn’t see the vast majority of my students, I didn’t know if they were there, who else was there, if they understood the concepts, etc. I understand the reasons for students not turning their cameras on…but it makes one hell of an experience for the instructor.
RESPONSE B: It does. When you teach online, you also move less since you subconsciously try to keep yourself centered on your camera, so you get stiff and thus more tired. Moving yourself around (during breaks or while in sessions even) with shoulder shrugs, head rolls, head tilts, etc. will help.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does online teaching make you tired? I am a first time professor and while I taught a couple of classes in person before the pandemic, this is my first time teaching this many hours. I found that attending conferences online is much more energy draining if compared to attending them in person. I started teaching after earning my PhD in 2020, so you can imagine that I've only experienced online professoring for the time being. What I realized is that teaching for hours online is incredibly exhausting. Given what I experienced with conferences, I can imagine that if the similarity holds, teaching in person should be somewhat less exhausting. Is this true? Do you think that online teaching is more exhausting than in person teaching?
RESPONSE A: **Me in late 2019**: "I think I will switch to online distance teaching only. That way I can get a huge number of international students and get more bang for the bucks, i.e. teach fewer courses and cash in on the volume. 200 international students per course is the way to go!" ***2020 and Covid happens and everything becomes Zoom-teaching.*** **Me in 2021**: "I'm done with anonymous, and physically and socially distant teaching. 2022 will be IRL teaching only."
RESPONSE B: It does. When you teach online, you also move less since you subconsciously try to keep yourself centered on your camera, so you get stiff and thus more tired. Moving yourself around (during breaks or while in sessions even) with shoulder shrugs, head rolls, head tilts, etc. will help.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does online teaching make you tired? I am a first time professor and while I taught a couple of classes in person before the pandemic, this is my first time teaching this many hours. I found that attending conferences online is much more energy draining if compared to attending them in person. I started teaching after earning my PhD in 2020, so you can imagine that I've only experienced online professoring for the time being. What I realized is that teaching for hours online is incredibly exhausting. Given what I experienced with conferences, I can imagine that if the similarity holds, teaching in person should be somewhat less exhausting. Is this true? Do you think that online teaching is more exhausting than in person teaching?
RESPONSE A: **Me in late 2019**: "I think I will switch to online distance teaching only. That way I can get a huge number of international students and get more bang for the bucks, i.e. teach fewer courses and cash in on the volume. 200 international students per course is the way to go!" ***2020 and Covid happens and everything becomes Zoom-teaching.*** **Me in 2021**: "I'm done with anonymous, and physically and socially distant teaching. 2022 will be IRL teaching only."
RESPONSE B: I hate teaching online. Pre-recorded lectures mean you get no interface with the audience - no visual cues to comprehension, no questions, not interaction. Online classroom sessions often result in really low engagement by many students, and it's impossible to walk around and see how people are getting on, challenge errors that you spot, etc. You can only see what they share, which often is very little. You can design around this somewhat, but if your university was anything like ours we were not given any resource to actually spend time re-writing our material for online format, so the opportunities to reformulate things were limited, and the module specifications/accreditations/assessment formats often have fixed requirements on what the skills and content to be covered are. If you can't write the module from scratch for an online format, the whole thing is harder work, less effective, and frankly soul crushing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does online teaching make you tired? I am a first time professor and while I taught a couple of classes in person before the pandemic, this is my first time teaching this many hours. I found that attending conferences online is much more energy draining if compared to attending them in person. I started teaching after earning my PhD in 2020, so you can imagine that I've only experienced online professoring for the time being. What I realized is that teaching for hours online is incredibly exhausting. Given what I experienced with conferences, I can imagine that if the similarity holds, teaching in person should be somewhat less exhausting. Is this true? Do you think that online teaching is more exhausting than in person teaching?
RESPONSE A: Yes it’s more tiring. In traditional classes, I’ll read the material, prep a lesson, and then go to the 50 min class. In online, I’ll read the material, prep a lesson, record the video, edit and upload the video, type the discussion, set the due dates, grade the discussion (check for completion), and answer emails about the discussion. Sometimes, I’ll give students a virtual live class option in lieu of completing the discussion but then I still have to grade the discussion for anyone who couldn’t attend.
RESPONSE B: Yeah, so sick of Zoom.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Student with PSA I have a student who refuses to speak due to anxiety, which I can understand to an extent however this is a public speaking class and in order to pass you must give the required speeches. They’ve already taken the course with another professor and failed because they did not give the speeches. Any advice on how I can encourage the student to give their speeches so they can pass the class?
RESPONSE A: If you're in the US and the student has this documented as a disability with your school's office of disability services (or whatever their name is), that office should be working with you on accommodations.
RESPONSE B: I'm going to sound like the cruel old codger, but I'll say it anyway: student needs to withdraw from the course and take something else. My understanding of how anxiety disorders are viewed by mental health professionals: total avoidance is not a successful treatment strategy. If this is some kind of documented ADA scenario, exempting a single student from speaking in public in a public speaking course is unreasonable. Don't do it. It's also not your job to provide mental health therapy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Student with PSA I have a student who refuses to speak due to anxiety, which I can understand to an extent however this is a public speaking class and in order to pass you must give the required speeches. They’ve already taken the course with another professor and failed because they did not give the speeches. Any advice on how I can encourage the student to give their speeches so they can pass the class?
RESPONSE A: If you're in the US and the student has this documented as a disability with your school's office of disability services (or whatever their name is), that office should be working with you on accommodations.
RESPONSE B: Id recommend allowing for a smaller audience with this student. Could they do the first speech with just you present, the second with you and a couple of your colleagues or friends they invite, and the third with you and a smaller group of students in the class, like maybe a couple interested in extra credit? The idea here is to gradually desensitize the student to the anxiety of speaking publicly. Another suggestion is to recommend that the student start preparing the speech in advance, perhaps with your support as an instructor, to boost confidence. Edit: Just saw that SoupSoka made this suggestion of gradually increasing the audience size already. I agree with that redditor! Edit 2: I taught public speaking for a couple years, and those are the strategies that my department used with students who needed a little extra help with such an anxiety-inducing exercise.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Student with PSA I have a student who refuses to speak due to anxiety, which I can understand to an extent however this is a public speaking class and in order to pass you must give the required speeches. They’ve already taken the course with another professor and failed because they did not give the speeches. Any advice on how I can encourage the student to give their speeches so they can pass the class?
RESPONSE A: Is it permissible to allow your student to record their speech using video software on their own, and then play that video for the class?
RESPONSE B: If you're in the US and the student has this documented as a disability with your school's office of disability services (or whatever their name is), that office should be working with you on accommodations.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Student with PSA I have a student who refuses to speak due to anxiety, which I can understand to an extent however this is a public speaking class and in order to pass you must give the required speeches. They’ve already taken the course with another professor and failed because they did not give the speeches. Any advice on how I can encourage the student to give their speeches so they can pass the class?
RESPONSE A: I once had a student film her speech instead, but that isn't always relevant/sufficient of course. https://www.comm.pitt.edu/speech-anxiety
RESPONSE B: If you're in the US and the student has this documented as a disability with your school's office of disability services (or whatever their name is), that office should be working with you on accommodations.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Student with PSA I have a student who refuses to speak due to anxiety, which I can understand to an extent however this is a public speaking class and in order to pass you must give the required speeches. They’ve already taken the course with another professor and failed because they did not give the speeches. Any advice on how I can encourage the student to give their speeches so they can pass the class?
RESPONSE A: I'm going to sound like the cruel old codger, but I'll say it anyway: student needs to withdraw from the course and take something else. My understanding of how anxiety disorders are viewed by mental health professionals: total avoidance is not a successful treatment strategy. If this is some kind of documented ADA scenario, exempting a single student from speaking in public in a public speaking course is unreasonable. Don't do it. It's also not your job to provide mental health therapy.
RESPONSE B: Is it permissible to allow your student to record their speech using video software on their own, and then play that video for the class?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: museums here are extremely small and regionally-focused); and I LOVE shopping (this town has little more than Walmart & Target). So, as you can see, I'm really out of my element. I love to travel, and I'm willing to take on pretty much any city. However, I've never wanted to live anywhere other than a large city, and now I find myself in a town straight out of a Hallmark movie. Has anyone else found themselves in this situation? If yes, what did you do about it? I thought about getting a second small place so I could spend the weekend in the small/mid-sized city with Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (and a lot more to do than my college town), but my salary won't allow it. :( Thanks for your input! :)
RESPONSE A: Get a really small, gas-sipping car, and do meet-ups in the closest city. You might also consider signing up for every professional seminar you can - gets you out of the house, and who knows?
RESPONSE B: There's a strong culture in academia to tell people to "bloom where they're planted", and sort of subtlety chide people for not being grateful that they have one of those magical, answer to all your prayers tenure track jobs. (At one point in my life, I might have bought this line of thinking, at least in part, too.) I'm not sure I buy that now, though. At 31, you pretty much know what you're about, in a broad sense. Some things may change, but you're a big city single guy in a middle of nowhere college town where the big draw is "It's a nice place to raise kids". You may find your niche over time (maybe you'll find a church community you like, or get active volunteering at the local museum, etc.), but you shouldn't be afraid to look for jobs, yes, even non academic jobs, in places where you'd actually like to live. It's just a job, man. What you're doing when you're not at work, and who your doing it with, matters a lot more than what you do to earn a paycheck.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: going person, yet it is hard for me to make friends here. No one is mean; I'm just having trouble finding people I vibe with. I attribute this to two factors: 1. I'm single (the town is very family-focused). 2. I'm just not that into the activities that are popular here (i.e., sports, church, and the outdoors). There aren't even activities I would enjoy doing alone here. I'm a big foodie (the restaurants here are all about meat, meat, and more meat); I enjoy going to museums (the museums here are extremely small and regionally-focused); and I LOVE shopping (this town has little more than Walmart & Target). So, as you can see, I'm really out of my element. I love to travel, and I'm willing to take on pretty much any city. However, I've never wanted to live anywhere other than a large city, and now I find myself in a town straight out of a Hallmark movie. Has anyone else found themselves in this situation? If yes, what did you do about it? I thought about getting a second small place so I could spend the weekend in the small/mid-sized city with Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (and a lot more to do than my college town), but my salary won't allow it. :( Thanks for your input! :)
RESPONSE A: I spent 10 years in a similar situation. Everybody told me to "bloom where you're planted." I had great colleagues and terrific students, so that kept me going. I earned tenure while living in that suffocating college town. I traveled as much as possible, but it was always disappointing to have to go back there. And then, when a position in my subfield opened up at a university in a big city, I jumped. Best move I ever made. So my advice is to put your head down, work your ass off, publish publish publish, and then get out.
RESPONSE B: Get a really small, gas-sipping car, and do meet-ups in the closest city. You might also consider signing up for every professional seminar you can - gets you out of the house, and who knows?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: ); and I LOVE shopping (this town has little more than Walmart & Target). So, as you can see, I'm really out of my element. I love to travel, and I'm willing to take on pretty much any city. However, I've never wanted to live anywhere other than a large city, and now I find myself in a town straight out of a Hallmark movie. Has anyone else found themselves in this situation? If yes, what did you do about it? I thought about getting a second small place so I could spend the weekend in the small/mid-sized city with Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (and a lot more to do than my college town), but my salary won't allow it. :( Thanks for your input! :)
RESPONSE A: “Publish your way out”. I was in a similar region very recently (I was living in the “largest” “city” in the region with a population of around 30,000). Job was okay, life was easy a la Hallmark movie as you said. But if you were not into high school football and church-ing, there wasn’t anything to do. The university was small enough. I put teaching and service on auto-pilot, focused on a couple of fast-tracked research projects, and got out.
RESPONSE B: Are you open to sharing where you live? I know that's a risk online, but there tends to be a lot more in most towns than people think. I lived in rural PA for 5 years and it was only at the end that I found some awesome stuff such as gaming groups and local theater, that I had no idea about. My suggestion is to do a ton of googling on Reddit, Facebook, etc because there might be stuff you don't know about. As for the place in a better town, would you consider getting a "crashpad" somewhere? My friends who are flight attendants or truckers often have an apartment they share with way too many people to live comfortably, but since they are all only there sometimes, it tends to workout that half the roommates aren't there at the same time. So it saves money, but the issue is sometimes it's crowded.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: it. :( Thanks for your input! :)
RESPONSE A: There’s really no good answer as I’m sure you’ve already concluded. You could “stick it out” for the next 5 years and throw yourself out into your research, build your CV, and apply for new positions in cities you want to be. But that will bring about unhealthy habits and if a family is something you want, then you’d be putting that on hold at an age where it becomes significantly more difficult to build one. Speaking from experience, I’ve lived in a small town for undergrad and then started my career in a small town after that (I’m now in a proper city, thank god) and overall it doesn’t usually get better. The best hope you have is to try out local meetups and other events, have a drink, and just have conversations with people. Even if nothing comes of it at least you’re building your social skills for when you do find people you mesh with. Typically in smaller towns people tend to get cliquey, and only chance to get in on it is by random meeting but it can be rewarding... but y’know could take years. Obviously adding COVID considerations exacerbate these problems. Oh and as I’m sure you’ve learned... app dating in small college towns is also shit both for your age group and if you’re looking for someone who isn’t into sports, fishing/hunting, double standards, unreasonable expectations, making you a step dad to their 3 kids, morbid obesity, or an immature barely 20 year old (that would probably raise ethical issues for your job)... then you’re shit out of luck
RESPONSE B: “Publish your way out”. I was in a similar region very recently (I was living in the “largest” “city” in the region with a population of around 30,000). Job was okay, life was easy a la Hallmark movie as you said. But if you were not into high school football and church-ing, there wasn’t anything to do. The university was small enough. I put teaching and service on auto-pilot, focused on a couple of fast-tracked research projects, and got out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: large city. The nearest Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (aka basic needs) are 2 hours away! I like my job, but I'm really having trouble with the town. My friends back home describe me as a friendly and outgoing person, yet it is hard for me to make friends here. No one is mean; I'm just having trouble finding people I vibe with. I attribute this to two factors: 1. I'm single (the town is very family-focused). 2. I'm just not that into the activities that are popular here (i.e., sports, church, and the outdoors). There aren't even activities I would enjoy doing alone here. I'm a big foodie (the restaurants here are all about meat, meat, and more meat); I enjoy going to museums (the museums here are extremely small and regionally-focused); and I LOVE shopping (this town has little more than Walmart & Target). So, as you can see, I'm really out of my element. I love to travel, and I'm willing to take on pretty much any city. However, I've never wanted to live anywhere other than a large city, and now I find myself in a town straight out of a Hallmark movie. Has anyone else found themselves in this situation? If yes, what did you do about it? I thought about getting a second small place so I could spend the weekend in the small/mid-sized city with Trader Joe's and Whole Foods (and a lot more to do than my college town), but my salary won't allow it. :( Thanks for your input! :)
RESPONSE A: Apply for positions elsewhere... Consider it another postdoc ;)
RESPONSE B: “Publish your way out”. I was in a similar region very recently (I was living in the “largest” “city” in the region with a population of around 30,000). Job was okay, life was easy a la Hallmark movie as you said. But if you were not into high school football and church-ing, there wasn’t anything to do. The university was small enough. I put teaching and service on auto-pilot, focused on a couple of fast-tracked research projects, and got out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: channels involved in my academic progression. As I had made it clear that I was not going to be subject to intimidation. It is arguable and perhaps logical that I was removed as a means to silence these issues. As I have highlighted before, written communication is an extremely atypical reason for such a drastic and final solution. Particularly when I have demonstrated promise in all other aspects of my performance. I would appreciate any advice/avenues to explore. I am currently launching an academic appeal so I can get a proper grading or an MPhil to at least show for my years of work. In addition to contacting the OIA, Research Excellence Framework, and potentially the local press / the Independent and the Guardian do articles based on student submissions and academic experiences to name and shame these members and faculty.
RESPONSE A: OP I’m so sorry that you’re going through all of this. It sound awful. Have you contacted your research degrees team, graduate school team or student union? If I were you I would talk to as many people outside of your department as possible who can support you. The bullying and harassment needs to be flagged up with people not in your lab/department as they are seemingly turning a blind eye to everything and actively trying to get rid of anyone who speaks out against them by the sounds of it. Personally I would also make this public on twitter with a thread and name and shame the uni and department. The @DoBetterAcademia and #BrokenAcademia tags are something you should check out. But keep in mind that people who have spoken up about this sort of thing have received backlash in the sense that they have been ousted from their departments/fields etc. which is awful but something to think about. I would try and find a position elsewhere with a supervisor you trust (perhaps someone you’ve met at a conference?) who you can explain all of this to and who will be supportive and understanding. Best of luck with everything and again, so sorry you’ve had to put up with this.
RESPONSE B: I am very impressed by your willingness to continue to fight. It takes courage and perseverance to hold a mirror up to systems that are broken. Hurrah for those like you willing to make those sacrifices!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: bullying and harassment may have tainted my character in the eyes of senior staff for whistleblowing and potentially influenced the channels involved in my academic progression. As I had made it clear that I was not going to be subject to intimidation. It is arguable and perhaps logical that I was removed as a means to silence these issues. As I have highlighted before, written communication is an extremely atypical reason for such a drastic and final solution. Particularly when I have demonstrated promise in all other aspects of my performance. I would appreciate any advice/avenues to explore. I am currently launching an academic appeal so I can get a proper grading or an MPhil to at least show for my years of work. In addition to contacting the OIA, Research Excellence Framework, and potentially the local press / the Independent and the Guardian do articles based on student submissions and academic experiences to name and shame these members and faculty.
RESPONSE A: Try your university Ombudsman. They might be able to review your case.
RESPONSE B: OP I’m so sorry that you’re going through all of this. It sound awful. Have you contacted your research degrees team, graduate school team or student union? If I were you I would talk to as many people outside of your department as possible who can support you. The bullying and harassment needs to be flagged up with people not in your lab/department as they are seemingly turning a blind eye to everything and actively trying to get rid of anyone who speaks out against them by the sounds of it. Personally I would also make this public on twitter with a thread and name and shame the uni and department. The @DoBetterAcademia and #BrokenAcademia tags are something you should check out. But keep in mind that people who have spoken up about this sort of thing have received backlash in the sense that they have been ousted from their departments/fields etc. which is awful but something to think about. I would try and find a position elsewhere with a supervisor you trust (perhaps someone you’ve met at a conference?) who you can explain all of this to and who will be supportive and understanding. Best of luck with everything and again, so sorry you’ve had to put up with this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . It is impossible to say whether these instances of bullying and harassment may have tainted my character in the eyes of senior staff for whistleblowing and potentially influenced the channels involved in my academic progression. As I had made it clear that I was not going to be subject to intimidation. It is arguable and perhaps logical that I was removed as a means to silence these issues. As I have highlighted before, written communication is an extremely atypical reason for such a drastic and final solution. Particularly when I have demonstrated promise in all other aspects of my performance. I would appreciate any advice/avenues to explore. I am currently launching an academic appeal so I can get a proper grading or an MPhil to at least show for my years of work. In addition to contacting the OIA, Research Excellence Framework, and potentially the local press / the Independent and the Guardian do articles based on student submissions and academic experiences to name and shame these members and faculty.
RESPONSE A: Best chances are to document everything you can, elevate to whatever the highest level you can is, and start making plans to transfer to another program as a second year if possible. Going to the press is almost never a good idea. They don't necessary have your interesting in mind or see things your way. The rules that the press think are fair aren't necessarily what you would think are fair. It sounds like your advisor just doesn't want you there. The unfortunate thing is that even if you won an appeal and stayed in the lab, you're going to still be working with someone who a) doesn't want you there, and b) has a lot of control over your progress. The best chance you have is to switch to another program where they actually do want you there and support you/
RESPONSE B: My recommendation may not be what you want to hear because you are still fighting this decision. I’m sorry this is happening and this would not easily happen in the US. Why were you not able to select another advisor ? and I mean from their point of view Here is my recommendation. They don’t want you. Go to another university where you can be appreciated. They are not going to overturn this and if it is overturn they will make your life miserable.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: communication is an extremely atypical reason for such a drastic and final solution. Particularly when I have demonstrated promise in all other aspects of my performance. I would appreciate any advice/avenues to explore. I am currently launching an academic appeal so I can get a proper grading or an MPhil to at least show for my years of work. In addition to contacting the OIA, Research Excellence Framework, and potentially the local press / the Independent and the Guardian do articles based on student submissions and academic experiences to name and shame these members and faculty.
RESPONSE A: My recommendation may not be what you want to hear because you are still fighting this decision. I’m sorry this is happening and this would not easily happen in the US. Why were you not able to select another advisor ? and I mean from their point of view Here is my recommendation. They don’t want you. Go to another university where you can be appreciated. They are not going to overturn this and if it is overturn they will make your life miserable.
RESPONSE B: OP I’m so sorry that you’re going through all of this. It sound awful. Have you contacted your research degrees team, graduate school team or student union? If I were you I would talk to as many people outside of your department as possible who can support you. The bullying and harassment needs to be flagged up with people not in your lab/department as they are seemingly turning a blind eye to everything and actively trying to get rid of anyone who speaks out against them by the sounds of it. Personally I would also make this public on twitter with a thread and name and shame the uni and department. The @DoBetterAcademia and #BrokenAcademia tags are something you should check out. But keep in mind that people who have spoken up about this sort of thing have received backlash in the sense that they have been ousted from their departments/fields etc. which is awful but something to think about. I would try and find a position elsewhere with a supervisor you trust (perhaps someone you’ve met at a conference?) who you can explain all of this to and who will be supportive and understanding. Best of luck with everything and again, so sorry you’ve had to put up with this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Just got tenure. Want to let my gender fluidity come out in professional environments. What do you think? I'd like to let my gender fluidity be present at work, but I am hesitant. I'm not in gender studies or similar, and it will be a surprise for most. Do I send an email to the faculty? Do I explain "gender" to students the first day of class even though it has nothing to do with the class? I'd definitely keep my clothes professional but I'm a 35 y.o. dude, and while teaching or presenting in a conference as my authentic self sounds exhilarating, I know it's an image I can't take back--especially if it's one of those 300-student survey. I'm wondering if anyone has any related experiences or feedback. Would you care if a male professor in your department suddenly would show up here and there in feminine clothing? Hesitant to see him/her representing the department?
RESPONSE A: From a student perspective: Definitely don't adress it directly. Nobody cares unless it's directly relevant to the stuff you teach.
RESPONSE B: I don't see what your gender has to do with your work environment. If someone asks you, you can choose to talk about it but sending mass email about it seems really inappropriate in a professional environment. If a male comes in feminine's clothing that's his choice and if people are curious they can talk to you about it. And I am one of those that after your phd if you choose to it is not him or her anymore but Dr.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Just got tenure. Want to let my gender fluidity come out in professional environments. What do you think? I'd like to let my gender fluidity be present at work, but I am hesitant. I'm not in gender studies or similar, and it will be a surprise for most. Do I send an email to the faculty? Do I explain "gender" to students the first day of class even though it has nothing to do with the class? I'd definitely keep my clothes professional but I'm a 35 y.o. dude, and while teaching or presenting in a conference as my authentic self sounds exhilarating, I know it's an image I can't take back--especially if it's one of those 300-student survey. I'm wondering if anyone has any related experiences or feedback. Would you care if a male professor in your department suddenly would show up here and there in feminine clothing? Hesitant to see him/her representing the department?
RESPONSE A: Kinda seems unnecessary to me tbh as this information doesn’t effect your work. Why not just have it on your website, that’s how my profs openly share this or an lgbtq poster on your door
RESPONSE B: From a student perspective: Definitely don't adress it directly. Nobody cares unless it's directly relevant to the stuff you teach.
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.