added
stringdate 2025-03-12 15:57:16
2025-03-21 13:32:23
| created
timestamp[us]date 2008-09-06 22:17:14
2024-12-31 23:58:17
| id
stringlengths 1
7
| metadata
dict | source
stringclasses 1
value | text
stringlengths 59
10.4M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.902715
| 2024-03-21T09:52:05 |
208686
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Andreas Blass",
"Cole",
"David Ketcheson",
"Martin Argerami",
"MisterMiyagi",
"Ommo",
"QuantumBrick",
"Sabine",
"Sylvain Ribault",
"TimRias",
"Wrzlprmft",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108889",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/153141",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/154257",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57283",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64745",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90168",
"user21820",
"xLeitix"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8102",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/208686"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Could uploading a paper on arXiv before publishing it in a journal lead to being "scooped", or does it actually prevent that?
On Quora, I found that one of the disadvantages of uploading papers on arXiv before publishing them in journals, is that one of being "scooped". For example:
What are some disadvantages of uploading papers on Arxiv before publishing them in journals?. From the answer of Paul Mitchell we can read:
Potential for Scooping: By making research freely available on Arxiv, there is a risk of being "scooped" by other researchers who may take the ideas or findings and publish them in a journal before the original authors have a chance to do so. This can lead to a loss of priority and recognition for the original work.
What are some pros and cons of publishing a paper on arXiv?. From the answer of Inna Vishik we can read:
Being scooped (if you post papers before they are accepted for publication). If someone is sitting on similar results, they might finish writing it up quickly and submit it to a journal with a faster peer review process than the one you submitted to. Worse yet, the editor and referees might not notice that a similar paper is already on ArXiv. Thus, those people will win where it really counts (peer reviewed paper), and few people will go back in the chronology to figure out which paper was submitted and/or posted on arXiv first.
However, one of the reasons (and probably the most important one) for posting on arXiv, or other repositories, is to establish primacy. Still from the Inna Vishik comment, we can indeed read:
Establishing primacy. If you are working on something similar as other researchers, being the first to post on arXiv is an important public marker of who was first (even if the peer review process works out so that the other one gets published first).
Therefore, how is it possible that you are "scooped" (basically leading other researchers to "steal" and publish your ideas before you in peer-reviewed journals), if you have the time stamp from arXiv as a proof of primacy?
Isn't the DOI provided by arXiv enough to establish primacy?
To me, it looks like a contradiction. Or, am I misunderstanding, or mixing up things?
(A further thought: if the best solution for not being scooped is to post your manuscript only when it has been formally accepted by the peer-review journal, what is then the meaning of posting a preprint, if after a few days, the same manuscript (i.e. already after the corrections deriving from the review process) is published online by the journal?)
Comment on your further thought: Things might have changed during the last 12 years, but while I was doing my PhD, papers were not published online within a few days after acceptance. By uploading to arXiv after acceptance, you were still beating the official publication by several months.
Related: Are there any examples for an ArXiv publication nurturing or preventing plagiarism?
See also: Is publishing on arXiv early a good idea?
Immature papers on arXiv
The scenario that results get scooped after being posted on arXiv should be treated as purely hypothetical, until someone provides examples that it actually happens.
My dream is to have any ideas worth stealing...
@QuantumBrick: Ahahahah :-)
You're not wrong, if you upload something onto the arXiv you should establish primacy and therefore prevent someone else from scooping you. If someone does actually scoop you, you should in theory be able to force a retraction by contacting the journal's editors with the evidence for plagiarism.
How to interpret the two answers on Quora then?
Paul Mitchell's answer is likely AI-generated, which means you should not trust it.
Inna Vishik explicitly said "for the paranoid" when she listed the cons, so she's not exactly serious. If you are paranoid, then the things she mentions are possible, although you'll likely be able to publish your own peer-reviewed paper anyway. If you're very paranoid, it is further possible that someone plagiarizes you, and the journal doesn't retract it (because it closes down, because it's disreputable, because the editor-in-chief is the person plagiarizing you, etc.)
Thanks a lot @Allure :-) Your answer is reassuring :-)
When people are nervous about getting scooped, they don't usually mean "somebody took my manuscript and submitted it verbatim elsewhere". They are more concerned that they upload their work, there are some delays (rejections etc), and in the meantime some other group sees the work, does some independent-ish work (which may well be more time-efficient than what you did because they have your arXiv paper to learn from), and then publish first. That's still not a super-realistic fear, but it's not as outlandish as this answer and the Quora guy make it sound.
But, independently of that, my advice regarding secrecy of results and getting scooped is always the same - don't worry about it, good groups have more than enough ideas of their own and bad groups don't suddenly produce good papers even if you give them a solid idea.
Thanks for your comments @xLeitix :-)
@xLeitix some other group sees the work, does some independent-ish work (which may well be more time-efficient than what you did because they have your arXiv paper to learn from), and then publish first - would it matter? If prepared honestly, they would have to cite the original work, which still establishes primacy.
@Ommo: The situation can actually be worse than what xLeitix said. There are clever people who do scoop ideas from others, including from papers that they reject.
@user21820 That's usually one of the arguments for using Arxiv though. If you publish to Arxiv first, it prevents a scummy reviewer from rejecting your work and then turning arround and publishing their own paper based on it. Now at bare minimum they would have to cite your Arxiv paper.
@Cole: But many do not cite the original work, nor the arXiv paper, especially if it is a rejected paper. Gate-keepers exist in many fields, even if not common. It has actually happened to me before. A common trick is to give a different solution to a similar problem, thus being able to claim that theirs is the first 'published' solution.
Thanks for your comments both user21820 and Cole :-)
Just a doubt for @user21820: With "There are clever people who do scoop ideas from others, including from papers that they reject"... Do you mean that editors and reviewers do reject on purpose to get your ideas and publish them on their own elsewhere? I mean, this would be the case once you submit a paper to a journal, it goes "under review", and either the editor or a review decide to reject your paper, since "too good", that they want to publish it (or something very similar) elsewhere? :-)
@Ommo: That's right. There are many clever people who act in certain ways to favour their own publication chances. They may not reject a very good paper, but they will gladly find as many faults with a submission as possible (even if ridiculous) so as to justify "reject" if it benefits them to do so.
@user21820 It probably varies by field, but at least in mine, most arXiv submissions are basically polished drafts of an entire paper, so it makes them very hard to ignore/dismiss. I'm more experimental though, so it's usually a matter of who discovered or demonstrated X rather than a battle over ideas and who had what idea first (which I imagine is harder to prove).
@Ommo Yes, but it is a little more subtle than you have laid out. Since papers are reviewed by peers working in the same area, there is a good chance that whatever is being published overlaps with one of the reviewers personal work. The typical form of theft is often the reviewer sees some insights or discoveries in the paper that would greatly benefit their own work (and publication of the paper would also steal thunder from their own work). They then try to be as petty as possible to get the paper rejected. They then take the insights, use them to advance their own work, and publish.
@Ommo So this is more stealing some key ideas rather than wholesale theft/plagiarism. If the paper is too strong to reject, another tactic is to try to slow it down as much as possible. Ask for major revisions, new experiments, ect. Then rush to publish your own work in a faster journal in order to scoop your competitor you have held up in review. It's very hard to prove a reviewer did either of these things, so a lot of people like arXiv as a way to get your work out there as quickly as possible without gatekeepers or potential sabotage.
Thanks a lot for your interesting comment(s)! Very nice insights and thoughts :-)
@Cole: Not just the field, but also the interest in the topic matters. For a topic with not so many experts looking at it, it's easier to weasel around because nobody really wants to fight for priority in a niche area.
You should completely ignore the Quora advice, most of the answers are from 7 years ago and completely out of date.
Currently, in all the fields I am aware of, submitting to Arxiv/Biorxiv is how you prevent getting scooped, not the other way around. As long as what you submit is essentially a high-quality draft of a manuscript you have established primacy.
The only way I can see this backfiring is if what you submit is so poor/error-filled that it doesn't actually support your claims (thus you establish nothing) and it prompts a competitor to submit their work to Arxiv or a journal. The main consideration of when to submit a preprint is usually a risk-reward assessment between getting scooped vs holding on to your work so you can begin following up on it before the rest of the field is made aware of it.
~7 years ago Arxiv/Biorxiv was a lot more controversial, and many people did not want to use it for fear of getting scooped since it wasn't completely accepted as legitimate. Now, however, many fields consider it completely legitimate and a solid submission carries as much weight as a publication in terms of determining primacy. Many labs now consider submitting a preprint as a normal part of the process of publishing a paper.
“~7 years ago Arxiv/Biorxiv was a lot more controversial” Was it really? This must be a very field dependent statement. ArXiv has been the primary way of sharing research in high energy physics since the 90s. The number of fields in which it ( and its like) have become accepted has steadily grown. So it may have become less controversial in your field over the last 7 years, but that may not apply for all fields.
Thanks a lot @Cole! (+1) :-) A very interesting (and updated) vision on this topic, thanks :-)
-1: "establishing primacy" is not the only consideration here. As I've seen personally, it can happen that a person uploads to arxiv a very good paper, and during the time the paper is referreed at a good journal, another group generalized the results and got published. The original author gets rejected (it happens at very good journals even with very good papers) and by now more general results than theirs are published, so the paper will not get accepted in a good journal. Also, arxiv was not "controversial" 25 years ago, let alone 7.
@MartinArgerami and TimRias My perspective is from a Biology background and pertains to Biorxiv, so it likely does not translate completely to theoretical fields or Arxiv. It definitely was a lot more controversial 7 years ago in the fields I have exposure to. I know several senior professors that at the time said they would "never" post a preprint and that it was utter foolishness. Today they now have several preprints and strongly endorse the practice.
As @TimRias pointed out, Arxiv in particular has been a standard part of how some fields operate for quite some time. I'm not sure how relevant this is to the question at hand, however, since someone operating in one of these fields would likely not have these questions/concerns. I assumed this question is coming from a field where preprints are still not fully "accepted"/routine.
@MartinArgerami That is quite unfortunate to hear. Do you know if the preprint in question was cited in the paper that essentially scooped them?
@Cole: yes, the second group had no ill intention. But the original author got screwed big time in terms of having an important paper in his cv.
This is field dependent, but generally the reliability of an arXiv publication is much less than that of a properly peer reviewed publication.
On the one hand, an arXiv DOI only shows that you put something on the internet. Whether it is on the same topic, let alone the same approach/methodology/results, not to say actually complete and sound, is not a given. Worse, it takes actual effort to establish all those things - effort that is already a scarce resource in proper review processes.
On the other hand, it often does not matter all that much who was first with absolute precession. If a rushed, bare-bones paper on arXiv is a few weeks or even months prior to a good, peer reviewed paper, there is a good chance people still prefer using and citing the latter. Primacy matters little for people that need to use the results.
"This is field dependent, but generally the reliability of an arXiv publication is much less than that of a properly peer reviewed publication." [Citation needed]
Scientists seem really reluctant to risk their reputation and put their garbage out there for everyone to see for eternity and risk their reputation. (Of course, there are people that output gabage, but that is than usually also true for any of their papers that make it through the peer review roulette.)
Even if an arXiv DOI doesn't prove much, the material you put on the arXiv proves a lot. Even if you later update your original paper, the original version and its date of submission remain available on the arXiv. More generally, even if you update the paper many times (and even if you withdraw it), all the submmitted versions and their dates remain available. So, if necessary, you could easily prove exactly what you submitted and when.
Thanks for your answer @MisterMiyagi.... However, I did not understand this part: "Whether it is on the same topic, let alone the same approach/methodology/results, not to say actually complete and sound, is not a given. Worse, it takes actual effort to establish all those things - effort that is already a scarce resource in proper review processes." :-)
@TimRias... Do you mean that, generally, people do not post their work on repositories like arXiv, before any acknowledgement of acceptance from the peer-reviewed journal where they have submitted the manuscript?
Thanks a lot @AndreasBlass! Also your comment is very reassuring :-)
No, I mean people generally don’t post on the arxiv unless they are confident in the work and they are comfortable with everyone reading it.
Thanks @TimRias :)
@Ommo To take your DOI and prove primacy with it you require others to do at least a full review of your paper in order and compare it to the hypothetical competitor paper - i.e. establish both soundness of the paper itself and then conflict with the other. Yes, there are domains where this happens anyways (and they should disregard what I wrote) but in many others competent reviewers are a very scarce resource compared to the sheer volume of at best mediocre papers out there. One needs way more than just a DOI to get someone whose verdict actually counts to consider such cases.
Thanks a lot for your explanation @MisterMiyagi :-)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.903819
| 2023-03-31T19:32:34 |
194820
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"TheMatrix Equation-balance",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/168786",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8103",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/194820"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What is a difference for authors when publishing in a journal with 300 annual papers compared to an open access journal publishing 9000 papers a year?
Both journals are indexed by major search engines and have similar ratings. From my point of view (with limited experience), if you are researching a narrow subject and you have found online an article matching your interest, would you care from which publishing house this article came from?
What is the problem you are trying to solve? And your title mentions authors whereas the body seems to be from the perspective of someone reading an article.
@BryanKrause - this is an author concerned about potential readers.
You didn't ask this, but there is a difference in cost to the author between these two - quite substantial, usually.
@Buffy - publishing 'open source' in Elsevier will cost you twice more than in MDPI
Ah, you didn't specify both options were open source
@DavidKetcheson - you can publish your article 'open source' in most of the journals. But in MDPI journals it is the only option.
I don't think I've ever even had a wisp of thought in my head about how many articles a given journal publishes when I read a particular paper.
However, I have been concerned about whether it's worth reading a paper in certain venues that I don't trust to conduct rigorous peer review. If the paper is central to what I'm working on I have no choice but to read and evaluate for myself, but the majority of papers I look at I'm looking for something specific besides the primary hypothesis the authors are interested in: something about their methodology or a reference value for some group, and if I'm searching through dozens of papers I may not spend as much time on the ones published somewhere I don't trust.
Bryan Krause - thank you. That confirms my understanding.
This is hard to answer. I think a reasonable framework to try to suss it out is the rigor of the review process of the two journals as an indicator of the level of trust a scientist can put in the papers they read.
Assuming all other things are equal, it takes a much bigger network on the part of section editors to find qualified reviewers for 9000 papers than for 300 papers. My assumption is that there's some limit to the amount of work you can ask of a section editor.
So, the way you pose your question, if the staff involved in reviewing at the journal with 9000 publications was 20-30 times bigger than that of the journal with 300 publications, I would probably be able to accept that the quality of the peer review were roughly equivalent, and then move on to asking other questions about which journal I would send a manuscript to.
In reality, such considerations would probably not work into my decision making process. I'd start by considering which journals people in my area tend to publish in, impact factor, which journals appear in my citation list ...
Note that the factors in my "real" decision tree are not independent of the question you're asking -- if the editorial standards of the journal publishing 9000 papers per year were not up to snuff, I assume that that journal would not attract the papers of people in my field that I respect, and would not have a good impact factor.
Scott Seidman - on a personal level, I feel a huge disconnect. I went through 5 journals and 3 publishing houses with my article. And I did not see even one intelligent and thoughtful sentence from neither support personal, editors or reviewers. On the other hand, when you read discussion boards like this one, you see highly intelligent discussions about the peer-review process.
@TheMatrixEquation-balance Do you have an advisor/mentor helping you?
@BryanKrause - Yes. I worked on this article with a professor who published dozens of articles and books. Reviews were actually helpful for our article. But the level of comments and templated sentences from editors install doubts about the usefulness of the peer-review process.
Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.904185
| 2017-06-23T06:29:43 |
91244
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexander Woo",
"David Ketcheson",
"Divya Varshney",
"Federico Poloni",
"GEdgar",
"Jagan Mohan",
"Yacine",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75142",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8104",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/91244"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What should I do if I have just observed minor mathematical typos in my accepted paper?
My paper was accepted at a good conference after 3 reviewers cleared it. After proof reading for the publishing, I sent it to the editor with approval.
However, now I have realised that there are 2 mistakes in the paper: 1. One of the equations dependent on time is using t instead of t+1 2. One of the equations is using best instead of best_i.
The editor has told me that the paper has been sent already for printing, and nothing can be done anymore. Can someone suggest what might be the best course of action now?
Are these errors any competent reader will know how to correct for themselves? If yes, then I would say you don't need to worry about it, because papers have these kinds of typos all the time. It's the errors that readers wouldn't know how to fix that are problematic.
These two equations were picked up from a paper (after referencing), so if the reader follows the reference given, he would be able to correct the mistake by himself. Mistake1 may not be detected otherwise, however Mistake2 is fairly obvious.
Some academics have a web site (for example, provided by their university) where they list errata for all their publications.
Okay, I'll do that too, apart from notifying the editor about the error.
These are not mathematical errors, these are simply innocuous typos in the formulas. Published papers are full of them. A "mathematical error" to me means "the proof of Theorem 1 does not work because you wrongly assumed $\xi$ to be positive", or even "Theorem 1 is false; here's a counterexample. It can't be salvaged even if one adds a technical assumption."
@FedericoPoloni Please make it as an answer to vote for it. I would add if the error will be obvious when the reader implements the method, so it does not make any sense. As long as it is clear from the context that you mean $x$ and not $y$, the error can be negligible.
@John It doesn't answer the question ("what should i do?"), so I think it's more appropriate as a comment.
@FedericoPoloni By reading the question and your comment, I got convinced, even if you did not suggest what to do. However, it is clear that the error should be neglected or corrected in the own webpage of the author.
I edited the title, since the answer could be quite different if the "errors" were fundamental rather than typographical.
As you wrote yourself:
The editor has told me that the paper has been sent already for printing, and nothing can be done anymore.
Given that the editor decides how a publication runs, there is nothing you can do. "Normal" journals usually publish errata but conference papers often do not have that possibility.
Don't worry about it too much: everybody makes mistakes/typos and it is not a big problem. The intelligent reader will spot the mistakes and not mind too much because he gets the point anyway, the other readers will not spot the mistake so they won't care either.
Just make sure you learn from this: next time double check everything and ask a meticulous, friendly colleague to do the same.
What you need to do is to request for a Corrigendum (some journals use erratum to denote Author originated mistakes).
A corrigendum refers to a change to their article that the author wishes to publish at any time after acceptance. (from Elsevier)
The Conference proceedings journal will have a page left empty for errata and corrigendum.
The journal is actually printed once a year. So if the errata is printed in the next journal, would it still be fine?
Please correct me if there is some other way the errata is published. I assume that it must be published with the next journal.
Moreover, @JaganMohan, can you please tell me how the errata would be presented for the original version of the paper?
If it is published in the next issue (even yearly), it would be fine. Also, sometimes, before the next annual issue, the publishers might choose to publish the erratum on their website along with the online paper if possible. Hope this helps.
@JaganMohan I have to disagree. Almost every published paper has such small typos. If for each typo, we need an erratum, journals will stop publishing articles and publish instead erratums for previous papers.
@John Typos are OK, but errors in Mathematical Formulae are a different beast altogether. Most Mathematical, Physics, et journals take their formulate very very seriously and would have low threshold for unacknowledged errors even withdrawing papers on notice.
It is up to the Author to request for clarification and up to the Editor to decide if the mistake warrants a change.
For Stack Exchange, the advice should be to allow for the best possible output.
Imagine if my advice was for: Just ignore it, nothing can be done and in fact, the journal takes mathematical mistakes seriously?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.904600
| 2014-03-22T18:52:12 |
18427
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Blueworld",
"Chris Beck",
"Genti Saliu",
"Jon",
"Tobias",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13428",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49948",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49949",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49950",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49951",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49952",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49953",
"itsjustme",
"murray"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8105",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18427"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Writer's contact information in recommendation letter
Should a recommendation letter for graduate school contain the writer's contact information?
Yes, probably. In general when you communicate with someone it is good practice to make it easy for them to get in touch with you again.
Many recommendation letters (admittedly mostly at the higher levels) end with "Please contact me if you want further information." And while doing graduate admissions in my department I have (occasionally) contacted a recommender for further information.
It is hard to see the downside of this. The people who read these letters are conscientious, busy professionals: they're not going to start spamming you or calling you up for frivolous reasons. The lack of including contact information might possibly be perceived negatively, but we well know that such letters are written quickly by busy people, so it is more likely to be perceived as an oversight. Furthermore, increasingly many academics have a website which tells how to reach them, so if I can google the professor's name and find out their email address that way, no problem. I would still feel free to contact them if I had a question to ask.
Another reason to include contact information: so that the receiving party can check the authenticity of the recommendation. (Unfortunately, it is not unknown for academic applicants to fabricate recommendations!)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.904872
| 2015-12-04T14:35:55 |
59369
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Arya Abhishek",
"Eqbal Ghasemyani",
"Federico Poloni",
"JeffE",
"PhilipRoman",
"Spammer",
"Steve Jessop",
"Tong Xie",
"akunset mantap1",
"fastwin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163891",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163892",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163905",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163908",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163909",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163946",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8234",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"larry",
"paul garrett",
"phys_chem_prof"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8106",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59369"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it okay to start a collaboration with a research group of which you're reviewing a paper?
A scientific journal assigned me a paper to review.
During the review process, I realized I have some interesting ideas about the paper project, so I am thinking about to contact the authors and propose them to start a collaboration together.
What should I do?
Should I contact them and explain my proposals directly? But will this invalidate my journal review?
In these cases, the first person to contact is the editor. Ask them to recommend the best course of action to you.
Finish the review and wait until the paper you are reviewing is published to contact them.
Reviews are supposed to be anonymous and by doing this you waive your anonymity away.
Yes, this. You cannot ethically admit to anyone (except the editor, or without the editor's permission) that you know the paper exists until it is formally published. On the other hand, if they've posted a preprint to the arXiv or their home page, you can admit that you know that exists, but if you start a collaboration, you should recuse yourself from refereeing the journal submission.
I see. But the publication time is very long. It will be probably published in September 2016... should I wait until that?
Yes, @larry, you have to wait, if there's no arXiv or homepage publication you could possibly have seen.
@paulgarrett Nope, there's no preprint around. I really hope I won't have lost my will about this project by that time
Look for other papers from that group. It is unlikely they have a single paper on the interesting topic. Contact them regarding the previous papers and submit your review in the meantime.
@JeffE: if the editor's permission is sufficient then why is it better to wait until the paper is published than it is to seek the editor's permission to proceed before that point? Is this one of those things that's so clearly dodgy and astonishing that it would damage the questioner's standing even to seek permission to do it?
Is this one of those things that's so clearly dodgy — Yes.
Almost universally, recent collaborators are flagged as conflicts of interest for the purpose of peer reviewing. Once you start collaborating with them, you fall into that category and you acquire a conflict of interest that is incompatible with your role as reviewer. No matter how you cut it, it's not kosher.
The ethics involved are much more muddy than invalidating a review. I suggest that taking action based upon the document you've been handed in confidence isn't right.
To say that reading a privileged document might not change the way you approach a problem somehow is naive, but to out and out arrange a collaboration with the authors during the process is simply over the top. I suspect if your community knew of such action, they would not approve of it. If I were the author, I would be giving the editor a piece of my mind about the reviewer.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.905202
| 2016-11-11T01:30:51 |
79677
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"BioGeo",
"ConfusedStudent007",
"Dr. Mom",
"Jeff",
"JeffE",
"Marta",
"NZKshatriya",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56279",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8107",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79677"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can a PhD student who preps animals for study, but didn't collect data, claim co-authorship?
I am a Phd student in immunology. I was the first student of my supervisor. 4 months after my arrival to the lab, another phd student started to work with us. We work with samples that we obtain from mice (bone marrow, blood, etc.). My supervisor wanted me to work in breeding, weaning, genotyping and handling (injections etc) our mice for the whole laboratory in addition to my project.
Although it was absolutely fine at the beginning, she did not want the other phd student to do any mouse work for 3.5 years. She told me that it would be considered as co-authorship. But when his paper was submitted, she excluded me even from ackowledgement. My supervisor blamed this on the student as he did not want to write my name. Then later told me it was just a help not a contribution. It is not a piece of data that i can claim in the paper. However, if this work was not done, paper would not be out. What would you advise?
Some peculiar problems with language... and with description of the situation...
More information would be helpful. What changed between when they said you were considered a co-author to the end? Do you have these things written down, maybe in emails? Did you change your duties, or not finish something? Even excluding you from acknowledgments seems spiteful, but also makes me wonder what we're missing.
As i explained above, i and other phd student started around the same time in the lab. But at the end of the third year, i already had 1 first name paper published and 2 projects almost completed which could turn into two papers. i already did almost 10 poster-talk presentations in symposiums. On the other hand, other one had no project working. Because of this my supervisor even made the masters student give her results to give him (which was about 60% of the paper) and wrote her name as 2nd co-author not 50% contributed author. Most of the conversations we had was oral.
I am at the end of my phd, i have my third paper that i am going to submit soon. No collaboration existed at the time (3 years work). Now its 98% completed and she puts pressure on me to write his name in my paper. I am totaly stucked and trying to understand the situation.
If [someone] contributed to a research paper…can she claim authorship? — Generally, yes. That's what authorship means.
By definition, you can't claim authorship unless you have been involved in the experiments AND writing of paper. That's why it's been suggested to me to be actively involved in every part of the project. Otherwise, you can't really claim authorship. Of course, that's not how it works most of the time, but personally I don't think breeding mice and doing injections means should be a co-author. I do that even for collaborators often.
That's a big issue I believe throughout academia. The problem is that different PIs have different standards in allowing or not co-authorships. Another issue is the double standards, as some PIs attitude is different. Probably the most common is to favour a PIs permanent co-worker, rather than a temporary employee who may have contributed more. Now, officially there are guidelines by the journals about who is supposed to be a co-author, although there are deliberate gaps for misinterpretation. So, generally it depends on the supervisor.
My rule of thumb is to add people that had some mental input while contributing to the specific project. So, the technician who cleans the labware would not qualify, the one who feeds the rats probably not also. But if the specific experiment had some specific requirements that you could provide, then it would probably qualify. On the other hand, if it was agreed like that from the beginning that that would be your contribution for the paper, why it would change afterwards...
As far as authorship goes, as the most relevant definition a la Merriam-Webster, "the source (as the author) of a piece of writing, music, or art." Seeing as what is more or less a lab tech job of prepping animals really does nothing so far as data collection or writing, would this not fall into support staff or just a line entry such as people who helped make the paper/project possible?
I think there are two ethical issues here:
1) Authorship. By most definitions, the work you did does not qualify you for authorship, because you did not have a significant hand in drafting/designing the research or the manuscript (that doesn't mean some labs wouldn't assign authorship in this case, but that if you read the fine print for authorship requirements for journals or professional societies, animal husbandry would not be sufficient). It seems clear you did not have a role in the manuscript because you didn't even realize your name was not included in the authors list or acknowledgments until now.
It would generally be good practice for the authors to at least include in acknowledgements somebody who did as much technical support as you did, and it would also be good practice for you to be offered to contribute to the manuscript and analysis to attain authorship privileges. You should not have been offered authorship as an incentive if the PI and other student did not intend to allow you to earn it.
2) Research ethics and appropriate use of graduate students. I think this area is where you have a greater case. It sounds like you were made to do way more work on another project than should be typical for a graduate student. A technician, sure, because your primary position would be as a paid assistant in the lab, but as a student, your primary position is as a student.
I am unclear why your PI thought this other student should not learn to work with the animals when their project was so dependent on animal work - that doesn't seem to be full training, how is the student going to start an independent research career if they have not learned the basic techniques of their field?
By no means should you expect to always work solely on your own project, but, unless you are overstating your contributions, which I understand is certainly possible, it seems like you were made to go beyond the normal level of assistance. I would consider carefully the technical contributions the primary author made to the project, and weigh how your efforts compared in terms of total hours.
Have you also had time to work on your own independent project, and is that work progressing to your satisfaction? If yes, then maybe there isn't a major issue, and this is just an unfortunate situation you will learn from in the future and you certainly now have a good reason to stop doing this work for other students. If no, then you certainly need to address this with your supervisor, and if you can not reach an arrangement that is suitable to you, you may need to talk to your program or department to get further guidance.
I would suggest being candid with your supervisor, and express your concerns. However, make sure that when doing so you keep your concerns professional so it does not come off as petty in-lab competitiveness between graduate students (which is, unfortunately, quite common). Also remember that although you are working on the study, the study and all of its data belong to your institution and the principal investigator of the study. One of the responsibilities of a graduate student is to "give back" to his/her PI's lab in exchange for supervision. This often takes the form of data collection, analysis, coding, etc. -- from your description, it sounds like this is your role. These roles are not typically grounds for authorship. However, if you contributed to the hypothesis formulation, hypothesis testing, or had written portions of the paper, you would be well within your rights to request authorship.
Thank you for your suggestions and ideas for the question. Training of the other students and teaching them how to analyse data are part of my responsibilities. I agree with that part. I would not count that as a co-authorship, it should not be. However, genotyping of 3500 mice in 3 years? as in that case, it includes 3 different pcr protocol, and in the end you produce a data which will allow you to decide which mice could be used in the experiments. Any mistake done at the process, when realized can even make a paper a crap. Are you all sure is it for nothing?
It is not "all for nothing", but contributes to the advancement of science. It also contributes to your lab's success. This being said, this is why I suggest that you bring your concerns to your PI. It all depends on your job description, and what your PI expects from you - i.e., how much do they expect you to contribute, and in what capacity. Although you may feel that your contributions were above and beyond what was expected of you as a RA, ask yourself who would have done this job if you did not. A case can be made for the importance of all jobs throughout the research process.
I'm not from the field, but if this work is one a technician could do, then it's generally up to the PI to add or not the technician in the authors list.
Not a tech but a research assistant. Usually our research assistants have Master's degree. If a supervisor has enough money ($30/hour), they hire. In our case, my PI did not want to spend money. But even that i know research assistants whose names are written on papers doing the same.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.905971
| 2017-01-08T22:28:24 |
82870
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Andrew is gone",
"BioGeo",
"Captain Emacs",
"Dan Romik",
"Franck Dernoncourt",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Significance",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27825",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48584",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62976"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8108",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/82870"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How often are authors not allowed to send their paper by email upon request?
Emailing the authors of a paper is a common way to obtain access to the paper when it is behind paywalls. However, publishing contracts may forbid authors to send their paper by email.
Is there any research/study/survey that tried to quantify how often authors are not allowed to send their paper by email upon request? I am especially interested in papers written in English.
The RoMEO Journals database contains thousands of journals, labeled with their archiving policy (preprint/postprint/publisher's version):
Except of the database:
That gives an approximate lower bound on how often authors are allowed to send their paper by email upon request, since if an author can upload a preprint/postprint/publisher's version to a repository, they are most likely allowed to send it to someone by email upon request.
Looking at the publishers might give a decent approximation but journals from the same publisher may have different policies, e.g. http://www.nature.com/news/gates-foundation-research-can-t-be-published-in-top-journals-1.21299:
A spokesperson for Nature’s publisher, Springer Nature, said that most Springer Nature journals do comply with the Gates Foundation policies. (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of the journal Nature.) But a “small number”, including Nature and some Nature-branded research titles, do not.
Related: Am I allowed to share a final copy of my published paper privately?
Really? Do you have an example for forbidding to send a paper by private email (I am not talking about uploading on a public site)? Frankly, if there is something like that, that journal ought to be completely blacklisted for authorship and review.
In the old times, the authors were entitled a number of physical copies to send to whoever requested them. The personal copy of the author today in pdf works the same way, and there is no way to forbid anyone from sharing his own copy with whoever asks for it.
@CaptainEmacs Am I allowed to share a final copy of my published paper privately?
@FranckDernoncourt it's quite telling, I think, that while people in the answers say "this may perhaps be the case", no-one actually names a journal/publisher...
I will speculate (and I'm guessing that a speculative answer is the best you'll be able to get to such a question) that the answer is effectively never. Specifically, I have never heard of a journal attempting to impose such a draconian restriction on authors, and moreover, I can think of two quite strong reasons why they would not do so:
Any journal that attempts to impose such a restriction is very likely to be blacklisted and boycotted by authors.
The restriction is unenforceable, since email communication is private and therefore a violation could never be detected by the publisher. In the world of dealmaking, savvy dealmakers know* that it is completely counterproductive to insert unenforceable clauses into a contract, since they will surely be ignored and their only effect will be to antagonize your counterparty and drive them to deal with a competitor instead.
* Okay, I don't actually know for a fact that "savvy dealmakers know ...", but since I know it and I'm not a very savvy dealmaker myself, I expect that it is even more obvious to savvy dealmakers than it is to me.
To summarize, if there is a journal forbidding authors from sending their paper to colleagues over email, it's a reasonably safe bet that the journal is a nonentity and can be safely ignored.
The copyright provisions of most journals in my field do technically prohibit authors from sharing PDFs of their work. However, as you say, this is unenforcable and pretty much everyone ignores it. I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for it.
@Significance can you provide an example of such a journal?
@Significance it is enforcable (e.g., send an email requesting the paper and see whether the author does it). @ Dan Thanks for the answer, never is a perfectly valid answer.
Many journals stamp the pdf with your name or with the university name when you download it, probably to have the possibility, in principle, to track the pdf.
@MassimoOrtolano but you can send the preprint version.
@DanRomik Yes of course, but sharing the preprint version is usually allowed by all journals, so it's not probably the case of interest to the OP.
@MassimoOrtolano a preprint is as good as the journal version for the purpose of having access to the content, so the distinction seems irrelevant to me. The fact that sending the preprint is allowed by all journals is precisely the point of my answer. OP never specified that he is asking about journal versions only.
@DanRomik I have received enough "I'd be surprised if such a study exists" comments (hello Massimo) that I tend to not specify everything. I am interested in preprints, postprints and final versions, whatever else that could be interesting to share some lights on the question.
@DanRomik "a preprint is as good as the journal version for the purpose of having access to the content" -> since the preprint is an article that has not yet undergone peer review, it is more likely to contain mistakes, be more unclear, be missing some explanation, etc. compared to postprints or final versions.
@Franck in math, authors commonly update their preprint after receiving the comments from the referee and post the updated version on arXiv, so that it effectively matches the published version in all aspects except the page formatting and fancy journal logos. You are right that in the case of an author who doesn't make an updated preprint version available, a preprint would not be as good as the final version (but I don't understand why authors would fail to take such a simple action - indeed I am baffled by many publishing conventions in other disciplines that seem highly suboptimal to me).
@DanRomik (updated preprint = postprint) postprints are not always ok to place online, e.g. see https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/understanding-your-rights-pre-prints-post-prints-and-publisher-versions/ and http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/journalbrowse.php?la=en&fIDnum=|&mode=simple
@significance if you are willing to name-and-shame them, I'd be really interested to know which journals these are. I've yet to encounter such a restriction myself, but I know things can be very interestingly field-dependent.
@DanRomik I have to admit that I'm one of those who don't update the arXiv versions (and my coauthors either). I have a few excuses for this: i) a bit of laziness (I can't deny this); ii) the moment the paper gets published, I've already had enough of revision, proofreading, etc., that I almost lose interest for its fate; iii) in my field, we are such a small community (<100 people) that, in case, asking to someone else for a copy is really not an issue; iv) I usually think I'll do it as soon as I have a free moment...
You will have better luck by looking at this from a publisher level rather than at a journal or conference level. In my field, Computer Science, most if not all publications are done through the ACM or the IEEE. I know for a fact that anything published through either of these institutions can be freely shared by the author, because it's part of their copyright release. Thus, I'm confident saying that most if not all authors of Computer Science articles are freely allowed to share their work.
All ACM publications must bear the following notice:
Copyright © 2016 by the Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.
(ACM). Permission to make digital or hard copies of portions of this
work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided
that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial
advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on
the first page in print or the first screen in digital media.
Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must
be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted.
I'm sure a lawyer could debate me on this, but it sounds to me like the ACM is not just giving the author permission, but anyone permission to make personal copies and distribute them on a per-person basis where there is no commercial incentive. This presumably includes the fostering of research collaborations.
The IEEE language in their contract is similar:
Authors/employers may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the Work, material extracted verbatim from the Work, or derivative
works for the author’s personal use or for company use, provided that
the source and the IEEE copyright notice are indicated, the copies are
not used in any way that implies IEEE endorsement of a product or
service of any employer, and the copies themselves are not offered for
sale.
Here the language is actually a little simpler than the ACM case, because under their language the author can make as many copies as they like and the only real stipulation is that you cannot offer the copies for sale. Under the ACM wording it's not necessarily clear what constitutes a commercial advantage or what constitutes a personal use.
Note that restricting your search to just "may the author email a copy of their own work" might be misleading. My last ACM copyright release specifically provides that I may:
(iii) Post the Accepted Version of the Work on (1) the Author's home
page, (2) the Owner's institutional repository, or (3) any repository
legally mandated by an agency funding the research on which the Work
is based.
Nowhere in this document do they specifically give me the right to email a copy of my work to other people, so whether or not I'm technically allowed to do that is a matter of interpretation of the contract. However, if someone emailed me and asked for a copy I could 100% satisfy that person by providing a link where they could download it from my website rather than email them directly, and I 100% stay within the actions specifically allowed by the contract.
The IEEE has an exactly analogous statement about distributing through personal webservers.
Looking at the publishers might give a decent approximation but journals from the same publisher may have different policies, e.g. http://www.nature.com/news/gates-foundation-research-can-t-be-published-in-top-journals-1.21299 "A spokesperson for Nature’s publisher, Springer Nature, said that most Springer Nature journals do comply with the Gates Foundation policies. (Nature’s news team is editorially independent of the journal Nature.) But a “small number”, including Nature and some Nature-branded research titles, do not. "
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.906773
| 2012-03-13T19:01:05 |
708
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"E.Lim",
"Fomite",
"Jim Clay",
"NPcompleteUser",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Zhen Lin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31176",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31178",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6346",
"tonkatsu182",
"user31151",
"user31187"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8109",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/708"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it possible to work on extra activities (start-up project) during PhD?
I am about to get my bachelor degree in computer science. I have applied PhD programs of US universities to earn doctorate degree in computer architecture subject. I kept my hopes high and applied the most of top US schools, but rejected from the most of them (mostly because my GRE, TOEFL grades are not top for these schools, I think). Hopefully I will be admitted some of the schools that I applied.
I know pursuing a PhD and conducting research is not easy, but it is a serious process that requires the one to devote himself or herself to. Luckily I like working on computer architecture and learn about new innovations, techniques, ideas proposed by researchers. I think computer architecture is a field fully open to innovation, research and development. However, at the same time I love spending time on web technologies. I have been developing new applications related with web services, mobile services, social media, content management systems etc.
Do you think would it be really possible to pursue a PhD and simultaneously work on a start-up project?
I am not looking for answers saying that it would be possible as long as you manage your time to work on them both or it is up to your advisor or program etc. I know after some point everything up to you, but I don't know the PhD experience and that's why I am asking this question here.
PS: I hope this question would help others in the sense that it is about the possibility of serious extra activities during PhD process, rather than being an personal issue.
Yes, Yes and absolutely Yes! Yes, you have to manage and balance your time well and make sure you devote the time to your Ph.D first, if your startup kicks off and you start raking in millions, you may again decide how to distribute your attention :)
Now, what are the benefits of doing a start-up-like project (notice 'like')? You don't really know how/what this project will turn into. So first pursue it as 'passion' or have 'will to do it' to solve a 'pain point' and NOT for 'it's fun to start my company, let's do it!' kinda attitude.
First, find a pain point and talk it out with your peers, friends etc. Basically anyone whose pain you will relieve :) Get a pulse of the solution and its possible acceptability.
Second: Is this in line with your PhD focus area? Can you 'put it line' with it? The reason I ask is that'll be all the more worthwhile and you'd be 2x willing to work your a** off :) and time devoted to either will be beneficial to both!
Now if it's not in line and a totally different project here are some benefits:
Strong honing of skills with a focus on 'value' - you'll HAVE to prioritize the requirements with a focus on the most valuable/risky items first (and not necessarily the easiest ones)
Understanding who will be your success critical stakeholders and how/what will satisfy their needs (i.e. what are the pain points, whose feeling it and how to relieve it)
What it takes to run a business or bring an idea to fruition
How painful is quick and dirty in the long run i.e. if you sacrifice maintainability/readability/adaptability the business will teach a lesson ;)
Develop a techno-business mindset i.e. along with the development skills you'll also (hopefully) develop some valuation skills. These are those that help you 'sell' your idea to someone (VCs, Angels etc.) to invest in your business - you'll learn to speak the language of 'business' to help them understand the value of your idea.
Learn to do risk/return tradeoffs
This will make you a 'System Engineer' in a sense - you'll be able to look at a broader picture along with your particular skill set (computer architecture)
Now, assuming your PhD is purely technical, you will develop (and appreciate) business understanding, complexity and communicability! In the future it'll help you communicate well with the 'other folks' (i.e. marketing, managers, CEOs, bosses, customers etc. etc.)
These skills ARE EXTREMELY VALUABLE in the long run. Working on your start-up project may help you at least get an inkling if not the entire understanding but you WILL definitely have a better understanding of technical + business oriented aspects and I think that's a skill all PhDs ought to have!!
PS: I am in your shoes :)
"Yes, you have to manage and balance your time well and make sure you devote the time to your Ph.D first, if your startup kicks off and you start raking in millions, you may again decide how to distribute your attention :)" - The failure rate for startup businesses is already staggeringly high. The probability you'll "start raking in millions", or do anything other than crater, if you're not focused on the business is - I'd assert - near 0.
Honestly, my instinct is "no".
Both startups and PhD advance in the same way - the massive influx of effort. And that effort is often unpredictable. Both settings have "crunch time" wherein for the next few weeks, you might as well have dropped off the face of the Earth.
Balancing that is, imo, a very tall order for a human being and will probably result in one of them suffering, falling to the side and getting triaged if you try to split the middle.
That being said, there are paths you can try, particularly if you can manage to either consult for a startup in a way that has structured limits on your time, or manage to link your dissertation to the startup's work enough that your effort counts for double. But as entirely unrelated projects? Its begging to have one fall apart.
It depends the most on how much time and effort you need to pursue your start-up project. If you were able to do it and have a normal job - then probably yes.
However, time management is an issue - both PhD and start-up are things with unbounded times - so always competing with each other. The thing with devoting oneself may be psychologically harder, as you need constantly to switch attention and evaluate priorities (but sometimes it may be beneficial - serving as an 'intellectual crop rotation').
Moreover, dealing with the pressure from two opposite sites at once may be difficult. And don't underestimate it.
For US, note that first 1-2 years is the coursework, so it may be not the easiest/possible to start your project then.
Anyway, it may be the best not to start both PhD and star-up exactly at the same time - better to learn how much time & effort is needed for one activity and e.g. what is approach of your professor / graduate school to your other project(s) (actually, sometimes they may be supportive, including in the financial aspect).
Source:
I'm a PhD student running a sort of a start-up project (Confrenzy).
EDIT: Now failed, or frozen.
is it "Welcome to Nginx" campaign?
@NPcompleteUser The site is no longer active, sadly.
Unfortunately the answer you don't want to hear is the most plausible one in my opinion. There are plenty of cases where people even start companies while doing a PhD and then never finish their PhD (Google being a notable example). People also do both at the same time, or change to a part-time PhD.
If you are serious about getting a PhD, this is only really an option in the later years of your studies. If you start working on a project that is not related to your PhD right away you will probably run into difficulties with your studies, the project or both.
Awesome question.
My answer is - for sure! (if it is related to your research as a grad student)
Let me expand. I think grad school is time for couple of things:
Widen your knowledge in the field.
Deepen your knowledge in the subfield of the subfield of the subfield ... of your field
bla bla bla
Get to be known by your peers
Make new connections
Professor could usually tell you that points 4 and 5 are easily achieved by publishing couple of papers and going to couple of conferences (realistically, how many conferences grad student can go in 5 years? maybe 8).
Of course, also, advisor doesn't want you to spend time on the stuff that will not has his/her (advisor's) name on it. That is understandable, advisor needs a list of stuff to put in the grant/whatever proposal to get funding. However:
Advisor pays you a minimum wage (in most of the cases)
Makes you work on his/her spherical cow
There are hardly any jobs on the market [1,2]
For at least these reasons my answer is - for sure.
Now, usually startup'ers invest time and money into something, and hope to get more money back. In my case, I have decided to invest in myself. So my startup goal is to contribute to a list of the opensource/closed source project in my field and arrive into authors/contributors list. This will accomplish the following:
Get to be known by your peers
Make new connections
Get myself aware of the code
One more thing I'm happy about, only my name will be on the list. In academia people get authorship on the papers for all kind of things, only not for doing research, well, in the software - there is no such issue - as commit history is the judge.
thanks for the attention.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/90/web/2012/03/Unemployment-Data-Worst-40-Years.html
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.caredit.a1300184
It can be great if you learn skills that you can apply in your PhD. Some Universities even encourage it. As long as you communicate this clearly to your professor and still devote enough attention to your PhD it is OK.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.907625
| 2012-10-18T14:16:02 |
4831
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Ali Shakiba",
"F'x",
"Fuhrmanator",
"James Manago",
"JeffE",
"Josh Hebert",
"Ng Yong Hao",
"Oscar",
"Roddy",
"T-800",
"Trouble-lling",
"aeismail",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12263",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12270",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12271",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12273",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12274",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12275",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12286",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12320",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3859",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/399",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"mert",
"nkint"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8110",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4831"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What are pros and cons for using summer-break to work in another research group?
Here at my university, we have 12-13 week-long summer break for the students excluding summer-school. It is almost as long as a semester. I guess this is roughly the case for other institutions. In fact I often observe that some grad students use this break to work in another research group usually in another country (European countries mostly, USA rarely). Even some others spend entire two-semeter academic term in another university.
My question is as follows: What would be the pros and cons for using summer-time to work in another research group away from your supervisor and/or your research topic? I guess the situation would be different for a masters and a PhD student (I am currently interested in the situation for a masters student, but general ideas covering the situation would be OK).
For a PhD student? If you have 12-week long summer breaks as PhD student, something is seriously amiss
Related to “Collaborating with professors other than the advisor”
According to our academic calendar, the time period between end of spring and the beginning of fall is 12-week long (ignoring summer-school). However, I am not sure about the case for PhD students. I think they may have to spend some time at the university during the summer, but it is up to the supervisor.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. PhD students don't have 12-week long summer. That would be like, taking at least 3 years’ worth of paid holidays in one single run.
@mert: Rephrasing what F'x said, PhD students are normally hired as year-round workers in their research groups, and don't normally get summer breaks. The only way they'd get the summer off is if they negotiated it with their supervisors in advance, and normally that doesn't happen.
Let me rephrase what F'x said: F'x's PhD students don't have a 12-week-long summer. My PhD students, on the other hand, like most others in my field, regularly take months-long summer internships with my blessing, if not insistence. Your mileage may vary.
Here are the obvious things:
Pro: the work in another group will build contacts, possibly improving your opportunities for future academic positions (PhD, postdoc, assistant professor position).
Pro: funding opportunities, if you're in need of extra money.
Con: the work done in another group will take up time and energy, and if not related to your current work, won't advance your research (experimenting, publishing, etc.). That should probably be your priority (this is related to the comment on the question about it being strange to get 12-week breaks...)
Con: if you don't coordinate it with your supervisor, this could affect the trust in the relationship (depending on the style of the supervisor).
If you wish to pursue an academic career, in some universities respectable journal articles published are worth more than contacts when competing for a job. So don't overestimate the first "pro" I mention above. At the master's level, this is less important.
The best strategy is to coordinate the "outside" work with your supervisor for maximum benefit.
NOTE: The answer below assumes you have approval from your university and/or employer!
If your university is closed for 12 weeks, I would argue it's almost entirely positive to go somewhere else and work, because:
If you work more, you get more results. Sounds obvious, but it's the scientific output that counts. You can't afford lingering around for 12 weeks if you want to get a scientific career. The work you do elsewhere might or might not help you directly towards your PhD, but if it results in publications, it certainly will enhance your academic career, even if the publications are unrelated to your PhD work.
You will enhance your international experience, which will enhance your chances of finding positions later on.
You will improve your academic contacts, which also enhances your chances.
If you acquire your own funding, you will gain experience in finding sources of money, which should also be greatly beneficial for your career.
All in all, I can't think of any reason not to do it, if the alternative is idling.
-1 the OP clearly said "another research group away from your supervisor and/or research topic" -- there's clearly some negative risk there IMO.
"away from supervisor and/or research topic", means it could be away from the supervisor while still beneficial for the own research. If the alternative is being idle, I don't see a negative risk. But I'll amend my answer a bit.
I actually don't have the rep to do a down vote :-)
If you are currently "employed full-time" by a research group (you are a student, or a scientific worker, whose funding is from a given research group), then any extended outside work for another research group needs to be discussed and approved by your current advisor in advance. Failure to do so, as Fuhrmanator suggests, will lead to major conflicts, as you are potentially committing a major breach of etiquette, and possibly violating your departmental regulations or your work contract if you don't secure the permissions in advance.
But that said, the best use of spending time in another research group is to develop new skills and techniques that you couldn't learn (or at least couldn't learn as well) by staying in your "home" group. In such cases, I suspect most advisors would support such a move, so long as it doesn't conflict with your current progress timeline and any requirements of your department (or your funding).
Yes. And related to this question
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.908352
| 2014-07-25T20:57:02 |
26401
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Asha Kanta Sharma",
"JeffE",
"Mad Jack",
"Mark Rosenblitt-Janssen",
"Priya Barani",
"Riya Rathod",
"Robert Hawlik",
"The Byzantine",
"Ulukai",
"Wendy",
"adipro",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149964",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15328",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19703",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70714",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70715",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70727"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8111",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26401"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Efficient ways to find the original paper which introduced a novel concept/algorithm?
Many times while reading papers (especially engineering), many concepts, algorithms or results are taken for granted because they are already established in research. Sadly, at this point, many are not even referenced directly or some authors refer to other publications which use them. Is there a good and a fast method to find the original paper?
Related: How can I find the first researcher who wrote about a specific subject
Good? Yes. Fast? No.
Here's the (horrible cheating) method that I use: if something is so well established that people don't bother referencing the original paper, then there's a good chance it's got an article on Wikipedia or Wolfram Mathworld or some other reference site. The references of such an article often include the original paper, but even if they don't they usually include something close enough in time that it does actually reference the original (or at least something closer to the point).
In many cases, however, you may not actually want the original: as the original becomes better understood, its presentation is often made much clearer and more succinct, and later textbooks or reviews may actually be the right source to point people at. For example, consider the difference between Newton's calculus, and calculus as it is now taught to undergraduates.
The best way is to talk with your professors. They should be familiar with established research and the people who originated novel ideas.
Failing that, using your skills at research at your library or asking a reference librarian to help you.
And how do you know the asker isn't a professor?
@JeffE Why is it not possible for a professor to talk with his professors?
Professors don't have professors. They have colleagues.
You are under the false assumption that professors know-it-all!
@TheByzantine, No, but they should know their field and take the challenge to answer a student's question by getting the knowledge.
Well, many of the professors are just following the money. They change fields, research directions to get grants where money is being pumped. Many have no clue what the new field is and it is up to the graduate student to explore on his own
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.908589
| 2017-11-24T20:15:18 |
99370
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Mark",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75255"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8112",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99370"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Accepting a tenure track position if I know I won’t stay till tenure
I am currently a fixed-term faculty, with the hopes of a tenure-track position somewhere. The last two years I’ve bounced between fixed-term position, both in at least reasonable long-distance driving from where my fiancé and I live. Now a tenure track position has come available for next year still not close to us but again reasonable long distance driving (I've worked anywhere from 1.5-3 hours away).
I am hoping in the time it would take to get tenure at this new position, a tenure track position in our actual city will become available (pretty big metro). Would I be screwing myself to leave the long-distance tenure track position without tenure, if I got a tenure-track position in our local city? Would it be a red-flag that I’m even applying without tenure or could I explain location as the reason for the move in my cover letter?
Some answers also in https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34965/will-it-hurt-you-to-leave-a-tenure-track-position-for-another-after-one-year
I would ask what the cost of applying is, the expected duration of the process, and the prediction of a similar position opening at your current institution.
If the cost is effectively zero (perhaps two hours of your time, then another hour to interview), the process taking 6 months, and a cursory conversation with your dept. head and budget, you will lose out if you never apply.
But if you do apply, and you are not offered anything, what would the harm be?
If you receive an offer, would you bet that it would be better (in terms of salary and benefits) than your current role right now?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.908783
| 2017-11-04T03:59:55 |
98392
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"AJK",
"Captain Emacs",
"David Richerby",
"Fomite",
"Greg",
"HEITZ",
"Noah Snyder",
"Rain",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9892"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8113",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98392"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can PhD students publish papers as sole author without including their supervisor?
If the supervisor does not actually write anything for or contribute to the paper, can a PhD student submit the paper as a single Author?
Would this be a faux pas and cause a strained relationship with the supervisor? I know they expect their name to be on all papers related to the PhD.
Also, does using their lab mean they have a right to have their name on the paper?
What field? Is this a field with a “last author” convention?
You ask two very different questions: if one can do it and if it will cause a strained relationship. Sure, yes, and depends on person, but can easily.
The thing that causes strained relationships with supervisors is doing stuff that relates to them without discussing it with them. No reasonable supervisor will object to you asking them, "I was thinking of doing X -- would that be OK?", unless X is something so egregious that any reasonable person would know it was deeply wrong. Ask your advisor. Their job is to provide advice to you.
Note: make sure your advisor is really not meeting the criteria for authorship before you consider this at all! See discussion on, e.g. https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship
Thank you all for your comments. Definitely supervisor discussions must happen. I just needed to hear from all what their views are before I discuss this with supervisor. I'm mostly an independent researcher on this. No funding no intellectual input from anyone. No lab support. Etc.
If the supervisor does not actually write anything or contribute in
the paper, can a PhD student write as a single Author?
Yes. If for no other reason than I did, which suggest its possible
Would this be a faux pas and cause a strained relationship with the
supervisor?
It depends on many, many factors. Is this a side-project that's been taking away from your actual work? Then it probably will. Have you talked to your supervisor and decided that it's the right way forward? Then it probably won't.
I know they expect their name to be on all papers related to the PhD.
This is not universally true. While I expect to be an author on most of my graduate student's papers, that's because I expect to have done work on most of them. With an upper, and potentially likely bound of "all of them". But if a student wrote something independent, then no, I don't expect my name on it.
Also, does using their lab mean they have a right to have their name
on the paper?
It depends on what you mean by "using their lab". Generally speaking, just providing equipment isn't enough to warrant authorship, but if I did use someone's lab, I'd take a long look at the "did nothing" assumption and make sure it's true.
That's also potentially the source of a strained relationship - if you're using my space, equipment, and potentially reagents for a project I'm not participating in, I'd be less than thrilled unless it was discussed ahead of time.
Thank you very much Fomite for your detailed answer. I'm using equipment I designed in his lab which I wrote a paper on with his name too. If I use this same equipment for a different paper related to my PhD, but a branch which my supervisor doesn't specialize in - would this warrant their name on the paper for each time I use this equipment?
@Rain Something like that is a conversation to have with your supervisor.
Basically the question becomes, if I published a paper including his name because he intellectually helped in the design. Does this mean every time I use this design for another paper, I have to put his name? (Although the topic is different and he will not contribute intellectually)
ok. I guess this is where I will start. Thank you. I just needed to know before I open the topic, and accidentally offend him.
@Rain In theory the answer is "Probably not". In practice, whether your supervisor is alright with you heading in a different direction, or whether or not they believe there is no potential for him to contribute intellectually, are functionally unknowable without talking to him.
Generally speaking, providing funding/equipment/space does not warrant authorship. Authorship is granted based on intellectual contributions to the work. It is somewhat rare for a student to conduct research and author a paper in which his/her supervisor contributes nothing, but if that were true, you could make a case for single authorship. But, such a proposal can be a faux pas, if it suggests you do not appreciate or even acknowledge your mentor's input.
I don't even get funded. No intellectual contribution to the paper. But, worried this strains the relationship..
If there was truly no intellectual contribution, I don't think you can even call that person a mentor. Are you sure that there have been no lab meetings, no private one-on-one meetings, or any interactions about the topic that could be considered 'intellectual'? Think broadly.
for this paper, the answer is no. It's in general a new topic I introduced to my supervisor. Not really his specialty. He did contribute to another paper which I put his name. But for this paper, it's a branch on its own. He doesn't have knowledge in. I'm only using his lab for it.
The thing is, I'm afraid the supervisor gets angry and gets in my way of getting a PhD for not putting their name.
Did you use a tool that was designed as to your supervisor's specifications? You seem to indicate that?
@CaptainEmacs Well I'm using a design that I designed and the supervisor had input in that design. So I published with their name. Would the use of this tool in any future paper mean their name must be on the paper? Because I'm assuming if we use tools others worked on, we would all have names of people we wouldn't even know.
You would at the very least have to cite your supervisor's previous papers.
@CaptainEmacs Thanks. I don't think supervisor minds after discussions as they agree too on my points of no funding or intellectual input or lab help or manuscript writing or previously designed equipment by me. But I will remember to cite their work as a nice gesture (although their work isn't related, but will try).
Short answer:
Yes, if the supervisor has not contributed to the scientific work.
No, if the supervisor provided the specific question or direction of research.
And, yes, it may cause some resentment from the supervisor. Though this depends on the supervisor, the area, and the past work and relationship between you two. In your case, you explain precisely why it will cause such a resentment.
My conclusion then: unless you have an extremely strong reason not to, you should consider including the supervisor as it does not detract in any significant way your credit.
At least at one math department in Finland, an article PhD thesis must include at least one single-authored article or preprint by the doctorand. Since people graduate from there, it follows that it must be possible to publish a paper without the supervisor's name.
This mostly certainly depends on the academical field in question.
Also, asking the supervisor if their name should be included sounds like a good choice. Presumably, they are a reasonable human being (you being their student), and will answer honestly and not take any offense on you asking.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.909303
| 2018-05-26T18:01:54 |
110375
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8114",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110375"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Collaborator omitting my name from their CV
I started working at a new university one year ago. Within this year I started working with a colleague, who before we collaborated had no experience on research, i.e., he was on the teaching side. We developed a couple of proposals, with me as principal investigator. One got rejected, and a second got accepted. We also started to work on initial ideas for a couple of papers, without any substantial work or input from him, i.e., I identified the journals, the theme for the paper, the structure, etc.
With the initial funding that got accepted we made a research trip to the university of my previous employment, where I still have collaborations. Within this process my colleague decided to apply for a position there, and while preparing his CV he omitted my name from his CV listing, for example, the projects with only his name as co-author, or co-investigator with no investigator listed, under directions from the new Head of my previous place of work that a disassociation or omission of my name might make it easy for my former colleagues to offer him a position, as I did not get along with a couple of them. I found out when he gave me his CV to review and I asked him to add the credits to those projects and future papers, indicating that there were credits messing for other people as well. I mentioned how this was unethical, including the fact that papers that were not yet written should not be mentioned. He disagrees and believes that this was acceptable, so long as he did not claim he did the whole work himself, alluding to the readers of his CV that other people are involved as he is a co-author.
Having spent all my academic life being extra careful with details and credits in my CV and others', as some time that is all a person gets for academic effort, I wanted to ask whether you find this behaviour ethical or unethical within academia?
Some of what your colleague did is unethical, some of it is not.
For listing grant funding, I haven’t seen a whole lot of official standards for how they should be presented. Listing one’s own role (PI, co-I, etc.) should be sufficient. One need not list all the principals for the grant (unless specifically asked).
However, when it comes to papers, leaving off who’s a coauthor on a paper is definitely unethical. It’s also unethical, in my view, to list a paper that you couldn’t produce if asked. So anything that’s just in the planning stage should not be listed.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.909570
| 2017-09-24T01:24:25 |
96402
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"1006a",
"Astor Florida",
"Davor",
"Mayou36",
"Our",
"aparente001",
"cbeleites",
"heropup",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58030",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58598",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80258"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8115",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96402"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What should TAs do if students disrespect them?
TAs are responsible for answering students' questions. But sometimes there are bad-mannered students who don't treat the TA with respect during the interaction. Should TAs just take it and still answer students with patience? Otherwise, they may be complained about by students. Or do TAs have a right to ask students to behave politely before answering them, or to just simply refuse to meet them?
Just to make sure: what do you exactly mean by bad-mannered? You know,I have seen TAs which tell something obviously wrong and when I (we, a couple of students noticed it) intervened, he told that I am wrong. Some students may leave it like that, but some may discuss further. If you, for example, classify this as bad-mannered (or questions in general?), it is a completely different story than "really" bad manners. So can you may elaborate on this, if possible with examples?
Could you add some context? Where are you (what country), and what kinds of disrespectful actions have you observed?
You are not owed respect, any more than you're owed any other feeling. If they are breaking a rule, than deal with that. If they are not breaking a rule, just shut up and do your job.
@Davor: of course students need to respect TAs the same is they need to respect any other human. Regardless whether it is a TA, technician, cleaning staff or the director.
@cbeleites "students need to respect TAs (or any other human being)" is just an opinion, so in this context, it is meaningless, I think. Plus, I actually agree with Davor, regardless of whether the that person is TA or a Professor, as long as the student is not breaking any rules, you should continue to your job because there is no reason for not to do it.
@cbeleites - that's the thing, I don't need to respect anyone. Fortunately we still don't live in a complete dystopia where wrongthink is literally a crime.
@Davor: we may have misunderstanding what "respecting" means. To me the basic level of respect that is due to everyone it is closely linked to the human rights (dignity), and respect to me is not a feeling but a property of your treatment of the person in question or your interaction with them. IMHO, anyone (including students :-P) is welcome to have whatever opinion, feelings and thoughts of anyone else (including TAs) - they are their very own. But interactions nevertheless need to meet the standard for professional manners. I do consider not meeting such a standard as breaking rules....
... This is my mental image triggered by the question: (Personally, I never had trouble with students treating me disrespectfully, btw) students leaving heaps of rubbish (chocolate papers, ...) in a lecture hall. I consider this very rude and disrespectful against the cleaning staff - and very unprofessional. It is clearly unacceptable behaviour in my culture. So is not greeting/not replying the greeting to receptionists or cleaning staff (or TAs or professors, ...). These 2 symptoms of lack of respect are the most common I've seen - and this is the level of (dis)respect I'm talking about.
@cbeleites - you are now also smushing professionalism into this all encompassing 'respect" that you have defined. To me, this word means nothing anymore, as it can mean everything. There are laws, there are rules, there are regulations. Bringing in abstract emotional concept like respect into it only makes the issues worse. Is leaving heaps of rubbish behind against the rules or your organisation? If yes, than enforce the rule. If not, either do nothing or complain to your superiors that you want such a rule. But no one cares about your private emotions about such matters.
The TAs in question should speak with the director of the course first and foremost - it will be important to have that person "on their side", and they likely have a better idea of what actions are available to the TA.
In a more general sense, my opinion is that you try to treat those students with a sort of detached professionalism, but you are under no obligation to go the extra mile to help them. And you are absolutely within your rights to ask them to behave politely.
As a TA, you have been granted a degree of authority from the instructor or professor that you are assisting, and in turn, the educational institution that employs you. Your mentality should reflect this responsibility that you have undertaken.
One of the things that I learned from teaching is that your own attitude and professionalism (or lack thereof) is continuously signaled to your students. That's not to say you have to rule with an iron fist in order to have your students' respect, especially in higher education. But if you act like a student that just happens to have teaching responsibilities, you could be setting up a learning environment that opens you up to being disrespected.
When I was a TA, there was only one incident where I had to explicitly establish my authority. During my recitation section, two undergraduates sitting at the back of the classroom were gossiping loudly, to the point where they were clearly disrupting the other students. I stopped mid-sentence, stopped writing on the board, turned around, and simply waited. The other students of course immediately noticed, but it took about 5 seconds for them to realize I had stopped because they were busy listening to each other. Once they had shut up and turned to look at me, I said, quite firmly but calmly, "Nobody is forcing you to be here. If you'd like to continue your conversation, feel free to do it elsewhere, but don't disrupt your classmates who are here to learn." And then I went right back to teaching.
My point is that you have power, and you should not feel shy about using it, so long as you remember that your purpose is to facilitate the education of your students. To the extent that lack of respect or disruptive behavior interferes with that goal, not only are you within your rights to exercise corrective action, I would say you have a duty to do so. However, the nature of your interactions with your students must always be professional. If there is disagreement about course topics, that's fine as long as it stays in the bounds of the concepts being taught. It's not fine if it becomes personal (e.g., "What you said was so obviously wrong! How can you be the TA for this class?" or "You're just an undergrad, and I'm doing my PhD in this stuff so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about here").
A similar strategy is to ask their names, and make a point of writing their names down. This is a subtle reminder that you have power over their grades - but never ever mention this.
@Davor I don't think it's out of line for a TA to get to know each student, and that could be accomplished by taking names (although in my opinion it is preferable to do it in a more organic way; e.g., through one-on-one interactions). Again, I subscribe to the philosophy that the TAs are there to facilitate learning by providing more personalized instruction in a large class than what the professor can do. They are not there to make the students "feel good" or be their shoulder to cry on. It's a university, not kindergarten.
To be clear, it's not the TA's problem if, as part of doing their job--and it IS a job--some students think that they're power tripping. As long as the TA is behaving professionally and making good faith efforts to help their students, they're fulfilling their role. If students don't like being held accountable for their conduct, that's their problem and their loss, not the TA's.
@heropup - of course, I agree. I was merely disputing axsvl77's advice that a TA should publicly threaten a student, whether explicitly or implicitly. I've seen that in action, it did not end well for the TA.
I loved your description of the technique right up to the sentence that began "Once they had shut up and turned to look at me". At that point, all you'd have to do, 99% of the time, would be to continue with what you were writing, drawing, explaining, asking, etc. In fact, the technique you described will often be more effective without the heavy handed scolding.
Some schools have a policy that disruptive students can be asked to leave the class by the instructor. You might check to see if the situation you describe rises to such a level.
Certainly consider discussing the situation with the supervising professor and/or the department chairperson.
First: The TA should try the best to find out the reason(s) behind such behaviour of the students. For example, (1) if the TA is very friendly with the students and has maintained a small distance with the fellow students, then the students might be thinking him as their friend in which case the formality would not come in the class; (2) if TA is not able to do proper teaching or problem solving, then students might take him as granted.
It also depends on the class size.
Second: What can be done?
As @Fomite points out, the TA should speak with the course in-charge to plan out the things to get the students in line. But, be ready with your points to discuss with the Professor as (s)he would definitely ask questions related to my 'First' point.
This is a difficult question to answer, we have to first consider the problem of "what level of respect should the students give the TA ?"
I am a docent in Europe and I have to teach undergrads in tutorials, and there are some things which I just let pass and somethings which I have zero tolerance for. Some things are so extreme that I would not tolerate them for a moment but thank goodness they have never occured.
Consider what you think is reasonable, do you want to expect the students to treat you like a god and even ignore you when you make an error ? If you expect that then sadly you will be very disappointed.
At the other end of the spectrum if a student made a comment about the appearance of a TA and made a sexual remark about them. Then I would strongly hold the view that this is totally unacceptable, as an academic if a TA came to my office and told me such a thing had happened then I would be deeply troubled and the next thing I would be doing would be contacting the HR officer for advice. I have never had a student come on to me in class, I hold a view that sexual relationships between the academic and the undergrad are an exceptionally bad idea.
I would lump racist, sexist or other bigoted abuse into the same bin of horrors which I would blow my lid at. If a student came to me and told me they did not want a white / black / asian / female / gay / muslim / jewish / christain / green / purple / whatever TA,
I would say "tough you are not able to choose the colour (gender / sexuaility / religion) of your TA. Chemistry is the same chemistry regardless of who the TA is. You need to grow up and become less bigoted"
In the middle you have a wide range of behaviours, I have had the class clown who kept on asking very odd questions such as "how long will be DVD player battery last" during a lesson on elctrochemistry (nerst equation). My advice with such people is never lose your cool, stay calm you need at least one adult in the room. One of those adults has to be you ! As long as the class clown does not disrupt the teaching you will just have to tolerate them.
The disruptive student who is chatting away on their phone or otherwise disrupting the lesson. My advice is to tell them to be quiet, and point out that they need to respect the right of others to learn. Also point out that if they want to discuss some sporting event from last night, their social lives or otherthings which are unreleated to the lesson then they can wait until they are not in the class before doing so.
I had a very offensive student who was being exceptionally rude to me and he kept saying "you do not know my name, you can not do anything about me". By chance I found out his name, the way I then dealed with the student was to walk up to him the next time I had to teach in the undergrad lab. I greeted him by name and told him I was glad to see him, I also told him that I hoped that he was going to have a productive and enjoyable day in the lab. This changed him from a horrible pest into a rather likeable little lamb.
Sometimes a good sense of humor is needed for improving the behaviour of students and making them keep their minds on the subject. I was once teaching basic nuclear chemistry to some undergrads. I had one who was swearing a lot and using the "s word". I turned to the class and in a totally deadpan way, I told them that the classic bioassay for determining exposure to airbourne plutonium is to get a feces sample, ash it and then measure the plutonium content in it. Suddenly using the s word was not quite so funny for the student. Human waste was no longer a swear word it was now something else. Sadly there are limited times when you can pull a stunt like that one to get them to focus and stop swearing.
It is important that you lead by example, if you for example want to your classroom to a cuss free zone, then do not litter your speech with colourful language which would make a factory labourer blush (I used to be a factory labourer in my youth).
You need to keep in mind that as a TA you are not there to be their friend, you are there to teach. Be friendly but try to keep a distance from the students. Never use your time as a TA to try to chat up students (ask for date) or arrange your social life with the students. I have seen some people break this rule, it results in a loss of respect from both the students and other people in the university.
One of the other people commented about make sure that they know you know their names as you have power over their grades. I would advise you to divorce in your mind their conduct in the classroom from their homework. If you grade problem sheets or homework, then ignore the name on written work. You should grade merely what is in front of you on the paper, do not care who the person is. Grade the written work in a totally fair way. One thing that this avoids, is if some horrible student who was "mouthing off" at you, conducting their social life in the classroom and calling you every dirty name under the sun spots that you marked them down becuase their were an arse in your lesson, then they have a tool to make your life harder. They now have a means of complaining to your boss.
If you grade them fairly and the student you flunk (one which did poor work) goes moaning to the head of department, the prof or whoever. If this person has a backbone they will tell the student to stop moaning when they see how you have marked their homework fairly.
You may sometimes have to accept that you might get a very gifted but lazy student. Occasionally you might encoutner a genius with a attitude problem who is lazy, unless you are in a subject such as medicine or the nuclear sector where a standard of behaviour (having the right attitude) is required for work then you will have to just put up with the lazy student who makes lifestyle choices which you disapprove of. I hold the view that the genius should use their time in a productive way rather than merely doing what is required of them in 5 minutes when most students need a whole hour to do it before doing no further productive work. But not everyone sees it the same way as me.
From the first moment you start to feel uncomfortable, you should inform either the professor teaching the course (if you are a grader), or your supervising administrator (if you are the instructor of the course, section, recitation section, or lab).
You are part of a system -- you are a cog in a complex machinery system. Each part of the machine plays its role. Part of your job as a TA is to inform your superior when a problem arises. This is exactly one of the problems that can easily arise on campus.
The way the department will deal with the problem will depend on the context in which the uncomfortable interaction occurred -- in the classroom, in your office, in a computer lab, in the library, etc.
To help you visualize yourself as part of a complex system, with support from your department, I'll mention a few possible ways the problem might be addressed:
A veteran TA might be asked to work quietly at another desk in your office.
You might be asked to move your office hours to a larger group office.
You might be advised to refer the student to the professor him or herself, who is better equipped to answer their question(s).
The professor might email the student to request a visit to his or her office hours, where the professor might listen to the student's point of view, and then perhaps explain the basic ground rules of respectful interaction on campus.
The student might be transferred to a different section (if the behavior was serious, or repeated).
If the behavior was egregious, the student might face serious consequences with the university.
I think you will find that over time, as you find that you are consistently supported by your department, your self-confidence will grow, and you'll become more comfortable asserting yourself with minor incidents. But to get from Point A (fear and uncertainty) to Point B (confident assertiveness), you must allow your department to support you. Your department can't support you if you don't report incidents that make you feel uncomfortable.
Now, sometimes there's a gray area and you're not sure whether something is worth reporting. As a new TA, your motto should be: if in doubt, report. Just a simple email or stopping by a supervisor's office to make a mention of what happened.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.911187
| 2012-04-25T11:55:17 |
1273
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Christopher J Poor",
"Ivar Persson",
"Josephine Moeller",
"Rafael S. Calsaverini",
"Southern Trendkill",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10328",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1180",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34400",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/762",
"jurassic",
"shelleybutterfly"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8116",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1273"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Use cases of org-mode as a scientific productivity tool for academics without programming needs
I am a social scientist working primarily on Linux, but also at times required to work on Windows systems at the University. I have been looking to improve my productivity in the academic workflow which primarily consist of:
Collecting literature, reference-management, review notes etc. (currently zotero)
Outlining, writing long documents (currently Lyx)
Task, time and project management (currently misplaced and lost pieces of paper)
I can imagine that these steps apply to most academics, and many will share my interest in developing a more productive workflow. In my research on potential solutions to this issue, I keep being drawn by org-mode as a potential swiss-knife solution that can take care of all these needs, and be my mainstay as a personal-information-manager, organiser and text editor. But being built on emacs, I find it forbidding. I also have no need to program anything, so learning emacs seems like major overkill for my needs.
Could academics who use org-mode or a similar solution for organising their workflow give examples of how they use it? Also helpful would be an evaluation of productivity improvements that such users have themselves experienced, and the kind of productivity improvements that can be expected with a basic academic workflow described above. I am interested in evaluating whether it pays off in terms of productivity improvements in the face of what appears to be a massive learning curve, especially as I don't need any programming tools?
I am aware that this might lead to subjective opinions, so I would request academics with a similar work profile to reply based on their personal experience regarding the learning curve, possible benefits, example cases and perhaps alternatives they have found superior (preferably also cross-platform and open source).
I use org-mode on Spacemacs and have written a guide for integrating it with Zotero: https://ontologicalblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/14/an-absolute-beginners-guide-to-spacemacs-for-academic-writing/
I use Org-mode and AUCTeX (Emacs LaTeX package), to do all three tasks
you outline. I have an Org folder that I sync across machines using
Dropbox, which I find to be a simple solution for someone who does not
use version control on a regular basis.
Organization
I separate my tasks into broad groups with each group getting its own
.org file. For example, I have .org files for administrative tasks,
journal publications, service, research topics, and any major projects
that I am currently working on.
The structure of an .org file is relatively simple, for example a file to
track journal submissions, revisions, etc. may look something like this:
* Initial Submissions
* Accepted
* Rejected
* Revisions
* Book Chapters
Org-mode uses asterisks to denote levels of headings, and <Tab> to
fold and unfold the headings. So expanding the revisions heading would
lead to:
* Revisions
** Paper 1
** Paper 2
DEADLINE: <2012-05-04 Fri>
You can set deadlines for any task by pressing C-c C-d, which will
generate the the DEADLINE: line you see above. Setting a deadline for
a task will make the task show up in the agenda view (accessed through
C-c a a), which is my main project planning tool for day to day
work inside of Org-mode.
You can also track the time you spend on tasks with C-c C-x C-i,
which will clock you in to a task and C-c C-x C-o, which clocks you
out. The tracked time will show up in the agenda view and can be
useful for project planning or reporting. You can also generate
separate standalone tables inside your .org files if you prefer a bit
more customization.
All of this can be done with a vanilla Org-mode install and no
customization. I have my tasks set as multi-state TODO lists that I
can cycle from TODO->STARTED->WAITING->DONE->CANCELED. I have my
keywords set in my .emacs configuration file with the following:
(setq org-todo-keywords
'((sequence "TODO" "STARTED" "WAITING" "|" "DONE" "CANCELED")))
The "|" separates in process keywords from finished state keywords.
If you are looking for more elaborate reports, such as Gantt charts,
my answer to this question briefly discusses some of the options
available.
Outlining
For outlining and writing long documents, you can just create a new
.org file and outline using the * heading approach. Org-mode makes it
easy to move headings around if you want to restructure your document
at any stage. For example, if you had this outline:
* Intro
* Part 2
** Part 2a
** Part 2b
* Part 1
** Part 1a
** Part 1b
You realize that Part 1 should really come before Part 2 so you move
the cursor to the Part 2 heading and press C-<down arrow>, and Part
2 and all of its subheadings will move to the proper position.
* Intro
* Part 1
** Part 1a
** Part 1b
* Part 2
** Part 2a
** Part 2b
Depending on your needs, writing a paper based on the outline can be
done in much the same way. Org-mode has support for LaTeX, both for
inline fragments and for environments. Since you mention LyX, I would
imagine the transition to stand-alone LaTeX should not be too onerous. The Org-mode LaTeX export does a fairly good job but if you have a document with a significant amount of LaTeX syntax, it may be better to just write the draft in LaTeX using AUCTeX, but this is beyond the scope of the question.
Reference Management
I use a combination of Org-mode and RefTeX (available with AUCTeX) to
manage my references and to make notes. As mentioned in John
Moeller's answer this takes some non-trivial configuration. I used
this setup almost verbatim to start my reference management, and I
have found that it works well. This link was inspired by the same setup and may be useful for both reference management and writing drafts in Org-mode that contain extensive references.
I start with a master .bib file, that contains the bibliographic
material for each reference. After adding updating the .bib file, I
use C-c ) to insert a new heading into my notes.org file. The
customization will generate a heading with the title of the paper and
a link to the PDF of the paper. For any notes I take on the paper, I
can use the rest of Org-mode's abilities to either have multi-heading
outline style notes as subheadings, or just write paragraphs separated
by a blank line. The end result is an .org file with headings for
papers, textbooks, etc. and subheadings for each paper with links to PDFs and all my notes in a single file.
Tips for Starting Out
There are a few ways to help smooth the way to working with Emacs,
Org-mode, and AUCTeX.
Install Emacs 24 pretest instead of Emacs 23. Emacs 24 has package
management included in the vanilla install which makes it much
easier to add packages without a lot of programming experience. It
also has Org-mode included in the default install. This link gives
instructions for a variety of operating systems. I have been using it for awhile now and I have found it to be very stable.
Go through the Emacs tutorial, accessed via C-h t. This will give
you the basics of navigating using the Emacs keys. It will likely
take some getting used to, especially how Emacs handles selection,
cutting, and pasting. This will likely be the biggest hurdle if
you are used to the cutting/pasting/navigation in word processors.
Keep this reference card handy. It has nearly all of the commands
that you will use on a daily basis.
For Org-mode specifically, look through the manual, but more
importantly look at the tutorials. Specifically the general
introductions and the power users describe their setup sections
(the first two sections linked above). These tutorials will
highlight the customizations made to the initialization file
(.emacs) for these users. Even without elisp experience, you
should be able to find something close to your desired workflow and
be able to modify it with some trial and error.
When I started with Emacs and Org-mode I had very little experience
with Emacs. A vanilla Org-mode install with no customization is still a powerful tool. As you get more comfortable with working in Org-mode you can start to work on customization. Even with very little interest in programming there is a significant enough user base that someone may have already done something close to what you are looking for.
After I got comfortable with Org-mode, I started using Bernt Hansen's set-up with no
changes. It is a bit intimidating on the whole as he has some extensive customizations, but he documents them well and explains almost everything he does.
Then after using it for awhile, I was able to modify
the initialization to something that better suited my workflow. It
took some trial and error and a bit of extra time on the learning
side, but I believe that it has payed off in the long run.
Once you are comfortable with Emacs, I would also recommend the Emacs
wiki. It has some descriptions of useful packages, some discussion,
and even some configuration suggestions to help build up your
initialization file. If you ever get to the point in your setup where you think, "I wish I could do XXX", the odds are someone else has written a package that covers what you need.
I would gladly code a vote-bot for this answer :) Thank you very much!
Great write up to inspire beginners.
I am an academic [history] who adopted org-mode about 18 months ago. Frankly, I'm puzzled by all the warnings about the steepness of the emacs learning curve. For a newcomer who doesn't do a lot of command-line work, the hardest part for me was configuring emacs on my Win and Ubuntu machines. But there are lots of resources and tutorials out there, many of them accessible from orgmode.org.
I started out only using emacs for org-mode. After watching a few screencasts I knew enough to start outlining. Gradually i've been using emacs for more and more tasks outside org-mode, though that remains my main use for the editor. I've been gradually increasing the complexity of my workflow over the last year, adapting bits of the various GTD setups linked to the org-mode.org. I am not a programmer and had only started working with a Linux machine a few months before getting into org-mode.
In my opinion, one of the obstacles to greater adoption of org-mode is that people see the amazing workflows set-up by gurus and assume they need to use emacs at that level. My opinion: for writing, organizing and work-flow, you can get 80% of the ultimate value of org-mode in about 20 minutes of instruction.
Thank you, this is indeed a useful answer. Would you like to add some sources that were helpful, especially the ones that best support your 80% in 20 min assertion?
This answer reflects my experience 100%. After a few days of awkwardness, I felt comfortable with the basic tasks I do everyday. I still learn things all the time, but you don't have to master the tool to start using it effectively.
I use org-mode as an grad student (computer science), and primarily use it for throwing together fast documents. It isn't great for papers/articles, but it is great for homework and notes, because it uses markdown for formatting. There is very little to learn here that can't be found in the manual. See the sections on exporting/publishing, and pay attention to the parts on LaTeX.
I used to use org-mode for scheduling and it was great (I went on vacation and lost interest in tracking all of my time). It's great for tracking how much time you spend on projects and doesn't need much configuration up front.
I also used it for collecting references, but that took some nontrivial configuration. It wasn't hard for me because I'm used to programming, but your mileage may vary.
I also used org-mode mainly for quick "document prototyping", but it really turned out great for producing latex/beamer presentations. I know of no better tool for this task.
Except that it's a bit deficient when it comes to overlays. Haven't really figured out a good way to handle that.
I really like Bernt Hansen's org-mode setup. I am not a programmer and I do feel a little lost in Emacs, but I'm having no trouble using org-mode. I started with Vincent Goulet's Emacs package because I also use emacs to edit latex and R scripts. Then I added Hansen's code to my .emacs file a few sections at a time where it seemed applicable to my workflow, editing slightly when I could decipher it and see a way to make it more applicable. It took a couple of days plus little tweaks occasionally since, but very manageable.
In addition to what has been mentioned, I use clocking into the different steps of a project almost religiously because I am working on estimating the time I spend on different tasks in order to better plan future projects. I've been terribly over-optimistic with promises of submitting work in the past.
Finally, I would highly recommend JabRef for literature management if you want to stay with free open source software. I've had no trouble with RefTex---I didn't have to do anything beyond Goulet's instructions. JabRef imports references in the usual way (e.g. Reference Manager, etc) and has a database-like interface, but creates a bibtex file in the background. Citations in Latex (in emacs) worked perfectly.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.912290
| 2012-04-25T23:29:21 |
1280
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Artem Kaznatcheev",
"JeffE",
"Jojo le Barjos",
"Lev Reyzin",
"Léo Léopold Hertz 준영",
"MasterShizzle",
"StasK",
"Suresh",
"Trevor Owens",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14562",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14570",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/726",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9009",
"luispedro",
"tbfp",
"wmac"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8117",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1280"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
When should I stop including talks on my cv?
When I was applying for grad school, I felt that my CV was pretty empty and so I included all my research related presentations (posters/talks) from conferences/competitions/etc (11 of them at the time). However, I am not sure how much of a role they played in my acceptance at that time (I feel I mostly got accepted based on my papers and two very strong reference letters).
Now I keep a semi-complete (semi- because of infrequent updates) list of presentations on my website; this is mostly so I can post slides. However, I feel the list has gotten too long for a CV (~25 items; about a full page) and other more important parts of my CV (such as publications) have grown to need that space more.
When should I start omitting or shortening the talks on my CV?
If I include a 'selected' talks section: How many talks should I select? Should I select them based on prestige of venue, or uniform-covering of my interests, or uniform-covering of my time (show that presentations are a regular activity)?
More context: I am at the graduate-student level in my academic progression. A related question: Do presentations given during interviews count as invited talks?
Short answer: After you get a tenure-track job.
Really ? I've been repeatedly asked to keep my presentations on my CV for departmental evals, and a non-scientific scan of senior faculty CVs indicates that many people keep their lists of presentations.
Sorry, I should have said "Not before...". I've certainly seen many CVs that don't list standard conference talks at all. (Also, CVs meant for human consumption are different from university-mandated forms for bureaucratic consumption.)
Without the discipline context, this is a pointless question, @Artem. In computer science, talks in cool conferences is everything. In statistics, you are accepted to pretty much every conference you are applying to, so getting some talks is not a big deal at all (winning the student competitions to travel to these conferences might be, though). In economics, I sometimes see acknowledgements for the "participants of the seminars at [list of 25 universities]": it takes them 3-5 years to publish a paper, so a well-connected economist might indeed give his or her talk 20-some times.
@StasK I was no aware of these distinctions, this could make a good answer for others that come to the site (I think we have some policy about allowing answers of the form "In this field..."). My personal question is pretty well answered by the current answers though, since I come from a theoretical CS/physics background.
@StasK: Correction: Papers in cool conferences are everything in CS, not talks (unless they're invited).
First of all: note that there is a difference between an academic CV and a resume.
An academic CV typically lists everything you've done related to academia; every talk, every conference paper, every award, every grant, every mentored postdoc, grad, and possibly undergrad.
A resume is a two-page document that summarizes your work/academic experience.
(Terminology may differ, some may refer to the first as a resume also; semantics aside, there is a distinction between the two documents.)
That being said, the answer to your question depends on which document you want to complete. The first should have everything, no matter how old. The second should list your most important, more recent accomplishments, in the interest of space. Regarding the second, the answer to "when should I remove stuff" is simply "whenever you have newer and better things to put in it's place".
I am not sure if I agree with your definition of academic CV. I obviously have no experience on hiring or admission committees, but the CVs I've seen on profs' websites still include some level of summary (usually by having a selected papers and selected presentations section). These documents are still much longer than 2 pages, what category do they fall into?
Frequently faculty will put up shorter versions of their CVs on their websites to give an overview of their work. Alternatively, many full professors will simply either stop updating them or just keep information on most recent and important publications. That said, your full CV should list out nearly everything. Part of evaluating a CV has to do with heft. You want it to have nice fresh stuff on top and go on for a significant number of pages.
Any CV that you actually send to a (US computer science) hiring committee must list all of your formally published papers. Talks don't matter as much, except as a second-order indicator; over time these tend to be replaced by program committee and editorial board memberships.
As you do more things, you can become more selective with what you list. I think most computer scientists quickly stop listing conference talks for papers that already appear in their CV. Then you can stop listing small talks you gave at your own department, etc. People who are very well established often become even more selective, listing only the big invited talks. You have to figure out the right balance to strike.
I think there's no right or wrong answer -- it's just a matter of how you want to present yourself and what you want to emphasize. I also don't think that section is at all the most important. It's good to show you've gone around and given some talks, but I think you're mostly evaluated on your actual research. Also, I don't understand the concern of running out of space on a CV; CVs unlike resumes have no page limits.
What do you think about luispedro's statement that do not include presentations presented in some degrees at universities? - - Assume you are PhD Physics and PhD Med. The presentations which you do receive exceptional attention in your departments, but still, they are part of your work and specialisation; because you integrate data analysis, data sources, ... in each piece of work you do. Should we put a boundary what kind of presentations we should not include in CV?
I think it's a personal choice and also not very significant. As long as you're clear what and where you presented, it's okay to do. My advice remains as what I wrote above
What I've seen from faculty candidates and faculty has been a graduation to "Invited talks" after a certain point on their CV. Invited Talks cuts out talks that you did at conferences (because it's assumed if your paper got in then you went to present your work) and stuff you volunteered to do. It does include when you've been asked to go somewhere to present (e.g., job talks about your research, when your advisor invited you back to talk about your new research/company, etc.) So if you feel like that section is getting really long, that's one thing you could do.
Your mileage may vary depending on your discipline though, this is specifically in Computer Science.
Here is what I do. I distinguish between talks/posters where you basically just applied and paid the conference fee versus any talks where someone invited you.
A poster where you just submitted an abstract often just means you paid to attend the conference (there is normally a bit of filtering to exclude any overtly commercial offerings, but this is not peer-review, as 90+% of things are accepted). Things like a department seminar, where every student can or is even required to present, similarly just means that you were attending that school. So, do not have these on your CV as you probably already list which schools you attended.
If, however, you got invited to give a talk somewhere, this is different as it means someone thought it was worth their time and money to have you come over and give them your ideas.
As for talks or posters related to peer-reviewed conference proceedings, list them as such ("peer-reviewed proceedings publication" or some equivalent formulation) and not as talks.
"this is not peer-review" is area specific. I'm at a conference right now where pretty much all the accepted papers are presented as posters, with only a tiny fraction being pulled out for 5 minute or 20 minute spotlights.
But is there a publication associated? If so, list that.
I edited my response to take your concerns into account. It is also a more precise rendition of what I actually meant.
It is difficult for me to agree with your statement about, not including presentations you presented at your departments during your graduation and/or specialisation. - - Assume you are doing PhD Physics and PhD Med. You always do the best and get exceptional attention and/or feedback. You receive emails about people asking for the presentations and/or titles and/or future studies. It is a lot of work to avoid and try to hide everything. - - I do agree if your presentation quality is bad, then you can skip from including them, but if you do already meta-analysis, data analysis, ... then ...
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.913148
| 2015-11-26T14:54:56 |
58910
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexandros",
"Cape Code",
"Diazenylium",
"IDC",
"Jcotton29",
"Joy Nnodi",
"Siva",
"Swift Equipment Solutions",
"adam",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162367",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162369",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/162473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/501",
"mdd",
"recluze"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8118",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/58910"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What options do I have when a journal refuses my paper based on 1/3 review by a non-relevant referee?
We submitted a paper to a fairly average journal and received a major revision decision. We made the suggested changes and resubmitted. The revision was reviewed by three referees and two of them mentioned that they were satisfied with the changes and the paper warrants a publication. The third reviewer made some strong comments and the editor's decision was 'reject'.
The third reviewer again raised some of the same concerns as the first two reviewers' original ones along with some completely irrelevant ones. For instance, one comment was that our technique did not improve performance; we were trying to improve the expressiveness of the model and claimed that this expressiveness did not come with a performance penalty.
I have already sent a request for reconsideration to the journal's editors but based on their past communication, I do not expect a positive response.
My question is: Is there a way to report such an incidence to the publisher? At a higher level of abstraction: is there a check in place for editors of journals or do they get a free hand after they have been appointed?
(I do not care much about the paper as I can probably find another venue; the paper is an extension of a highly cited work. I just want to make sure I play my part in keeping the academic process in line because I have seen it slip a little too often.)
If this information is needed: The journal is an "impact factor" journal published by Springer.
Edit: Just to clarify, "options" refer to ways to play my part in improving the system. The publication of this particular paper is not an issue as mentioned in the parentheses above.
You had a "major" revision decision. And then a rejection. It is not very common but unfortunately it happens sometimes. And now you want to punish the editor for rejecting your manuscript based on harsh comments from one of your reviewers? And how will this help you?
I'm sorry if it came out like that. I don't want to 'punish' the editor. I just want someone else to review the third reviewer's comments to ensure they really warrant a rejection. I wish I could share them here so that you would see how irrelevant they are but since this is public, I don't think that's feasible.
@recluze: Did the reviewers give an explicit recommendation (i.e., major/minor revision, reject, ...)?
@MatthiasDiener, yes. 2/3 said 'warrants a publication' in the second round.
If you want this not to go unnoticed, you can apply Anonymous' suggestion and also write a polite but clear e-mail to the editor and the editor in chief of the journal explaining why you consider the handling of your paper unsatisfactory. This may carry more weight if you make it clear that you do not try to change the decision and are already submitting elsewhere.
I would only recommend this if you are in a position where the handling editor cannot hurt your career too badly (e.g. tenured, or working mainly in a different field), as he or she may keep a grudge.
A very minor action you can also take without any risk is to write your very first name on your black list of editors you will never again submit to, and will never referee for.
Yep, already did that in the email but I don't think they can hurt me. See, I live in a place where publications are counted, not weighed. So, a journal is a journal is a journal :)
Half-joking, half-serious:
Next time you're having some beers with some trusted colleagues, tell this story and gripe about this particular journal. For one, it will blow off some steam. (Caveat: I wouldn't recommend complaining to people you don't know well, at least if you are junior.)
Moreover, in the long run, this is how reputations are built or lost. If your colleagues are as upset by your story as you are, then they might tell it to others, avoid publishing in this journal, and/or decline referee requests from this journal's editors. (Conversely, if your colleagues think you're being unreasonable, you might get some useful advice.)
This would have only a minor effect of course, but it would do more than contacting the publisher: in the long run, authors hold all the cards, as a journal is only as good as the papers that get submitted to it.
Thanks. Probably the most useful advice since it tells me what to do. It appears the answer to my question would be: editors are free to do as they like :)
When submitting papers you will often get reviewers who dislike your work for various reasons. Often their reviews will leave you scratching your head wondering how they misunderstand your work so badly. This is normal. You got it particularly bad with this happening after a major revision.
If you have the option of a rebuttal, you should politely mention why you disagree with the reviewers' points and hope for the best. Failing that, there's nothing you can really do. Your best option is to throw your hands in the air, curse loudly, and then resubmit elsewhere.
reviewers who dislike your work and misunderstand your work so badly are the least plausible reasons for a rejection. It's better advice to be critical of one's own work instead of jumping to the conclusion of conspiracy or incompetence from the reviewers' part
@CapeCode Thanks for the very useful comment. I have already conceded that the paper isn't ground breaking. It's an extension of a very good work and for archival purpose, sufficient for an average journal. I have shared the comments with some colleagues to ensure I'm not being biased. Just wanted to see if there was anything I could do to improve the system.
From my experience in the "normal" two rewier case the behaviour in case of an accepted and rejected at the same time is to invite a third revier and go for the majority vote. You seem to already have the majority vote cause three persons accepted the review.
The editor has always a chance to "override" a reviewers decision and reject on his own for scientific reasons. I assume you can conisder it as your rights to get access to this decision.
You always have the right to go to the editor in chief. Imo from what I heard very limited success chance. You might be better just to resubmit in a similar journal with few adaptations.
If you feel 100% unfair treated for unscientific reasons try to look for a person which you consider really integer and see if he agrees to your judgement. The decide if it is worth to fight for your justice. Go the editor in chief way. As mentioned before, low success chance. Save all communications. I do not recommend the following but you can "tag" the journal/editor quite publicly. There is sides dedicated for this, look them up yourself. I personally recommend to avoid this. Focus on the people who like your work. Resubmit elsewhere and continue to focus on being a good scientist and not start hunting down the bad ones. There is always a limit how much we can look away, but dont set this limit to low.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.913705
| 2018-05-01T13:46:01 |
108972
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Brian Borchers",
"David Ketcheson",
"Solar Mike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72855",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"user2768"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8119",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108972"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can I get admitted to Master in mathematics program if I only have a medical degree?
I will complete my medical school (in Indonesia) very shortly.
I'm planning to pursue a master degree in mathematics at a university in the USA or UK. I do not have a mathematics bachelor's degree. During my years as a med school student I studied math independently from textbooks and sites such as Coursera and MIT OCW.
Can a student with only a medical degree get admitted to a graduate program in Mathematics?
They may or may not accept you - it all depends on their entry criteria and how flexible they can or want to be...
A medical degree demonstrates your ability to learn, there are certainly top schools in the US and the UK that will accept you.
The difficulty that you will have is in convincing an admissions committee that you have sufficient background in mathematics. It's impossible for us to answer this question, so I've voted to close it.
I heavily edited the question because the answer might be quite different if you had, say, a physics degree (see https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43178/doing-phd-in-math-physics-after-obtaining-a-bachelor-degree-in-an-unrelated-fiel?rq=1).
The question is whether you have enough background to be likely to pass the first-semester courses in such a program. For instance, if you have never studied real analysis, complex analysis or differential equations at the level of a senior undergraduate course, you may find yourself completely lost in graduate courses. I think it will be very difficult to convince an admissions committee that you would survive the first semester.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.913918
| 2019-10-09T02:08:18 |
138262
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Albert",
"Buffy",
"Dan Romik",
"David Richerby",
"Davidmh",
"Kimball",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"YYY",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102868",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2801",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"ruakh",
"user102868",
"user2705196"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8120",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138262"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Why is my paper "under review" if it contains no results?
I've recently submitted a paper for review for a reputed math journal. The main paper is just 2 pages (everything else being in appendix), where I setup a new problem, and the central result I had left unproven. (I said the proof is yet to be done). I did not send this paper in a hurry, I had spent a good amount of time and best of my abilities to prove it, but couldn't. The paper cleared editorial screening (after being there for a few weeks) and went to "Under Review". What could be the reason to go to "under review", when there is no proof that has to be reviewed. I'd like to understand, what are all the things that are "reviewed" for a math paper that is "under review"?
Does the journal have a web page "instructions for reviewers" or similar? If so, that will tell you what reviewers are supposed to evaluate.
If the journal is “reputed”, it will want to evaluate your paper not just for being correct (which seems a nonissue in your particular case) but also for being novel, interesting, and related to the topic of the journal. So a reviewer is assigned and the paper will undergo review just like any other math paper.
Are you sure it is a reputable journal and not one that is essentially a pay for publication scam?
@user2705196 : Yes.
There's a good chance the journal is getting confirmation that it is indeed a new problem. The fact that it's new to you does not mean it's actually new - perhaps you've simply not seen the paper(s) that stated and maybe even solved the problem.
The journal could also be confirming if the problem is actually interesting. It's not so difficult to come up with a new problem, but coming up with an interesting new problem would be something else.
+1 for the first point. Second one ofcourse, the onus is on the author, but journal also has to assess it.
And +1 for the second point.
@Buffy : Last sentence is true only for number theory and combinatorics. Not in areas like Analysis.
@user102868, Sorry, no. My dissertation was in analysis. All mathematics should be interesting. There is no point otherwise. I once worked on a problem (prior to dissertation) that turned out to be too easy. I could generate new theorems every day. That was boring. Trivial is boring. Later I found something interesting.
@Buffy : I mean coming up with a new but difficult (non trivial) problem in analysis is not easy, and if its diffcult, then it is most probably will turn out to be interesting. But this not the case in number theory, apparently (as I was told) its sometimes quite easy to come up with a simple looking conjecture that is very difficult to prove/solve, and once proved/disproved, it might turn out to be not interesting at all.
@user102868 write down a random function, compute its derivative, and destroy the paper where you wrote the original function. The indefinite integral of the result exists, and can be expressed in terms of elementary functions, but the techniques necessary to find it out may or may not be applicable to less capricious cases.
@Davidmh : Thanks for the example. This comes under Integral calculus, and not Analysis in modern day terminology
I hope there is a thread on mathoverflow, for exmaples of this kind in Analysis.
@user102868 what is "Analysis in modern day terminology" ?
@YYY : Sure, it can be called Analysis as there are couple of pages on integration of elementary functions in the book "Real Analysis" by Walter Rudin. But I am at loss, and I don't have good points to argue my point on Analysis and against example by Davidmh. Thats fine, I agree its not difficult to come up with difficult problems in Analysis as well.
@user102868 how about : here's a small modification of a well-known PDE, prove existence and unicity of solutions in some class of regularity, and find an efficient numerical scheme. it seems to be a big industry.
@glougloubarbaki : Clarify : I am not saying difficulty is by definition interesting. I am saying most probably they turn out to be interesting, if things have been done in the right spirit. I don't have enough knowledge to comment on the examples of modified PDE, but isn't that the case with every field? Lot of papers being generated with modifications of problems?
@user102868 For many people, a large part of what makes a problem interesting is that one can solve it, or at least prove something nontrivial about it.
@kimball : Yes should be difficult until solved. Once solved it should look easy. This I think hallmark of interesting problems. If its too easy to solve also makes them boring.
Does the editor makes any specific requests to the reviewers when handing over the papers to them? Does he specifically ask, if its a new problem on certain fronts? is it interesting problem from any perspective?
Why woudln't they review your paper? All reputable journals review all papers that they consider publishing..
The fact that there's no proof to check doesn't mean there's nothing to check. Arguably, in a mathematics paper, it means there's more to check: why should they accept your paper that doesn't prove anything? The fact that you put everything in an appendix doesn't mean it doesn't get reviewed. The journal will be publishing that appendix, so they want to know that it's OK. (Otherwise, everybody's next paper would be "Abstract: [blah blah] Introduction: See appendix." and publishing just got a whole lot easier.)
I am not saying it should be accepted without checking. If you see the last line of my question "what are all the things that are "reviewed" for a math paper that is "under review"?", so I am asking what are things other than "correctness of result" that will be reviewed. If you see the title of my question, before the edit (chnged by David Ketcheson), I was asking "what are all the things that are reviewed for a math paper". The title proposed by David Ketcheson might have slightly misled you to think that I am arguing for accept without reviewing, but thats not the case.(contnued...
...I think my question is completely answered by the answer by Allure and the comment by Dan Romik.
@user102868: In the initial version of your question, you asked "What could be the reason to go to 'under review', when there is no proof that has to be reviewed", which makes it sound like you expected to bypass review this way. So it's no coincidence that David Ketcheson edited the title that way, and David Richerby's answer works just as well for the original version of the question as it does for the current version.
@user102868 What do you feel that I've assumed? You asked, "What could be the reason to go to "under review", when there is no proof that has to be reviewed[?]" and I answered that question. If the journal publishes your paper, then their name becomes associated with it. They want to make sure it's of appropriate quality.
@DavidRicherby : No worries, the rhetoric style made me think like that. I got your message : the fact that they review is more of a common sense thing to any journal, and no different for a math journal.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.914594
| 2021-09-27T16:03:11 |
175959
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexander Woo",
"Andrew",
"Ben",
"Buffy",
"Especially Lime",
"HJRW",
"IY2",
"Joshua",
"Kaare",
"Kimball",
"Michael Homer",
"Mike",
"MrVocabulary",
"Nat",
"Pablo H",
"Pam",
"Russell McMahon",
"Tripartio",
"Zach H",
"alephzero",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/124760",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13438",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/140175",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151712",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17740",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38709",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61871",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62853",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68772",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68971",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74638",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83574",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91884",
"learner",
"sharur",
"ti7"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8121",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/175959"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can I recommend rejection of a paper after simply reading its Abstract and Introduction?
I am reviewing a paper of a top-tier computer science conference. After reading the abstract and introduction of the paper, I think that the paper does not have that standard to make it up to the conference reputation. In other words, the problem that they have solved is a minor one and perhaps belongs to some low-tier conference.
Can I simply recommend to reject the paper without reading it further? Is it right to do so? I am feeling that it is a waste of time to read it further. Or should I must read the full paper and verify their claims and suggest the improvements (if any)?
Note: I am somewhat new to reviewing; this is the 6th paper that I am reviewing this year.
Would it take you more than a few minutes to give a light pass over the remainder of the paper?
Please don’t write answers in comments. It bypasses our quality measures by not having voting (both up and down) available on comments, as well as having other problems detailed on meta. Comments are for clarifying and improving the question; please don’t use them for other purposes.
Trivial case: abstract is gibberish. Should question be better?
@Nat, what would "a light pass" done in a few minutes accomplish? That is still not reading the entire paper.
@Tripartio I have seen papers where the abstract and intro manage to "bury the lede". (That's the fault of the authors.) I have also read abstract/intros and totally misunderstood the point of the paper until I read on, then go back and realize the point was right there in the abstract but I just failed to grasp it. (That's my fault.) I would argue that a good reviewer should avoid both traps. A light pass will generally be sufficient to at least see if more attention is merited.
It is of course possible that a single portion of a paper will be sufficient for rejection, so you can recommend rejection on the basis of a single part alone. However, you should remember that the best practice for a peer-reviewer is not just to reach a recommendation but to offer useful advice to the author on how they might improve the paper. As a reviewer, you have an opportunity to help the authors of a paper make it better for the next submission.
As a secondary matter, except in extreme cases, failing to read the entire paper may be viewed as a bit of a dereliction of duty by some people --- I would certainly view it that way. Even desk-rejections will almost always say that the editor read your paper, so even here, the author is given the courtesy of having their paper read in full.
As a secondary matter, failing to read the entire paper may be viewed as a bit of a dereliction of duty by some people - Maybe by some people, but in my field (pure math, where papers can be quite long and take time to go through the details), if it is a clear reject I would regard reading the whole paper as a waste of reviewing effort.
@Kimball I remain unconvinced that in your discipline it's any different than in others. If it's a complex and long paper the attention to detail will be different, but the idea stands.
+1 for the sentence "However, you should remember that the best practice for a peer-reviewer is not just to reach a recommendation but to offer useful advice to the author on how they might improve the paper."
@MrVocabulary This could be a debate about semantics, but it somebody spends 100 pages proving to their own satisfaction than 1+1=3, and the introduction and abstract state that 1+1=3 is a key result in their work, I'm unlikely to want to read the details except for personal amusement.
@alephzero sure, but is that likely and frequent enough that we should focus on that when discussing general rules and best practices?
@alephzero would the same be true if someone is proving, say, that 1 + 1 = 1? Which is actually a thing in some branches of math and CS (Boolean Algebra).
@alephzero Godel might have failed your test :-)
if they can prove 1+1 != 2 for some context, then perhaps bravo! still, it is important to have a strategy for cranks https://web.mst.edu/~lmhall/WhatToDoWhenTrisectorComes.pdf .. I suspect this question is focused on the former where they are not a crank, but some initial proof to their claim is obviously flawed (though one might split hairs over whether this indeed defines a crank in another question..)
I think you guys are stressing out a bit too much over extreme edge-cases. For what it's worth, I concede that there may be some highly unusual instances where a paper is so long and complex, and so devoid of quality, that you could reasonably provide a review without reading the whole thing.
@MrVocabulary In math, it's pretty common to reject a paper based on the stated results without trying to verify them or read carefully if the methods or ancillary results are of great interest. I've been on both ends of this phenomenon. Desk rejects typically work this way too. What Kimball describes isn't an edge case.
@ZachH as in "nobody is calculating this to see if it makes sense", or as in "if it doesn't add up, we will not read the rest"?
@MrVocabulary As in "the claimed results are not interesting enough for this journal, so they should resubmit to a more appropriate journal". Referee time is scarce and reports typically aren't portable, so while it'd be ideal to give some feedback along with the rejection sometimes that isn't in the cards.
I'm in engineering / neuroscience. if I'm handed 30+ pages from someone who claims to have solved all of neuroscience with 'one simple trick', then I think my time is better spent than refuting every little mistake they made. And yes, these manuscripts do exist.
must read the full paper and verify their claims and suggest the improvements
Read again the letter editor sent you. Why did they want your input on the paper?
In my field, the review is not about "rejecting" or "accepting" but about finding errors and flaws, as well as good points, and assessing the value of the artefact. The editor will decide whether these issues are suitable for rejection, acceptance, or acceptance with modifications.
For example, here are the top-level questions that editors ask reviewers in PNAS:
Suitable Quality?
Sufficient General Interest?
Conclusions Justified?
Clearly Written?
Procedures Described?
Supplemental Material Warranted?
As you can see, only one question is about suitability for the outlet. The others are about the quality of the research paper as it stands.
A CS conference paper review is unlikely to come with a letter from an editor (and it may not be any individual's decision).
I have two points, one objective and one subjective, why you should not do this.
Objectively, it is quite common to form an opinion of a paper only by reading the abstract and introduction. I have heard that most reviewers decide by the end of reading the introduction whether they want to recommend revision or rejection; reading the rest of the article does not usually change this initial impression significantly. However, sometimes a promising introduction might fail to deliver and so an initial inclination towards recommending revision might change to a recommendation of rejection. On the other side, sometimes a lackluster introduction might be followed by an article with real potential, in which case the reviewer who initially felt inclined to recommend rejection might realize that the introduction needs to be rewritten to properly highlight the value of the article. So, objectively, you cannot properly evaluate an article until you have completely read it. Bad beginnings might end well, just as good beginnings might end badly.
Subjectively, it is irresponsible and even morally wrong to claim to give a scholarly review of an article that you have not read completely. Would you write in your evaluation to the article, "My recommendation for rejection is based only on reading the abstract and introduction of the article; I saw no need to read further"? If you would not openly write that, then that should tell you that there is something wrong with doing that. I am sure that you would feel rather upset if you found out that a reviewer of one of your articles did that to you. So, subjectively, it is wrong to recommend rejection of an article you are asked to review if you have not read the entire article.
Should "end of reading the instruction" be "end of reading the introduction" (crosses fingers and hopes that you meant introduction!). Also, as an author you can have "good" reviews and still get a rejection.
@Pam, Yes; thanks for pointing it out. I have corrected the typo.
As a small addition to the other answers:
Whatever you choose to do, please be honest and open about it towards the editor, the other reviewers and the authors. If you really made your recommendations after reading the abstract and the introduction, (and think that was quite enough), then say so in your review. This helps the others in putting your review in perspective.
Look at this through the author's perspective. They spent time working on this research and writing the paper - probably because they believe it is important enough to be worth their time and the readers' time. Now, as a reviewer, you may think that this is wrong and the research is not so good to merit publication, because
the problem that they have solved is a minor one and perhaps belongs to some low-tier conference.
Perhaps you are right and the author's are wrong. But how helpful would it be for the authors to receive a rejection stating only this? Surely, they would like to know how to become a better researcher and how to increase the chances for their next paper to be accepted. Can you help them with it? Can you offer constructive critique and helpful suggestions for improvement? This will make the whole experience more pleasant and rewarding and ultimately worth everyone's time.
As others have pointed out, your responsibility is to help the editor decide what to do.
I don't think you can fairly recommend rejection without actually reading the paper. You could write the editor declining to review because, based on the abstract and introduction you don't think the paper is significant enough to warrant the time it would take you to read the manuscript carefully.
Then the editor can find other reviewers, or agree with your assessment and desk reject.
There are two scenarios both consistent with the data that you have described.
The paper makes only a minor contribution to the field and you should recommend rejection from this journal.
The authors have found an important result but failed to effectively describe/"sell" its importance in the abstract and introduction. This is not uncommon when researchers are wrapped up in their own field, they see the importance and feel it should be obvious to the reader. Good scientists are not always good writers. Here you might need to recommend revisions in order to better highlight the contribution of the paper.
If you stop reading after the introduction, you don't know which scenario is the case, and you are doing the authors a disservice by assuming (1).
If you were submitting work for feedback, would you feel satisfied if someone read only the first section and returned it to you saying it wasn't good enough?
In theoretical CS I wouldn't recommend this. If mathematics I would definitely suggest it would be improper. You don't have enough information on what the future value of the paper might be.
It is possible, though unlikely, perhaps, that the techniques used to prove a "minor result" are actually more valuable than the result itself. Those techniques might, in theory, be used to establish other, much more important, things. How something is done can be much more important than what is done; certainly in mathematics and possibly in other theoretical fields.
I'll agree that the authors should have pointed this out, of course, if they thought it was important.
If you told me, as an editor or conference program chair, that you'd done this, I'd likely feel like I needed additional advice before rejecting the paper. You are admitting to providing little advice of value.
I'd disagree with this specifically for mathematics, though that is in the context of journals, and because reading the paper carefully may take another several weeks if not longer. If a paper is not suitable for a journal, you should recommend rejection QUICKLY so that the authors can quickly submit it somewhere else.
@AlexanderWoo, actually, for mathematics you would be wrong. Sometimes the proof of a theorem is far more important than its statement and gives far more insight into how things fit together. I'd expect a mathematician to know that. In particular, you don't gain insight into mathematics by reading a bunch of theorem statements.
@Buffy: with respect, speaking as a mathematician, I think Alexander Woo is exactly right.
@HJRW, I too, am a mathematician and know of which I write. Would you feel a bit foolish if you rejected a paper without reading it and hidden somewhere in a proof is the crux of the Riemann Hypothesis? Yes. Yes, you would.
@Buffy: No, if they hadn’t mentioned it in their introduction, I wouldn’t feel foolish at all! More seriously, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but it is not an accurate statement about the practices of mathematics journals, and I worry that you will mislead any early career mathematicians who happen to read this thread. The fact is that maths journals often reject papers based on the importance of their results rather than correctness, and that importance is usually primarily judged on the results stated in the abstract and introduction.
I reckon a professional non-isolated mathematician would reasonably estimate the contents of their own paper. If the proof is what's important/novel, they'd state that in the abstract/title, wouldn't they?
Just to add to this... admittedly I'm a former theoretical physicist, not a mathematician, but I would think if Paper X proved some obscure result, but used a technique that could be applied to prove the Riemann Hypothesis, and didn't point that out, then a perfectly valid novel Paper Y would be to take the technique and actually solve the Riemann Hypothesis (with a proper citation to Paper X). In my opinion, it shouldn't be the referee's job to realize that Paper Y could be written, if the author of Paper X didn't point it out in the abstract/introduction/discussion.
Paper X should be published if the obscure result is correct but not necessarily in a top journal.
If a math journal is asking for a quick opinion, then yes it's ok to recommend rejection based on just the introduction but you must actually read the introduction carefully! If the introduction clearly lays out the main results of the paper and you think those results aren't interesting enough to merit acceptance at the level of the journal where it's submitted then there's no need to read the rest of the paper carefully.
By contrast, if they've already gotten quick opinions and are asking for a more thorough refereeing job then I think it's inappropriate to not read the paper more thoroughly. Remember that other people may have different opinions about the merits of the paper.
Based on the other answers, I guess this will probably be a contrarian opinion, although to be honest I suspect this is probably how many people behave even if they don't admit it. I don't think you have an obligation to thoroughly read the paper, although I think you should spend, say, an hour or so going through it. For a top tier journal / conference, "results are not sufficiently impactful for this venue" is a valid reason to reject the paper. I think you should read the discussion, main figures/results, and read through the text (not necessarily checking every step) to make sure that you understand what is there and can summarize it. You should at least be able to confirm that the content of the paper matches what is in the abstract and introduction, or else find if there is something in the paper that you need to look into in more detail because it could change your opinion.
In an ideal world, every referee would thoroughly read every paper they were sent and send detailed feedback on how to improve the paper. In the real world, people are busy, and if you already think the headline results of the paper are not sufficiently interesting for the top tier journal/conference you are reviewing for, I don't think you are obligated to spend days checking every claim.
It would be different if the journal/conference were mid or lower tier... then I would tend to say that something correct and novel could be publishable even if the impact of the main results was not very large. Judging correctness requires more work to actually read the paper and check things, compared to judging the importance of the headline results, assuming you have a good sense of the quality standards in the field.
I feel this is the only answer that really considers what OP asks: "must I read the full paper and verify their claims", to which I agree that the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.
I’ll sacrifice politeness for the sake of clarity:
If you have time to write here - you have time to read the paper.
You may feel that you can’t understand it (I’ve seen such badly written) but at least you should give a try.
Reading a paper is not the same as reading a comic book. You need to think alongside what is written. You need to develop an intuition of their idea and much more.
(copy-pasting directly from the OP comments, to enable room for discussions)
In some (most?) top-tier CS conferences, papers are screened before they are assigned to reviewers. Usually, this involves checking for obvious plagiarism, but it can also extend to verifying whether the manuscript is (just from its looks) acceptable. The idea is to maximize the gain from reviewers: assigning 5 papers that do not even "need" reviewing to be rejected would waste the reviewer's time; and would also waste the reviewer potential contribution to the proceedings.
If the paper passed such screening it's likely that the abstract was deemed "somewhat" appropriate for the venue.
You should read it thoroughly and - moreover - question whether YOU are the problem (ie, lack of expertise, which is common and acceptable): if this is the case, then avoid clear statements and do mention that your recommendation is just an educated guess.
If the abstract is really, really bad, then you can still recommend a rejection. But - for the sake of science - try to provide at least some additional motivations.
I wouldn't base a decision to accept or reject a peer-reviewed paper based solely on the abstract and introduction sections and an opinion "the problem that they have solved is a minor one." Perhaps there is more in the paper that authors haven't explored and perhaps their focus is not correct.
There's a plugin in chrome called Read Shit Faster (ugly name but what a powerful tool it is) that allows you to read the paper in a super-easy manner allowing you to detect major flaws almost instantly and know what to look for in a more thorough reading.
The order in which I read carefully these contributions goes like this:
Abstract: What am I suppose to learn from this piece? What is it that the authors claim to have found that has not been addressed before?
Conclusions: Yes, I go to that section right away to see if it is consistent with the abstract and if they are delivering what was promised.
Methods: If this section has problems from the experimental plan, setup, tools, etc., I will start considering rejection.
By now, you should have seen if the language is correct or if there are major problems in this department. I collect those right away to either help the authors write a better paper or simply to justify a rejection in case there is no substantial contribution.
If at this time I consider that the authors have something worth reading, I'll read their Results and Discussion section to check for consistency with the sections that I have already read and then I will move to he references section to see how up to date is the bibliography. By the way, I would dig some extra references that are more current to suggest some improvements for the authors and perhaps to see if there's something remotely similar that has been published... Sometimes, if you know the authors, you may see if the work has been published before and point those works to the editor. Turn it in can also detect plagiarism (intentional or not) and you may point that to the conference organizers.
Typically, by the end of a Read Shit Faster session I would have made my mind in regards to reject, major editing needed, or accept (rarely) a paper. The remaining process is to document everything.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.916657
| 2020-08-09T21:31:09 |
153723
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Ajasja",
"Dan Romik",
"Diagon",
"Greg Martin",
"Issel",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Nik",
"SSimon",
"Scott Seidman",
"TestGuest",
"TimRias",
"astronat supports the strike",
"carros",
"crobar",
"dusa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1016",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108889",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109007",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128186",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24304",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72119",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93303",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99546",
"justhalf",
"paul garrett",
"user3067860"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8122",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/153723"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How to deal with hostility from administrators when starting a new postdoc position?
I applied for a postdoc at a lab in the US as I really liked
the work of that lab.
I had the initial interview with the professor and then with the lab members.
All went well and the professor welcomed me to join the lab.
When the administrative part started, things got very strange quickly:
The prof put me in touch with his lab manager, and then, casually mentioned that the university has a covid-related hiring freeze...but that it might be OK since I have a scholarship/bring my own money (which I do). It was however only then that I learned about the hiring freeze.
The lab manager (quite unfriendly) told me that given that I have my own funding I will be only considered a "visiting postdoc" and would not receive benefits. When I asked about more details, she told me to "google".
I then got invited to a zoom meeting to clarify some other points about a document I had handed to admin. First of all the mail suggested that it was me, prof and one admin person.
Against my expectations 6 or 7 people joined and it felt like a cross-examination.
In addition, the meeting turned out to not be about said document at all (they even said that that document was fine??). First, they told me that my scholarship can't be below their minimal level. Then they told me that I would not be allowed to collaborate with another college during this time. Then they asked all kinds of further questions like: If you are really an engineer, why was the department you were at before the department of chemistry? When I said that yes I was an engineer, the admin person said "OK I will have to google to check if this chemistry department really hires engineers" - i.e. she made it clear that they don't believe me....?
I asked them about the terms and conditions for "visiting postdocs", they said there are none (???). That is, I have no clue about what rights, benefits etc. I would have when joining the lab.
The prof seemed to side with admin, though he told me to call him after this cross-examination-style meeting. There he said that it is strange for him as well that admin does not allow for collabs (and he would not mind if I would collab but we should keep it under wraps) and mentioned that he would make up for it if my salary should be below the minimum. But, although he had previously
mentioned that he would make sure that I would not be just a "visiting postdoc", he now seemed to have changed his mind.
This entire process was so hostile, I still can't believe it. I invested a lot of energy trying to get this job, but then having to fully commit without being considered a full employe..? I feel like the prof was not fully transparent.. though I really like the work of his lab and it could be great for my career.
And by the way, the place I was before was Stanford, so I am not coming from some (supposedly) random university.
Is this usual behavior, and how could I deal with this most constructively?
Personally I would not take that position but there is no definitive answer to this question so I am voting to close as depends on individual factors.
Please don't close it. I really need to understand from people with more experience if this is usual and what could be done and would appreciate opinions.
I took the liberty of adding the covid-19 tag, because I have the impression (I'm in the US at an R1) that the craziness and uncertainty and unclear messages from high admin and HR make such things much much worse than any other time I've seen. E.g., people and institutions who might be reasonably decent in "normal" times may do nasty things when stressed... I know this doesn't answer your question, hence just a comment...
This seems like a legitimate question - especially because of covid many other postdocs and academics might be affected too. I don't understand the insistence on closing - it is of public interest.
I hate to suggest it, are you female or a minority? Are they trying to get you to withdraw so they can say they offered the role to someone with protected class status so they look good, and then offer it to someone else? This almost sounds like they are doing everything they can to make you quit.
This question needs additional clarification on the nature of the postdoc "position". In the opening sentence you say you "applied for a postdoc", which makes it sound like you applied for an advertised open position. However, later you mentioned that you "bring your own money". Are you being funded by a grant? If so, did you first obtain the grant and then start looking for a host, or did you apply for the grant after discussing with the professor? All these things matter in trying to interpret the seemingly odd behaviour of the administrative staff.
It is not unusual for paid-direct postdoc positions (postdocs who do not receive their salary through the institution that they are working at) to be without benefits (healthcare etc...).
Run for your life. Run don't stop. That is toxic and strange environment. PI is really unprofessional
I don't understand what your status is right now. Have you moved to the new location and are ready to work, or has this not happened yet?
@ScottSeidman That hasn't happened yet. Somewhat still in the admin loop and not sure what is going to happen..
Sounds to me like maybe the department is under serious financial pressure, and are now trying to bring in you (and your postdoc money) with no financial exposure to themselves, and the free option to get rid of you as soon as your money runs out if they want to.
Is this usual behavior
Short answer: no.
Longer answer: I have heard many stories of bad workplaces, both in academia and beyond. Even at good workplaces one occasionally encounters weird, rude, and borderline exploitative practices and staff/employer attitudes. So perhaps it’s not entirely accurate to say it’s not usual. But by and large, the situation that you describe does not sound good or normal. Self-respecting, respectable US institutions will generally go to great lengths to make their postdocs feel welcome, and will have an orderly, transparent hiring and onboarding process, clear policies, and staff that will communicate those policies to you upon request (even if not always in the most friendly or efficient manner). That’s quite a contrast with what you are describing.
and how could I deal with this most constructively?
Since you bring your own scholarship and generally sound like you are an attractive hire (and someone who has the self-confidence to not be shy about being one) I would guess that you have a fair amount of leverage in this situation, and will assume in this answer that that is the case - specifically, that you have a reasonable likelihood of finding alternate employment quickly if the current offer does not pan out. You need to put that leverage to use. The key is to make the professor/mentor-to-be aware that there is a minimum level of treatment that you are expecting from him and his department, and that should he fail to offer you credible assurance that you will be receiving that minimum, you have other options and will go elsewhere.
To put it bluntly (although in your communication with the professor you will want to be less blunt), you need to make a credible threat about withdrawing your acceptance of the offer to join the professor’s lab, assuming you’ve already accepted, or about not accepting if you haven’t yet.
In preparation for bringing this up, there are two crucial pieces of information you will need to know:
What are your options? Do you have other places you could quickly arrange to give you offers? Given that you have your own scholarship, I am hoping the answer is yes. But do your homework and explore this at least informally, by sending out feeler emails etc.
What are your minimum expectations from the current professor and his lab? That’s a personal question you’ll have to ask yourself and answer - it may include things like health benefits, a written contract or reference to a set of institutional policies governing your type of position, a conversion of the “visiting postdoc” to a title more commensurate with your qualifications, or similar things.
Once you know the answer to the above questions, ask to have a video meeting with the professor and politely bring up your concerns. Be tactful, and make sure to mention all the positive things that make you want to join his lab rather than someone else’s, but also make it clear to him that your concerns are serious enough that you can and likely will withdraw your agreement to join his lab if he does not take them seriously.
I mentioned the threat to bail out needs to be credible. That means it would be good to mention any specific facts at your disposal to make it seem like you have the ability to act on the threat (again, I am using blunt language - I trust that you can phrase it more diplomatically in the actual conversation). For example, you can mention names of specific places where you have a pending offer or promise of one, or at least adopt an attitude that signals your confidence that you can get another offer easily because you have your own funding.
Finally, part of making the threat credible is that you need to be mentally willing to act on it in the scenario where the conditions you are setting are not met. If you think you’re not willing, the approach I am proposing may not be right for you.
Good luck! I hope things work out. But cover your bases and be prepared for the possibility they may not. Honestly, this behavior does not sound normal, and should not (in an ideal world at least) be an acceptable way to treat people.
Thank you very much for this great answer. I am sending feeler mails right now also just to keep myself grounded. I know that the behavior was not OK. I guess I have invested so much already, and the lab is that excellent work-wise, that I have lowered my standards a bit. Not sure if that is good though. I feel also put in a position that if I ask for the basics (as health insurance) I am being "difficult" although this entire situation really only comes from their lack of transparency.
@carros this (what you’re describing - making people feel guilty or ashamed for asking for basic things) is precisely the game many employers play, knowing that the employees they are hiring are both inexperienced in these types of negotiations and are negotiating in a highly asymmetric power dynamic. Unfortunately in such situations sometimes the only language people understand is power, aka leverage. The amazing thing is that usually speaking this language will result in other people respecting you more, and not less. Many people find this counterintuitive but I’ve seen it happen many times.
So many +1s for this answer!
This really is the answer from someone with a lot of experience & humanity @DanRomik .. wow just wow. Thank you so much
@carros you are more correct than you realize - I do speak from experience, both of a postdoc and of an employer. When I was a postdoc I was treated badly on one occasion by a host department. The details were not as bad as what you‘re describing, but the experience left a mark on me, and I vowed at the time that if I ever became an administrator I would make a point of not taking part in or allowing such abuse. More recently I actually did become an administrator for a few years (a dept. chair). It was very satisfying to get to live up to that promise I had made to myself years before.
A friend of mine in History of Economic thought, who had to fight for tenure in very hostile Economics departments (and won, twice), let me know to be clear about one thing: Never depend on anything you're told until it's in writing.
Also, regarding the aggressive and combative mode of putting you on the defensive and giving you as little as possible, maybe keep this comment by Kissinger in mind (paraphrasing). "I learned politics in academic departments." Now if you know anything about Kissinger ...
I'm not sure why you are considering this "offer". You've given a lot of downsides that could easily lead to future pain and suffering. But other than a weak endorsement in your first paragraph, you haven't really given any positive aspects to this position.
If you have any other offer(s) with better conditions, you should probably consider them first. If it is this or nothing at all, then be very wary if you take it. The professor in question can probably help somewhat.
I'll note that some of the restrictions given by the administration are probably the result of laws that must be followed, since the position is not a standard one. If you aren't a regular employee, then you don't have the protections (or requirements) that regular employees have.
Perhaps you can also ask other postdocs about your experience?
@carros Or hypothetically it could be that the existing postdocs are finding themselves trapped in this position...not ideal, since postdoc is supposed to be a temporary step before moving on to a faculty position. (Of course, the academic job market in general is so awful that it may not be the fault of the postdoc position...but if you personally get stuck as a postdoc forever, it's not good regardless of why.)
@carros Please be careful. It hurts me a bit, every time you say "I really love the work of this lab". You were sabotaged into a meeting that they were not upfront about. They're trying to get rid of you. "Visiting" researchers often have zero rights. I've held a visiting research position in which I was not even covered under the university's anti-harassment policy (meaning that I could be harassed and abused by the administration, and would not be able to file a grievance, as there is "no internal mechanism" to file a complaint... this basically means the only option is to sue). Run away.
Being postdoc for 6 years is not flattering at all. @carros
@carros All? Are you sure? What kind of person and where they are now? R2 R3 or R1? Have grants?
Currently, I am in a similar situation (working since 12 months as a postdoc in the U.S. with a scholarship that covers 24 months from the "NIH" of my home country). Similar to what you described, I came expecting to be a regular postdoc based on the prior communication with the PI.
Personal situation:
Upon my arrival, I quickly realized that my PI does not support me or project in any relevant manner and that I am essentially a visiting scholar working on a line of research that is as of today not really of interest to my PI. In the beginning, I was super motivated and provided weekly detailed “Objectives and Key Results” (OKRs) during our meetings. I would recommend you to give it at least a try. Nevertheless, over time I had to somewhat realize that the meetings should be kept as slender as possible, given that the technical/research feedback is limited either way. I decided to stay and I do not regret it too much. The PI is overall a supportive and respectful leader. While I have to apply for computing resources (applying to Google Cloud credits) and organize data (i.e., setting up MTAs with other institutions) myself, the PI allows me to do so freely. Nevertheless, I keep him always in the loop. I am still thightly conntected to institutions in my home country - i.e., getting data is not a significant bottleneck for me. The institution provides a strong halo effect and is an interesting place to be for me, irrespective of my output.
Thus, the following factors are in my view important to consider:
Do you expect your PI to be supportive even if you work somewhat like an independent collaborator on your own projects?
Is it possible to obtain data in chemistry independently or are you very dependent on the group?
Is the institution/environment exciting enough to justify some degree of a diminished research output?
If the answer to all 3 questions above is not "yes", I would recommend to leave. While you may want to try to talk it through with your supervisor, do not expect that you will be able to change too much about the supervision style.
That is an extremely pragmatic and useful answer, thank you
I want to warn you about a red flag that I see, which has come up in two parts of your question:
The lab manager (quite unfriendly) told me that given that I have my
own funding I will be only considered a "visiting postdoc" and would
not receive benefits. When I asked about more details, she told me to
"google".
and:
I asked them about the terms and conditions for "visiting postdocs",
they said there are none (???). That is, I have no clue about what
rights, benefits etc. I would have when joining the lab.
A "visiting" researcher is usually someone who works elsewhere and is visiting. This usually means that your employer (which is different from the place where you're "visiting") is the one that has an employment contract, which outlines all the things that you mentioned: rights, benefits, terms & conditions, etc., and the place you're "visiting" may have some much smaller-scale agreement with you or your primary institution, outlining the terms of your "visit", usually allowing them to have reduced responsibilities and liabilities compared to if you were a regular employee.
Unfortunately, some universities have started to give the title of "visiting" researcher, to people that are working exclusively at the university, which can be an extremely shady way of binning you into a category that is neither faculty nor staff nor student, meaning that you are not represented by the faculty association, you are not represented by the staff association, and you're not represented by the student union, and therefore have zero support and almost zero rights.
Let's look for a second at the Memorandum of Agreement between the University of Waterloo and its Faculty Association:
"In all matters under this Article, a Member has the right to seek
advice from the Association and to be accompanied by an academic
colleague for advice and support (including, if necessary, aid in
presenting the Member's position) during any meetings attended to
discuss such matters."
Therefore, if a professor is called into a surprise meeting with 7 people (like what happened to you) from the university administration, the faculty association will provide an academic colleague (e.g. another professor) to join them as a witness and support-person for the meeting, if the professor wishes. The same is true of people represented by the Staff Association, or the Student Union, but as a "visiting" researcher, which union or vocational association will represent you? It would be the labor union of your employer (the company or university that sent you to "visit" this university!), but wait a minute: You don't have one!
Also, look at section 9 which outlines a process by which an employee represented by the Faculty Association (e.g. a professor) can make an internal complaint if something goes wrong. The Staff Association will have something similar, as does the Student Union, but they have gone out of their way to point out that "visiting" positions are not covered:
What happens if you get harassed or abused or the university does not follow their own policies? There might be no internal process available to you for making a complaint, because you're "only" and visiting researcher --- How do I know this? Because it happened to me when I was a "visiting" researcher at the University of Waterloo, which is one of the top universities in Canada (this can happen anywhere, and the opening to your accepted answer: "I have heard many stories of bad workplaces, both in academia and beyond. Even at good workplaces one occasionally encounters weird, rude, and borderline exploitative practices and staff/employer attitudes" is a bit of a polite way of saying what goes on).
Therefore, you were very smart to ask those questions about the nature of a "visiting" position.
Since you said many times that you have a fellowship that will be paying your salary, I would recommend to look at the rules that they have for "host" institutions like this university which you are currently considering. As a postdoctoral fellow, I held a Banting Fellowship at McMaster University and they had certain guidelines for host institutions (I have put bold-font emphasis on the specific aspects about which you expressed concern):
From the outset of the application process, applicants and host
institutions should discuss:
the details of the fellowship appointment any benefits offered to the
Fellow any financial obligations associated with the appointment
(union dues, insurance premiums, etc.)
the availability of any research and/or other support
the rights and responsibilities of postdoctoral fellows
any other institution-specific policies that might apply to the Banting Fellow any established research-related
Summary: If you go into a "visiting" position (usually not a "real" employee) and you don't have a "primary" institution that is bound by standard employment laws, be careful. Let me quote Buffy's answer: "If you aren't a regular employee, then you don't have the protections (or requirements) that regular employees have." Please be careful and take care of yourself.
I'm glad it helped. I understand your feeling of being horribly sad, because I've been through this exact situation. In fact my PhD was from a chemistry department, & my "visiting" position at University of Waterloo was in the electrical engineering department, & I was made to feel out of place after I arrived. Basically your entire question was déjà vu for me. The prof might still be worthy of your high level of respect, but it comes as no surprise that he will "kowtow" to his administration (he needs them more than he needs you). Harvard is notorious for giving "soft contracts" to postdocs.
I agree this is a great answer. To further illustrate the problematic nature of a visiting appointment, let me add that at my institution policy does not allow giving such an appointment to a scholar who does not already have a primary appointment elsewhere. On the other hand, I recommend checking whether any of these issues are really applicable to your specific situation. It’s possible that “visiting postdocs” at the specific institution you are considering have more rights than they do elsewhere and are closer to being considered normal employees. Seems unlikely, but it’s worth checking.
While a Postdoc is a training position, you're also something of a "hired gun". In a normal situation, the PI needs something done, and hires a postdoc to do it. Bringing your own money to the position isn't very typical.
Sometimes profs have absolutely no awareness of the red tape required to bring in a postdoc, or any employee, and assume because they made arrangements to bring someone in, somehow magically, the admins can make that happen.
In this case, it seems that the University cannot actually do any "real" hiring because of a hiring freeze, and they are trying to come up with a creative way to bring you in. All indications are that they can't make an arrangement to actually make you an employee of the university, and you would be walking into some nebulous situation. This is good for you if you have no better options, but bad for you if you need a job! There will be ALL SORTS of ramifications. For example, if you are in the US, you will likely be on the hook for the 7.5% FICA tax normally paid by the employer. This is called a self employment tax, and would be an immediate 7.5% pay cut. You may or may not have health insurance. You will have very little in the way of job protection.
You should not be told to "google" anything. This is your life, and you are entering a position. At the very least, you are entitled to know all the details, without confusion. The only place you should have to look is in their employee handbook or your contract.
If this weren't pandemic times, I'd tell you to run away, but I suspect many universities have hiring freezes right now.
At the very least, I would ask them two questions: Will you be an employee of the university? and Can I see my benefits package in writing?
Bringing your own money to a postdoc is quite typical, especially for international students.
Please contact Human Resources, and the International Student Services of the institution. Now, the latter might not give specific information on postdocs but they usually do a lot of related paperwork and in my opinion they are the most knowledge people in a university about these matters. The benefits can be learned through HR. It seems to me that they are taking your scholarship granted. The benefits are usually included for postdocs that are "hired" but scholarship holders/fellows are not necessarily employees, so I think they are putting you in this category. The way they brush off your questions would make me think twice to be honest, but been there done that, it seems you are further in the process and don't want to consider other options. There is also a lot of uncertainty around visas, hiring etc. but they should at least be transparent about it.
I think that that was HR and International Students Services (the latter I am sure, and she was the nicer one, I assume the rest was HR but they did not introduce themselves if I remember correctly)
Sorry, I don't understand, you mean you have talked to them already? lab manager is not HR, the HR works at an institutional level (not departmental, or lab level)
It doesn't matter, you can do some research and find the contact information of HR, try to reach them via telephone if possible, you can make calls with Skype. Just explain your situation, get as much information as you can on rights and benefits the people in your situation have, how to communicate about this with the lab etc.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.918846
| 2012-10-09T13:43:49 |
3673
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Ahmed Okour",
"Artem Kaznatcheev",
"Bob Durrant",
"Mark",
"StrongBad",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10483",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10784",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10785",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10786",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10788",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10790",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"just-learning",
"lenybernard",
"ybeltukov"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8123",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3673"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can you mention that you were a paper reviewer after it has been published?
Possible Duplicate:
Are the referees of a journal allowed to reveal the title of the papers they review after the review process?
Suppose you were a single-blind paper reviewer (i.e. you could see the author's name, but they couldn't see your name) and you didn't obviously de-anonymize yourself during the review. If the paper gets accepted and published, and you are writing a review/summary of it (in its published form, not in any pre-publication form you have seen) on your blog after it appears in print.
Can you mention the fact that you were a reviewer for this paper?
Can you make comments about pre-publication versions of the paper? For instance: 'when submitted the paper lacked X, but other reviewers and I suggested it to be added and after revisions the author provided a full proof of X'.
Why would you want to do 1?
@DanielE.Shub mostly to make the blog post more personal and convey the people side of research. I usually like to say how I came across a paper and usually it is through an author I follow or forward/backward-citations of things I've read. In this case however, I would never (or at least not so soon) have come across this paper if I was not a reviewer for it. Thanks for that second link! I knew I have seen something similar around, but couldn't find it.
Why don't you ask "that" (how to convey the people side of research).
@DanielE.Shub I don't know how to formulate that question in any non-vague way. Also, you guys are fast to spot and close dupes, I was hoping to vote to close my own question :D. Thanks for the fast response.
I'd say it strongly depends on the policy of a particular journal the paper is reviewed for, so you'd better check the guidelines for reviewers. If I recall correctly, there is at least one journal having the policy that the reviewer can disclose her/his identity to the author only if the paper was eventually published in the journal in question and only after the publication has actually taken place.
I'd just pretend that you stumbled across a paper, rather than say you reviewed it on your blog.
And you should not make comments about the pre-published version of the paper. This could be embarrassing for the author, and seriously violates the trust embodied in the reviewing process.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.919097
| 2012-08-04T09:45:14 |
2745
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Daniel Hershcovich",
"Diomidis Spinellis",
"Frank Myat Thu",
"Josh",
"Nikolaj-K",
"coneslayer",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6880",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6881",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6882",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6934",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6935",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7015",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9155",
"icyreaction"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8124",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2745"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
In the social sciences, is it easier to get a post doc than a PhD?
I am completing a PhD in Global Studies in Germany, and would like to apply for a post doc in North America, especially Canada. However, I am not sure if there is funding for post docs in the social sciences. For international students is it easier to apply for a PhD than for a post doc?
I have a publication in an edited book from a prestigious publisher, another in English in a peer reviewed journal published from Germany.
I think the question could use some clarification. It's not exactly the same as your previous question (http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1994/), but there's some overlap in that both are about moving from a German Ph.D. program in global studies to a postdoc in Canada. Another issue is that the title here ("is it easier to get a post doc than a PhD?") doesn't seem to me to have much to do with the body of the question.
If you already have a PhD, the chances of being admitted into a second PhD program are quite low, I would imagine. Furthermore, I would not recommend such a strategy: the possibility of being labeled as a "perpetual student" could have negative ramifications on one's career.
That said, there is funding for post-doctoral associates in addition to graduate students, even in the social sciences; in particular, there are a number of fellowships that are designed specifically for postdoctoral candidates in the humanities and social sciences. Of course, there is relatively more funding for PhD's than for postdoctoral associates.
Why are the chances low, why wouldn't they hire a PhD? Let's assume the field is not exactly the same.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.919302
| 2014-06-15T00:29:45 |
24000
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Caroline Egbuna",
"Cynthia",
"Filmes e Videos Online",
"GHADAATTIA",
"Goytotua Torres Diana Yesenia",
"Kestutis",
"Mo84",
"Nikhil",
"Star",
"TheRedRebbe",
"aloysiushs",
"doha kourani",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64242",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64243",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64244",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64246",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64247",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64317",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64698",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64776",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64821",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64890",
"user64246",
"user64248"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8125",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24000"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Are there any proposals to make sharing code and data with publications a requirement?
Depending on the project, many researchers have to rewrite code and reproduce datasets from previous works in order to perform experimental evaluations. Although some dataset are understood to contain private data, and thus cannot be shared, it would be very nice to have access to the source code and results produced along with the papers.
Most of the big data works present results from experiments run with very large databases, and the code developed, which is usually non-trivial to rewrite, is rarely available to the public. I even heard once that some conferences would start to request the source code of the project to be submitted along with the paper.
My question is: is there any global regulation that states what a conference must request while accepting a paper? And, if so, are there any proposals at all to make source code sharing a must?
The academic 'process' is an unregulated mess of random, contradictory habits
To directly answer your question, NO, there aren't any global regulations on what conferences or publishers should require or how they should do anything else.
It's a key point of academic independence - anybody is free to run their academic conferences or publications as they like. There is an unwritten consensus on what constitutes good practice, but it's not regulated, it's not mandatory, it varies across academic fields, and it varies across countries.
Change happens by convincing lots and lots of unrelated people and organizations
Any proposals to change something (say, make source code sharing a must) only become real when lots of separate organizers (most of them who never ever hear about each other) in different fields agree that it's a good idea; that it benefits them without making it too hard for them; and take the initiative to implement it. It helps if some academic subfield implements the practice and it's widely seen as working well.
The only force is funding
Large funding agencies have the only practical power, as if they make funding conditional on X, then people will try to get X - or at least something that on paper looks similar to X. Note that if they don't think that X benefits them, then it will be the latter option; doing the very minimum possible to tick a checkbox "yes we do have X". And it's by definition not a global regulation, but a country-specific one.
I don't know any global regulations, but scientific community understand the problem that you described and that is why github recently made it possible to get a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) for any GitHub repository archive (blog post) making the code citable.
As far as I remember any DOI should be maintained for at least 10 years.
There is a Coursera course of the Data Science Specialization track which talks about this topic. The course is:
Reproducible Research
website: https://www.coursera.org/course/repdata
Institution: Johns Hopkins University
Instructors: Roger D. Peng, Jeff Leek, Brian Caffo
Note: the course can be done for free.
Some of the topics of the course are:
Explanation of what is the replication a research work
Explanation of what makes a research reproducible (from your question, you are basically asking whether reproducible research is a standard in the scientific world)
Description, tutorials and exercise on how to use Rmarkdown which is a package of the R language developed to create code that can be both: converted to a human readable format (Sweave the code) and executed to perform a data analysis of some sort (Tangle the code).
The last lectures are quite interesting, because they talk about real examples that have occurred in the past where reproducible research has been useful, and cases where the lack of reproducibility has been a problem.
My question is: is there any global regulation that states what a conference must request while accepting a paper? And, if so, are there any proposals at all to make source code sharing a must?
I don't think so. My personal hope is that reproducible research will tend to have more citations and that it will be more valued by peers.
This problem has been recognized, but there is only slow progress on the sort of institutional innovation necessary to address it. Many technological components of the solution are in place, but their are socio-cultural forces of resistance in nearly all academic disciplines and academic journals. NSF and other funding agencies are looking for ways to overcome the resistance.
For a thorough analysis and prognosis, you could listen to this talk: THE CREDIBILITY CRISIS IN COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE: AN INFORMATION ISSUE (includes slides).
EDIT: Here's a recent blog post about this in the field of bio-medicine: Can you show us that again please?
There is no particular "universal" regulation, and attempts to do so, even for things like the PLoS data sharing policy go somewhat pear-shaped. This is because, as @Peteris mentions, academia and research is a rather unregulated bunch. There's no guiding force, and there isn't really the backing for there to be one.
Even things that are firmly enforced, like the protection of human subjects, have standards that vary from place to place.
Personally, I also think that those advancing these policies often forget that different fields have different problems. For some fields, "Make your data open" is committing them to a rather intensive hosting and software support problem with very little money to back it. For others, "make your data open" may be exceeding the informed consent their patients gave.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.919826
| 2016-02-08T15:03:21 |
62982
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dan Fox",
"FJC",
"Federico Poloni",
"Jackie Seratt",
"Jose",
"Kay",
"M A Khan",
"Mark Omo",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Quora Feans",
"Richard Nam",
"Rick Hinkle",
"Ruate Kamur",
"Ryan Saenz",
"Spammer McSpamface",
"Yemon Choi",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175439",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175442",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175444",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175448",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175476",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175480",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175576",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175779",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20818",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4189",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44978",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8970",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"maryam",
"profmartinez",
"rxjn",
"skymningen",
"user213769",
"user3133512"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8126",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62982"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What to enter for "current situation" in PhD application if one is unemployed
I am applying for a PhD program, in one of section they ask about my Current situation (professional/academic.
I finished my master and now I do not have job and just applying for PhD and writing my paper.
what should I write that have better effect on them?
p.s :It is a mandatory part and it has a small line
Is 'currently job seeking' too negatively loaded for you? The unemployed are clearly lazy people who drink beer all day and watch sports compulsively. But job seekers are proactive.
When I was unemployed, I have jokingly used the term "freelance mathematician".
I see nothing wrong with writing "unemployed".
@user37208 As someone who gets PhD applications forwarded to me as part of my departmental committee work: I wouldn't reject an application that used your joke, but my eyes would roll so hard you could use them to power a flywheel. There is a time and place for being Oh So Funny and PhD applications really, really, really are not one of those.
As someone with experience of post-graduation unemployment, I'd say don't be worried about it. It is perfectly understandable that you finished your degree and are now applying to PhDs without being employed in between.
It would be helpful to know the exact phrasing of the question but if it is expecting a simple one line answer I would just put "Recent graduate" and maybe the classification of your degree (MSc, MA, etc. and the subject).
Think about why they are asking the question. Is it to check if you are in the middle of a degree or finished? Is it to check your grade? Or what type of degree you have? Or is it to check if you have a job so they need to think about your start date of PhD in relation to quitting your job? There is no shame in just writing "currently unemployed". I did this and I am now 2 years into my PhD. You may need to explain in more detail at an interview and justify why you are not working, but if you have a sensible reason this will not be a barrier.
thank you for your explanation, it really made me relax <3
I'd say "Applying to Ph.D. programs"
Isn't that fairly obvious given that this is on an application form for a PhD?
@FJC You'd think, but yet they ask...
@MarkOmo ...which surely indicates that they are asking for some other purpose. Answering the question with an answer that is blatantly obvious and provides no information would, in my opinion, make the candidate look a bit stupid.
It sounds to me more like a smart-aleck response. As you say, it does tend to imply "doing nothing important", but the more conventional way to say that would be to simply write "Unemployed".
"Unemployed" can come across as the opposite of a "winner/go-getter" response; in fact in the wrong eyes it may read "I'm applying to your program since I can't get a job (otherwise I wouldn't care to)."My original advice is not as trivial as it seems: It means that her main current activity is, in fact, getting ready to pursue a Ph.D., and nothing that occupies her time is more important.
As is always the case, "answer may vary by culture".
What country are you applying in? (I'd guess US but you never know). In the US, I'd agree there's problem with writing "unemployed." In fact, that makes sense to do.
In Japan (and I believe Korea), you need to have some sort of zaiseki from which you are applying. Unemployed would be a mark against you. Ideally, get an affiliation with some university to be your basis. South of that, have a full time job that can give you status. Writing "unemployed" (mushoku) or "independent researcher" would both be negative.
if you are not doing anything, at present, then you can keep it blank. But blank doesn't give a good impression. So I suggest to summarize your research results on which you are concentrating now. Since you have modified your question saying that it is mandatory, then you may write something like "completed my masters degree in month-year and concentrating on the publications based on my masters thesis"
thanks for your answer but it is a mandatory part and it has a small line so I have no space for explaining
Then you can write something like "Completed Masters Degree in Month-Year and concentrating on publications."
@Kayan In case of an interview that might lead to the question on what kind of publication/topic you are currently working on. So you should be prepared to have an answer. Else don't write it.
You have mentioned that you are writing paper. If you are working on materialising your master thesis or any other research work, you can mention the same with decent phrase in the current situation section. This will convince graduate committee members that you are still in field and you are keen on pursuing research.
It would be perfectly applicable according to your situation to call yourself as an
Independent Researcher
until you are admitted to a PhD programme. After which you could be known as a PhD student / research scholar / graduate student as what you may prefer.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.920339
| 2017-03-09T20:47:05 |
86235
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Christian Matt",
"Coder",
"David Richerby",
"E.P.",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Michael",
"Miguel",
"Pioneer83",
"Sasho Nikolov",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"dentist_inedible",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10646",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14695",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46184",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47913",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53762",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68261",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91335",
"jpmc26",
"user2390246",
"zibadawa timmy"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8127",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86235"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it okay to list a PhD student as corresponding author?
A colleague and I are both PhD students. We have conducted a project together that is unrelated to our respective theses. The project involved a bioinformatics analysis of public datasets, so we are not presenting any new experimental data (i.e., there was no overhead associated with the experiments). However, we have generated some very interesting results that we believe are suitable for publication.
A question that has arisen while preparing the manuscript is who to list as corresponding author. Our supervisors were not involved in the project. I designed the majority of the experiments, but my colleague and I are both concerned that listing myself as corresponding author despite the fact that I am a PhD student would be (a) improper or unethical, (b) likely to draw the ire of the university for listing it as our affiliation, as we do not have faculty appointments, and/or (c) likely to cause reviewers to dismiss the work. What is the appropriate course of action?
But you say that your colleague is also a PhD student. So you seem to be running out of authors to designate as corresponding.
(a) No, it's not unethical to list a PhD student as a corresponding author (b) definitely not, and if that draws the ire of your university, well, that's not a university you want to study in (c) likely not.
@TobiasKildetoft I guess what we are wondering is, should we try to identify a faculty member who does research in this area to "sponsor" our submission by acting as corresponding author? We are planning on asking an expert in the field who my colleague knows personally and who had previously expressed interest in the project to review the manuscript before submission, would it be best to also ask him to be the corresponding author?
What makes you believe that a PhD student should not be corresponding author?
@dentist_inedible Be careful with just handing out authorship like that. While some fields are fairly lax in what suffices to constitute authorship, in some "gift" authorship (or authorship that's solely used to make the paper look more important) like you're essentially proposing is considered unethical. You should make yourself aware of field and journal standards for authorship. In principle, no one should ever care who the (corresponding) author of a paper is. If it passes the initial muster test by the editor, reviewers should consider it in good faith.
What did you advisor say about it? Surely, they can at least tell you if this is normal in your field and could potentially give you advice on how the university will react.
With one of my friends I got a paper in which we both are listed as Corr. Author. Since you are PhD students, you can use university affiliation.
Make sure to check whether your email account will expire after you graduate, and consider carefully which address to provide if it does.
I am corresponding author on all the papers for which I'm first author, including those I published during my PhD in collaboration with my supervisor and other senior people. Never once have I had any problems, with editors, university or coauthors, for that matter.
In my field, electrical and electronic engineering, it is the norm that PhD students are the corresponding authors of their papers, even if other coauthors are professors. In fact, during my PhD all my papers were coauthored with three professors including one associate and I was the corresponding authors. No problem, in my opinion
At least in my field (theoretical computer science), the corresponding author is often (but not necessarily) the person who did most of the work and prepared the final version of the paper. It is therefore completely normal to have PhD students as corresponding authors.
I'm my area of theoretical computer science, the corresponding author is literally that: the author who dealt with the submission process. Sure, the upshot is that it's completely normal for it to be a student but, for example, I'd never think, "Oh. X is the corresponding author. That must mean they did most of the work or prepared the final manuscript."
@DavidRicherby Sure, but typically (at least for the papers I'm involved) the person who prepares the final document is also the one who submits it. This must of course not always be true. Moreover, people after publication will more likely contact the corresponding author, so this should rather be someone who can and is willing to discuss issues with the paper, and not someone randomly chosen...
But, in the cases I've been involved in, all the co-authors have been willing and able to discuss issues with the paper. "Able" is more or less a condition of co-authorship, so that really ought to boil down to "willing" and most people are happy to talk about their work.
-1. As David said, being a corresponding author has and should have no implication for who did how much of the work. At least not in TCS, and not in fields that have adopted the mathematics publication culture. In most papers I was involved in everyone contributed to the writing to some extent, and who is a corresponding author is essentially an arbitrary choice.
@SashoNikolov Apparently, there are different approaches to this. Just out of curiosity: If a paper is authored by two people and one of them (say author X) clearly did much more than the other one, why would you resolve this arbitrary choice differently than setting X to be the corresponding author? If it is arbitrary, there is no harm in choosing X, and there seem to be people like me who make certain (maybe wrong and unjustified) assumptions.
The answer is that you try not to have this situation in the first place. From the AMS culture statement: "the authors of a mathematical paper are almost always listed alphabetically by surname; all
authors are assumed to have made substantive intellectual contributions to the work."
@SashoNikolov If one person did 80% and the other one 20%, I'd say both contributed substantially. I understand that you want to avoid this, but it is not always possible.
You are missing the point. You may choose to have the corresponding author to be the one who did more of the work, or less: that is your private choice. Both authors should know the work well enough to answer to emails and that's all that a corresponding author is supposed to do. But saying that the "corresponding author is typically the person who did most of the work" is is in my opinion a misleading and dangerous claim to make. Would you like hiring and promotions being based on this supposedly typical thing?
@SashoNikolov Now I see your point, thanks for the clarification! I tried to edit the answer to somewhat prevent misleading interpretations without changing the intended meaning.
I am a PhD student, and I was the corresponding author on a paper published during my postbac [and my supervisor was a coauthor]. No one will think of it as improper or unethical. You are university affiliated, so there should be no problems there. And as long as the work is high quality and is reasonable (has your supervisor/other expert/faculty read over the paper?), I can't imagine a reviewer caring. If you're worried you can submit to a journal with double blind review.
On the contrary, I can only imagine being a corresponding author on a quality paper so early in your career being a positive outcome, as it exemplifies your independence.
Different fields have different conventions for authorship, but I've never heard of any of them that prevents or even discourages a PhD student from being a corresponding author. I've done it myself, at the suggestion of my advisor.
(a) improper or unethical
No, it's totally proper and ethical, as far as I've ever heard.
(b) likely to draw the ire of the university for listing it as our affiliation, as we do not have faculty appointments
Faculty or not, you are affiliated with the university, and thus it's entirely appropriate to list your university affiliation when publishing a work. Not listing it would be more likely to draw ire (not that anyone really checks up on this stuff in most cases).
(c) likely to cause reviewers to dismiss the work
Okay, in rare cases there may be something to that. If the result you're publishing is unusual in some way, or especially noteworthy, having someone with an established reputation in the field do the submission may help. Crackpots also claim their results are unusual or noteworthy, after all, and the journal editors are probably less likely to dismiss an odd-sounding paper out of hand if they get it from a known expert. But this is unlikely to make a difference in the many typical cases where you are submitting a publishable but otherwise run-of-the-mill result.
And I would note that the important criterion here is that the submitter has a good reputation in the field, not that they are faculty. It's certainly possible to get your name known as a researcher while still in a PhD program, and then it should be no problem for you to submit a paper on a topic you are known to be experienced with.
I cannot speak for all fields, but at least in physics, materials science and chemistry, I am not aware of any problem with a graduate student being a corresponding author.
Typically, the corresponding author indication tells the reader who can/should be contacted in case of questions, requests for data, additional information, etc, and for convenience offers the (then) current e-mail address. Moreover, in many journals, this designation is not mandatory.
Yes, I've heard opinions that the corresponding author should be either the faculty ("because the students will leave soon, but the advisor will remain, and thus her/his contact will be more prominent") or the "main" author (who is typically the first author). In my opinion, either way is fine, but not for the reasons listed. It should be the person who will be the best to communicate on behalf of all the authors (i.e. knowledgeable about the project and able to communicate).
Now, I am (and most other people responding here are) talking about "corresponding author" designation as it will be printed in the journal, which can be different from a similar designation in the article submission process (aka "submitting author").
When I was a graduate student, I designated my name as the corresponding author once or maybe a few times, - as I fell some sort of pride in that ("I've grown up enough to be able to do that!"), but then realized that it was mostly irrelevant. In the future, as a postdoc and a faculty advisor myself, I avoided this designation when possible.)
Usually, the corresponding author designation is helpful when authors from multiple groups are involved, and it is not clear for the reader who to contact. As an experienced reader myself, in the absence of that designation, I would try to contact either the first author or the advisor of the first author.
Re: affiliation.
Being a graduate student (or for that matter any student) is sufficient to list your affiliation with the university. Moreover, unless there are some special circumstances, you should list your university affiliation. It would look strange if you didn't.
Designation of the corresponding author (or lack of such) is very unlikely to affect the review process and the decision. What might however raise a red flag with the reviewer or the editor is the absence of a faculty member among the authors, especially if none of the authors has a recognizable publication record in the field. While it is not prohibited, and is not a barrier for publication by itself, it might be an indication of one of the following two situations:
1. A graduate student(s) is not doing something right.
I've seen several cases when students were attempting (successfully or not) to publish without the knowledge of their advisors (sometimes including them as coauthors, sometimes excluding): in one, the graduate student was misguided by some weird believe (in part, probably due to a different cultural background) that he had to publish some paper as the sole author, without his advisor or collaborators in order to become successful and find the next position motivation). In another case (IIRC), the student wanted to submit the publication against the request of the advisor to wait, due to concerns about the validity of the data.
2. The author(s) is(are) not a bona fide researcher(s) but a person(s) with some mental problems.
(I received plenty of "preprints", proposals, etc. about new perpetuum mobile design, alternative relativity theory, etc. from such people.)
However, there are legitimate cases when even a graduate student might publish without his/her advisor. I am actually aware of the situation where a very modest advisor was refusing to put his name on the publication of his student "because of lack of significant contribution", which was actually a problem for the graduate student, who wanted to have at least one publication co-authored with his advisor before he'd graduate. (For the most of the scientific world, graduating without any publication with your advisor would look weird, and could be an indication of some problems.)
In the follow-up comment, you mentioned some other faculty member willing to critically read your article prior to submission. Depending on the actual contribution of that person that may qualify as an authorship. But I had multiple occasions when I gave my manuscript to my colleagues for comments prior to submission, and no authorship by them was expected or assumed.
Now, just in case, let me offer a related advice of caution about the authorship. I have seen situations when graduate students were not realizing what type of contributions qualify for being listed as an author. And that led to very unfortunate omission of the authors from the paper. The authors who were omitted often include people from collaborator's group (if you interacted only with one person from that group you might not be aware of other contributors from that group, including that person's advisor), sometimes people from your own group (a person might not have crunched the data, but provided a crucial for the paper insight or hypothesis).
One other aspect is if you are a visiting researcher in someone else's lab using that lab's equipment, it means that the PI of that group (the faculty) has provided you with the opportunity to conduct your research using his/her, often sufficiently unique equipment (method, technique, etc.) without which you wouldn't be able to obtain your results. Depending on the circumstances, that can also qualify for the authorship.
Finally, the issue of including advisors. Sometimes, some graduate students do not realize the contribution of their advisor to the project. I've actually heard some graduate students expressing an opinion like this: "I did all the work, I didn't ask or get any help, I wrote the paper myself, why should I include him/her as an author?"
It depends. While in some cases, you might not have to (and an honest advisor will probably tell you if that's the case), in many cases, there are several legitimate reasons why the advisor should be a co-author:
a) The advisor is providing you with the opportunity to work in his/her lab, using his/her, often highly customized, equipment, methods, tools, approaches (e.g. software libraries developed in the group), etc.
b) If any part of your research project (including your RA-ship) was relying on the grant money obtained by your advisor. (Why that matters? Besides other debatable arguments, it most likely means that your project was a part of a larger funded project which in essence [and you might not realize that] was conceived by your advisor.)
c) If at any stage of your project you received valuable suggestions related to your research (including the initial idea for the project).
d) ...
It is hard to list all possible circumstances, - this is just a guide of how to evaluate this, not a comprehensive list.
HTH.
Is there any chance you can edit this down or provide a bullet point summary? There are some good points (at least in the first half, I didn't make it to the end) but at the moment it's a wall of text.
This was a good discussion, just to add a point: If you already have an advisor who is supporting your work, it is generally good etiquette to keep them in the loop about other research activities you undertake.
This question is strange to me in the sense that the authors typically don't designate a corresponding author in my field of chemistry/physics. Typically, whoever submits the paper to the journal's online system is automatically labelled the corresponding author by the journal itself. It's not a big deal to be corresponding author, it just means you're the person who actually submitted the paper.
Yes. It is totally proper and ethical, as long as you are one of the main person/people who understand well the work.
Indeed, almost all my publications during my graduate student time to obtain a PhD, I am the corresponding author for almost all these papers (around 10+ papers).
In reality, you do not even need to be a graduate student in PhD to be the corresponding author. There are both undergrads and amateurs who are the leading and the corresponding authors for their papers.
It is fairly common in my PhD institution to do so.
(p.s. My PhD institution is Massachusetts Institute of Technology.)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.921652
| 2013-10-01T00:18:45 |
13098
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"JPDynan",
"SmulianJulian",
"Yuri Borges",
"daaxix",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33427",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4572",
"m4n0",
"user33450"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8128",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13098"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Should I submit a conference paper (extended abstract) to this chemical engineering conference?
The deadline for uploading conference papers (extended abstracts) for presentations at the AICHE conference (http://www.aiche.org/conferences/aiche-annual-meeting/2013) is tonight. I have already been accepted to present on the basis of my abstracts submitted a while ago. (I wasn't invited to this conference; it requires registration and submission of material).
I emailed the event organizer and received the reply: "We strongly encourage a paper (synonymous with extended abstract) submission. However, it is not a requirement to present."
I can submit something today, but I would prefer not to. For one thing, some of the material needs a little more polish. And for another, I'd rather not reveal research results before the presentation date in November. I meant to ask my advisor his opinion earlier when I met with him today, but it slipped my mind. I've just started year two of grad school and this will be my first conference presentation.
Is there a good reason to go ahead and submit anyway? Having no conference experience, I am not even sure what/who these papers/extended abstracts are for. Am I skipping something that I really should be doing?
Thanks
EDIT: Checking the online presentations, it appears that most people have not uploaded an extended abstract. Not sure if that makes a difference...
As a chemical engineer, I would recommend against submitting an extended abstract. The primary reason for this is that, unlike proceedings of the Materials Research Society, the extended abstracts of the AIChE annual meeting are not peer-reviewed. Therefore, any such publication will automatically be of lower weight than something that has been published in a venue that provides peer review.
In addition, because the work has effectively been "published," you will find it harder to secure publication for fuller versions of this work later on, as many journals could view the extended abstract as a "prior publication" and reject a paper on those grounds.
Moreover, as David Ketcheson suggests in his answer, the dissemination of your research will be greatly hampered by the relatively low circulation of the extended abstracts.
So, for this conference in particular, and more generally for any conference whose proceedings are not peer-reviewed, I would avoid submitting extended abstracts and conference proceedings.
The main thing you get by submitting something is a publication on your CV. The value of a conference publication varies heavily by field; except in computer science, they are usually of much less value than a journal publication. But since you are a student, presumably even this is a substantial addition to your CV.
Unfortunately, conference papers are usually published in a book that is later impossible to get a copy of. Usually a conference publication is a limited, preliminary version of work that will later be published in a journal. It can also be a good place to publish work that is interesting but that you can't/won't pursue far enough to make it worth a journal publication.
Speaking as a professor, you should not submit anything to a conference without first having your advisor review it. So I think at this point you're better off not submitting anything, but I recommend planning in advance to submit something to the next conference.
Let me chime in advising against submitting an extended abstract submission.
In my field (analytical chemistry/biospectroscopy) we joke that such proceedings (including the mandatory ones e.g. with SPIE conferences) are quite good if you need a publication, but at the same time want to make sure that noone will ever read it.
Most of our conferences do not have their "own" proceedings any more, but instead papers can be submitted to a themed issue of a proper journal, undergoing the usual peer-reviewing process for a paper.
Maybe you can ask the organizer whether any such issue is planned, and for what journal?
But in some engineering fields, like optics, SPIE conference papers are often fleshed out and published in peer-reviewed journals later. So the answer is it depends on the field. Some fields, like biomedical sciences, won't allow this kind of conference paper -> peer reviewed upgraded paper path to occur.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.922002
| 2016-06-22T16:17:41 |
71739
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Engr. Mureed Abbas",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nesara Venkatesh",
"Paul Baker",
"SecretAgentMan",
"allsail7",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201485",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201486",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201487",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201504",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94518"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8129",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71739"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Sharing a proof on ResearchGate? Inappropriate?
Is it inappropriate to share a proof of a manuscript online, such as ResearchGate? The manuscript is part of a large special session in a journal that currently has no publication date yet..
This likely depends on the publisher's policies, especially if you have transferred copyright to them. Some publishers may allow it and others don't. The publisher should have their copyright policy and agreement posted, or have sent you a copy when the paper was accepted.
Take a look at your copyright agreement - many will differentiate between the preprint, postprint, and the final published version.
Default language in copyright agreement tends to be most restrictive with the final published version and least restrictive with the preprint.
You can always contact the publisher and specifically ask for permission. I've done this in the past and even gotten special permission to post the final published version (they asked I prominently add the publication and DOI to the 1st page).
For what it's worth: this link, from the website of ACM (a large publisher in computer science), says that "An author posting a paper on commercial piracy sites (such as ResearchGate) knowing they have assigned copyright to the publisher is in violation of the copyright agreement the author entered into with their publisher as it is illegal sharing of the published work".
That's why I usually edit and negotiate the copyright agreement to include rights for authors to post preprint to "institutional repositories, personal websites and repositories, and academic social media sites."
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.922194
| 2013-06-02T19:32:00 |
10411
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"Mostafa",
"Willie Wong",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6618",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8130",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10411"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How to cite lecture notes? (and should I even do this?)
When learning a new subject, I would frequently use lecture notes found somewhere in the Internet. When writing a paper (or a master thesis, as in my case, but the rules should be similar, I believe) one should give some reference for used results which are not common knowledge, if I understand correctly. This make me wonder: what do I do if I want to reference a result I found in some notes?
The natural thing to do would be to just add these notes to bibliography. What format would be preferable for this? Note that there will generally not be much publishing information, perhaps not even a definite year and place. (A BibTeX template would be .)
Secondly, is it OK to cite such materials as a reference?
I think this question should be asked on academia.SE.
@Vahid: though in most cases when that happens, either the results are tangential or the results are reproduced in full.
You should make a good-faith effort to find and cite original source of the results (to give proper credit). You should only cite the lecture notes if (1) they are the original source, or (2) the original source is inaccessible, either literally (out of print or unpublished) or figuratively (written in a foreign language, with excessive generality or formality, or just badly).
Finding the original source may require significantly more scholarly diligence on your part than the author of the lecture notes, since most lecture-note authors (including myself) are fairly sloppy with references. Such is life.
If the lecture notes contain the proofs in full, I don't see why one must find the original source.
@WillieWong: surely it's good to give credit where credit is due. It is possible to over-do it, I suppose, but I think textbooks (not to mention lecture notes) err too much in neglect rather than over-footnoting.
@paulgarrett: With the exception of parts of the introductory paragraphs, where it has become the norm to give a historical overview of the field, in which case historical primacy would be King, I would in fact argue that for the benefit of the readers the moral imperative should be to cite the resource that contains the best exposition of the technical result needed.
@WillieWong: why not both? Not too burdensome to tell both a helpful source, as well as "origin" source. Delicate, yes, to say "don't try to read this, but cite it"? :)
@paulgarrett: I never said that one mustn't find the original source. I merely disagree with the notion that one must find the original source. If one can track down the original source, great! But having spent some time (out of personal interest) trying to track down, historically, the original instance of Widget X, I am inclined to be very, very relaxed about what constitutes a "good-faith effort". I especially will not demand a masters student to dig through the literature by himself for the first instance of Obscure Technical Lemma 3.1.52....
@WillieWong: Most of the scientific community agrees with you, to its detriment.
To my taste, citations are fulfilling several purposes, some of which may not be fulfillable simultaneously. So, one should be honest about where one found a result, even if the source is not widely available. Thus, cite (in the best, most usable form possible) the lecture notes. Still, yes, accessible sources meet another criterion, namely, helping readers reproduce/understand your results.
Edit: in light of various comments and other answers... another purpose served by spending some (not unlimited) time finding original sources (even while being honest about the source one actually used or _learned_from_) is to give at least a lower bound for the age (and locale of origin) of the idea. Nevertheless, at the same time, it certainly can happen that a much later exposition does a much better job of explaining... after all, benefiting from hindsight.
Yet another reason to exert some effort to credit original sources is to dampen a bit a tendency that otherwise can dominate, namely, some form of "Great Man/Woman" syndrome, in which a very few people are portrayed as being responsible for nearly all good, big ideas.
From a general point of view, lecture notes are gray literature, meaning they might lack standard bibliographic metadata (you mentioned the year and place), may be harder to track down for readers, or not long-term available. Thus, one should generally prefer to cite conventional literature (such as books or articles in journals) over gray literature.
For a masters thesis, it should be fine to cite gray literature, but do check with your advisor. When you do so, you might as well discuss the format he'd recommend for citation. If you found the lecture notes online, one idea would be to cite it as online source, where key metadata would be the URL and the date of access.
In contrast to a masters thesis, many publishers discourage or forbid the citation of gray literature for journal papers. So if you want to make a paper from the thesis and the citation is essential, you would have to find the original source.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.922914
| 2014-12-18T00:26:11 |
34448
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Bob Brown",
"M.N.Raia",
"Pete L. Clark",
"SCIENCEDOMAIN international",
"applied_math",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94496",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94621",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94637",
"kess",
"user94475",
"xLeitix",
"xyz"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8131",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34448"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can one or two spelling mistakes in a statement of purpose hurt your chances for graduate school?
I am wondering can spelling one or two wrong words in SOP hurt chance of getting accepted to graduate school? There might be a mistake about spelling one of my professor's name wrong.
Hurt your chances as in "having a non-zero chance of being detrimental to your application"? Probably yes. As in "being the sole, or even a deciding reason for your rejection"? Very likely no.
If the professor is on the admissions committee, you are, as we say, scrod. Otherwise, there are many names spelled in idiosyncratic ways; possibly no one will ever notice.
@Bob: I just finished my semester's teaching and got several emails saying "Thanks, Professor Clarke!" I wish the students were more attentive to my not-so-difficult-to-spell name, but I'm obviously not going to ding them in any way for it. I think the poor impression caused by misspelling people's names is much more subtle than that.
@Pete: I think the circumstances are different between students finishing a class and someone applying to a graduate program. However, I have an even easier name than yours, and so it mostly doesn't get mangled.
@Bob: Yes, they are different: my students had four months to learn my name! I would feel honorbound not to hold a name misspelling against a graduate applicant. If someone is applying for a job, then misspelling my name becomes worse because they are presumably dropping my name because of familiarity with my work and the misspelling vitiates that. In fields in which prospective grad students are supposed to have deep familiarity with the faculty at their program, maybe something similar would apply. Even so, this is a pretty forgivable offense.
Uhhh, Pete... now that I think about it, you teach in Clarke County, which may account for at least some mistakes with your name. So, maybe even more forgivable in your case than in general. (And I agree that it's forgivable in general, but more in some cases than others.)
We once had an applicant for graduate study in mathematics whose statement of purpose explained why he wanted to become a "mathematition". This was not regarded favorably by the admissions committee. On the other hand, a misspelling of a professor's name might not even be noticed; it depends to some extent on whether the professor's name is "Blagoveshchenskaya" or "Smith".
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.923316
| 2017-03-23T16:20:14 |
86930
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dan Romik",
"Fred Douglis",
"Nicole Ruggiano",
"Pete L. Clark",
"PsySp",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15501",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4246",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46816",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67898",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70561",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"lighthouse keeper",
"sean",
"sessej"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8132",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86930"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How to decide if a paper should be accepted?
Different conferences have different standards of accepting papers. A paper rejected at a conference A might be best paper at a conference B (in a lower rank).
I'm reviewing a paper for a conference, that is not really related to my narrow field, that I don't know its ranking, that I haven't read any paper from previous series.
The paper is so so, not too strong, not too weak. It would be a straight reject in some top-tier conferences, but might be accepted/weak accepted at some other lower rank conferences. How do I make a decision about this paper for this particular conference?
An obvious solutions is to read a couple of papers from previous series to have a sense, but given it is not very related to my narrow field, it will take me a lot of time, and I'm having several other deadlines.
UPDATE: to answer Pete L. Clark's comments.
So I think your first task must be to decide whether to referee the
paper at all
I have never submitted to a journal before, but I think one of the main difference between journals and conferences is that: in a conference, the chairs can't always select the right reviewers for a paper.
In a conference, there is a fixed set of PC members. After the deadline for abstractions, the PC members start bidding for the papers they want/don't want to review. The PC chairs then have a painful task: assigns papers to PC members (there are tool supported, but mostly useless). Obviously, there is never the case that everybody is satisfied, it's very rare that you get the papers that you want to review, and it's not uncommon that you get the papers that you don't want to review. When you are a PC member, you can't refuse to review the papers assigned to you.
If the conference adopts double-blinded review, you are not allowed to assign external reviewers either. In the case you can ask external reviewers to do reviewing for you, since those external reviewers do the reviewing without any credit (at least PC members have their names in the conference's web site), in most of the cases you can only assign to your postdocs/PhD students. So now you understand why I have to review this paper, and that refusing to review papers is not an option (my boss is the unlucky PC member).
As a reviewer, is this your job? Isn't there an editor or program committee member making the final accept/reject decision?
In CS, all reviewers make their own decisions, then the PC members make the final decision based on those decisions. For example, I had a paper which all 3 reviewers gave "weak accepted", but then it was rejected. I had another paper which got both "accepted" and "weak rejected", and the final decision was "accepted".
Given you are not PC member, it's not for you to decide. You can recommend. If you cannot recommend, because you cannot judge the value of the paper, just be honest.
Given your update: I think you can say no to your boss. If you can't (or it's too late now) then your boss, who is the PC member, should be familiar enough with the paper and review, as well as the context of the conference, to help recommend for or against.
@qsp: Thanks for the update; it definitely places the situation far outside of my experience. I really don't understand why it's okay for someone to assign their subordinates to referee a paper but not suggest a qualified outsider reviewer. "So now you understand why I have to review this paper, and that refusing to review papers is not an option (my boss is the unlucky PC member)." That makes me understand why your "boss" (thesis advisor? postdoctoral supervisor?) cannot refuse, because he agreed to the situation. It doesn't make me understand why you can't refuse...
...except generally that you have to do what your boss tells you. (To be honest, though I am a lifelong academic I find this remarkable: I can't think of a single situation in which I've compelled a subordinate to do something they didn't want to.) But it sounds like it would be most helpful to assume the premise that you have to referee the paper. So...okay, skip to the part of my answer where it is assumed you will be refereeing the paper.
First let me say that I work in a field (pure math) that is closely related intellectually but for which approximately zero percent of papers are published in conferences. In this case I don't see how it matters that it is a conference rather than a journal except possibly to reduce the timeline until the decision (though some journals in my field are starting to ask for reports within a few weeks!), so I will answer based on my own experience.
The main problem here is that your expert opinion has been called for on something that you do not feel like a fully fledged expert and that (as is most often the case!) it is not practical for you to fix this by substantially increasing your expertise.
So I think your first task must be to decide whether to referee the paper at all. If you for instance you didn't understand the paper at all then certainly you should not be a referee. If you've already agreed to do it, that makes backing out of it more socially awkward, but it could still be the right decision, as it may take some reading of the paper to find the stuff you don't understand. If you vaguely understand it but really not enough to evaluate it in any meaningful way, again I think you should not referee it. If you like, you can explicitly offer to referee something else instead, and I'll bet the chances are good that a different paper could be found.
If you feel that you can or must referee the paper but really feel shaky about evaluating it, then you can write a report in such a way that your evaluation will be minimized, e.g. by explicitly writing something like
I was asked to review this paper, and so I will. But I want to be clear that it lies outside of my core area of expertise, so my recommendations about its suitability for the conference are tentative. I hope that more weight will be put on the other recommendations.
And then you can give a "weak" recommendation, which should then be drowned out by the others.
However, your question suggests that you are sufficiently qualified to referee the paper that the first alternative is not appropriate and the second one may not be either: you write
The paper is so so, not too strong, not too weak. It would be a straight reject in some top-tier conferences, but might be accepted/weak accepted at some other lower rank conferences. How do I make a decision about this paper for this particular conference?
[Point of order: a paper can't be "weak accepted" by a conference. It must either be accepted or rejected. So here you are doing a bit of what other people have brought up: conflating the referee's recommendation with the editor's decision.]
Rather importantly, you don't say why the paper would be a clear reject at top conferences. (Not the assertion is surprising: presumably the vast majority of submitted papers in your field fall into this category.) Knowing that means that you have some information and insight about the paper (and more than you've told us). In fact it might be helpful for you to tell us how you came to this conclusion.
Probably I don't need to tell you that if the paper does not contain any correct, novel work that is of interest to someone, it should not be published anywhere. Conversely, if it does meet these requirements it should be published somewhere. If you don't know enough about the standards of this particular conference, you can work around that by explaining you would recommend rejection in venue A but recommend acceptance in venue B (this is rather common information in referee reports, at least in my field). Then the editor can decide where the conference lies with respect to the data points you've provided.
If you feel qualified enough, then at a certain point you do have to impose whatever standard you feel is most reasonable. If you don't know the field very well and the paper is not interesting to you, then [assuming you've decided to go ahead with the referee job] you should recommend it for rejection: what else? On the other hand, if you find the paper to be at least somewhat interesting you should act so as to leave the door open for the paper to be accepted, in particular by writing that you would recommend it for acceptance at journal or conference X. Ultimately you're leaving a decision to the editorial board that they would have anyway: among papers that are publishable in absolute terms, do they want to publish these papers or those papers? If they get a whole bunch of reports of the form "The paper is okay; it could be published somewhere in between heaven and hell; I don't really have strong feelings about it" then they're going to have a problem....but who is to blame for the problem? Them, of course: they did not find the right referees and were not clear enough in their standards.
Let me end by saying that I have found myself in similar situations more than once: namely, I get asked to referee a paper by a journal I've never heard of, in a subfield of mathematics different from any of the ones I've thought deeply about. And in fact I have usually done more or less the above: sometimes I turn it down (and I have learned to be decisive about this; if I gave some choice to the editor, it always turns out that they want me to do it anyway), but if I can do it I often take the job. A paper should certainly look novel to the relative outsider if it will look so to the expert, and in some cases I have rejected the paper for not making clear progress over (even) its own citations. More often the papers have been a bit interesting. Sometimes I have found significant mistakes: I can't remember a situation where the mistake was so bad that I outright recommended rejection, but there have been situations in which revisions have been necessary in order for the principal results to look correct. (I don't know how this plays out for the shorter timeframe of a conference: presumably outright rejection becomes more likely.) In fact the most common outcome is that I understand the paper well enough and think it's somewhat interesting and novel, though certainly not the kind of breakthrough to be published in a higher tier journal. In these cases I have recommended the paper for acceptance and included in my referee report an honest depiction of the situation: e.g. if I am unfamiliar with the journal, I say so. I believe in every such case the paper has been accepted. This has been fine for me, since having been an author many times and an editor never, fundamentally I am more sympathetic to the situation of a solid paper being rejected than to the plight of a journal that publishes a good paper rather than a great one. "A tie goes to the author," I feel. Given the number of papers I've refereed, this attitude seems to be okay with the editors, who do in fact once in a (great) while cheerfully reverse my recommendations.
If the paper isn't related to your field and you're not familiar with the conference, how did you get roped into reviewing it?
But given that you did, I suggest you provide detailed feedback on the paper, without focusing too much on the actual recommendation. As a commenter mentioned, it doesn't sound like you're a PC member, more an external reviewer, so if you either leave it to the program committee to evaluate based on your feedback, or offer a weak reject or weak accept rating (if you have to) with text privately to the PC saying that you aren't calibrated for the conference, that should be enough.
I do not think you need to spend inordinate amounts of time reading other papers from the conference simply to gauge its competitiveness.
First, some conferences will have two (or more) reviewers per abstract/paper, so the conference planners might consider consensus. Your review alone may not be the deciding factor.
Second, the goal of conference presentations is completely different that that of journals. They are meant for the discussion of and generation of new ideas. So, the stakes are fairly low if you have a paper that is on the fence (especially if you cannot evaluate the paper within its specific field). If you can give qualitative feedback, that would be helpful for the conference committee. However, when I review conference papers I always consider that the author may be a graduate student or junior faculty. This is a learning experience for them. So, my advice? If the topic is relevant and would be interesting to the conference audience there is fairly little harm in accepting. Every conference - even prestigious ones - have some poor presentations (either poor topics or poor presentation content/delivery). If the one you accept ends up being not that great, the conference's reputation is not necessarily harmed.
"Second, the goal of conference presentations is completely different that that of journals. They are meant for the discussion of and generation of new ideas. So, the stakes are fairly low if you have a paper that is on the fence (especially if you cannot evaluate the paper within its specific field)." I think that is true in some fields and really not in others. E.g. in some branches of computer science, conference publications are viewed as more prestigious than journals and therefore most academics don't publish in journals anymore.
" However, when I review conference papers I always consider that the author may be a graduate student or junior faculty. This is a learning experience for them." That's interesting. In my field (pure mathematics) there are almost no conference papers, and when I review journal papers I always look up whether the author is a graduate student or junior faculty member.
Thanks for the information about your discipline, Pete! I will keep that in mind in future responses. In terms of your second comment, the conferences I have reviewed for in the past have been blinded, so that may help or hurt some of those who submit.
You're overthinking this. The answer is very simple: if you like the paper and think it advances science in some meaningful way, recommend acceptance. If not, recommend rejection. That's all there is to it. The ranking of the conference is irrelevant.
The point is that the conference organizers have decided to put you in charge of making a recommendation based on your taste and your standards. You are now the leader and the tastemaker (to a limited extent, since your recommendation is still subject to review by the program committee), so act on that role - lead, don't follow, which means recommending based on what you think is the right decision. And if you impose higher standards than is typical for this conference, well, then the conference will actually be slightly more highly regarded next year; it is precisely through the collective leadership of reviewers and editors that conferences and journals acquire their reputation. So don't worry about conforming to other people's notions of how selective the conference should be. Just make up your own and go with that.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to suggest a reviewer to not base their decision on the standards of the venue, as it makes the reviewing process even more random and potentially unfair than it already tends to be. Since the OP is an exceptional situation, in which they are not aware of the standards of the conference, I also strongly object to the idea that their decision will lead to an actual improvement in the reputation of the venue - if anything, it will lead to a single group of authors being disappointed about a reviewer who applied an unreasonably high standard.
"The point is that the conference organizers have decided to put you in charge of making a recommendation based on your taste and your standards." Did they? Or did they do a bad/lazy job of conveying the standards to be used? (Or did they do a good enough job with that but choose a referee that doesn't have the expertise to implement these standards?) "Just make up your own and go with that." I agree with @lighthouse that in certain situations this could end up causing harm, e.g. relative to backing out of the refereeing job.
@Pete I stand by what I said. It is the job of the conference organizers to choose qualified referees and to give them good guidance about what's expected of them, and it is the job of the referees to give the best recommendation they can, incorporating the guidance they receive and their personal views of what they think counts for good work. Any harm that may be caused by poor guidance from the organizers is 100% their fault and need not concern OP. The only caveat I would add is that if OP feels truly unqualified to provide a useful recommendation then they should let the organizers know,
... but that doesn't sound like the situation here. OP seems to have a pretty solid opinion that the paper being discussed is not terribly interesting.
@DanRomik "Any harm that may be caused by poor guidance [...] need not concern OP." Sounds like in your perspective, the optimal outcome is the one where OP doesn't become guilty, regardless of potential harm (win-lose situation). For me, the optimal outcome should achieve this goal and at the same time maximize fairness towards the authors of the paper (win-win situation).
@lighthousekeeper no, this has nothing to do with guilt. If I'm a reviewer, I'm going to make the recommendation that in my opinion best advances science. That is the ultimate goal and there is nothing more fair or just than striving towards it. Towards that end, if I received guidance from the organizers to help calibrate my recommendation, I would follow it; and if I didn't receive guidance I would apply my own judgment based on the assumption that that's what the organizers are expecting me to do. That's all there is to it, and I don't understand what you mean about win-win vs win-lose.
@DanRomik I mean guilt in the sense of "it's the fault of the organizers", as you literally said in your comment - you accept a situation that potentially involves harm because the harm is not OP's fault. It's win-lose vs. win-win because a review calibrated to the standards of the venue, rather than some personal standard, would be less likely to cause harm to the authors.
@lighthousekeeper I disagree with the entire premise that the reviewer applying their best judgment, while taking into account whatever guidance (or lack thereof) they received from the conference organizers, is any more likely to "cause harm to the authors" (and why is that a bad thing anyway? Doesn't any rejection of a bad paper "cause harm to the authors"?) than the alternative action of the reviewer letting their decision be influenced by (what I see as) irrelevant information. The action I recommend is simply what I see as most fair and the best way to support the scientific enterprise.
@DanRomik I think your mode of action would indeed be fair if you were the only reviewer at the conference, since this would mean that every author group is assessed by the same standard. But when you have multiple reviewers who apply different standards, I feel it's unfair to the authors who are less lucky with the reviewers.
@lighthousekeeper ok, we've both made our points I think. Let's agree to disagree.
As I understood, your confusion is this: There is a paper X which has been submitted to conf-A and you have to review it and give the recommendation. Fact is that rank(A) < rank(top-tier). I am a CS guy and can answer this with my somewhat philosophical way.
I have reviewed many works till now, and in my experience, I never incorporate the rank (or, popularity) of the venue (say it journal/conference) into my review quality i.e. the recommendation.
We all are doing scientific duty, we are laborers of Science. We just have to work on our assigned duty. It would be really wise to do that duty with right commitment and without compromising on the quality of the outcome.
IMHO, it would be better if you could review the paper just as a scientific work, rather than focusing on the venue ranking etc. Give your best review and let the conference committee take the final call.
The computer science research has degraded recently because of some miscreant venues such as bogus journals and conferences. So, it is high time that all researchers do their duty (work, review, edits etc.) honestly and with high quality.
I wish it were that easy, but I know that when people are aware of the relative competitiveness of conferences, there are many times when people say "this paper wouldn't get into XXX but it is acceptable for YYY". I don't think it's fair to say that every conference should have a universal level, but even if you desired such an outcome, I don't see how you get there overnight. That being said, individuals may recommend rejection from YYY because they are applying the standard from XXX -- not everyone has the same scale. But in practice, most grade on a curve.
I feel this answer avoids the initial question: Given a mediocre (neither particularly good or bad) paper, how to decide for the recommendation?
I agree with @lighthouse keeper. In fact, I am not confident that the answerer fully understood the question nor that I really understand the answer. E.g.: "We all are doing scientific duty, we are laborers of Science. We just have to work on our assigned duty. It would be really wise to do that duty with right commitment." Sure; what else? "and without compromising on the quality of the outcome." Que?? The outcome is either acceptance or rejection. So how would a referee compromise the quality of it? I just don't understand what the words mean in this context.
I understand the intent of the answer to say that the reviewer should apply an absolute standard. Is the paper above some threshold - for instance, does it have any obvious flaws, is it repeating other work, other things that would say it shouldn't be accepted regardless of venue. I think that answer had a lot in common with mine, when I said to do a detailed review providing feedback on what is good and bad about the paper. The difference is, when actually asked to commit yea or nay, I think the rating needs to be on a curve; Coder doesn't.
@Fred: That was the part of the answer that I did understand; it's the other stuff (and how this interacts with it) that I am confused by. However not taking into account the quality of the venue as a referee could only be the right thing to do if (as seems very unlikely) one is working in a field where all venues are viewed as being equally prestigious or one has only ever refereed for venues of a roughly similar quality (perhaps without explicitly realizing this).
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.924942
| 2017-09-16T03:51:42 |
96075
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"AnOldSoul",
"Karl",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79936"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8133",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96075"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How long does it take the German KMK to evaluate a degree and what are the criteria?
I am awaiting my evaluation of my degree by the KMK (Kultusministerkonferenz). I paid the 200 Euro fee a month ago and am still waiting for a response. It is mentioned on their website that it takes three months for processing. Does anyone have any experience with this? Will it really take that long? And what is the probability of failing the evaluation? What are the criteria that they look into? Any help would be much appreciated.
If they say that it takes 3 months, why worry after 1 month?
Waits are always anxious mate :) Just wanted to check if there's anyone who got it done quickly.
Sounds utterly ridiculous that the KMK would review individual foreign degrees. Just the kind of thing these crackpots might actually think up. ;) Have you got a link for a German taxpayer to read up on this procedure?
I can't comment on the wait times, but the goal of the evaluation is to ensure that your degree is comparable to the equivalent degrees offered by German universities. They will be looking at things like the number of credits in your major, and if you have training in the field sufficient to be equal to the German counterparts. The grades will also be considered.
The odds of "failing" are impossible to judge, but if you're short on credits or have a low grade-point average, you are likely to run into trouble.
Thank you for the explanation mate. Do you know any instances where people got the results prior to the mentioned 3 months? :)
@mayooran First, may I suggest you to not call random people "mate"? Then, even if there were such an instance, it would be totally useless to conclude anything about your case.
First of all, I would like to apologize for the "mate" thing and thank you very much for your taking your time in answering the question.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.925151
| 2017-10-07T16:48:42 |
97032
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexander Woo",
"Andreas Blass",
"Anonymous",
"Charles E. Grant",
"Dave L Renfro",
"JeffE",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/464",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49593",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80972"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8134",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97032"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What does it mean to "succeed" in mathematics?
I don't know if here is the right place to ask this question but I would be glad if you could help me.
I am currently a first year PhD student in pure mathematics, and I have some issues that seem like are preventing me to try to become a mathematician, and come in my mind every now and then.
I start with my background, when I was in high school I tried a lot to be in our national IMO team but I didn't even get close to it, after that I tried a lot of university math books and almost finished undergraduate material in my high school, but after getting to university I didn't have any success in my first years, and after that I got to some "CV-filling" places, that I used to get to a rather good university in math for my PhD, but when I see young great mathematicians, almost all of them have had some of the great successes in their high school and undergraduate, and seems like everyone is looking at them like a great mathematician because of that, and they do not need to put a lot of effort on what they're doing, for example, one of my colleagues got to one of the best universities in math without trying to learn a lot of mathematics - even those that I knew from high school- but has a lot of "success" in mathematics.
In my undergraduate I tried to continue my way of reading mathematics, and learned a lot in my undergraduate studies (from books not courses, and for that I didn't have the best GPA in class), also worked with some professors and other things that not so bad undergraduate students usually do.
My questions are the following:
1) What is a mathematical success?
(for example, I know that in PhD working on good things and having great ideas about core problems in mathematics is a success, but it seems that I'm doing something wrong because it seems that I will not get good things in math by just doing what I'm doing)
2) how can I have motivation to become a great mathematician and be sure that all my efforts are not in vain?
(for example, in my department, everyone talks about having some number of papers published to get to a better place (which I think is something bad to be someone's goal in math) , and when I see former graduate students of my department, almost all of them are in big data analysis and stastics and these non-pure mathematical jobs, even after having a good understanding of some part of pure mathematics)
I would be happy to see other questions similar to this, if there are any in this website, but I would be happy to not put duplicate to this one, if there are duplicates, I would be happy to see answers in my case.
Regards,
Sorry to put anonymous, I'm a little insecure when asking these questions!
What level of success are you looking for? Fields Medal or bust? Good enough to have prove some theorem that is worthy of publication in Annals of Mathematics? Good enough to get a job at a top math department? Good enough to get a job at some research university? Good enough to prove some theorem someone else is interested in?
Good enough to be the best mathematician!
Life is not a competition, and neither is mathematics. (Unfortunately, the job market is a competition.) If your goals are based on comparisons to others, you're pretty much doomed to a sad life.
You should measure success by having measurable, reachable goals. Being "the best mathematician" is not such a benchmark, and setting that as your goal, as Alexander Woo mentioned, will almost certainly guarantee you will be unhappy in your mathematics career. Moreover, not pursuing a career you want because you can't be "the best" in that discipline seems shortsighted.
If success requires being the best mathematician, then everyone on this site is a failure.
What is a mathematical success? — Results that you are proud of and that other people like.
'Good enough to be the best mathematician'
Not to be cute, but the set of mathematicians is not well-ordered!
@Charles E. Grant: +1 --- Good point, but you probably mean "linearly ordered".
@DaveLRenfro The set of mathematicians isn’t even partially ordered.
@JeffE: Yep --- transitivity surely fails, which incidentally reminds me of my tennis playing days.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.925648
| 2017-10-27T14:49:38 |
98011
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dawn",
"DetlevCM",
"Faheem Mitha",
"Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai",
"HRSE",
"Jakob Streipel",
"Jim421616",
"Mark Rosenblitt-Janssen",
"Matthew Leingang",
"Peiffap",
"UTF-8",
"corsiKa",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149186",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19703",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33949",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51279",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5701",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67078",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81461",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81901",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"ivanivan",
"paul garrett",
"user21820",
"user2768"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8135",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98011"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Correcting professors' lecture notes
One of my profs in college has (after years of students asking him to do so) put forth a syllabus with all the material for the class he is teaching.
With the help of 3 students from previous years (who did most of the writing), he made a neat 90 page syllabus covering what is taught during lectures.
My year is the first year that'll benefit from this as it was finished early September 2017 (currently in October 2017). However, as is to be expected, some typos still exist, and some little mistakes in formulas do too. I read through it and compiled a Word doc containing all the typos and mistakes I could find and was wondering if it would be badly received if I sent him an email with those. He has asked his students to tell him if they found mistakes, so I know I should probably let him know about those, but I'm not sure as to whether fixing typos will be seen as arrogant or even remotely relevant, since I'm probably the only one getting triggered by them because of my OCD.
Thanks !
Just FYI, I wouldn't usually call this a "syllabus" in the U.S. I would describe this as comprehensive lecture notes or a lecture guide.
I have less than 90 pages of typed notes/instructions/examples and I offer a bonus point or two to any student that finds an error of any type - typo, actual error, dead link, etc - in the content. Granted, a couple of points really doesn't change a final grade (unless it was so close that I would round up anyway) but it does give some motivation to report errors instead of ignoring...
When he asked for mistakes, did he mean typos? Or logical / factual mistakes?
Please don't send an MS Word document. Send plain text or a PDF.
@corsiKa He didn't specify but I'd assume both
@UTF-8 I'll edit it in LaTeX ;)
@Peiffap: You can simply export the MS Word document to PDF. No need to duplicate the work done.
As the others say, I doubt these will be looked upon unfavourably. Especially given that the document was written with students and is new, I would expect the lecturer to be quite happy to have received corrections. (Especially of typos.) It makes me think back to statistics in my maths degree where we got an explicit warning that the document contained typos which got fixed along the way - because it was rewritten too. - Over time, the document will then become perfect.
Frankly, I'm surprised anyone would hesitate to send in corrections to lecture notes (because that is what they are). In the worst case scenario, they'll simply be ignored (unlikely). The professor will probably reply and thank you (very likely). It's very very unlikely he will hold it against you, and if he does, he's nuts. And given that he's actually asked for corrections, a negative reaction is vanishingly unlikely. And no need to apologise or explain. You're doing him a favor. Personally I find typos very annoying, but maybe it's my OCD too.
Why not approach him face-to-face about it? Tell him you've been keeping track of typos in a separate file, and if he'd like it, you can send it to him. Then you can discuss the format, etc.
Give him a diff.
I'd recommend pushing typos to the end. They are far less important than other errors.
@DetlevCM ... "become perfect"... :) Yes, it is comforting to believe that all our writings will eventually become perfect, but unless we stop writing, our rates of production of flawed documents will surely vastly exceed our corrections of them. :)
@paulgarrett I've found that the number of typos in an all-but-finished document is a strange creature: it is (hopefully) monotonically decreasing, bounded below, but nevertheless doesn't converge!
I can only speak for myself, and I'm just a postdoc.
I would be indifferent if someone pointed out one or two typos; on the one hand that's helpful, on the other a bit pedantic.
However, if I received a "Word doc containing all the typos and mistakes [you] could find" in a 90 page document, I would be delighted and grateful.
As an aside, I'm currently working through a textbook to brush up my statistics skills. I'm trying to collect the mistakes that I stumble upon in order to send them to the author once I've finished the book, so he can correct them in the next edition.
Thanks, I know it might sound pedantic but given that he asked for it I think I'm gonna go for it.
@Peiffap I would only consider it pedantic to point out one or two typos, but having a 90 page document proofread is really nice.
I do not know any professor who would think "How pedantic!" when a student points out even a single typo by email. We all want our material to be flawless while spending as little effort as possible.
I cannot speak for all professors, of course, but I'm my case I'd be delighted and I'm fairly sure that such would be the reaction of most professors.
Over the last two years I have circulated some lecture notes among my students and a few other persons, and I'm really frustrated by the lack of feedback on typos (or anything else, for that matter).
I would talk to them in private and, if they don't know about your ocd, let it come up during the conversation as you explain why you made the effort - they are sure to ask...
I once spent a whole weekend doing a massive differentiation based proof to see the result was as stated ( you've seen those in maths / engineering where it says : it can be shown that xyz from abc). Well the proof as shown was incorrect so after doing it several times and getting it checked I took it to the Prof and said I thought I was making an error and could he check it.
Next lecture I nearly fell of my chair when he started with "the proof you were given last week has an error in it, been like that for 5 years, anyway the correct proof is now available thanks to" and gave my name... Not asked for, not expected but a real surprise as he had not warned me either...
Yes, you should send the errata. (But, as others said, use a format that the authors can definitely read without going extra steps. PDF or text, for example; not docx.)
I have been recording errors in notes, books, papers and even forum posts since forever (I tend to read things very thoroughly, sentence by sentence, as my mind is otherwise tempted to skip the actually important parts and dwell on the easy bits; the list of errata comes out of this rather naturally). Most of the time, as long as I've discovered any mathematical errors (as opposed to just typos), I've notified the authors, and the notification has been either received positively (authors thank and often correct the errors) or ignored (i.e., no reply). In my experience, it gets ignored the more often the older the work in question is; after all a paper you have written 15 years ago could just as well be a paper by a different author to you. But if the work is recent or even currently in class use, then the authors are likely to be thankful and highly responsive. (Out of maybe fifty authors I've contacted, only 1-2 have been defensive, and one of these two was outside of academia.)
Mathematics isn't quite like open-source software where bug reports and community patches are actively encouraged, but it's getting closer (unsurprisingly, given the noticeable social overlap). That said, as an algebraic combinatorialist I am probably closer to computer science than the average mathematician.
"as opposed to just typos" Typos should be reported too. They're errors.
As a professor I always welcome suggestions for improvement like these, as long as they are presented politely and respectfully.
If your professor has already made the effort to write down and publish his class notes then your should expect him to welcome whatever helps him improve the material. This is real work and any help is welcome (after writing, rewriting, reading and re-reading, it becomes harder and harder to pick up your own errors).
In addition, I would like to suggest that academia is a place where you should be more concerned about truth (and therefore quality of class notes) than personal feelings, be it of professors or of students. What matters is that the quality of education keeps improving and you can help make that happen.
Having an OCD student willing to do that work for you is a godsent for a professor, so go ahead and expect him to thank you for it!
(of course if he reacts negatively just let it go: that would only reveal a flaw in character...)
Thanks, the part about truth being more important than personal feelings makes sense, and it's a point of view none of the other answers have raised.
You need to stay firm , send him the doc state that's it's unaceptable for a university profesor have typos in any text he sends his students and offer to corect/mantain the document in exchange for creds
I would have some typos to point out for you.
You should probably also expand the answer somewhat
This is not accurate/appropriate/relevant. (Plus, gosh, you have an "incorrect" space before your first comma.)
Is...is this a serious answer?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.926470
| 2014-05-02T16:51:55 |
20159
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Boris Kovačević",
"Burke9077",
"Jedi",
"RoboKaren",
"Simon L Rydin Myerson",
"Trabol.com",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100570",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55049",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55051",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55072"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8136",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20159"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How are GPAs from different universities evaluated for admissions to MS programs in the USA?
I am about to apply for a Master program in U.S. as I am about to graduate in Bachelor of Engineering. Though I heard that all my grades during all my academic life is taken into consideration (GPA). Here in Brazil is very common to have a huge gap between universities both in teaching level and avaliation process. So, holding a degree from a weak college may be much easier and thus helping you to get a higher GPA while a well-known college will be much more difficult and probably your grades will be lower. Even though you have a degree from the very best college and you do have a good knowledge of most subjects, the GPA from the person who came from the weak college may be higher.
This also extends to the outside world (comparison between GPA's from different countries). So, how is it really done in practice? Do I still hold a reasonable chance of getting into a nice college with not a so high GPA?
Also see: Is it ethical to apply different criteria for graduate admissions based on country of undergraduate study?
You can add a note in your statement or supplemental materials that "At my university, ____, the mean GPA was 3.5 with an sd of _ and in my department, the mean was xyz with an sd of __" so that it's clear that you are two sigmas above average, etc.
That assumes that you are above average. You should be able to get this info from the university registrar or office of institutional research.
But you should know that GPAs as a whole are deprecated in the application process. Individual grades (how well did you do in computer science, for example), some test scores in some disciplines, and your statement is much more important. As well as your letters of recommendation.
If your university is not well known, being "above average" at your university does not carry much meaning either.
It at least gives some context as to where you are in terms of your peer pool. You can also add a note in your file that "University of ____ is ranked 3rd in my country according to the survey of universities conducted by so and so organization." But I wouldn't worry too much about this. If we're seriously looking at you, we'll contact you and try to evaluate you via criteria non-dependent on your institution -- by telephone interview for example.
In my (US, research university, engineering) department, we don't do phone interviews for any MS students (the volume of applications is just too high). I guess YMMV depending on the department.
In general 3.4 or 3.5+ is considered a good GPA, and you won't need to explain why it isn't higher to any reasonable admissions board no matter where you graduated from. Well know schools want a diverse grad student body, and will look to pull students from prestigious schools as well as smaller state schools and international schools.
No matter the GPA, I would apply a prestigious "dream" program or two and see what happens. This is especially true if you can line up excellent recommendations. While it might be a longer shot, $50 application fee isn't much, and you will not be left playing "what-if" with yourself.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.926778
| 2012-09-20T14:40:40 |
3327
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anthony Labarre",
"DavideChicco.it",
"Derrick Stolee",
"JP McCarthy",
"JeffE",
"Landric",
"March Ho",
"Nicholas",
"Roland",
"Stat-R",
"StrongBad",
"TheChronicScribbler",
"enthu",
"gcd0318",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1210",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9573",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9574",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9577",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9586",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9595",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9631",
"sebtic",
"user2350366",
"ystan"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8137",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3327"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What is expected of a postdoc?
What do different people in the department expect from a postdoc?
By different people I mean the advisor, graduate students and PhD students.
I know it mainly depends on the job description but there are few basic things that a postdoc must be expected to do. How aggressive (proactive) must one be? This question is important since a postdoc cannot just wait for the adviser to give him/her inputs. Rather the postdoc must take the project(s) as another PhD research of his own but be completely accountable to the adviser in terms of what he/she is doing and how is he/she doing that.
The above are my thoughts. My question is divided into the following sub-parts:
What would you as a professor expect from your postdoc?
What preparation one must do to rise to the expected level?
Is the preparation merely restricted to having sound academic record and experience?
This question is a possible duplicate of this http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2173/who-actually-is-a-post-doctoral-fellow
By now the answers here are so useful that I'd be against closing this question as a duplicate.
@DavideChicco.it the link your provided is essentially a list of questions. The final question is clearly a duplicate, but the answers focus on the other questions in the list. I therefore say not duplicate, but relevant.
You'll very quickly learn that being an academic involves more than just writing research papers. Your time as a postdoc is when you can start learning about these other aspects, while building your own profile.
A postdoc needs to do the following:
Build a publication record. This will involve both what you are paid to do and your own line of research.
Get involved with supervising students. Help with the PhDs in the lab, and get involved in supervising masters students.
Get involved with obtaining funding. This can either be by helping your employer or (ideally) obtaining your own funding.
Build an international reputation.
Start collaborating with external parties.
Gain some teaching experience. This is absolutely crucial if you want a faculty position.
Learn how to manage projects and a lab. This includes overseeing the progress of projects, allocating your time (and others), presenting results at meetings and writing deliverables. If you are in a lab setting, you will need to learn how to fix/calibrate/maintain critical equipment and software so that you can start your own lab some day, and you will need to become proficient in teaching more junior members on how to use that equipment.
Start to devise a strategic research plan. While it is fun to do opportunistic research, solving a problem that comes along or investigating any idea that pops into your head, a better long term strategy is to formulate an interesting long term research plan and follow it, building result upon result.
Be as proactive as humanly possible, without being annoying. Talk to everyone in the department, especially people whose research interests are close to your. Go to conferences and sit down and work with interesting people (not necessarily the superstars).
To the manage projects I would add how to fix/calibrate/maintain critical equipment and software so that you can start your own lab some day.
I am going to print this answer and hang it above my monitor for the next three years.
As for managing project, I feel it also include overseeing the progress of the projects and how different people (mostly students) are taking it further.
Speaking from personal experience, I would emphasize the importance of gaining teaching experience. During my PhD and postdoc years, I was not offered any opportunity to obtain teaching experience - nor was it even considered a possibility. This has made it extremely difficult for me now when applying for lectureship positions.
I consider most of these activities necessary for senior PhD students, and some of them (like "Build a publication record") even for junior PhD students.
Great answer, I wish I'd been able to read that before I got started.
I like this answer. +1 for that strategic research plan and ...building result upon result.
Let me add one item that Dave Clarke omitted, which I think is actually the most important:
Separate your research reputation from your advisor's. Congratulations! You have enough of an independent research record to land a postdoctoral position. Unfortunately, that reputation is almost certainly deeply entangled with your PhD advisor's; deep down, many people in your research community still wonder if (or simply assume that) you've just been riding your advisor's coattails. Your primary job is to convince them otherwise. Do not work with your advisor, and do not work in the same subsubsubfield as your PhD thesis. Make a name for yourself as a truly independent researcher and scholar.
And a secondary corollary:
Do not just ride your supervisor's coattails.
Is /that/ why a post-doc cannot be at the same place as a PhD? I've been wondering about that.
"cannot" is strong (because it happens) but "probably shouldn't be" is true.
+1 for Make a name for yourself as a truly independent researcher and scholar.
+1. The whole point of the "changing institutions" custom, at least as I understand it, is to act as a replicate measurement of your abilities as an academic using new variables. There will be a higher degree of confidence from the point of view of hiring committees if you can demonstrate that you consistently obtain papers and funding even with different advisors and lab environments.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.927231
| 2017-07-01T09:42:37 |
91578
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anon",
"Carol",
"JeffE",
"Nikey Mike",
"Nikos",
"Wrzlprmft",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51566",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53234",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69968",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9578"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8138",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/91578"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Compressing figures for paper submission
I recently submitted my first paper to a journal and had some trouble with the figures I uploaded. Specifically, the journal required vector graphics figures to be exported at 1200dpi, grayscale at 600dpi and coloured at 300dpi and I could choose between tiff and eps formats. The problem I faced was that there was an upload limit of 30MBs and I had to submit each figure separately. Keeping the dpi guidelines produced images that had a total size more than 200MBs and the only way I could upload them was by exporting them to 200dpi. Has anyone faced a similar issue and if so, how did you solve it?
What format are the images? I guess .eps
If you have access to a linux machine, you can use the command ps2pdf or gs to considerably reduce the size of your files.
How did the editor answer when you asked them this question? (You did ask the editor, didn't you?)
I did answer but no reply yet.
Are you really sure that the journal requires you to convert vector graphics to pixel graphics? If yes, they are stupid. If no, just use vector graphics and your size problem should be gone.
In my experience, Matlab is very good at compressing figures in *.eps format(I have also used SciLab, Mathematica, R, but the best compressed images are produces with Matlab - 2D, 3D images, 3D histograms, density contour plots, 3D object reconstruction, etc).
I didn't know that @Mikey Mike. Thank you very much!
I am assuming that the OP already is being careful to make the bitmapped images approximately the size that they will be printed (that is, the image should be 600dpi (or whatever) at the printed size, not the original size it was created just in case that was some default large format
The upload limit is clearly a stricter requirement than the image resolution threshold since you can't submit a paper over that size. As you have done, I suspect most people would compress the images to meet the file limit.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.927453
| 2020-01-11T21:47:56 |
142748
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Buffy",
"Captain Emacs",
"Elizabeth Henning",
"Flydog57",
"Myshkin",
"Nanne",
"chepner",
"corsiKa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102417",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14648",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7144",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8139",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/142748"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it appropriate to ask a student I tutored how their exam went?
I tutored a student in math for two weeks to help her prepare for an exam. I expected her to inform me how the exam went, but she did not.
Is it appropriate to ask her how the exam went?
We are in Ireland.
What are you planning to say to her if it turns out it went badly? You might be embarrassing her.
@ElizabethHenning, actually, I would want to follow up with a discussion about how "we" can make it better for the future. What needs to be done on her part and mine so that the outcomes improve.
Is it appropriate to ask a stackexchange user, in case that the conclusion of this question was to actually ask the student how it went, how the student did?
hahahhaa @Nanne, She did so so.
I expected her to inform me how the exam went
I'm not sure why you expected this. While it's certainly not unusual to follow up with a tutor (or thank them), it's not a requirement.
Is it appropriate to ask her how the exam went?
I see no reason why not.
Not a question about academia, but of general interpersonal interaction. It's good manners of the student to inform the tutor, but not outright bad manners not to do so. Many students are either thoughtless or worried about more imminent things. Whether or not to contact depends on rapport with the student.
@CaptainEmacs True, but you only know it's not a question about academia because you already know it's not about academia.
https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic specifially lists "requirements and expectations of students, postdocs, or professors," as an on-topic question. It's at least tangentially on-topic, IMO.
You might also ask this in the context of how you can improve your tutoring. No matter how it went, you might following up with "is there anything I could have done to help you more?"
As a tutor in undergrad, we were taught to ask "how did the exam go?" and not "what did you make on the exam?" The idea being that the tutee gets to project their feelings onto their score (some are happy with a 75) and gives them a way out ("ehh ok I guess").
It's implicit in these instructions that asking "how did the exam go?" is appropriate for the tutor.
Well, the are two sides to the answer. It's either the exam went well or it didn't. If it didn't, I am not sure your tutee will be comfortable to tell you about it. Another thing is that your tutee may also expect you to ask how it went, to show you care. So it depends. Regardless though, it's not a bad thing to ask a student how the exam went.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.927767
| 2014-02-17T19:43:53 |
17070
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"A rural reader",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Arsalan Wahid Asghar",
"Cape Code",
"David Ketcheson",
"Eric Marsh",
"Federico Poloni",
"Flyto",
"Fomite",
"GayashanNA",
"Jealie",
"JeffE",
"Jukka Suomela",
"Lisa",
"Lucubrator",
"Moyli",
"Nemo",
"Noah Snyder",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Samuel",
"ShreevatsaR",
"Vaibhav",
"badbayesian",
"cbeleites",
"darthbith",
"dbluesk",
"gfkri",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136702",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32575",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46037",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46038",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46039",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46044",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46045",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46046",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46047",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46048",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46088",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46121",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46157",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46160",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"kimmy",
"ricksmt",
"user31527",
"user46039",
"user46160",
"user82683",
"user_4337270"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8140",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17070"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Does gold open-access with article processing charge (APC) really help access to science and save taxpayer money?
I value the reputation of the journals to which I submit articles. Mostly, I wish to confront my work with the most competent researchers in my field through peer review, in order to have an expert opinion on its quality. In my field, the best ranked/most reputable journals are dominantly subscription-based (although all offer 3'000$ open access (OA) options, that not many researcher choose). So I give priority to reputation/quality over OA policy. On the other hand, I'm well aware that subscription journals are a big weight on universities budget.
So, does OA* really help access to science and save taxpayer money?
The arguments I know about that suggest it does:
I'm aware of the arguments (very efficiently publicized by big OA publishers like Frontiers) that OA is good karma because it gives access to science 'for free'. People argue that when the taxpayers pay for research, they should also get to read the results without paying a subscription.
Reasons for which I'm not sure it does:
I believe that if every article costs 500-3000$ just to publish, and the total number of article explodes, taxpayers (or private scientific funding agencies) are not winning a lot in the change. I also think that people can go to the library to get access to research.
Isn't it reasonable to use the options that we have to freely give access to our work (self-archiving, sending preprint to people who ask politely, etc.).
ps. I published in both OA and subscription-based, and I will gladly submit to OA journals if they end up being the highest quality ones in my field.
*I'm talking about OA journals with article processing charge. I'm aware of the existence of completely free OA journals (funded by universities I presume), but they are only relevant for a few research topics. And not mine.
Edit apparently the science funding agencies of the UK think that gold OA is not that good of a strategy.
Not all open access journals require author fees.
There is absolutely no reason every article should cost $500 to $3000 just to publish. By the way, you may want to look at the example of the Journal of Machine Learning Research.
Can we call "OA with processing charge" "pay-to-publish"? I feel that the expression "open access" is used to mean too many things and it would be better if we phased it out completely.
There is one reason: copyediting. As far as I know, no journal does copyediting and also costs less than $40/page. I don't think that copyediting is worth the price, but it is a reason for the cost. Also outside of the mathematical sciences some significant typesetting costs are inevitable.
@FedericoPoloni The established term for this is gold open access. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_access#Implementation_practices. I've edited the title accordingly.
@NoahSnyder: http://theoryofcomputing.org/ does copyediting and costs nothing.
+1: What a great question. It's questions like this that make me want to be a part of this site. (You know you've asked a good question on academia.SE when "Ask your advisor!" is not a plausible answer...)
I feel this question might be mostly about hybrid OA rather than gold OA in general. Fully OA journals are very different and they work in various ways. Hybrid OA has tons of problems: http://rossmounce.co.uk/2017/02/20/hybrid-open-access-is-unreliable/ http://bjoern.brembs.net/2016/04/how-gold-open-access-may-make-things-worse/
Sounds like an unsustainable system. Taxpayers pay a lot to support research, much of which never benefits them directly, yet publishers provide added value and that's not paid for by taxes.
I also think that people can go to the library to get access to research.
You're assuming that libraries can pay for access. That's not the case anymore. Even Harvard univerity, one of the richest in the world, can't pay for all the journals its researchers need. I think none of the Universities I know have access to all the journals it needs. So, you can imagine a public library won't grant access to all the existing literature.
That's even worse in developing/not too rich countries. In this case, you can notice that most Open Access (OA) journals adapt the cost of publication to the wealth of the country the article comes from (for example Plos).
It can also be a problem for small enterprises, that aren't very rich, so they can't subscribe to journals and have to pay "per view", but need access to the latest research in order to innovate. So, non-OA journals are an impediment to the technological progress too.
And I will also add the fact that, even in rich countries, it is not always that easy to go to a library. For example, when answering here on Stack Exchange, I try to add links to research articles which can be more precise than my own answer. If the OP is really very interested in a complete understanding of the answer, he could go to a library. But in most cases, if he doesn't have access to an article through the Internet, it will just waste an opportunity for him to learn.
I published in both OA and subscription-based, and I will gladly submit to OA journals if they end up being the highest quality ones in my field.
However, you're pointing to a real problem here. If the "best" journals are not OA, do you have to compromise your career (or your students') to publish in an OA journal? In fact, some people would answer that the Impact Factor-based ranking of journals doesn't make much sense (see for example this article). And it is one of the reasons for the creation of Plos One, a "mega-journal" accepting articles only based on their scientific value, and not on an estimate of the interest its conclusions might have in the future. But for sure, this is a hot topic.
And another real problem here is money. If the Universities have to pay both for keeping access to non-OA journals, and for publishing in OA journals at the same time, it will be even more expensive. No university can afford it. A proposed solution is green Open-Access, where the articles are just put in repositories, and nobody needs to pay neither for publishing, nor for accessing. With a good post-publication peer-review system, this could work. But it also implies a huge paradigm shift, with new problems.
Isn't it reasonable to use the options that we have to freely give access to our work (self-archiving, sending preprint to people who ask politely, etc.).
That is in fact kind of green OA. But, depending on the license you agree with when you publish in a journal, that's not always possible.
You are raising important points, just to clarify, when I say reputable, I do not strictly speak about impact factor (in my fields, top journals have an IF of about 3) but journals respected by the community. As for not so rich countries: I think that OA publisher are well aware of the huge potential in article-processing charges in these areas.
In each of my past jobs I have occasionally run into papers that I cannot access given the databases the university has subscribed to. Sometimes, I ping colleagues elsewhere and find it, which is a real hassle. Other times, if the article was only a "nice to have," I just skip it. In this way, not being freely available will affect the impact of your work (all else being equal). In some quite indirect way, this seems to lower the value that taxpayers are getting.
@EricMarsh 'not being freely available will affect the impact of your work' It may very well be, but this is not the original topic of my question.
As far as I know, Elsevier does not send take-down orders for pre-prints. They allow those (see http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=30&fIDnum=%7C). The actions you've linked to involve cases where authors posted the final journal version.
'A proposed solution is green Open-Access, where the articles are just put in repositories, and nobody needs to pay neither for publishing, nor for accessing. With a good post-publication peer-review system, this could work' Agreed, but how do we fund this? Managing high quality publications and hosting the data for ever securely, with a back-up strategy etc, is obviously not free.
I actually see a shift in favor of green open access, e.g. the new German UrhG. As for gold open access, I haven't done it yet and I'm not likely to do it - instead I use the self-archiving policy. IMHO besides the huge costs the big publishers charge for their gold OA, I do think that this myriad of spamming gold OA journals really threaten the concept - hopefully not the concept of the other OA versions.
'Even Harvard univerity, one of the richest in the world, can't pay for all the journals its researchers need' Or with this statement, they used their position as an influential institution to bring publishers to negotiate subscription fees. I work at Harvard and 2 years after this announcement, I have access to most relevant subscription journals.
(Edited to address Anonymous Mathematician's great remark)
Well, my understanding is that you asked a math question: is it better for the tax payers to have academics publishing in Gold Open-Access, compared to the standard journals? Neglecting the fact that the tax-payer won't have access for free to articles published in regular journals, this could be answered by a comparison between the current closed system (all the costs are concentrated in the library subscriptions of journals) and the open system (all the costs are concentrated in OA journals processing costs).
It is hard to have good figures, so I will make a number of approximations... Feel free to correct/adapt these as you like. I also consider only Harvard - other institutions may give very different outcomes.
So, trusting this link, the total library expenditure for research purpose is 3 750 000 $ /year for roughly 20% of Harvard's collection - in other words, the total yearly spending of Harvard's library for science publications amounts to the mind-boggling 19 000 000 $ / year (!)
Knowing that Harvard has roughly 2000 faculty members cf the Wikipedia page, the total expenditure per faculty is between 9000$ and 9500$ per year.
Given that the typical faculty publish maybe 3 papers per year (depending on the field!), any cost lower than 3000 $ per publication in OA journals is worth the money for the tax payer, as this means that the overall cost per year and per faculty is below 9000 $. Furthermore, according to this article from Nature the true average cost of OA publication is around 2300 $ (with some good journals well below), making the open system a better value for tax payers.
My reading of the $3.75 million figure is that it covers only 20% of the journal Harvard subscribes to ("In 2010, the comparable amount accounted for more than 20% of all periodical subscription costs"). In that case, the spending is more like $9375/year per faculty member. That would fit pretty well with the $3000 figure. My understanding is that it is not based on actual costs, but rather is an attempt by publishers to re-capture all the current spending if the model switched from subscriptions to gold open access. (Fortunately, competition would presumably drive the price down.)
@Anonymous Mathematician: the sentence I based my reasoning on is "Harvard’s annual cost for journals from these providers now approaches $3.75M." - which does not let any room for ambiguity. Also, The Guardian reported exactly the same figure and no comment under that article suggests that it was wrong (here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/24/harvard-university-journal-publishers-prices ).
The key phrase is "these providers". It refers only to the "certain providers" mentioned in the previous sentence, while the next sentence says that "all periodical subscription costs" are five times larger. Similarly, the Guardian article refers to "many large journal publishers, which bill the library around $3.5m a year" without saying anything about the total budget (not limited to these particular publishers).
For comparison, http://www.provost.harvard.edu/institutional_research/Provost_-_Harvard_Fact_Book_2009-10_FINAL_new.pdf says that library collection costs were about $35 million/year in 2009. The Faculty Advisory Council memorandum broke it down the collection costs as 50% journals, so 20% of the journal costs would indeed be about $3.5 million.
@Anonymous Mathematician: You are absolutely right. thank you for correcting me :) I edited the response.
@AnonymousMathematician & Jealie, thanks for your valuable contributions. In fact we could simply trust a company like Elsevier to have done the maths for us. If their APC is 3000$ it's for a reason...
@Jigg: "In fact we could simply trust a company like Elsevier" must be the most ironic thing I've read on this site. :-)
@Shree: I'm not sure if ironic is exactly the word I'd use, but it is certainly "one of the lines I am most glad I did not have a hot beverage in my mouth when reading", yes. Or: we could trust a company like Elsevier and unfortunately we largely do even though by now it is painfully clear that we shouldn't trust a company like Elsevier any farther than we can throw it.
@ShreevatsaR and Pete, ironic is the word. My point is that if Elsevier charges 3000$ it's because that is more than the average it makes per article with subscriptions. It was a way of saying they did the calculations form this post long before we did.
@Jigg: I stand corrected. Your use of the term ironic is in accord with the dictionary definition of the word (which I know by heart since it occurs in song in my favorite episode of Futurama).
Of course, there are many subscription journals (notably those published by mathematical societies) with much more economical subscription costs, so that they are a much better value than typical gold OA.
To expand on JeffE's comment: the diamond open access (free for both authors and readers) certainly does benefit the taxpayers while for the golden open access (the author-pays model) it is less clear, as detailed in the answer by AlexIok. A detailed discusion of differences among different kinds of open access can be found e.g. here: http://www.jasonmkelly.com/2013/01/27/green-gold-and-diamond-a-short-primer-on-open-access/
EDIT: To make things clear, this answer was written for the original version of the question that dealt with OA in general rather than with the author-pays model.
Isn't it reasonable to use the options that we have to freely give access to our work (self-archiving, sending preprint to people who ask politely, etc.).
Many academics don't self-archive, especially for non-recent work, and consider the idea of sending a pre-print out - first, this implies that the reader knows that they can ask for this (given you're talking about the general public, I don't think it's a great assumption to make), and second that you'll do so in a timely fashion. Consider the circumstance where you're a faintly scientifically literate family member trying to make sense of what the doctor's are telling you about a loved ones medical condition - it's very possible that sending out a preprint, or a PDF, if you can even find a corresponding author, the email address is still current, etc. will come only after several weeks, which can be extremely frustrating.
Beyond that, if they can't get past the paywall, how do they know if it's worth reaching out to you?
I also think "Will save the taxpayer money" is a little bit of a red herring. The argument I've always heard, and advanced, is not that it will save the tax payer money, but given they have already paid for the reseach, Open Access gives them access to what they paid for.
As to whether or not it will save them money, I think that's a question that changes based on the dynamics of the journal publishing industry. Right now, I'd say the answer is no - in addition to authorship fees, I have yet to see a library be able to drop a major publisher because there's sufficient OA coverage in a field (or group of fields). I suspect the cost savings for individual users not having to pay $50 or whatever it is for access to an article pale in comparison to library subscription fees, mainly because per-article readership is fairly low.
Someday, perhaps, but I think cost is one of the weaker arguments for OA.
Can I rephrase the question "Will OA save the taxpayers money?" to be "Under an author-pays OA system, will the public pay more for the same amount of, or less, research?" I think it is a given that taxpayers deserve access to research they have funded, but the trade off may be that less research gets done - is this trade-off worth it? I'm genuinely curious for a response from someone who has thought about this more than I have, because I'm still trying to form an opinion. Thanks! :-)
@darthbith I'll add some thoughts on that shortly.
Thanks for the comments. I agree that in the short term, cost is not a great argument for OA. The far better argument is the moral one, that the public has already paid for the research and they deserve access to it. It will be interesting to see how the field changes now that the new rules in the UK are in place, or whether there will be much change at all. Thanks again!
'Many academics don't self-archive' well, they should.
Let me add a slightly different point. It's slightly off-topic because this is not OA in any of the colorful meanings, but it is on topic for possibilities to lower costs and get the taxpayers access to published papers:
Here in Germany one reaction to the library subscription costs is that now the DFG negotiates nationwide (not only university libraries) subscriptions with some publishers. I believe the DFG is a big enough player to stand their ground when haggling with Springer, Elsevier & Co.
I found some numbers:
total costs for scientific libraries (Germany-wide): 793 M€ / a
therof infrastructure costs for buildings and staff: 548 M€ / a
for buying books and journals: 245 M€ / a
the Nationallizenzen cost ca. 110 M€ / a (according to the text linked above they started with much less)
I did not find numbers on how much subscription costs the libraries saved. All in all, I assume that the total costs probably stayed roughly the same (at least that's what I hope) but the availability is increased.
The nice thing from taxpayer's point of view is that everyone can access these papers without the need even to go the next university library (need to get a login, though but that's not difficult).
On the topic of save taxpayer money, I think it is important to consider the question - where does the money to pay the publisher come from, in an "author-pays" system? Presumably, PIs will have to add the cost of publishing into the budget they submit in grant proposals. This may increase the amount the grant giver is required to give PIs, or perhaps they will be able to do less research for a given grant. Either way, the taxpayer may end up paying more for research, and it may be research they are not interested in, so even if they can access it all freely, they may not care to.
Now the counterargument to this is that if universities are no longer required to pay subscription fees, the amount they take from a grant should be reduced, and so the PI will end up with more or less the same amount of money as under the old system. I think this may eventually be the case, but the transition time will probably be somewhat difficult, and I would imagine that universities will be loath to give up a very steady source of funding - they will just find some other use for the money if not subscription fees.
In the UK, PIs are no longer allowed to add publishing costs to research council proposals. Instead, universities are given block grants for this purpose. In my experience these grants can run out towards the end of the year....
It's also worth noting one of the downsides of the author-pays model that hasn't been mentioned thus far: that it becomes unaffordable for somebody to publish research if they are not part of a university.
There're two completely different aspects to your question. "Help access to science" is completely different from "save taxpayer money", as will be apparent in the following.
Help access to science: this is relatively straightforward. The answer is yes, as you can see from Wiki:
OA articles are generally viewed online and downloaded more often than paywalled articles and that readership continues for longer. Readership is especially higher in demographics that typically lack access to subscription journals (in addition to the general population, this includes many medical practitioners, patient groups, policymakers, non-profit sector workers, industry researchers, and independent researchers).
Save taxpayer money: this aspect is much more complex, because where all the money in publishing goes to is itself complex, but I'll go ahead and venture the answer "not really".
The reasoning is pretty intuitive. Publishing involves lots of things, and those things cost money. So to actually save money, you need to either do the same thing for less money, or don't do the thing at all.
So the question becomes "is it cheaper for the publisher to publish an OA article than a subscription article?". Drawing on my experience doing editorial work in academic publishing, I am quite confident that the answer is "no". The production process is 100% the same, except that at the end, one bills the author for the APC. Things like the editorial management system, the journal's website, the indexing - they are all the same.
Hence any savings come from other aspects of publishing, like marketing or distribution. Here OA definitely saves on distribution, since OA doesn't involve print journals and therefore doesn't need to be distributed. But then again, it's generally already possible to subscribe to electronic journals only (i.e., you do not request the print journal if you don't want it), which would also eliminate distribution costs. Marketing is a different animal and I am not an expert on it, but my impression is that it really isn't that different. You have $X in budget (in turn this is indexed to the journal's revenue) and you use all of it. Sure you might do something different when promoting an OA journal, but ultimately you still use all the budget.
One thing that isn't complex is whether the publisher gets less revenue if all the journals convert completely to OA. This can be easily calculated by taking the journal's subscription revenue and comparing that to the expected revenue if every paper paid the APC. Here the answer is usually "no"; the publisher does not lose revenue if everything converts to OA. In fact they probably gain revenue. This differential is a big part of the reason why publishers are able to waive OA fees for some authors.
So the answer is not really - gold open access simply shifts the money around. To actually save taxpayer money, one needs to do what I alluded to in the second paragraph: either do the same thing for less money, or don't do it at all.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.929584
| 2018-07-04T04:17:01 |
112183
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Academia.jpg",
"Buffy",
"Karl",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83230",
"nabla"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8141",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/112183"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Preserving ownership of authorship in the period after leaving a position and before journal submission
Background:
I am currently working on a paper as a first author with 3 other members.
My tenure with the research institute ends on the end of this month and I have no intention to continue any working relationship due to the very complex political environment and "back-scratching" among upper management in this research institute I am in, plus my observations of other ethical issues.
However, I intend to submit this paper to a journal after the end of my tenure. This journal has an associated conference that has deadline submission on the 15th July 2018. For this particular conference, an acceptances of a paper for this conference would enable a direct proceeding to its associated journal.
I have a valid concern aimed at the senior research fellow (No PhD), whom I report to and who is also the last author of this paper, due to strong corroborated anecdotes (credit stealing included) from multiple employees. As far as facts is concerned, he comes from industry after 20 years, without a PhD, and sorely lacks technical skills in my observation.
This further cements my concern and I am aware that there exists a possibility that my concerns may be misguided.
Measures taken:
1) I have created an official email confirming the roles, responsibilities and order of authorship of each team member involved in this project. The email has been acknowledged by each individual team member including aforementioned senior research fellow/ programme director (without a PhD).
His role is to review to review the draft before my submission (possible and probably potential red flag?).
He has not acknowledged nor mentioned anything in his reply about getting back to me with changes to the draft.
2) I intend to submit my paper to an open journal arXiv before submitting any draft to this senior research fellow.
3) 2) is followed by a submission of a draft to senior research fellow with a co-correspondence to the integrity office, worded in a diplomatic manner.
Are these three steps sufficient? What more should I be aware of?
Edit: The email also serves as a centralised communication where any work done by must submitted to that email.
re 2) I tend to think it is neither wise nor ethical to submit anything to arXiv without the consent of all co-authors, so that is probably not an option.
@Alice I am close to completion of paper, not close to submission; journal's call for paper opens in October.
How do I say 'No' when I will not be in the research institute to ensure control? I see no reasonable way to put a pristine draft in his hands, leave the research institute without an iota of doubts when the research fellow in question has at least 2 isolated case of hijacking paper?
Edit: I have stated that that his lack of technical skills are from my direct observation.
This only makes sense if the guy could bully you into not bringing up formal complaints if he striked you from the authors list. But you are leaving, so how would he do that? He could falsify a lot of records, but that brings him into jail if it fails, as it will if you sign your emails and keep copies. Unless he's a mad idiot, he's not going to risk that.
In the world of patent, researchers establish priority in the following way. They keep a bound notebook (no loose-leaf) so that pages can't be added between other pages. Whenever they have a good idea for which they want to establish priority they make a dated complete note of the idea. They then get a colleague to date and sign their note. At some companies most employees always have this patent book with them so they can record ideas as they occur.
Then, if another person somewhere tries to patent the idea, they can present the patent book as evidence of prior art. The other person in this case may be completely unknown to you, but for patent, priority is pretty much the whole game.
You can do something like this yourself, if you are unsure. It needn't be confrontational to your co workers. Make a signed and dated (paper) copy of each version of the paper that you work on and have a non-involved but trusted colleague sign and date it. You can even leave them with a signed and dated copy so that you each have one.
The existence of these copies protects you a bit from being excluded. But in the absence of a problem, they are just private notes and so non-confrontational.
For your future, you are likely better off with cordial relations with your co-authors. It may even turn out that they are proud of their association with you.
Hi Buffy, your method appears to be similar to what I propositioned.
I created an email, indicating the role, responsibilities of each member and their corresponding authorship.
The email also serves as a first - stop "depository" for any work progress - no matter how minute - done by co-authors.
It appears that my proposition is in the right direction.
@Physkid, get a neutral third party involved: the signer. Make it non-alterable: paper. In an extreme case, use a lawyer as the third party, but you need to be pretty convinced of problems before you need that.
I am afraid there is no neutral party I can count on.
This is an Asian-oriented working environment with people not willing to risk prospects or livelihood; the political relation on the upper echelon is also very complex.
I have sent all email attachment to the integrity office to have a general discussion about how my work can be protected and be advised of any necessary steps that should be taken.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.930331
| 2017-12-03T06:42:35 |
99862
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Equinox",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Phil",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83816",
"janh"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8142",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99862"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Reporting a student who cheats
Firstly, I do not believe this to be a duplicate of the related recently posted question due to the key fact that that user was anonymous to his class and I am not.
This has happened 3 times now. While taking standardized tests, someone cheats. These aren't just classroom tests, but rather officially proctored, nation-wide tests. The first time, some students had significantly more time, both starting before the official call to start, and ending after the official end. The Proctor was pretty relaxed, and either didn't notice / didn't care. The second time, someone's phone went off twice, and on full volume (the student in question had to stand up and manually turn the phone off). The Proctor did not alert his superiors, although many students had lost a significant amount of time and the incident negatively impacted our scores. We were told beforehand that any distractions during would be an immediate invalidation of the test (we even had to keep our phones in a box), but this seemed to go unnoticed. The third time was similar.
I complained to my peers afterward, and they all told me not to tell anyone or do anything for fear that it would cancel or negatively impact our scores (most of them did well). I didn't feel comfortable with this, but I didn't report anything both for fear of both my reputation being impacted, and for fear of my scores being cancelled on a test that I studied significantly for and potentially did well on. If I were to report any of these incidents, most people would immediately know that it was me who had filed the report, and I would be severely socially ostracised. I did/do not desire this at all. In hindsight, I should have kept it to myself, not expressed my worries to my friends / acquaintances, but unfortunately this did not happen.
In a situation like this, what is the appropriate course of action post-disclosure? Report the student in question and risk negative reputation, a cancellation of scores, and hard work put in (but do the right thing and have fairness reign), or keep the cheating to oneself (and preserve reputation but carry a dishonest weight)?
"The first time, some students had significantly more time": Do you know that they might have been allotted more time because of a disability?
They started while the proctor was reading instructions, closing their book when he looked around. It was clear that they were cheating. They worked through the 'please close your test books now.' The proctor also asks at the beginning if anybody has extra-time needs etc.
Based on your comments, this is a question about college admission exams (which are nominally off-topic here), However, given the nature of the question could still be applied to exams at all educational levels, I'd leave this question open.
Yes, sometimes students are assigned more time because of some disability. A few years ago, when teaching at a university in Canada, the university notified me that a student provided a medical letter proving that he has some issues with concentration, and that I should give him extra time due to his disability. It is quite possible that this happened here and in that case, the university will not tell the other students.
I know for a fact that is not what happened, but anyway, this discussion is beside the original question.
Simply that the ramifications are the same.
If you really wanted to do something then you should have voiced your points to the relevant authority (head proctor, Dean whoever) at the end of the exam.
Speaking to your peers after - in the canteen , bar wherever, is just a discussion / rant that is not productive in reducing / controlling cheating, but dooes allow you and your colleagues to relieve stress after the exam.
I don't know in which country you live. If a phone ring, this is not cheating because a phone that rings does not provide any information to a student. However, if a student is using his phone to look up at information on the internet, take phone calls or send messages, or look at answers stored on his phone, this is of course cheating. So if the phone just rings, I don't think that it really matters.
About ending after the official end, if it is just a few minutes, maybe that the professor just decided to give a few more minutes to give a chance to those who could not finish the exam on time. I don't know about your country, but in my native country (Canada), it is not something unusual that a professor will give 5 more minutes to students if he sees that many of them have not finished the exam. In that case, this would not be called cheating, as long as every student can have this extra time.
So, if you think that it is cheating, then you can report it (if you think you are OK with the possible consequences). But from your description, I am not sure that we can really call this cheating.
Having your phone ring during a high-pressure test situation will break concentration for others. Especially when you have been told to not bring your phone (and/or mute it), this is an obvious case of "I don't really care about anybody but myself", which can (and probably will) negatively impact the score of other students.
@janh A "high-pressure test" is a test where you are not well-prepared. The best way to succeed in an exam is to prepare yourself well and sleep well. If a cell phone ringing for a few seconds bother you in a perhaps 1 or 2 hours test, I think that it means that you are not well prepared.
We were specifically told beforehand to silence our phones and place them in a common box. As janh said, this disturbs everybody's concentration and will affect scores. As for the extra time, these are nationwide tests. Millions are taking it on the same time, and 5-20 extra minutes has a significant impact.
Sorry, I live in the United States. Massachusetts.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.930920
| 2013-02-17T03:06:53 |
8048
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"0101",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"DeveloperInDevelopment",
"Hammad Haleem",
"Julien__",
"Tushar Gupta",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19400",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19402",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19451",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19492",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82318"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8143",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8048"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Applying to PhD programs in mathematics: would a letter of recommendation from my department chair at the community college be of any advantage?
I finished my MS in mathematics 5 years ago. Over these years I have been teaching at a community college (primarily calculus 1,2,3 with analytical geometry and Ordinary Diff. Eqs). When I was in my masters program I was having trouble narrowing my interests and decided to stop at my masters and start teaching. During this time as an instructor I have become very interested in some applied mathematics (biology in particular). I plan to apply to several PhD programs in the near future. With that said, I didn't keep in touch with too many people from the university I attended. I did stay in touch with a couple of my professors (on a minimal basis) and plan to ask them for letters of recommendation.
My questions...
Would a letter of recommendation from my department chair at the community college be of any advantage (and even suffice as 1 of the 3 required)? Or should I call a professor from 5-7 years ago that may remember the grade they gave me? To me the latter seems very generic and I feel my department chair could say more about my dedication to mathematics and teaching.
Thanks!
Does your department chair have a Ph.D.? That could make a difference, since the admissions committee may wonder whether someone without a Ph.D. really knows what is needed to succeed in a Ph.D. program (so if you have a choice between several colleagues to ask for a recommendation, I'd choose one with a Ph.D.).
I was accepted into a number of Computer Engineering PhD programs with recommendations from the following people:
My then-current department chair at the high school where I taught physics and computer science.
A professor from the graduate education program where I got my Master's degree in teaching.
A professor who taught "how to teach physics" courses at another university, where I had been taking a series of the courses in order to become a better physics teacher.
I would have loved to get recommendation letters from professors from my undergraduate engineering curriculum, but my degree was from 15 years prior, and no one would have remembered me, nor been able to write anything substantial.
The letters I did get gave detailed information about my work performance from a teaching perspective for technical classes, and from a learning perspective in (somewhat) technically-minded classes.
Bottom line: get letters from people who can comment on your ability to do research, if possible, but more importantly from people who know you well and can add information to help a committee decide on whether or not to accept you.
As a "non-traditional applicant," you will be evaluated more on your work experience, and less on your coursework than most. So a letter from your department chair where you teach would be very helpful.
Fortunately, your work experience is very germane to your graduate study aspirations. I (and most others) can see how an interest in "applied mathematics (biology in particular)" grew out your your teaching calculus, analytic geometry, and differential equations. (And there's the old saying, "those that don't want to practice, teach. Those that don't want to teach, do research.")
Even in a research-oriented graduate program, teaching ability is a "tiebreaker." In your case, with your heavy experience, a potential "deal maker." Graduate students are expected to do research first, but teaching, second. You already offer the teaching "bird in hand," and if someone has doubts about your academic background, the likely thinking is that since you can teach this stuff, you're not likely to be bad.
While research earns the advancement, teaching "earns your keep." You may take particular interest in programs where there are tenured associate professors, people who can't get promoted to full professor based on research, but get tenure based on teaching ability.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.931260
| 2013-07-05T15:51:27 |
10977
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anyon",
"BSteinhurst",
"Barry",
"Federico Poloni",
"JeffE",
"JoshuaZ",
"Panpan",
"Peter Jansson",
"Simon Drew",
"The Unfun Cat",
"TimRias",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108889",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17254",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27247",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27250",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27257",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27258",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27263",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27264",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7561",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97038",
"techlover",
"user27250",
"user3158009",
"user360487"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8144",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10977"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it better to have a single-author paper or a joint-authored paper?
I am a new graduate student and I am about to start writing my first paper. Some of my adviser's other students have been working on similar topic to what I have been working on and he has been pushing us to combine our results into one paper. However, I feel my results could be a paper on their own. I want to start beefing up my CV so that I can get extra funding and, hopefully down the road, a research position but I am afraid that if I am only a coauthor on a paper it won't look as good as if I am the sole author (especially since I worked completely on my own for my section).
So my question is: would it be better to try and publish a paper in which I am the sole author or would it be better to try and publish a slightly better paper in which I have 2 or 3 additional coauthors? Do funding selection committees and the like give precedence to people with papers that they are sole authors over ones who have coauthors?
Edit: My field is math, in case this matters.
Have you already asked your advisor?
Why not do both? You write a paper with them as a co-author and they write a paper with you as a co-author. Win-win situation. The paper has some common grounds but your specialities hopefully vary enough so you can focus on different topics in-depth, thus having enough material for two papers.
You should really listen to what your advisor says. "...he has been pushing us to combine our results into one paper." That about says it. Your advisor knows what works and what doesn't work as a paper in your field. He also knows (presumably) about the scope of your work and how it fits into what you and the other students have been doing.
There is little downside to this. The importance of the paper to your career has far more to do with how well received the paper is than with how many authors there are. Having more authors means the paper is stronger, means you have a network of people to help rewrite and deal with any negative reviews you may get, and (as suggested in Peter's answers) it shows you can collaborate with others.
It would not hurt to bring this up with your advisor, make your point (ask your question), and see how the advisor reacts.
That last line (either you trust ... or not ... get a new advisor) is perhaps a bit extreme. There is room for some disagreement with an adviser being you need to find a new one.
The way authorships count varies substantially between fields. You therefore need to figure out how things are in yours. Multi-author papers are commonplace in most fields today and in some (mine included) there is almost a negative to be sole author (it seems as if you do not collaborate). This view strongly depends on what kind of paper/study it is.
Anyway, benefits with co-authorships is that your name becomes associated with others. If it is only with your fellow graduate students, the value may be somewhat limited but if you are co-authoring with someone who is well known and respected, the value is much larger.
In your case, the way you have described it, it seems silly to put your research into another paper if it can stand alone. If the joint paper is likely to become a benchmark paper and get lots of attention, then being part of it may not be a bad idea. So you see that it really is a problem of assessing how you can optinise your gain from it as well as how much the science will gain from a colaborative paper where all parts are present. One way to resolve such issues is sometimes to write several papers where the group is present on all but where the first author varies so that your own work is accredited you but the joint effort is also acknowledged.
These kinds of decisions are always tricky and, in my opinion, depend on how the work can be divided up without losing strength and impact. You should definitely bring this to the table and discuss the options with your peers.
but if you are co-authoring with someone who is well known and respected, the value is much larger — This is not necessarily true. If you only publish with people who are well-known, you may develop a reputation for riding other people's coat-tails. (This is why I insist that my PhD students publish at least one paper without me before they finish.)
True. In this case it is from a graduate students perspective which of course deserves to be emphasized.
The relevant questions should be: What have those other people done regarding your own research? Are their contributions worth adding them as coauthors? These are the questions that you should be thinking about. From what I read from your post, it seems to me that the other people did not contribute much to your research, and you feel that you should publish the paper on your own. What confuses you is "the dark side of the force:"
"Do funding selection committees and the like give precedence to people with papers that they are sole authors over ones who have coauthors?"
The thoughts that surround this question are very serious issues (c.f. the current ethical standards of academia), and you should think about it. I think the answer of the paraphrased question above should never be a determining factor on whether you should publish that paper on your own or with coauthors. You have to first form your own ethics depending on what you think is true/right/just, and pursue that direction regardless of the monetary/fundetary/titletary disadvantages that it brings within.
Although, you have a valid point, it does not quite pertain to the question at hand, which is what the pros and cons are of combining results in a joint paper.
It is better to have a single-authored paper than a joint-authored paper. But it's better to have a joint-authored paper than nothing at all. Given the difficulty of getting papers published, joint is probably the way to go here.
I do not subscribe to single authorship. No man is an island. I strongly believe that there is power in team work (co-authorship) than single authors. You need to bring in different reasearchers from different faculties for you to have a QUALITY ARTICLE for publication.
Steven Weinberg's A Model of Leptons turned out to be pretty important too...
I guess I’ll just toss out 20% of my papers then.
OP is in math. In math at least there are a lot of single author papers of very high quality. There are also others with other authors. There's no special reason to think that coauthors are necessary. Is it possible that you are making this conclusion because this is the norm in your field? If so, what is your field?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.931809
| 2012-08-04T20:02:27 |
2749
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Anonymous Postdoc",
"Danu",
"Federico Poloni",
"Jill Clover",
"Jules",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Maxim.K",
"Pato",
"Ryan C. Thompson",
"SveinKhoryvsson",
"Sylvain Peyronnet",
"Szymon Bęczkowski",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1312",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6892",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6893",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6894",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6896",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6952",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6957",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6962",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6963",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"ragnar",
"zundarz"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8145",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2749"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it desirable to compliment a seminar speaker before asking a question?
Some people, when asking a question at the end of a seminar, make comments on the talk first along the lines of "great talk," "really enjoyed this talk," or similar phrases. Is this a desirable thing to do? I've noticed that most people don't do this, but some of my favorite scientists do.
Great question, @AnonymousPostdoc.
My personal preference is not to offer a compliment in this setting. It often strikes me as less sincere (off-handed or perfunctory). If I really want to compliment someone, I tend to catch up with them later and start with something like "I really enjoyed your talk. If you have a minute to talk, I have a question for you about..." On the other hand, I know that some people feel like asking questions (especially if they are critical of some aspect of the work) can feel hostile, and so they find the compliment as a good way to off-set that.
Totally agree. I groan inwards every single time somebody does that. Usually, after conferences, my inner voice is sore.
If it's your honest opinion, then I would compliment the talk. However, I wouldn't do it just to be polite. There is no need for false kindness.
I would only do this for a talk I liked.
When asking a question, it is desirable to explicitly establish a non-confrontational tone. It is natural and common (though of course not correct) to interpret even well-meaning questions in an antagonistic way. If the speaker feels threatened, they will be less able to focus on the content of the question and may instead become defensive. A question that is interpreted as non-confrontational is therefore likely to get a better answer.
Complimenting the speaker is one way to make your subsequent question non-confrontational, and is a good idea as long as you are sincere. Other ways include saying something nice about the topic itself ("you're studying a very interesting question"), smiling, and carefully controlling your tone of voice. These are especially important if your question amounts to a criticism of the presented material.
Yes, and tone of voice and body language matter enormously. The relative status of the speaker and the questioner matter enormously.
I think if you reason why you compliment the person, like "I really enjoyed your talk because [state your specific reason here]", it will always be warmly accepted.
The one drawback is that insecure, literal-minded people may worry that it's an implicit insult (the talk wasn't good to praise for its own merits, but at least the subject is worthwhile).
@AnonymousMathematician My guess is that, depending on your country, it may or may not be seen as an insult.
I have edited the answer because it was too ambiguous. I meant that you should state specifically why you like the talk.
I agree with the other posters.
Personally, I try to make my tone of voice, attitude and choice of words respectful when asking a question while the conference is in session (and of course otherwise). I try to indicate indirectly that I enjoyed the talk (if indeed I did), without offering a direct compliment.
You note your favourite scientists being complimentary to speakers. I expect that these scientists are well-established, well-regarded and that they know that any praise from them would be a particular boost to, in particular, more junior scientists.
It is not desirable, but you can do it if you want. But do it shortly, because there is not a lot of time for questions after a talk.
Personally, I think that saving the compliment as a way to start a discussion later with the speaker is preferable.
To tell the truth, I also think that, except for clarification requests, questions are better asked in a discussion with the speaker, after the session. This is the only way to have complete and clear answers.
Somewhat like @Dan C suggested...
If you really felt inspired and got something new from the talk you should offer verbal appreciation. If you very much liked the presentation and is relevant to your research, it would be a good idea to talk in person.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.932172
| 2012-11-09T07:31:30 |
5214
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Christophe",
"JeffE",
"JiK",
"Joshua",
"Learning",
"OldSchool",
"Suresh",
"Usha",
"dearN",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13404",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13405",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13406",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13408",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13438",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13439",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13442",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13650",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13654",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"unknownprotocol",
"user13439",
"user13443",
"user13654",
"user256021",
"user310282",
"user3457600"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8146",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5214"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Extending a result submitted to a conference before acceptance/rejection notification
I recently submitted a paper to a conference whose notification of acceptance/rejection is due to 3 months from now. However I realize that I can extend my results in such a way that it gets much more general and such that the results of the previous paper follows as a special case. The generalization however is non-trivial, in the sense that I will need much more advanced and esoteric techniques, and somewhat more 20 pages to write it properly. It also fits in the scope of a conference whose deadline is in 2 months. Here are my options.
1) Put the first paper at arxiv. Write the second paper citing it and showing where things get different. Submit the second paper. But then the second paper doesn't get self contained enough.
2) Put the first paper at arxiv. Make the second paper self contained by rewriting all results that I need from the first one, but specifying that it is a generalization of the first one. Submit the second paper.
3) Write the second paper and wait for the result of the first conference. If accepted, write the second paper as an independent extension of the first one. If rejected, merge everything into a new piece of work and resubmit to a new conference whose deadline is in 5 months.
Problems:
a) There are two groups working in a very related subject, and I'm afraid putting the first paper in arxiv would lead them to a similar generalization before me. So I wonder If I should wait to put the first paper on arxiv until having finished the second one.
b) If I write the second paper and put it at arxiv before the notification from the conference, could this make the first paper be rejected because the program committee would argue that there is a possible generalization of it? Even though highly non-trivial?
c) If I submit the second paper to a new conference but don't put it on arxiv, would I fall in the case of double submission?
What is the best way to proceed in this case? I believe several researchers might have faced similar situations.
My preference would be for option 3)
My preference would be for option 3 and put the paper on ArXiv. And why aren't you just collaborating with the other two groups?
@OneMoreAcademic Is the conference fine with you putting your results on ArXiv before/during/after the conference? What conference is this, if I may ask? I have had this thought about several conference papers that I submitted to the ASME but I could never find information about whether or not I could submit a preprint to ArXiv.
Firstly, this question is relevant to your considerations.
In my community it is quite common to publish a (possibly extended/revised) submitted work as a technical report or a pre-print right after, or before the conference submission. The idea is to get a useful reference for future work falling exactly in the period between submission, notification and hopefully publication. ArXiv, or a TR with ISSN is fine for that.
Having said that, the option 2 is something I myself often resort to. Also to consider with this option, if the publication date of the "generalization" is after the submission deadline, such a rejection would be baseless.
As you yourself note, option 1 leads to a non-self-encapsulated paper and option 3, even though fine and correct, prolongs the period between invention and publication.
Researcher does not just stop because you submitted a conference paper. In many fields arxiv is not an option. Waiting when you do not need to is not an option either. But you have another option. Incorporate enough of your first paper in a second one for it to be understandable, and cite the unpublished work for the details. By the time the second paper is published, the first one should be out and the full reference can be included.
cite the unpublished work for the details — Do not do this without putting the first paper on the web. If the second paper relies on results or techniques that are only described in an unpublished manuscript, the reader has no way to verify, even in principle, that those results are correct, relevant, or even described correctly. That's sufficient reason to reject the second paper.
I had the same situation where we proposed a method and then generalized it later.
What I did (not the best option though) is wrote two papers (yes they overlap in almost 30% of the content) then submitted them for two different conferences.
still waiting for the feedback.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.932569
| 2015-04-13T09:29:40 |
43481
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alateve78",
"Ashina Shanuka",
"Cape Code",
"Fomite",
"Grant Cole",
"Jerome Viveiros",
"Kevin De Pelsmaeker ",
"Leafk",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"StrongBad",
"Travis Preston CalArts",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117898",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117899",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117900",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117913",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117922",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123422",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"jakebeal",
"user8001",
"xLeitix"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8147",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43481"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Are there studies testing whether academia rewards researchers based on number of publications?
I would like to know whether any scientific study has tested a hypothesis relating number of publications to career advancement.
It is often suggested that hiring and promotion decisions at research institutions are based heavily on the number of publications produced. That is, one is more likely to get a tenure-track position and subsequently to get tenure if one has a larger number of publications (independent of quality). One could also introduce an opposing argument that large numbers of publications are negatively correlated with quality of work and therefore negatively impact career advancement. Are there any studies supporting either of these views?
Some remarks: I understand well that even if there is correlation it would not imply causation. Also, I suspect that the relation between publication quantity and career advancement is very different between disciplines and between world regions. I would be interested in studies that address the question globally or among some subset of academe.
I believe this question is different from Whether to publish one big paper or many smaller papers for a given research project?, since I am asking for general scientific studies rather than opinions.
I am aware that, for many reasons, reaching valid conclusions may be impossible. I am interested in whether it has been attempted.
Note also the reversed causality effect. Since successful researchers tend to have long list of publication, it is often falsely assumed that it is the explaining variable.
Interesting question. However, I assume you should make sure to think about survivor bias here - if having a bad publication record during your PhD makes you inelligible for TT and postdocs, and hence those people quit after a PhD, you will only see good track records when looking at tenure stats.
This will be hard. How do you operationalize "quality of work", if not through some publication-related metric like citations? If your success in obtaining grants is partly driven by your publications (because that's how people hear your name), then grants acquired will also be correlated with publications, without necessarily being a measure of "quality of work". Bottom line: I'm afraid there are so many issues with measurement and confounding that I would take any results of such a study with a large grain of salt.
Is this relevant: http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/3155/929
Do we need studies? I've had several tenure and promotion committees outright state a needed number of publications.
There's quite a bit of this sort of thing in economics. One early and now classic study, Katz 1973, performs a regression of salary on the number of books, articles, "excellent articles", and other variables associated with a faculty member, and finds what seems to me to be very low impact of publication on annual salary even in 1973 dollars: an article is worth $18 and an excellent article worth $102 in annual salary.
A later study Diamond 1986, estimates the marginal value of a citation on lifetime salary: somewhere in the $50 to $1300 range (!!). Note that is in economics where citations are somewhat stingy, back before people started gaming citation rates as much as they do today.
Since there has been a huge volume of publications on the determinants of faculty salary within the economics literature. For some reason, this particular labor market has been of exceptional interest to academic economists.
It's interesting to imagine oneself as distributing money when citing other people's work.
In biology, there was a recent study relating publication metrics (including quantity of publications) to odds of becoming a PI. A summary of the article is here and the full article is here.
Can you provide a bit more of a summary of this article in your answer please? Answers that depend almost entirely on an external resource have a tendency to decay badly over time.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.933028
| 2018-01-05T19:19:35 |
101661
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"101010111100",
"Elizabeth Henning",
"astronat supports the strike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41814",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85495",
"john fowles"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8148",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/101661"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Money as a factor in PhD admissions
I'm wondering to what extent money is a factor in phd admissions? For example, does an admissions committee limit the number of students admitted in a year depending on how much the department can afford that year? and approximately what percentage of the departments funds go to graduate funding(I am asking mostly in regards to US universities that rank in the top 20 for math.)?
And also, are qualified students who are less expensive more likely to get admitted because it wont cost the department much, if anything at all, since at many institutions certain groups receive their funding from the central administration rather than the department(such as women and minorities)?
Below is a source where the writer says
Even as faculty members on committees expressed philosophical commitment to diversity, Posselt observed financial motivations at play. Some universities offer extra funds for minority graduate students, so that a fellowship might be paid for from general university funds and not departmental funds. Where such incentives exist, they appear to have a strong impact, Posselt writes.
and in What do admission committees look for in a diversity essay?, Paul Garrett says:
being a woman in a STEM field (Science, Tech, Engineering, Math), or of ethnic origin other than northwestern European . . . opens certain money-pots to both the department and to the individual.
You have too many questions and most of them depend on the country and/or university. There are also a few misconceptions in your post regarding funding and costs of a PhD.
I sort of deliberately asked many questions in my first paragraph not to elicit a response to each question but to get a better general understanding of how money factors into phd admissions. What misconceptions?
"... since at many institutions certain groups (women and minorities) receive their funding from the central administration rather than the department." I have never heard of this practice, could you name such an institution?
I edited my answers with credible sources where I got the information from
@johnfowles For example, where funding comes from (it is not always the department) and costs associated with a PhD (math students also need various equipment).
@astronat I know of a couple of situations in the US where a few grad student slots are either reserved for URGs or URGs are given preferential admission. In these particular situations I don't think there is additional funding coming from above the department, but it's possible. I do know this happens for faculty hiring.
Anecdotally, I don't think "cost" enters too much into US graduate admissions decisions, with the possible exception of international students from certain countries. The additional "money-pots" might refer to designated university fellowships for URGs rather than standard grad funding.
@ElizabethHenning Are the slots that you mentioned for specific groups or general URGs?
@johnfowles The ones I know of are for general URGs meaning gender and/or URM ethnicity. That is, they are not specifically earmarked for Latina women or somesuch. Fellowships OTOH are often specifically designated for Latina women, etc.
Top-ranked schools generally commit to offering accepted candidates a certain level of support during their graduate candidacies. Therefore, finances must play a role in how many students they can afford to admit: if you only have sufficient financial resources to support 30 students, and 40 enroll, you're in for a bit of trouble. Thus, the students who are most desirable are those who can provide their own funding, in part or in whole, via external or internal fellowships or "matching funds" from the department. This frees up money that can be used on other students. (I would imagine that in math, much of this funding is awarded in the form of teaching assistantships rather than RA-type positions.)
This makes deciding how many students to admit a difficult challenge. Top students will have competing offers, and thus universities need to admit enough students to make sure they fulfill their research and teaching needs, but need to not be overly generous in making offers, in case yields exceed expectations.
As far as diversity goes, I agree with the assessments in the article you linked to: diversity only comes to play after candidates have cleared the qualification bar.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.933374
| 2013-05-14T09:42:03 |
9982
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Abolfazl",
"CCR",
"Gini John",
"JeffE",
"Peter Jansson",
"Raphael",
"Rebekah B.",
"Srijan",
"StrongBad",
"Thomas Christy Louis",
"Tony",
"efuller100",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24616",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24617",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24618",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24619",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24626",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24629",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/897",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8149",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9982"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What should I do if I realize there is a minor error in a paper I submitted?
I have submitted a research article and later realized that it has a slight error. The paper is now under review. I have proposed a few theorems; one theorem contains a slight error that can easily be removed. The methodology is correct. Would this cause the rejection of my paper?
I would contact the editor and point out the problem. The editor might be able to convey the issue to the reviewers. If the process has come too far you might get a reject but you could still contact the editor explaning your problem and ask if the paper could be reconsidered.
@PeterJansson Is there more chances of getting rejection? Will they not consider my other contributions and idea presented in the paper?
Everything depends on how serious the problem is in terms of affecting any of your conclusions. If you do not do anything, nothing might happen, so it is a judgement call. If the correction helps anyone understanding the paper better, I would say you should make the contact. If it is on the level of a typo and does not affect results, it should not be grounds for rejection. Clearly it is impossible toprovide clear distinct recommendations without knowing the details.
@PeterJansson It will not affect the result. More specifically, I have constructed an iteration method of second order where I have given the expression for error estimates. There is one typo in the final error estimate expression. Although it will not affect order of the convergence.
It does not sound like a big problem to me. My original suggestion, however, still stands. You could send off a mail to the editor pointing at the error and making clear that it is of no significance for the peper. The worst that can happen is that you do not get a reply. I would think any editor would be happy to receive an upfront letter like that. I would, however, also like to see others comments on this.
@PeterJansson Thank you very much sir for your valuable suggestions.
In order to answer this question, we need to define some magnitudes of errors.
A small error does not affect the conclusions and if the manuscript was accepted as is could be fixed in the proof stage before the manuscript goes to press.
A minor error does not affect the conclusions but requires too many changes to be made that it could not be fixed in the proof stage.
A substantial error affects the conclusions and would require the manuscript to be re-reviewed.
If you have found a substantial error, you need to contact the editor and request the manuscript be pulled from the review process. You do not want to waste the time of the editor and reviewers. A small error can either be ignored or reported to the editor if you think that the correction will help save the reviewers time. Minor errors are the real problem. There is no easy way to tell the editor/reviewer what is wrong, but an unclear manuscript is likely to get negative reviews. I would suggest contacting the editor and explaining and apologizing for the problem.
The real question should be how did you find the error? What are you doing looking at a manuscript after it has been submitted?
Dear sir it is a matter of small error. It will not affect conclusions. There is one typo in writing the expression for the error estimate. Although it will not affect my conclusions.
I would then let the editor know. You don't want the reviewers scratching their heads trying to figure out what is going on.
Dear sir wouldn't it will leave bad impact on editor?
@srijan this is not really a discussion site. If you want to discuss the issue, you could try our chat room.
wouldn't it will leave bad impact on editor? — Not as bad as if the reviewer finds the error, or worse, if the error is only discovered post-publication.
"What are you doing looking at a manuscript after it has been submitted?" -- I hope that's sarcastic. If you mean it, the imho obvious answer is: check that you did not make any minor or substantial mistake during the overnighter preceding the deadline. Or prepare your arXiv upload. Or polish some more for the final version you are optimistic enough to assume you'll need.
@Raphael I am serious. I think you should incorporate into your submission process the extra day, or three, to allow you and a colleague to look for mistakes to avoid exactly these types of issues. I also think when you submit something to peer review that if the reviews come back as "publish as is" (not that that happens frequently), that you should not have to tell the editor "I want to do some "additional polishing". As for ArXiv, I don't use it, but I think I would probably prepare both submissions at the same time to keep everything in sync.
@StrongBad Point taken. But then, we all know that there's always another mistake.
What if you have submitted a[n]... article ... that has a slight error?
You're answering your own question. If it's slight, then it's slight, and should not matter much.
Still, to be more practical: If
The error, despite its slightness, means a significant claim is invalid, and
The "distance" from the submitted version to the corrected version is small (e.g. replace a sentence, change a couple of numbers etc.), and
You've just now submitted the paper (i.e. not weeks ago)
then I might describe a correction, in at most one paragraph of text (hopefully much less), and would write the PC chair to ask whether that can be passed on to the reviewers.
In all other cases I'd just wait it out and see.
Would it cause the rejection of my paper?
If the error is indeed slight, then this is very unlikely. But if your theorem says "P = NP" and you typed "=" instead of "!=", then maybe it will be rejected :-)
Seriously, though, the only cases I think this could have any weight is:
Clueless reviewer who loses track of the flow of the paper because of the slight mistake, and thinks you've derailed yourself with it
The slight mistake being accompanied by several other mistakes, slight or otherwise, so the submission is perceived as having numerous mistakes (regardless of their severity).
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.933877
| 2013-08-20T09:49:13 |
11992
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous",
"Gavin",
"Jipperzipper",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"StasK",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5674",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8072",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8309",
"posdef"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8150",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11992"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What does a US university expect of a student applying from the UK?
How understanding are American Top-10 universities of different expectations abroad? In the UK, nearly nobody publishes anything before they start their PhD. The master courses are much shorter and usually include mostly courses instead of research. We are not expected to do any teaching. I am therefore wondering whether all of this will count against a UK student applying to the US. Personally, I have a very good profile for a UK student (Top of my class in undergrad and masters), but I only have 2 research internships outside of my courses. Is it expected of UK students to achieve the same things as US students applying to the same universities?
Applying to what? Graduate studies? Post-graduate studies?
Applying for a PhD.
Are you at a well-known university? If so, then people at the US universities are likely to know and trust your letter writers.
The same as for any other country, I suppose.
One of the requirements is obviously English. For you, it would mean not to blush when somebody says, "Neat pants!"
This may vary by field; my experience is in mathematics.
Most US students start a PhD program immediately after finishing their bachelor's degree, so they apply during the last year of their undergraduate program. It is less common to complete a separate master's first, especially in the sciences where PhD students are funded and masters students are typically not. The first couple of years of a PhD program are usually coursework similar to a masters program (you would probably be able to skip some or most of these courses, if they are comparable to what you have taken).
Therefore, the US students with whom you are competing are mainly undergraduates in the last year of their bachelors program. At this level a few of them may have published papers, but most will not. They may have research experience from summer projects, summer internships, independent study or lab work, but it is not usually comparable to graduate research. Very few of them will have any formal teaching experience; at most they may have worked as teaching assistants, which usually means grading homework. Some of them may have taken a few graduate-level courses at their undergraduate university, but not to the full extent of a masters degree.
So I don't think you need to be concerned about your level of preparation or experience in comparison with US applicants. If anything, you should be ahead.
As mentioned in comments, at a major US research department there should be people who have either come from UK universities or have experience with them. If they are not already on the graduate admissions committee, the committee members will consult with them if they have questions.
Good luck!
If you are literally talking Top-10, you will be on equal footing with American applicants, especially with your research internships.
Below that threshold you may well surpass American applicants, as you haven't spent any of your time minoring in side subjects since school.
This may not relate to how well your applications fare, but the larger universities will be well versed in taking on Eurasian applications, and you should expect fair judgement on UKish criteria.
@Gavin, you might even find some professors at those schools whose Alma Mater is your own. There's a lot of crossing the pond in academia, especially among the higher ranked schools.
To continue on @JonathanLandrum's point, if you do find such profs (a) from your university, (b) within your field (biology, right?), anywhere in the US, you could approach them and ask how to best frame your UK experience in your Ph.D. application so that would be easier to understand for the US colleagues. (Addressing the US graduate admissions in their language would also signal that you have done your homework on preparing for the course of the Ph.D., is aware of the expectations, and ready to tackle the challenges.)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.934199
| 2013-08-28T09:07:58 |
12241
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dmytro Perevoznyi",
"G33K",
"Gavin",
"Gratuit",
"MiGang",
"Revolution88",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30856",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30858",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30869",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8072",
"undu"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8151",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12241"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can I submit more than 3 reference letters with my grad school applications?
Is it acceptable to attach additional reference letters to an application under the supporting documents category of an application? Say I have 3 references from my masters institution, and another 2 from my undergraduate institution. I would think that if they are all positive, that the more is better. Would this be acceptable or is it a no-no? I am particularly thinking about top-10 universities.
US universities.
@GHP: Other schools explicitly tell you not to submit anything beyond what's required. So don't shoot yourself in the foot by not following directions!
No!
US institutions expect that you have never seen your recommendation letters; your references are supposed to upload/submit them directly to your target departments. But presumably you are uploading/submitting your own supporting documents.
If the application web site somehow restricts you to naming only three references, then you only get three letters; choose wisely. If it's a paper application, just ask all your references to mail in their letters.
(I assume you are applying to a graduate program.)
Moreover, many schools now no longer allow additional recommendation letters. If they ask for three, they want three, no more, no less. Four is not allowed, and five is right out.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.934348
| 2013-11-15T18:33:38 |
14143
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Abc",
"Allen Seay",
"Austin Henley",
"Cog77",
"J.R.",
"JBeck",
"JeffE",
"Suresh",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36482",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36483",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36489",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/780",
"jame_smith",
"supertopi"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8152",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14143"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How far do you commute to graduate school?
I decided that I want to go to graduate school. I started looking into some local schools, but none of them have any programs that are very appealing. I found a program that is two and a half hours away and classes are held on Saturdays. Is this ridiculous? How long is too long of a commute? As much as I would love to just move there for a few years, I have a husband and a toddler. I can't uproot them as well. My only other option is to take the program online. Do people even take online programs seriously in the job market?
Are you doing research or just taking classes?
Is this for a masters or a Ph.D ?
More and more universities are offering programs that can be taken as a mix of online and resident classes. That is, you might be able to complete part of the program online, which would mean less commuting, yet you'd still have the advantages of being an on-campus student for at least some of your program.
And if this is a research degree: In which field? Some research absolutely requires physical presence in a lab; other research requires only portable computing equipment and internet/library access.
Indeed, it matters if it is just a course-work based program or if it requires research, lab work, etc.
You'll need to check with your program to be sure what's expected of participants, and if you reach out and contact an enrolled student (or if their admissions office has a student they could direct you to for such questions) you can ask them for their experience of "what it really takes", and what options you have.
For one example, all around the USA there are "weekend {MBA/etc}" and sometimes "executive" programs. These are designed precisely for people like you, people who are working full time during the week, who live far out of town, etc.
The first step is determining what is really needed - is that one day all you really have to be there for, in person? Are there demonstrations, oral reports, projects, group meetings, etc, that must be done on any other day of the week?
To continue with this answer, we must assume the answer is "yes, the program really only requires you to be here Saturday, and everything else can be done at your home, email, web, etc".
As a matter of my experience, I have not done this myself, but I've worked with about 4 people who were doing exactly this. They would finish their work on Friday, commenting about how they had a long drive ahead of them. If they had a morning class some would go down on friday night, stay in a hotel (or couch surf, or stay with a friend/family), and then go to their classes. When they were done they'd drive home and be there in time for dinner.
Some others drive down early on Saturday, did class, and drove back all in one day. This is doable - they were doing 3 hours each trip, so 6 hours of driving in one day. But I must warn you - according to psychological/cognitive research, people do not habituate to commutes of this length. If you find a way to enjoy the drive as an experience, like your chance to listen to audio books, loud music, be by yourself to meditate and think, etc, then that's fine. Most people just always hate it - it's one of the few things we, as human beings, suck at just getting use to.
In the experience of my coworkers, none of them liked the drive. But in the case of all of them, they decided that the unpleasantness was worth it because their degree was important to them, and all it cost them was a chunk of their weekend. They didn't like it, they always looked a bit down to have to make the drive the next day, but they did it anyway. Another coworker stayed with family/friends and stayed the whole weekend, driving back Sunday night.
My father was actually going to do this for his PhD in English Literature, but found 1.5 hours back and forth while working 50-60 hours entirely too unpleasant, and stopped before even really starting it. Your value and personal situation - and how you handle long stretches of time in the car - will heavily influence your experience.
In short, "Your Mileage May Very". There is no "too long" or "too short" to commute. Commutes suck. As humans, we universally tend to hate them, especially while driving. As a personal note, I've found that anything over 20 minutes per day (if every day) starts to wear on me, and anything over 45 minutes is very displeasing (unless I'm on public transportation, which I find relaxing and can easily do double the time). Meanwhile, some people drive an hour and a half and just "deal with it" temporarily. I find road trips for 3 hours ok, but the ride back is rough even if I did very little that day, and I spend most of the next day tired. You'll kind of have to find this out yourself - might I suggest some trial runs to scope out the campus?
Finally, you could also try to find creative solutions, which will depend on your personal situation. Some couples, if they are both off during the weekend, will travel together and one will go to school while the other has a Family Fun Day. Since this is almost always done on trips to a larger city than one lives in, there are often museums, parks, movies, etc. This can be anywhere from relatively cheap (pack a cooler and picnic, choose low/no cost fun things to do) to prohibitively expensive.
As to online classes, that really is a separate question you might want to search for, with lots of good answers all over. To give you an executive summary: it depends on who you ask - but some people say they worked for them just fine, and there are some people who give them no value. What percentage of hiring decisions will consider them a negative? No one seems to offer good data, and I'm aware of no quality comprehensive studies for any area of degree. Education is strictly "let the buyer beware" in the USA, with little exceptions. (They are starting to crack down on some aspects that involve federal student aid, but only on the worst offenders.)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.934856
| 2016-03-06T00:10:20 |
64627
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Aleksandr Blekh",
"David Ketcheson",
"Wrzlprmft",
"darij grinberg",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12391",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"jakebeal"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8153",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/64627"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What is a post-print of an article or research paper, and what is it used for?
Today I ran across the wording "post-print version" of an article (on ResearchGate). I'm aware of terms pre-print, in preparation, under review, published, etc., but I have never seen the term "post-print" before. What does it mean and what else should we know about it (i.e., when to use it)?
I did some reading online and now understand the terminology better. Still, if anybody wants to share their perspectives on and/or around the topic, they are welcome to do so.
Can you please write up a self-answer, then?
@jakebeal: Sure, I'm planning on doing it. There will be some delay, though, due to a number of much higher-priority work-related tasks I have to cater to.
Related: Does a preprint include revisions made in response to peer review?
Just to clarify, what are benefits, if any, of archiving a post-print version, if the time difference between a would-be post-print and a journal publication is not significant (I assume several months to a half a year is not a big deal)?
A postprint is the final version that is given to the journal for copy editing and typesetting. It includes changes made in the refereeing process, but not the journal's typesetting. It is often referred to also by the phrase "author's final version".
In contrast, a preprint most specifically refers to a manuscript as it was before peer review. However, the term preprint is often used more generally (for instance, when referring to a preprint server) to refer to any version of the manuscript besides the journal's final typeset copy. Thus it is common to find postprints on arxiv.org, which is commonly referred to as a preprint server.
Postprints are mainly used as a way to provide green open access. Many publishers allow authors to distribute postprints through their own website, an institutional website, or a preprint server. Many institutions (e.g. Harvard) assert a non-exclusive right to distribute postprints written by their employees, regardless of publishing agreements.
Thank you (+1) - I have already read that, as I said in my comment above. However, what is not clear to me is what is the point of distributing this document (via posting it to an e-print server, etc.), when the time frame between current and next step (publication) is not quite significant (which, most likely, is field- and journal-dependent, though). I mean, once a paper is officially published, many journals either prohibit the distribution, or place the paper under embargo.
I appreciate your edit. You've added some info I was planning to add as a part of a relatively comprehensive self-answer - now I'm considering abandoning this idea for obvious reasons. If you will update it even more for more comprehensiveness (if feasible, of course), I will abandon the idea of self-answer completely and will gladly accept your answer.
I'm not sure what else you're looking for, but you are free to edit it and add more.
Wait. I am used to a postprint meaning a version that is newer than the published version (e.g., a version that was updated to reflect mistakes found after publication, or an electronic reedition). Is this really standard terminology?
Wikipedia agrees with you ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postprint ). Ouch, I am pretty sure I've spread my "alternative definition" to a few places...
A standard definition comes from SHERPA/RoMEO:
[...] this listing characterises pre-prints as being the version of the paper before peer review and post-prints as being the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made.
This means that in terms of content, post-prints are the article as published. However, in terms of appearance this might not be the same as the published article, as publishers often reserve for themselves their own arrangement of type-setting and formatting. Typically, this means that the author cannot use the publisher-generated .pdf file, but must make their own .pdf version for submission to a repository.
For green open access purposes, self-archiving the post-print is preferable to self-archiving the pre-print, as it is the post-print that contains the content improved after feedback from reviewers.
Publishers may use different terminology: For example, Elsevier uses "Accepted Manuscript" instead of the word post-print in its sharing policy.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.935327
| 2013-07-05T17:48:52 |
10983
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"AJed",
"Emily Bell",
"Haoyu",
"Satya21u",
"Tobias Kienzler",
"Tsvetelina Dobreva",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27266",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27267",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27268",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27270",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27287",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27311",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/442",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4472",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/532",
"mattboud",
"seteropere",
"user27287",
"user3440489",
"verdelite"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8154",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10983"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What to do when a referee asks for changes I am not willing to make?
I have submitted a paper later that was reviewed by four reviewers. I submitted my revisions to all reviewers. Three accepted the review, while the last is still asking for modifications.
The problem is that the reviewer is asking to measure the performance of our work using performance metrics that were never taken into consideration before in the literature (and our problem is well studied - at 30 references !) ..
These performance metrics would require a complete Master Thesis.
Is it fair to judge a paper based on performance metrics that were not taken into consideration by the authors at the first hand ? (noting that none of the previous work considered these metrics) ..
I hate to say it, but the reviewer seems to be reading a paper about my problem for the first time ever, and some of the reviewer comments are contradicting.
Note: I am sorry if this have been asked before. I could not find any thing related.
is it a conference or journal paper? is the final decision of acceptance/rejection in the hands of this reviewer or someone else?
it is a journal paper, the decision is the hands of the editor, I guess. But I think the editor is using a template to answer me.
In your question, there is no mention of an editor for the journal to which you have submitted your work. If you disagree with one or more of the reviewers, there is nothing remarkable about that; it is common, a review is an educated opinion about your work, supposedly based on facts. Normally you would provide an account for how you have met the comments (as you seem to have done) and in the cases where you disagree, you provide an account based on facts and reasoning why you think your way is better than that of the reviewer. It should then be up to the editor, not the reviewer, to decide whether your revisions make the manuscript acceptable or not. In some cases the editor will request a second round of reviews, this is normal, particularly if the revisions have been so substantial that the manuscript is quite different from the original.
This is what I see as a relatively typical way for a review process to take place.
particularly if the revisions have been so substantial that the manuscript is quite different from the original. I think this is my case then. Thanks,
I agree with the other comments that it is ok to not satisfy the demands of all reviewers and that in the end the editor makes the call.
However, it is still possible that the reviewer has a good point that the other reviewers missed. It is entirely possible that common metrics in the field are problematic and that since the other reviewers are "from the field" (and so are you, for that matter), they just don't give it a second thought. I have encountered these kinds of situations before. Remember that ultimately, you are the one responsible for what you write in your paper - not the reviewers or the editor. Therefore, I suggest that you keep an open mind and think deeply if the reviewer has a point and how you want to address it and act accordingly.
I am just mentioning this since it is sometimes easy to become overly defensive and dismiss reviewer comments as bad judgement.
Can you elaborate more how the discussion has proceeded? If I am under the correct impression, you don't have to agree with every reviewer nor do everything they suggest. Instead, you need to tell them that their comments have been seriously considered. You should be OK by writing the same statement that you wrote here: you disagree, your point of view is supported by previous research, and so on.
If I may relay a piece of wisdom that was passed down to me many years ago, even if you are convinced that the reviewer is a complete idiot, it only means that your paper was obviously not completely idiot-proof.
If somebody managed to find fault on what you considered a trivial point, then the point may not be as trivial or clear as you think. Applied to your specific case,
you could show, in your manuscript, that the results shown are sufficient to make whatever point you want to make, and that other specific tests, i.e. the ones suggested by the reviewer, would not contribute to the result.
In any case, though, my first step would be to talk to the editor in charge of your manuscript. She/He will be making the final decision, so it makes more sense to discuss with her/him directly, and not engage in a lengthy -- and essentially pointless -- battle with an individual referee. In such cases the editor can usually tell you how she/he would like to see the referee's points addressed, and that will give you something to work with.
I also echo Bitwise's sentiment that, in the end, it's up to you. If the journal, via the referees and editor, makes demands that you cannot live with, then you can live without that particular journal.
Your mentioning trivial reminds me of The use of words such as “clearly”, “obviously” etc. in a technical paper
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.935788
| 2012-05-16T05:41:47 |
1580
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Artem Kaznatcheev",
"Cameron Smith",
"Chad",
"Chris Beeley",
"Christian Elsner",
"Federico Poloni",
"Hack-R",
"JOpuckman",
"Jan-Willem",
"JeffE",
"MERose",
"Matsemann",
"Nik",
"Paul T.",
"anon",
"deathlock",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31167",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3850",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3851",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3853",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3854",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3855",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3865",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3866",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3869",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67258",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/833",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93303",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"jrand",
"sgf",
"tpg2114"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8155",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1580"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Attributing contributions to academic work that occur in Stack Exchange
Sometimes we may ask questions on stack exchange or online forums wherein the response is helpful or even essential to a piece of work that gets published in an academic journal. If this occurs, how should credit be given to those involved in the exchange? Should they all be included as authors? Should a link to the forum be included as a reference in the paper?
Once something is in a stack exchange or forum, it's "published". Perhaps in the future, the current peer review model will transform into people writing blogs and posting in forums and databases. But for now, how might this issue be dealt with while forums, blogs, etc coexist with journals?
This issue has come up on CS Theory StackExchange; the most popular recommendation is to copy the BibTeX that MathOverflow generates when you click on a "cite" link. Several questions and answers from both of those sites have been cited in journal articles.
@JeffE Many thanks for the reference. I suspected that this sort of question might have come up in other places but it was sufficiently difficult for me to find that I thought it was worth posting another question here. I think that, as I have seen mentioned in some of the answers below, the way in which the issues I've raised are dealt with vary significantly by field so it is good to know how they might be dealt with in computer science.
@EnergyNumbers I think I understand your perspective on the second paragraph, but the first part of the question scratches the surface of a deeper issue the way I see it. If it is a rant (...written in a wild, impassioned way), then it is one I expect to resonate to some degree with others. I think the political aspects of science are real and should not be swept under the rug in discussion. What I will do is remove what is less relevant to the question and post some of my comments as an answer.
@EnergyNumbers Here's one reference for the debate about whether or not Stack Exchange is considered to be a forum.
@JeffE it's nice to know that journal articles cited several articles from MO and CS Theory, are you able to give any example that was picked up by Google Scholar? i.e. Google Scholar shows that a Stack Exchage post got cited significantly?
@JeffE but when you said "Several questions and answers from both of those sites have been cited in journal articles", are you able to give some examples? I'm very curious!
@user1271772 Sorry, I spoke too soon. Here's one (self-serving) example: this Google Scholar link shows four citations to this StackExchange post.
@JeffE I was confused because when I saw "J Erickson" and stack exchange, I immediately thought it was Jon Ericson, who is the one that implemented the "cite" button for certain Stack Exchange sites, and I thought "that can't be right", so I clicked on the papers that cited it, and thought "ahh Jeffrey Shallit! The one I passed by on the Waterloo campus frequently over the last 15 years! But why is his username JeffE instead of JeffS ?" ... Then I figured out that your last name is actually Erickson, so confusion resolved! Thank you :)
Issue of citing authorship
Starting from first principles, I think in most instances on StackExchange it would be the original poster of the quoted answer that would be the relevant author. The person asking the question is useful but it is typically the information provided in a particular answer that would be the typical candidate for citation.
That said, I imagine there could be instances where the question itself or an overall exchange represents the unit of citation. In such a case, it would make sense to cite all relevant contributors.
Does something learnt from StackExchange need to be cited?
A lot of learning goes into a journal article. This learning comes from many sources. That which gets cited is only a small fraction of that. A scientist might (a) read a statistics book; (b) ask a friend; or (c) ask a question on Stats.StackExchange.com to learn more about how to analyse his or her data. In both cases, the person has devised an analysis plan based on having learnt something. However, generally these sources are not cited. In each case the scientist has learnt how to do something, but ultimately the knowledge is already established in the literature.
I also think that the vast majority of posts on StackExchange do not constitute a citable unit of original research. That said, where this does occur and it it influences your work, it makes sense to cite the source.
cstheory regularly generates original proofs (although we are not too great at keeping track of these), some of them out-performing the best in the literature, I assume the same happens over at MO. If you did learn something important from SE, even if it is not citable, I feel that you should mention it in your acknowledgement just as you would if a colleague gave important suggestions during a coffee break.
Yes, something learnt from StackExchange needs to be cited, just as "something learnt" from a journal article needs to be cited.
@JeffE If part of my result was learned on StackExchange, yes. If I learned on StackExchange what abbreviation X means or how to use my statistics software, no.
I don't really agree that SE should never be cited or that an answerer necessarily deserves more credit than an asker. For most journals it would probably be wise for the paper's author to verify the information from SE in peer-reviewed / scholarly sources and cite those as well, but credit should go where it's due. Certainly for other publication types like blogs, books, lectures, etc. it's good to have a standardized recommended citation format and to encourage fair attribution. For my part, I intend to cite SE threads in my book, in addition to other sources I used to verify them.
Citing a forum post is very close to "personal communications".
The benefit of actually citing (instead of thanking the author in the acknowledgements) is that you:
explicitly say what was their contribution,
give more details or provide the context(sometimes the post is longer, with more threads than those mentioned in the paper),
implicitly build visibility or prestige of the forum/SE site/MO/...
When it comes to the author(s), there is no established approach. Typically (default from cite on the MathOverflow and link -> cite on the StackExchange) you cite the exact post (e.g. the selected answer with its author). However, if you want to point explicitly to more authors (e.g. actually you base on two answers or the question itself is non-trivial), then it may be a good idea to include them as well.
If you consider that their contribution is substantial, then you can decide to have them as coauthors (of course assuming they agree). But then the rules are no different from talking in person. (Except for the fact, that on fora some people may be unreachable).
Moreover, if something is simple (but not trivial, i.e. present in standard textbooks), citation is welcome. For that reason people quote tables of integrals and for the same reason I think that simple findings you base on should be cited as well.
I think that hiding one's sources is neither productive nor fair.
What merits a citation or coauthorship is a subtle question, but the answer doesn't change when people interact online. The main difference is that the interaction is more visible: authors may feel awkward if they decline to cite a publicly visible (but unimportant) contribution, and the contributor may feel encouraged to complain. This adds to the pressure of the decision, but it shouldn't change the answer, and the other issues and subtleties are the same as in offline interaction.
As for online contributions being "published", I suppose that's true in the technical sense that they have been made available to the public, but that's not what academics mean when they talk about publication. For example, listing a stackexchange answer as a publication on one's CV would be considered at least eccentric, if not deceptive, regardless of how impressive the answer was. (The best one could hope for is to list it somewhere else.)
I'm not sure what the relevance of the second paragraph of the question is, but here's a guess. Suppose Alice is writing a paper and Bob makes an absolutely critical intellectual contribution via a stackexchange answer. Normally such a contribution would merit coauthorship, but Alice might declare that Bob's work is already published via stackexchange and that she will simply cite it rather than making him an author. That would be unreasonable and unfair to Bob, but if Alice was scrupulous in citing Bob's answer and giving him full credit for its contents, then it's not clear that Bob would have any recourse. I'm not convinced this is more than a theoretical problem, since the number of stackexchange answers that could merit coauthorship is tiny (maybe not zero, but that's a good first approximation) and most authors are well behaved anyway. However, I suppose it could happen.
There's a simple test for citing/acknowledging. Did you come up with the contribution yourself ? If not, then you need to cite whoever did.
Whether this amounts to authorship, and how exactly to cite the contribution (as a footnote, acknowledgement, personal contribution or whatever), depends on the conventions of your research area (especially for authorship thresholds). In general, if you're merely deciding between different kinds of citation, more information is usually better.
As for the entire second paragraph about conventions in publishing, I think that's irrelevant.
Naming a contribution in the acknowledgement section is not citing. There's a fundamental difference between that.
Your first paragraph is misleading, because it seems to imply that the reverse implication holds, too (if I came up with something myself, I don't need a reference). However, if I come up with a contribution myself and then I find out that it's a known result, good practice demands that I add a reference.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.936689
| 2016-02-24T20:01:35 |
63951
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Adam Green",
"Aleksandr Blekh",
"Allure",
"Andrew is gone",
"Check phạt nguội",
"Damian Yerrick",
"Damien Cortez",
"Dan Romik",
"David Ketcheson",
"Debora Weber-Wulff",
"Emily Ginas TheTravelingEm",
"Fomite",
"Franck Dernoncourt",
"IgotiT",
"Jae",
"JeffE",
"John",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Pieter Naaijkens",
"Rick Henderson",
"The Learning Experience Spring",
"Tingchang Yin",
"Wei Peng Yap",
"Y K",
"Zhe Li",
"a3nm",
"ff524",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12391",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17423",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179261",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179262",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179263",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179264",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179267",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179269",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179273",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179359",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179398",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179455",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205500",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/206132",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27825",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32489",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42651",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43868",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49731",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54013",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"ppoyk",
"ryn",
"techheightsirvine",
"tomasz",
"underdog987",
"zibadawa timmy"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8156",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63951"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
If an author does not intend to make much revenue from a book, why not make it open-access?
Many authors do not intend to make much revenue from books (textbooks or research books) they contribute to, yet they don't make it open access. Why?
Because the publisher?
@ff524 Why not choosing a publisher that allows the book to be open access?
Probably because open access is relatively low in the list of considerations for choosing a publisher.
To me the real question here is "what value is added by the publisher".
Note that the publisher intends to make revenue from the book - or at least not make a massive loss - even if the authors don't. If you're planning to publish it entirely OA, you need a) to find some way of offsetting the publisher's production costs (which are very substantial); or b) publish it yourself. Which of these situations do you envisage? The answers are massively different.
Because it was a lot of work to write it, so whoever wants it should pay for it?
@gnasher729 Most money doesn't go to people who didn't most of the work (viz., the authors).
@DavidKetcheson That's indeed one of the main questions behind.
@DavidKetcheson oh I don't know, let's see: the publisher gets the book refereed (creating prestige for the author by agreeing to publish it following the reviewing process, assuming it's a reputable publisher with high standards); copyedit the book; design a front and back cover; print the book; market the book; sell the book on their website and on Amazon, at professional conferences etc.; send you sales reports and royalties. I suppose you could in theory do all of those things yourself or through a vanity press. Do you also grow and hunt your own food? Generate your own electricity?
@FranckDernoncourt: Where did I talk about receiving money? I talked about people paying. Demonstrating that they appreciate the work by putting their hands in their pockets.
@DanRomik Many Stack Exchange users do grow their own food or generate their own electric power. And Amazon is starting to offer more and more of those services through CreateSpace and KDP.
@DamianYerrick well I guess those would be the people who also self-publish the books they write, printing them on a homemade printing press running on their self-generated electric power, using paper made from a pulp they mixed themselves, while eating their homegrown food. I'm sure they would have plenty of time left over to do cutting-edge research to generate content for the books they're writing.
@DanRomik I do believe the publisher adds value. I simply said that the question should be phrased as focusing on that, since that is the heart of the matter.
self-publish the books they write, printing them on a homemade printing press running on their self-generated electric power, using paper made from a pulp they mixed themselves, while eating their homegrown food. — Yeah, pretty much. What's your point?
Easy answer: Something that's greater than zero is greater than zero.
Don't worry most of the books available are still open through GenLib.
@IgotiT yes
There are a number of reasons why not to, and they stem from the reasons one might want to publish a book, even if you aren't making much if any money:
The prestige of the publisher matters. For many tenure committees, professional organizations, etc. "A Book from BigDeal University Press" > "Some Markdown Files on Github" or what have you in terms of evaluation. In effect, you are getting paid, but in prestige and reputation rather than money.
Publishers take care of a number of things that, if you're self-publishing an open access book you have to do yourself, including copy-editing, layout, and most importantly, finding peer reviewers.
Seeing a book adopted widely (another part of the whole prestige aspect) will likely be more difficult for an open-access book, at least at present, where they are fairly common. Who is going to do the marketing? Has it actually been properly peer reviewed? Are there nice, hard-bound copies available (some of us like reading things on paper), etc.
That is not to say that there are not some very successful efforts in my field to do open access books. Hernan and Robins causal inference book, for example, has drafts and code available online: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-book/
But neither one of those authors is in the position to need much benefit from a book publication, and it's still being placed in a traditional press when it's finished.
Nice answer (+1). A slightly off-topic question for you, if you don't mind: can you comment on what are essential differences, if any, between the book by Hernan & Robins you've mentioned and the classic treatment by Judea Pearl (and, perhaps, other books on the topic)?
In your first bullet, I would go so far as to replace > with >> (or \gg).
@AleksandrBlekh As disclaimer, I am not a causal inference researcher. I use computational models, which cheat, and are inherently counterfactual. But I know people who are. My generally feeling is that Pearl's book is more technical and a bit heavier on graph theoretical framing of things. Miguel Hernan is particularly adept at making causal inference concepts clear, and IIRC the book is geared more toward potential outcome frameworks, which are more clearly applicable to epidemiologists.
@Fomite: I appreciate your insights (+1) - they are very helpful (and I have a similar sentiment about the Pearl's book upon a very brief review of its contents). I will definitely make sure to read the Hernan & Robins' book eventually, as I'm interested in causal inference.
@NateEldredge: This is true, but don't you find this state of things very unfortunate? IMHO, a publisher's prestige is a relatively fuzzy concept, based on questionable value (excluding the stance of tenure committees, professional organizations, etc.). By "value" I mean value to science and humankind's knowledge. (to be continued)
@NateEldredge: (cont'd) All those technical aspects could be easily outsourced to relevant companies (copy-editing, layout, etc.) and academic professionals (peer reviewing). This would take away an unreasonably significant power from publishers ("gatekeepers of knowledge") and place it to whom it belongs - to producers of knowledge (authors, researchers, peer reviewers, etc.).
@AleksandrBlekh: Well, I'm not saying it's ideal. But this comment thread is hardly the place for a detailed discussion on the current state of academic publishing.
@NateEldredge: I guess, you're right about that :-).
For many tenure committees, professional organizations, etc. "A Book from BigDeal University Press" > "Some Markdown Files on Github" : where by "many" you mean "all".
Publishers, even "big-name" publishers no longer take care of copyediting or layout. They expect you to deliver camera-ready copy that they can put their copyright on and sell for a lot of money, giving you peanuts, if at all. I encourage you to self-publish, either by putting a PDF online, or through a self-publishing printers. We just have to educate the tenure committees that publishers are no longer academic, but money-making companies.
@DeboraWeber-Wulff This will come as a great shock to the copy editor working on a chapter I just completed, which is definitely not camera ready.
Freely available books are not unheard of in mathematics, either: for example, Allen Hatcher has put up his algebraic topology textbook on his website, white David Fremlin published (under a copyleft license) the source code of his four-volume measure theory monograph.
@DanRomik where by "many" you mean "all" — No, where by "many" he means "most", but (from personal experience) definitely not all.
@JeffE In fairness, my tenure committee's response would probably be "Why were you writing books at all?"
Regarding your third point, a lot of books are not properly peer-reviewed either.
"nice, hard-bound copies available" doesn't make sense to me -- you could have a print-on-demand version of your open-access book so people who want a hard copy can order one.
Many authors do not intend to make much revenue from books (textbooks or research books) they contribute to, yet they don't make it open access. Why?
First, while authors may not "intend" to make much revenue, that still does not mean that they will happily give up whatever revenue they are actually going to make (and keep in mind that the actual amount of revenue is impossible to predict with accuracy at the time an author needs to make this decision). So if an author feels that making their book open-access will lead to a loss of revenue, then unless that author is sufficiently generous, passionate about open-access, and/or financially well-off, not insisting on making the book available as open-access would be a completely rational decision, regardless of whether the publisher would give permission or not.
Second, and more importantly in my opinion, after you have spent a few years and a huge amount of labor and creative energy writing a book, the idea of giving it away for free is simply ... uncomfortable, even for purely psychological reasons. I decided to make my book open access and am quite happy with my decision, but I can completely understand and respect authors who have made the opposite decision, and don't think such a decision should be criticized by anyone who hasn't gone through a similar creative journey themselves.
As the entry level for self-publishing is now very low, there is a whole swamp of the low quality content. Once you join this swamp, it is very difficult to raise above it, as nobody can find you. A good quality content initially belonging to this swamp takes long time to be noticed, if ever.
It is critical to have the public reviewing system not for picking best of the best but first for discarding the really low quality junk. Automated search tools, even Google technologies, cannot do this properly, as the junkwriters are often much more experts in "search engine optimization". Hence they trash with lots of revenue generating ads around somehow always takes if not the first then at least a second place in the search results.
The only way known for me to mitigate this is to link (or publish in) the official website of the notable university. Web search will take this into consideration, but the option is not easily available for all potentially good publishers.
It is the lack of the serious public reviewing system that hinders publishing of the free content.
ff524 basically answered in the comment: publishers don't usually allow it. Just as with journal articles it might be possible to negotiate publishing under an open access license for a fee. Sometimes it is also possible to negotiate being allowed to publish a "preprint" version on your homepage or a preprint server such as the arXiv. Typically this is a version without the editing and layout work done by the publisher.
Of course authors can just decide to not publish with a publisher (or self-publish) and just upload the book to their homepage, as many people do. You will miss out on royalties (not a big deal, as noted in the question) and marketing efforts of the publisher.
"Of course authors can just decide to not publish with a publisher (or self-publish) and just upload the book to their homepage, but this has basically the same status as articles that are not peer reviewed." I must say that I disagree with this. On the one hand, part of the peer review process is the prestige of publishing in the most competitive journals. There is no "Annals of textbook publishing," and (at least) in many academic fields, publishing textbooks is viewed more like service than research...
On the other hand, I don't think that textbooks are "peer reviewed" -- parts of them are looked over by people designated by the textbook company, but not in the same way. Moreover, textbooks are not published solely because their content is innovate or novel -- there is no way to explain the flood of nearly identical calculus textbooks in these terms. They are published because the publisher thinks they can make money....
In my opinion, a high-quality self-published textbook nowadays confers most of the rewards of traditional publishing. The main differences are: (i) the royalties, which are usually rather nominal but a few people (think Stewart of Stewart's calculus) can make real money. (ii) the marketing. Because the publisher wants to sell the text, they have resources available to promote it that most individual authors lack. Those with sufficient web-presence or social media savvy can compete with this, but most academics do not have the time or skills for this.
By the way, in the above comments I had in mind mostly textbooks. I see now that the OP didn't specify. When it comes to a research monograph, prestige of the publishing company does play some role.
@PeteL.Clark: I agree with you, the distinction is not as important as for articles. And you are right that peer review of books in general cannot be compared to peer review of articles. There is however a selection procedure, in the sense that serious publishers don't publish anything that gets submitted to them. Of course if you are already an established and visible researcher in your field there may be little difference to publishing with a publisher and on your own homepage.
With the textbook company I signed with, part of the agreement is that they publish it for say... 3 years, and afterwards I can do what I want with it as all rights revert back to me. That could be fairly common.
-1 because the answer is incorrect. Most publishers allow open access books, the author just has be ready to pay for them the same way they pay for OA journal articles. See e.g. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/open-access-policies/open-access-books.
@Allure: that's what I say in my answer: with many publishers you can publish under an open access license for a fee.
Your answer implies most publishers don't allow open access books though. I haven't done thorough studies, but my sense is that most publishers allow it.
I'm surprised at all the answers given because they all seem to miss the point.
If you publish something open-access, you need to pay for it. An author publishing a non-OA book receives author royalties. The same author publishing an OA book has to pay the publisher. The price is not cheap. Check out Cambridge University Press's website on OA books.
How much are your Book Processing Charges?
Our standard charge for a monograph of up to 120,000 words is £9,500/$14,500/€13,000 (excluding any applicable VAT or local sales tax), and £55/$84/€76 per additional thousand words. We are usually able to offer a discount of £2/$3/€2.5 per page for camera ready copy.
We do, however, consider each book individually. Additional fees may apply depending upon the complexity of the work.
It's one thing to write a book and make little/no money. It's another to actually lose money writing the book. Yes, CUP's website also says you will continue to receive royalties, but OA means the content is available for free. How many people will pay for the book when they can already read for free?
tl; dr: authors don't make books OA because it doesn't make economic sense.
Good point. Going through a publisher is optional though.
@FranckDernoncourt it might be just me reacting to the term 'open access', since it has a very specific meaning in my experience. If you're thinking of "why not just make the book freely available on the author's website without engaging a publisher", that would be a different question entirely.
"you need to pay for it" if you go via a publisher. These book processing charges don't represent actual costs that you would incur if you just hosted your book online yourself (which costs ~nothing).
There is a point about human nature - people tend to value things according to how much they have to pay to get them. An author might well feel that if people can download something for free from a website that it will not be valued. As a user of some excellent free software and the recipient of some excellent free advice here, I know that this is not always true, but other users and other authors might not agree with me.
There is also the obverse to this - that some people will ask, "If it's that good, why is she giving it away?" This meshes with the belief that anything which is valuable can be "monetized" and anything which cannot have a numeric value put on it, does not have value.
Again, I think that the internet is changing these perceptions, but not for everyone and not in every circumstance.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.938347
| 2015-07-30T17:32:59 |
49661
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"410 gone",
"Abdellatif",
"Alexandros",
"Andy W",
"ChrisTX",
"Compass",
"Franck Dernoncourt",
"Greg",
"Hercule Poirot",
"Lakshay Kalra",
"Manuel Lazo",
"New Alexandria",
"Ooker",
"Oswald Veblen",
"Riyaad",
"Shubhanshu Khandelwal",
"Spammer",
"anamika",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137874",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137876",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137881",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137896",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137898",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137953",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137954",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/137955",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16122",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22013",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3962",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96",
"lbaron"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8157",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49661"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What features does Adobe Illustrator lack compared to Microsoft PowerPoint for making posters?
I have used Microsoft PowerPoint to make posters so far, and I am considering giving Adobe Illustrator a shot for my next poster. What features does Adobe Illustrator lack compared to Microsoft PowerPoint to make a poster?
For example, one cannot generate bulleted lists automatically in Adobe Illustrator.
(I am aware of the question Software to use for creating posters for academic conferences?.)
Interesting choice. Why Illustrator rather than InDesign? Would you be doing a lot of vector drawing?
@EnergyNumbers I didn't think much about inDesign vs. Illustrator. I was simply given an Illustrator template I have to follow. I guess Adobe Illustrator vs Adobe Indesign for poster could be another question :) My understanding so far is that InDesign is more convenient for multi-page layouts and for handling text, and overall is easier to use than Illustrator. In my case I don't have to do much vector drawing if any.
Illustrator is more a graphic design software than a content placement software like PowerPoint. You'd probably get more mileage out of using PhotoShop than Illustrator based on my experience with it.
Illustrator/Inkscape posters can turn out MUCH nicer than PowerPoint. I highly recommend making the switch, I have switched to Inkscape and I have not looked back once. I can't think of anything in PP that I miss. (Also: to learn, you can follow along with the links from this SciFund poster class, here. I actually took that class, highly recommend that as well :) )
I believe you could get better results with latex/beamer.
You can't have fancy transitions in Illustrator.
@Oswald you can't have any transitions in a poster...
I wonder what kind of poster you would like to do and what format you content have. For example, if you are math-heavy or extensively using plugins from Office to visualize things, than you may have problems.
Please add version numbers to this question, as it will become obsolete without them.
@NewAlexandria I think it's best to indicate the version numbers for mentioned lacking feature. I currently use Adobe Illustrator CC 2015 19.0.0 64-bit, Adobe Illustrator CC 17.0.0 64-bit, and Microsoft PowerPoint 2013, on Windows 7 SP1 x64 Ultimate.
@ff524 Illustrator/Inkscape are for drawing vector files. Why don't you use InDesign/Inkscape? They are born for designing
I believe that Adobe Illustrator has many more features that MS PowerPoint for graphic design and image processing.
The key question is: what will you use those features to accomplish when creating your poster?
I created sever posters in MS PowerPoint and found that it had sufficient features and was easy to use. The only issues came when trying to print it out, because the output of Mac PowerPoint wasn't compatible with the Windows PowerPoint that the printer used.
In my view, extra-fancy graphic design will not result in better posters. Instead, what most posters need is bigger fonts, less text, bigger/simpler graphics and images, and headlines + call-outs that guide the viewer through the story. You can accomplish all these goals using PowerPoint.
Thanks. I am aware that Adobe Illustrator has many features that Microsoft PowerPoint lack (but not necessarily to make a poster): in this question I would like to focus on the features that Adobe Illustrator lack compared the to Microsoft PowerPoint to make a poster, regardless of the fact that Microsoft PowerPoint may be good enough :)
A big +1, great advice. I would like to emphasize BIGGER FONTS. Bigger fonts for conference presentations, bigger fonts for figures in journal articles, and bigger fonts for posters. Pretty much all three the norm (or default in much software) is too small IMO.
Illustrator is nice for designing individual vector graphic elements (such as logos) but it is not for typesetting and page layouts. It will also probably be problematic when you try to combine graphics with paragraphs of text, like typical scientific poster. This is usually, what typesetting applications like InDesign do. InDesign can be used for a single page layout as well. On the other hand, if you do not know InDesign, it will probably be overkill to learn it for creating a single poster.
For scientific guys like me, with no artistic ability whatsoever, I found using latex / beamer with some existing poster templates the easier thing to do. It also has the advantage that you can copy text and formulas directly from your poster paper. So, I would strongly advice you to use beamer, since it is also what most scientific posters are usually done in CS conferences, judging from what I have seen in demo and poster sessions.
If you do not believe me, see this which is the most frequent poster design I have seen in conferences. It takes 2 minutes to do it in Beamer but it will take many days in either Illustrator or InDesign
I have used the beamerposter class extensively for scientific posters, as well as Illustrator. Beamerposter is quite limited in terms of flowing text from one box to another; flowing text around inset diagrams is a pain. Illustrator has no problem with paragraphs of text, as far as I have been able to determine.
So I haven't kept up with how illustrator has changed over the years, but when I used it regularly (10+ years ago), I did primarily because of its ability to make vector based graphics.
I think (any one can correct me if they know better) that Power point has this ability, but not nearly to the extent that illustrator does. In my opinion, illustrator and power point are fundamentally different in what their intended uses are. Even back when I used illustrator extensively, I never used it for layout and design. I would import graphics from Illustrator into adobe Pagemaker (which is very similar to power point, and imo more appropriate for poster making).
I think it would be fairly frustrating to make a scientific poster solely in Illustrator.
My experience involves an unfortunate truth that I haven't seen mentioned in any of the other answers.
In many interactions with program managers here in the US, I need to create slides in PowerPoint because either 1) it is a required format for certain communications or 2) the program managers use PowerPoint to communicate elsewhere in the government and giving them PowerPoint slides makes it easier for them to include my work in their communications.
This, in turn, creates a significant network effect, because communication with program managers in proposals and reports often predates both papers, talks, and posters. PowerPoint thus has a major advantage over other software alternatives (including Adobe Illustrator), in that my graphics are already in PowerPoint and it's much easier to move them to different documents within the same program rather than shifting them between different programs.
+1 that's the main drawback I have found so far in using Adobe Illustrator for posters vs. using PowerPoint. PowerPoint can take care of both slides and posters.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.938889
| 2015-10-30T17:27:43 |
57225
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Franck Dernoncourt",
"Jim B",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nawab Singh",
"Olexandr Konovalov",
"Peter James Oberly",
"Professor emerita",
"Spammer",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"Tamamo",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157028",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157029",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157030",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157032",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157039",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157176",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27020",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/452",
"sahraoui"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8158",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57225"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
I've reproduced a paper: where shall I share the code and findings?
The majority of papers don't share their code. However, I sometimes want to reproduce the results, and therefore re-code the experiments to try to reproduce the papers.
Where shall I share the code, findings, comments, and potentially some data sets, put aside from GitHub? Ideally I am looking for a common place where people share the work they have done when reproducing papers.
I am mostly interested in computer science papers.
@Matinking True. Is there any more centralized option?
Seems like http://arxiv.org would be a good fit, assuming that you write up your findings into something resembling a paper.
what's wrong with GitHub and or Codeplex?
@JimB Hard to see the list of reproduced papers.
@ff524 Thanks, nice, that's exactly the kind of places I am looking for. (my CS field is natural language processing)
I just tried it in codeplex- it lets me upload up to 500 MB of supporting docs per release
Look also at the ReScience Journal: http://rescience.github.io/
In the field of Computer Networks, there is the Reproducing Networking Research blog, which allows anybody to contribute replications of networking experiments, or original research in a form that allows it to be replicated:
This blog is a collection of network research stories, each of which includes full instructions to replicate experiments. Our goal is to kickstart a discussion of repeatable research in the network systems community, by showing that “runnable papers” are indeed possible, today. If every result in every figure of a paper could be replicated easily (by anyone with a local or EC2 VM), it would be much easier to build on prior code, results, and scripts, understand the concepts behind them, and most importantly: put them to practice in the real world.
If there is no such equivalent in your field, consider starting one. You can do what Nick McKeown did with the networking blog - seed the blog by teaching a class in which students are required to reproduce a published result as an assignment, and invite them to contribute it to the blog.
Sometimes you may even be able to submit a replication to the original journal or conference. For instance, the International Journal of Forecasting explicitly encourages short correspondences on replications.
If you are already writing up your findings anyway, it wouldn't hurt to submit them just to see what happens. The journal itself certainly does have a vested interest in replications of their articles. Of course, replications could be judged "too boring" and be rejected. However, the interest in replications seems to have been growing recently.
Alternatively: attempt to replicate 100 psychology studies, fail to replicate, write up and submit to Science. Better do this only after you got tenure, because this may cost you friends.
And even after tenure many won't publish such papers as it may result in missed grants/awards/...
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.939167
| 2012-05-28T04:47:00 |
1767
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"719016",
"Paul Mc Auley",
"Yauhen Yakimovich",
"adrianmcmenamin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42923",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4352",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4359",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/477",
"ony",
"siamii"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8159",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1767"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How to start a startup based on university research?
This is a follow-up to How good are entrepreneurial opportunities for faculty members?.
Say, a few researchers, professors and their students, at a university would like to start a company to exploit and commercialize their research.
Who owns the copyright/patent of their research? Will the university claim ownership of the startup company? What is the general procedure?
This will heavily depend on the specific country you are talking about. We have a so-called Innovation Lab that aims at encouraging "entrepreneurship and innovation by identifying, supporting and providing guidance for potential high-tech startups and spin-off companies originating at TU/e." Specifically, they guide researchers along the entire process: from checking whether the idea can be patented to actually establishing a startup / spin-off company.
With respect to copyright: lion's share of our research is being published so there can be no problems for companies to use the ideas presented in scientific papers. Using unpublished results might be more tricky but I can imagine that the university will agree to formally keep copyright and allow the company to benefit from it under some restricted conditions.
What about ownership of the company?
The university cannot claim ownership of the company as such, however, they can claim ownership of some intellectual property without which the company is worthless.
The only way how it could gain ownership of company shares is if you make a copyright/patent licencing deal which would include those shares as part of the compensation.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.939386
| 2012-05-05T19:31:28 |
1422
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Gopi",
"JeffE",
"John Bentin",
"Noah Snyder",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Shep",
"Stephan Kulla",
"Suresh",
"Sylvain Peyronnet",
"Yang Zhao",
"grunwald2.0",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10630",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10677",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10679",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10691",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98834",
"paul garrett",
"rlms",
"user10630",
"user2412"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8160",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1422"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can I cite a URL only instead of author, title, etc. in a research paper?
When writing a thesis, is it acceptable practice to cite only the URL of referenced research papers where they are published electronically? Or is it compulsory to give proper authors, title, year of publication, etc... information?
Example:
Data mining is the process of analyzing large data sets in order to discover hidden patterns within these data sets.[1] Stock market prices do not follow random walk.[2]
[1] http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5FIEAwyn9aoC
[2] http://rfs.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/1/41.short
It happened to me twice: I have once cited an article from wikipedia. Try giving the authors and date of publication for that one ;), the second time was to give the url where my source code could be found.
If one acquires information from Wikipedia, one should acknowledge this, otherwise one is being dishonest, quite literally. That this information is "disqualified" somehow seems to argue that one must never look at Wiki, because one is acquiring inadmissible info? What? This is crazy! :)
If you use LaTeX: biblatex has the type "online" which you can use to cite online resources...
No, it's not OK to cite URLs because firstly, you are citing ONLY the URL! The URL could change at any given time without notice. Also, you are assuming that everyone is reading your paper electronically and has access to the internet.
You NEED to give the name of the paper, the author(s), the Journal it was published in and the year it was published.
You may not be citing a paper. For example, you might be citing software, or a news article.
...in which case you still need to cite the author(s), date, and (for news articles) the name of the newspaper/magazine/website.
However, using DOI (Digital object identifier) link (i.e. http://dx.doi.org/...) gives a permalink to a paper. However, it is a good to add it to the citation, not to replace it with it. Another choice is using arXiv id (e.g. http://arxiv.org/abs/...); in fact it is often used instead of the full citations (but on slides are other informal things, not in papers/theses).
I disagree with @Suresh (but I did that in the past) : software must be put in footnotes, unless you're citing a paper describing a software.
I would bet that DOI will outlive physical libraries of journals.
How would I cite a page like http://go.worldbank.org/CGC782MDY0, which has neither an author nor a title or a date (ok "last updated"), but a perma URL?
Absolutely not! The other answers mention impermanence of URLs, which is an issue, but not, I think, the most important one. The most important reason is that some of the information in a citation, especially the author and year of publication, is important context for interpreting a citation, and is therefore essential content to the paper itself.
I agree, but should add that the impermanence of the URL is closer to a non-issue in some cases. Take, for example, the arXiv which is rapidly gaining traction in the academic world. If you want to cite an arXiv paper, the most important part is the url (which is permanent).
@Shep: The arXiv identifier is certainly permanent, but in principle the URL might change (and in fact it has changed in the past). One common citation method, which is recommended by the arXiv, is "arXiv:1205.0542", or "arXiv:1205.0542v1" if you want to specify the version number. You can link this to the URL http://arXiv.org/abs/1205.0542 when someone clicks on it, but in the text it is best to focus on the arXiv identifier instead.
The point of a bibliography is not only to identify your sources, but to allow your readers to read those sources themselves, at some indefinite time in the future. Bare URLs rarely serve that function, in part because URLs are (by design) transient, and in part because you cannot assume that your unknown future reader will have internet access. This is the same reason why citations should still include page numbers, even though a quick Google search on the title and authors almost always finds the paper.
On the other hand, books go out of print, library subscriptions lapse, some conference proceedings are only distributed online, some papers are still preprints, and sometimes the source in question is a blog, a usenet post, a source code repository, or a StackExchange question. For sources without permanent reliable offline access, I think you must include a URL in your bibliography, despite its transience, in addition to as much traditional identifying information (authors, title, journal/conference/book title, page numbers, date) as possible.
The MLA Style guide (via Indiana University) says the following:
World Wide Web Sites:
There are many different kinds of web sites, so it is impossible to give just one set of precise instructions for citation format. If you can not find some of the information needed, cite what is available. The following Works Cited/Bibliography examples are only guidelines; utilize the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers for additional examples.
What you need (at minimum):
Site title (if there is no title use a description such as "Home Page")
Date you accessed the information
URL
What you need (if available):
Author(s)/Editor(s) name
Publication or last update date
Organization/Institution name associated with the site
URL sources are a grey area. When possible, cite the original source. For example if you are citing books.google.* , then you need to cite that book as a book and not a URL. For academic publications, there is an OPTIONAL URL field you may use, but this should be in addition to citing the original conference/journal/workshop/etc.
There are circumstances where a URL is the best identifier of the resource, and in those cases, you'll have to cite the URL. For example, I used a URL resource from the libary of congress because it was unpublished historical (circa 1890AD) blueprints scanned into their library.
The best practice is to include standard bibliographic information, a relatively stable hypertext link for current readers (e.g. to the ArXiv), and the DOI.
(I think:) Definitely give a URL if there is one, with the date you down/up-loaded the paper, and perhaps give a revision date of the paper, if it itself gives one.
AND give the more traditional reference information as well.
The URL allows people to find an e-copy, at least for a while. The conventional references do not necessarily produce copies accessible through the internet, though sometimes they do.
For the time being, these two sorts of citations give different information, have different utilities. One may take the pose that one makes the other irrelevant, but I think this is not accurate. The common "objections" to internet-accessible things, that they are "transient", while physical references are "permanent", is disingenuous, upon some thought. First, many good things are transient, which is not an argument against them! Second, physical references are equally transient, if in a different way... usually that many different libraries throughout the world maintain "cached" copies. Well, maybe Google has cached the now-gone document at a vanished URL? :)
In summary, operationally, give all the information you have in citations, even while recognizing that some of it has an expiration date.
For everything that have been reviewed AND permanently archived then the bibliography is fine. For all the rest footnotes are the place to be.
No, it is clearly and everyone agrees, not acceptable practice to cite only the URL. So download a PDF copy of the exact web page. You can even state in the publication that you have a copy of the exact PDF which corresponds with your reference. If anyone asks you for sa copy of the PDF, you may wish to do one of the following:
Immediately give them the pdf (which may be a license violation). I feel comfortable to do this, in some situations, but not all.
or
Tell them you would like to give them your saved copy, after they convince you, that the web site will allow you to give them a copy.
It is not your problem, if the web site will not give you permission, to give others a copy of the saved PDF. However a license violation would be your fault.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.940102
| 2012-05-29T20:07:03 |
1803
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Bravo",
"Chris Gregg",
"John Peter",
"Morteza Manavi",
"RSG",
"ayr-ton",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4434",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4435",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4447",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4460",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4461",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4462",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4465",
"leo",
"sergzach"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8161",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1803"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What are ways that academics make money?
Possible Duplicate:
How do academics make money from applying their research?
What are the various revenue sources for academics? Are some ways to earn money more usual than others?
I'm asking this question per this comment.
What is the difference from http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1763/how-do-academics-make-money-from-applying-their-research? Perhaps these questions need to be merged.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.940214
| 2018-02-25T19:55:21 |
104526
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Allure",
"M. A. Grado-Caffaro",
"Stella Biderman",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12660",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/88128"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8162",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104526"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Why would the editor of a reputable journal act simultaneously as the editor of a potentially predatory journal?
Can anybody explain why someone who is editor of a reputable journal also act simultaneously as an editor for a potentially predatory journal?
Voting to close because Arun Bansil is likely the only person who can really answer this.
I’ve edited the question to focus on the central issue. Calling out an individual editor in such a manner is inflammatory.
We cannot know if this is really the case, but many disreputable publishers surreptitiously list well known scientists in their editorial boards, without asking their consent.
The editor is the only person that knows for sure. Some possibilities (note I do not know if ikpress is a flaky publisher - I'm simply assuming it is):
He doesn't think ikpress is a flaky publisher. Compare Frontiers and MDPI, both publishers that were included on Beall's list that also had established academics defending them.
He isn't aware ikpress is a flaky publisher.
He doesn't care that ikpress is a flaky publisher (for whatever reason).
He doesn't know he's listed as an editor, or he might have tried to be "unlisted" but the publisher has been slow at removing him.
Why you do not enter into the key issue? that is, what is reputation?
I don't see how reputation is relevant?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.940398
| 2018-04-01T22:15:26 |
107383
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"David Richerby",
"Matteo",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"Solar Mike",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"ZachMcDargh",
"aparente001",
"corsiKa",
"exp23",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62035",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72855",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90743",
"oikos99"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8163",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107383"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
PhD stipend continues being paid
I graduated with a PhD after 2 years (I was very efficient) and even though I have already received my degree and moved out of town, I'm still getting a stipend deposited into my bank account. I contacted my advisor about it but my advisor didn't reply at all, so I don't know what to do about this. Is there a minimum funding requirement or something like that? Or is it just a mistake? What to do now?
Have you tried contacting the department?
The most important thing is to not spend the money until you find out what is going on. If it is a mistake, the school may be able to demand the money back, and that can be awkward if you no longer have it.
Hi, no I have not contacted the department yet. Thought I want to check it out with my advisor first. I have still 95% of the money, since this whole moving out thing was harder than I thought and the stipend came at a relief, but I will be able to restore the full amount if demanded back. My question is, is there a minimum residence requirement and hence a minimum duration for the stipend in PhD programs?
We can't know in your case without knowing your specific employment details. But I can't imagine there being a minimum, and in any case, if you're no longer an employee/student at the university, then receiving the money must clearly be a mistake.
We can answer the "what to do now" part, but not the rest. There's one vote to close so far. I suggest you remove the part we can't answer (Is there a minimum funding requirement or something like that? Or is it just a mistake?), and also, contact the department first thing Monday morning.
The only possible situation where I can see this not being a mistake is when your contract is to work for 9 month (academic year) but your salary is paid over 12. In that case, if you quit after 9 months, you'd keep getting payments for 3 more months, because it's money you've already earned. But I think if that were the case, you'd probably already know and wouldn't have to ask.
As others have said, contact your department as soon as possible. I've had this experience and seen it happen with friends, and some departments will get fairly aggressive demanding the money back.
Contact your department, CC'ing your advisor.
It happened to me once: I was paid over the summer by my department even if I was out of the US for an internship at a company research lab in Europe.
I came back in September and found additional money in my US account. I told our administrator. she figured out what happened and she told me that in case I had already spent the money, the department would have found a way to ensure things would get straighten out with the university.
I still had all of it, so I just wrote a check to the university to return the money.
In any sane jurisdiction, somebody who accidentally overpays you isn't allowed to punish you for their mistake. So you can be required to pay back the money but they have to be careful not to cause you financial hardship.
@DavidRicherby: indeed I believe my department (and my somewhat-resource-rich university) also assumed so, and also probably wondered if I could have sued (I wouldn't have, but just in case), and they would have preferred to let the issue go in case I did not have the money.
@DavidRicherby Useful information considering the majority of recently-graduated students are entering a workforce with an abysmal expense-to-asset ratio and massive student loans to start paying back!
This is like someone giving you wrong change or the bank crediting you money incorrectly in your checking account. You need to not spend it, let someone know and give the money back. Two reasons: (1) ethical--don't take money that doesn't belong to you, when given in error and (2) they will likely find out about it and want it back (and legally you have to give back a check or direct deposit sent in error).
Don't contact your professor, contact the payroll or whatever person like that. Make a call and send a letter.
P.s. If your current job overpays you in error, how are you going to handle that? What would you answer if this hypothetical was asked on a job interview?! You know the answer. [This isn't even really an academia question. This is a "what do I do if someone pays me too much in error" question.]
It could be possible, but unlikely, that the contract specified 36 monthly payments without any clause to stop them if you finished early... The only thing to do is to contact the payroll people and have your contract checked.
Is there a minimum funding requirement or something like that?
This happened in my case. There was a total amount of money dedicated to a project, payed in the form of a stipend. I finished the project earlier but the money continued to come.
Of course you should contact the relevant authorities (the ones who provided the stipend) and inform them about your case. This may be an error, in which case you are likely to be asked to give the money back (what happens depends on many parameters), or you may be in the lucky case I was in.
Contact university finance, your chair’s office, or bursars office. It is very likely you’ll have to pay it back.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.940813
| 2018-05-21T02:28:19 |
110040
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Flyto",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8164",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110040"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Sending a copyright transfer
The following sentences is in the Submission Guidelines of a journal:
Once a paper has been accepted for publication, the authors are assumed to have the copyright transferred to World Scientific Publishing Company.
I have an accepted paper in this journal, but I have not been requested to submit the copyright to the publisher yet. Must I send a copyright to the publisher?
Odd wording. It seems to state what the publisher will assume, but not anything about will actually happen. Such loose language (perhaps a poor translation?) would make me want to check that the journal is real.
Every time I've submitted something to a non-open-access academic venue I've had to sign something explicitly assigning the copyright.
In terms of advice, I wouldn't do anything. They can assume all they like :-)
The key word in that statement is assumed. That means that they believe that your submission and their acceptance of your manuscript implies that you have agreed to transfer the copyright to them. They are basically saying "you don't need to send a form transferring copyright, because you did so by allowing them to publish.
If there is a reason this is not the case—for instance, all the authors are US government employees, so that the work is in the public domain—then the publisher should be alerted for guidance.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.940956
| 2018-07-16T23:11:45 |
113776
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94994",
"lily.evance"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8165",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/113776"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it common to get a job (industry) after getting a PhD degree in Germany? (engineering field)
I am an engineering PhD student in Germany. I am planning to get a job in industry after finishing my degree? Is this common in Germany?
Thank you guys in advance.
Yes, many engineers do this. In fact, industrial partnerships with academia for PhD students are much more frequent in Germany than in the US. Many of these lead to job placements following graduation. So it certainly is a possibility—most of my grad students there decided to go to industry.
What about Computational Mechanics field? Or FEM? also same circumstances?
It's a little bit tougher, but it still happens—software companies, users of those packages, etc.
You mean Phds in the field of Computational mechanics are not in demand, relatively?
I just mean that the opportunities for industry may be more specialized since the number of computational mechanics people can be small.
In general, yes. This is very common in Germany. Broadly speaking, science and engineering doctorates are well respected in German industry and it greatly increases your chances of finding a job related to your given field. I studied a chemistry doctorate in Germany. All of my former colleagues landed well paid industry jobs very soon after graduating. I, however, returned home to the UK where I struggled to find any work related to chemistry in the slightest.
The situation may well be different in engineering, but in chemistry at the time someone leaving merely having completed their Diplom (later Masters) studies would have struggled to find work in industry. A doctorate seemed almost mandatory following an undergraduate degree in the sciences for employment in related fields.
It is common practice. You can compare the number of PhDs with the number of postdoc-positions and then it's easy to tell that most PhDs are going to industry afterwards.
People from industry are telling me, that sometimes they are interested at the expertise of the person gained during the PhD (e.g. if you are doing Computational Mechanics, there are many companies looking for those people), but even more because you will learn to be self-organized, you'll have a certain tolerance against frustration, you can develop first leadership skills, etc.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.941142
| 2018-07-11T19:56:18 |
112535
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8166",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/112535"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How can a paper accepted for a poster session be credible?
If a paper is accepted in poster session of a conference or workshop such that only one page of the article will be published in proceedings, how this paper can be credible? (in particular in computer science and in a workshop like this: http://deic.uab.cat/conferences/cbt/cbt2018/)
I'm not sure what you mean by credible. If you are a student, especially, being in a poster session is a really good opportunity to meet people in the field and impress them with your brilliance and future prospects.
As one of the senior professors who used to wander around poster sessions, I was honored to meet such new and upcoming researchers and learn from them. If I had anything useful to say, perhaps they gained something as well. You can usually, at a poster session, distribute a longer version of your work with contact information.
The same goes, I think, for young faculty, though to a lesser extent. But still, use it as a chance to make contacts and extend your reach.
The "paper" in a poster session is probably an abstract, rather than an actual paper. It is a record of the poster presentation, but may or may not have been peer-reviewed. Obviously you would not want to use it as a primary source of results or data but it could be used as a demonstration that a certain topic is being researched.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.941296
| 2018-08-29T15:03:55 |
116027
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Maryam",
"Yemon Choi",
"aeismail",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42750",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97527",
"mathreadler",
"user2768"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8167",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/116027"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Awaiting editorial office processing for more than 22 days, Is it appropriate to contact?
I have recently submitted an article to a tylor & francis journal which uses ScholarOne.
My co-author submitted the article 22 days ago, and since then, the status has remained as "Awaiting Editorial Office Process".
Is it alright that it hasn't been changed for so long?
Should I contact the editor?
How long does the process take normally?
NOTE: thank you for suggesting this page "What does the typical workflow of a journal look like?", I have read this topic. Unfortunately in this paper the average time for "Awaiting Editorial Office Process" was considered to be "A FEW WORK DAYS". My problem is I have waited for 22 days. If anyone have had the same experience, I would really appreciated answering me. Thank You.
I've waited far longer.
22 days? Start submitting to some obscure field of mathematics and it could easily take a couple of years.
I think the above comments may have misread slightly - the OP is talking about the gap between submission and being sent to handling editors or referees, not the time taken to hear a final decision
Unfortunately in this paper the average time for "Awaiting Editorial Office Process" was considered to be "A FEW WORK DAYS". So there's your answer. You've been waiting unusually long, and should contact the editorial office.
@Maryam: Shouting in capital letters is not a good way to communicate with other users. The reason why they marked it as a duplicate is because most such questions have their “root answer” there. What you’re basically asking is “is my case abnormal?” And the answer you see from that page is yes, it is? For future readers, they’ll want to do the same. So that’s why it’s been marked duplicate. If users want to nominate it for reopening, they can.
@aeismail it's not shouting, I'm showing emphasize. Sorry, but no, that's not my question. I'm asking for other experiences and what others might have done in this kind of situation.
Yes, you should. 22 days before the paper is passed on to an editor is out of the ordinary. It's true that it's summer and people might be on holiday, but this is the publisher we're talking about - even if some of them are on holiday, they should have people to cover. Journals don't close shop when the staff are on holiday.
I would contact the publisher. If you know the desk editor's email address that would be the best person to write to; if not, you can use Taylor & Francis's author services contact form.
It's summer, and people are using their time for vacations, conference travels and research visits. Your editor may be climbing mount Everest or crossing Atlantic as we speak. A delay of ~1 month is not unusual in my area (mathematics) after the referee reports are secured. Bear in mind that the reports may contradict each other and your Editor may need more time to read your paper carefully themselves.
Waiting for the outcome is not easy, but at this stage I think that's the best decision.
I guess that's right; But I suppose the holidays are just for one week, not 22 days!!
Dmitry, it sounds like @Maryam is not waiting for referee reports; instead, the paper was submitted 3-4 weeks ago, and the online system is showing "awaiting editorial process" rather than "with referees". My suspicion is that the editor has asked for referees and they are being slow to respond, or the first choice has declined, etc
@Maryam Keep in mind not everyone is taking their vacation during the same week ... (not that "the holidays" are really just one week) so many slow downs are to be expected.
Thanks, to make it clear I'm waiting for EO to send the paper to editor! and not referees!!
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.941639
| 2012-05-27T17:45:26 |
1748
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dave Clarke",
"David White",
"John Bensin",
"Lucas",
"Nick Chammas",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Suresh",
"THom jonesjnse",
"Tyler Langan",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4312",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4317",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4332",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/950",
"jobucks",
"picakhu"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8168",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1748"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Professors and Liberal Arts Colleges
In general, do professors work at liberal arts colleges because they do not want to have to face the pressure of writing a lot of research papers? Instead they want their evaluations to be skewed towards their teaching quality?
Question sounds overly provocative. Teaching creates pressure, too. There are several deadlines every week (each lecture). Also, some people prefer teaching over research. I don't think they are trying to skew their evaluation, rather they are doing what they want to do.
I agree with what Dave Clarke and Pete Clark said. There's plenty of pressure in a liberal arts job. However, there is often more pressure related to being a great teacher, and less pressure related to winning a grant. There's certainly plenty of pressure to publish. As a math professor at a small liberal arts college, I have published over 30 papers in the past ten years, but probably could have gotten tenure with only 6 (good) papers. I certainly didn't choose the job to avoid research pressure. I chose it because I love teaching and research both.
You're not expressing the question in the most flattering way, but yes: most academic jobs are a mix of research and teaching (and also service / administration), and there is a lot of variation in the importance placed on each from job to job. Some people are more interested in one than the other, and the faculty at liberal arts colleges have signed up for a job in which more emphasis is placed on teaching and student contact than a, well, a research university.
At a good liberal arts college faculty are still expected to be research active -- it's just that they spend more hours per week on teaching than their colleagues at a more research-oriented institution. Someone who felt like writing research papers was pressure that they didn't want to face would probably be more comfortable at something like a four-year, junior, or community college, in which in most cases the research expectations are really nominal.
But a professor isn't prohibited from publishing a lot of papers even if he/she works at an LAC?
Prohibited in what sense?
Like is there a limit for example like 20 papers per year a professor can publish at a LAC?
No, there are no publication limits in any academic job (!!).
I wish there were limits :). "You shall NOT publish more than two papers a year" - that would be so awesome.
As a professor in a liberal arts setting, I can say that publishing is possible but you have to be more ruthless in your time management. The institution is built to pull you away from research and towards teaching and service. I spend as little time as possible preparing classes and doing service and maximize my research time. Some fellow academics in my university think that I am not being a team player but that's ok. I don't see my colleagues as potential friends. In summary, I am convinced that most professors who end up in a liberal arts college in the humanities and social sciences would actually prefer to be in a research university. But they are thankful and grateful for having a tenure-track position in what is a desperate job market. Some also convince themselves that they actually like teaching more but I think this is just a coping mechanism to come to terms with the fact that they are not in a research university. The original question is poorly phrased b/c it is operating under the assumption that there is actual choice where you end up getting a job. Most academics--even those coming from the most prestigious grad programs--have no choice institutionally and geographically if they wish to have a tt job.
"I am convinced that most professors who end up in a liberal arts college in the humanities and social sciences would actually prefer to be in a research university." - this is certainly not true at the liberal arts college where I work. Most of my colleagues would be miserable at a research school. They prefer the community aspect, small class sizes, and emphasis on teaching.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.941970
| 2013-11-14T14:53:47 |
14084
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexander Drake",
"Elchin",
"JᴀʏMᴇᴇ",
"gented",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36362"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8169",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14084"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Computer Science PhD with Geology BS
I am planning to do my PhD in CS (Robotics to be specific). I will be completing my masters with a thesis and a publication in a field that is very closely related to CS. However, my BS is in Geology. So I am mostly concerned whether I will be considered for a PhD at a school since my undergraduate major is not CS. I feel this way because I contacted professors at some schools and they didn't respond back to me.
Did you take enough CS courses to fulfill the requirement for admission? Usually programs list them on their websites. Did you get good grades from those courses?
You should not expect to receive a useful answer if you "cold-call" (or "cold-email") a professor. They have too many time constraints, and if your email looks like a junk email or wild goose chase, the professor will probably treat it as such, even if it isn't!
That said, I suspect that coming from a field so far away from CS will have an impact on the admissions process, because it will be hard for faculty members in CS to adjudicate your performance as a bachelor's student in geology. You can overcome this through the usual methods (strong letter of recommendation, cogent explanations in the statement of purpose, and so on). Your primary challenge will be to coherently show that you are willing and able to undertake graduate level coursework and research in computer science.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.942142
| 2016-10-12T16:19:58 |
78206
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Maarten Buis",
"MikeP",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nicole Hamilton",
"O. R. Mapper",
"gerrit",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51610",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63209",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9553",
"srp"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8170",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78206"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Can university revoke the degree when data were edited/fabricated? Is student or supervisor at fault? Can the student be sent to prison or fined?
Say a M. Tech thesis contains original experimental data, but some results were edited to show significant results, and is this is later found out. Can this editing result in a cancelling/revocation of the awarded degree, even if found after some years? Who can be held responsible for this fabrication (faculty, student, and/or supervisor)? What action will/can the university take on the student? Can the student be punished legally with prison and/or fine?
The "prison or fine" part will depend on what your country's laws say. You haven't said what country that is, but I think that part is not really on-topic for this site. (Though I don't know any country where prison or fine are possible for falsifying results in a thesis. In grant-supported research, maybe, but still unlikely.)
Don't do it.
It will depend on who does the fabricating. If the student fabricates data and the supervisor/faculty doesn't know, then they are not complicit. If the thesis is only for school, prison is not likely; if it is part of a grant for developing a new drug, then prison might be an option.
the fabrication is only in answer. the experimental data is original. supervisor also know about it. fabrication is for making significant result. not related with drug, it is related with machining and cant harm anyone.is only student fault or supervisor. can court can take any major action on student
This is typically handled by the university and not the court. But you could loose your degree anytime, and that can have consequences for your employment. Often it only ends in court if you choose to appeal against the university's decision
if the previous results are also satisfactory but supervisor say for change some results for making results significant. the student is work according to the supervisor and dont know what is right and wrong. if thesis found wrong after award of degree, can university evaluate this and announce it OK and how the fault in thesis found later.
A prominent German example is former minister of defence zu Gutenberg. He lost his title and his job because of plagiarism years after the fact.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl-Theodor_zu_Guttenberg
However, this may very well work differently in other countries.
To underline Mr. zu Guttenberg is not just a one-off case, please also list his colleague Annette Schavan, or some other cases from this list.
Question is about fabricating data, not plagiarism.
True, but in terms of severity I would say they are comparable.
I'd say that fabricating data is ten times worse. If the contents of a paper is good and correct then I can learn from it, whether it's plagiarised or not. If a paper contains fabricated data and I read it, then it is actively hurting me because I learn things that are not true.
I disagree: Plagiarism undermines the very process through which academia works. Regardless, I think we can agree that both are very bad practices.
Yes. It happens and it can change national elections.
In 2013, US Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) was retiring. Incumbency is always an advantage, so when Baucus retired early, John Walsh was appointed to fill his seat shortly before the election.
But then the New York Times published devastating evidence that Walsh had plagiarized his thesis for a master's degree at the US Army War College years earlier. The War College revoked his degree and ground his name off a bronze plaque bearing the names of his graduating class.
Walsh was forced to withdraw his candidacy and his was one of the seats Republicans gained in that election.
It was later revealed that the source of the information was a researcher on staff with the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Question is about fabricating data, not plagiarism.
@MikeP, academic misconduct is academic misconduct. Take your pick of how you do it, but if you're caught, this is what can happen.
@DanielR.Collins, yes, thank you for catching that, now corrected.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.942585
| 2012-05-29T20:11:33 |
1804
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Bravo",
"Dennis",
"Gerhard Burger",
"Josh Pinto",
"MohdRash",
"Papiro",
"bobthejoe",
"digitalsean",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4437",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4438",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4439",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4456",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4458",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4533",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"vijay"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8171",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1804"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Who applies academic CS research in the industry and how?
After a paper is published, say in CS, who reads the paper? How are the ideas presented there applied to business and industry? How is industry collaboration done?
I'm asking this question per this comment.
This is an extremely broad question, probably too broad to be answered in this level of generality (beyond "it depends"). Many academic papers are never directly applied to business and industry. When they are, how this happens depends on the field and on the details of the specific application.
I think it is a good question if you narrow it down to one field. Would be great if you could mention the area in the Q.
I would point out that the industry also publishes papers.
I think it depends in large part on what the research is. Some fields lend themselves more readily to real-life application, while others like, say, theoretical physics, are a long way from being used by industry.
It also depends on the researcher. I am a firm believer in the "Last Research Mile" principle (disclosure: the man who wrote that is my advisor). The premise of the Last Research Mile is that a big part of doing research is taking it all the way through to implementation. Doing the early research provides a good start, but lots of important lessons, including research lessons, are learned as the idea is carried through to execution. I'm studying in an Information Systems program, and so my research is in business, computers, and people. While it would be easy to do the basic research and move on to another topic, I think it is important to continue to push and test the idea even in its implementation phases.
As a result of following the Last Research Mile principle, my advisor has created at least one company that sells the product of decades of his research. Many lessons were learned, and many publications resulted because of those lessons throughout the whole process.
We have a lab within our department that "...takes state-of-the-art methods, techniques, and tools on software product quality analysis developed during more fundamental/strategic research... and applies, validates, and deploys these in industry and government."
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.942833
| 2012-05-29T20:15:12 |
1806
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Abid Rahman K",
"Brian Rushton",
"Dejan",
"Federico Poloni",
"Irwin",
"Jo Jordan",
"Lanil Marasinghe",
"Mark O'Connell",
"Nick_inaw",
"Nishrito",
"Tyb Rafiei",
"WernerCD",
"dimitris",
"dm713",
"enedene",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1018",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42922",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4444",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4445",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4449",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4454",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4455",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4488",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/983",
"jlordo",
"user2013"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8172",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1806"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Why don't professors start companies?
Why don't more professors attempt to use the knowledge gained during the course of their research work by starting a company and commercializing their findings?
I'm asking this question per this comment.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/29232 “Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, teach gym.” ― Woody Allen - Is there any truth to the "reverse" of this saying: Those who teach, can't "do"?
In Italy, if you're employed as a full-time university professor, you are legally not allowed to start a private business company. There are some exemptions for university spin-offs, but basically the law is that you should be teaching and doing university work full-time if you have a 100% salary.
They do, I can name five professors off the top of my head that have co-founded companies!
This question seems to be based on a misconception, namely that professors start companies substantially less frequently than they could or should.
The vast majority of professors, even in fairly applied areas like computer science (compared with literature, say), are simply not in a position to start companies based on their research. You need a viable business plan, and they don't grow on trees. Specifically, even really profound research with many practical applications usually just doesn't have obvious commercial potential as a stand-alone business, since it won't be clear how to monetize it. Of course, there are exceptions, and plenty of important businesses were started by faculty, but only a small fraction of professors could do this successfully.
Here's another way of looking at it. There's no reason why a business based on a professor's research needs to be founded by the professor. If you see someone with great ideas, you can buy the rights to the ideas and found your own company. If professors were missing a lot of wonderful opportunities to found companies, then you'd expect entrepreneurs to step in and do it, but that doesn't happen very often either.
Ultimately, this is why we have academic research. The stuff that leads to obvious business plans could easily be funded by industry. By contrast, one of the reasons why academia includes research is to make sure work that can't easily be sold doesn't get neglected.
I didn't want to submit this as a separate answer, but I think that XKCD explains it well http://xkcd.com/664/
Because we're having too much fun doing research to waste our time making mere money.
Lots of professors do start companies based on their research. Especially in engineering, entrepreneurship is one of the signs of a healthy department. But starting and running a company is a tremendous amount of work, requiring a very different set of skills than being a successful academic researcher. Brilliant and novel ideas, even the tiny minority that are marketable in principle, are neither necessary nor sufficient to maintain a successful business. Business plans are just the beginning.
Also, the metrics for success are very different. Put baldly, academic research is successful if and only if your peers like it; a business is successful if and only if it makes money. Academics tend to be more narcissistic than greedy. As evidence: most faculty in science and engineering could easily double their annual salaries simply by leaving academia for industry. If money were our primary motivation, we wouldn't be academics in the first place.
There's also a closely related issue of openness. Academic research is (in principle) entirely public; academic researchers publish their ideas for other people to use, adapt, modify, and apply in ways that are completely out of their control. Businesses, on the other hand, keep tighter control of their best ideas, either hiding them behind non-disclosure agreements or locking their use behind patents, lest some competitor use them to gain an advantage. If you're an academic researcher, someone else using your ideas (usually) helps you; if you're a business, someone else using your ideas (usually) hurts you. For academic researchers used to the unfettered exchange of ideas, the secrecy required for a successful business can be incredibly stifling, if not offensive.
Or maybe that's just me.
While this tongue-in-cheek answer is definitely correct, could you expand on it for those who aren't familiar with the research mindset?
I did that in the past (now it's my brother turn ;)), and trust me, you don't start a company for the money, you do it because you think it will be fun, and that maybe you will provide something that will change the world (or at least something). Sometimes it's work, sometimes not. In fact, most of the time you will work a tremendous number of hours, for a salary (if you are lucky) that will be just the average salary of an average guy. And at the end you can end up totally broke.
Almost 10 years after this experience, I don't regret it, but this is a completely different work than research, and for me this is less fun than research. However, being in the shareholders of a company, and just be there for giving advice is both interesting and fun, because all the "boring" work is done by others.
There's more to life than making money... teaching students, grading exams, obtaining funding, being away from your family to present papers at conferences, correcting appallingly written research papers, reviewing similarly appalling papers, trying to get promoted.... It's a laugh a minute and we wouldn't change it for the world.
And it puts bread on the table.
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned yet is intellectual property rights. As an academic, you generally share intellectual property rights with the institution you are affiliated with, at least insofar as royalties must be shared. See How do academics make money from applying their research? for a related question with some more information on this and related subjects.
For any given concept or niche, there is often a huge gap between the time when it's interesting to research that topic, and when it's mature enough to commercialize.
No matter if we're talking about new hardware, new chemical processes or new AI algorithms, there tends to be a decade or two between the point where there are major unresearched and novel parts of the problem, and where it's profitable to scale it as a business; and the problems you need to solve in order to demonstrate a proof of concept are very different from the type of problems you need to solve to make it cheap, predictable and attractive to consumers.
Most researchers are (and should be) working on areas that are far too bleeding edge to be commercialized yet. Most new product development is working on technologies that are already too mature and 'boring' to generate significant publishable research.
In essence, if you see a new 'bleeding edge technology' product in any area, there probably is a 10-20 year old academic paper describing the concept with an implementation that sort-of works if the stars are right, takes impractical effort to make, and practical use requires complementary things that aren't available yet. After some time... the prerequisites have commoditized, someone else has driven the costs down, and you can implement a lot of time in polishing the concept in order to build and sell it - but most researchers would rather research new things than polish the 'old' ones for consumption.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.943438
| 2013-10-07T15:27:18 |
13247
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Aakash Balani",
"Anisur Rahaman Sakib",
"Anton Malarev",
"Aura",
"Ben Norris",
"Chris C",
"Colas",
"David Ketcheson",
"HEMANTH",
"John_dydx",
"duzzy",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33843",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33901",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33902",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33907",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33916",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7745",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8901",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8173",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13247"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How can I best use my time as a Mathematical sciences PhD student in the UK
I would like some useful advice regarding pursuing a PhD in mathematical sciences in the UK. I've just started my PhD in mathematical modelling and would like to know as much as possible about how to make the most of the entire journey. I have some ideas here and there but I want to know what things to do and things to avoid, planning ahead, useful websites etc.
Topic/Question have been edited to broaden scope of question.
I've not heard about books, but many departments have a graduate student handbook. But I don't think that's quite what you're looking for.
@ Chris C, not quite what I'm looking for. I'm more interested in books like-How to Get a PhD: A Handbook for Students and Their Supervisors, Your PhD Companion, etc. I just need a recommendation before getting any of them.
I find it hard (even narrowed to the UK) to believe that the answers to this question will not vary significantly by field and/or by institution. Could you narrow down your focus?
@John Normally these kinds of 'lists' questions are discouraged on this site. That said, I do think it is a valuable question. Perhaps an edit could turn the question into something where the answer would not change over time (as new books/articles are published). Might I propose "How can I maximize my time during my PhD in ____ science in the UK?" Besides books and articles, inside the brains of the members here there is a wealth of information.
@earthling, thanks for the very useful suggestion, I'll edit my post to reflect this.
I changed the title; "maximize my time" would mean that you want to take as long as possible to graduate.
As a recently-started science PhD student myself, I can recommend:
The Research Student’s Guide To Success
Pat Cryer
Pub Open University Press, 2006
ISBN: 0 335 22117 3
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.943904
| 2013-01-19T16:16:50 |
7345
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"ASethi17",
"BadProgrammingRobot",
"Elder Geek",
"F'x",
"JeffE",
"Kraken",
"Luiz Carlos Querino Filho",
"Nate Eldredge",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17451",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17454",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17508",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8174",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7345"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it possible to give too much praise in a reference letter that supports a green card application?
I am currently writing a reference letter for a colleague applying for a US green card. Given that I don't know much about the process and expectations of the immigration bureaucrats who will handle the application, I asked around for examples of such letter. Obviously, they are all glowing, and I started writing in the same style.
Now, don’t get me wrong: she is truly a great researcher, I wish her the best of success with her application and hope to help as much as I can (at least, not to let her down). But… at the same time, as I finished writing my letter, I wondered: is it possible that I went over the top with praise? Is it even possible, in such a case? And if so, how can I tell? I mean, I did not write anything factual wrong, but if read very literal (and outside context), it might sound more like the eulogy of a Nobel prize winner than the recommendation of a mid-carreer researcher (even a very good one).
I'm reminded of Steven Krantz's discussion of recommendations in his book A Primer of Mathematical Writing, where he lists some sample phrases in increasing order of praise, finishing with "X is the greatest mathematician since Gauss".
What, no "Gauss was very very smart. Princeps mathematicorum is the term. So when I tell you that X makes Gauss look like an idiot child, I want you to understand my full meaning."?
Letters written for a green card application are very differently structured to letters written for other purposes. As was explained to me when I went through the process, the structure of a green card letter is usually
I am awesome
here are all the ways in which I am awesome
because I am so awesome, you should trust me when I say that this person should get a green card
and oh yeah, they're pretty awesome, which I can tell because I'm awesome.
I'm only slightly exaggerating here. The point is that GC letters are not read by academics - they are read by lawyers who don't evaluate technical skills so much as achievements and strength of recommender. So there's no way to go over the top really.
Yeah, your general four-part plan is pretty much what I followed ;-) It's a weird experience, hence my question. Thanks for this very specific reply, I stand reässured!
You know, this isn't all that different from an academic recommendation letter. (Ha ha only serious.)
There a few signs that you might have gone over the top:
Have you used many absolute superlatives ("the best" rather than "one of the best," "the most dedicated" instead of "extremely dedicated", and so on)?
Is your letter too long or too detailed, given the length of time you have known the person (four pages is probably too long for someone who worked for you on a summer project, unless you've known that person independently in other contexts before then).
and most importantly
Would such a letter, if you were the one receiving it rather than writing it, cause you to have an unfavorable or skeptical reaction about the candidate?
In other words, if it makes you think "nobody's that good," you've probably gone over the top.
The roles are not symmetric, and thus I have no idea what goes through the mind of a US immigration officer when he reads such a letter. Other signs are good checks, though (and as I read them, I recognized that I would never write with absolute superlatives in reference letters, so on that one at least I am safe).
Well, that may be true, but in general, if you can't believe what you've written, it's unlikely somebody else will!
Having been the recipient of a few recommendation letters when applying for a US Green Card, I can assure you it is impossible to give too much praise. The letters I received from my colleagues were humbling and, to put it mildly, embarrassing!!
The purpose of a recommendation letter for green card application is to convince the application reviewer that the applicant is a person the US wants for its national interest.
As long as you don't lie, I think you're fine.
For example, you can say you think she is the best scientist you ever met. This would be your own subjective opinion. You think that way. Others may not think the same. No one can say you lie because it's just your opinion.
Basically, you can say anything you want. But, be careful. You don't want to step on your own toes. You better have evidences to support whatever you say in your recommendation letter. For instance, she'd better be good enough to be called the best scienist you ever met. The evidences would be something like, she received some outstanding awards from well known organizations, etc.
Remember, you'll have to sign on the bottom of the recommendation letter and send it to the US government. Would you be careful when you submit a document to any government?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.944341
| 2012-09-04T20:59:34 |
3100
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Andrew Ng",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Ben Norris",
"Buttonwood",
"Chris",
"JRN",
"JeffE",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Jonny",
"Kostya_I",
"Laisa",
"MacariS",
"Peter Green",
"Pradit",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11909",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12011",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15332",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42323",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7894",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7896",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7899",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7905",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924",
"justhalf",
"thecodejack",
"user2406714"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8175",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3100"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
I'd like to use a figure from a paper; what's the best way to do this?
So, I've seen a really nice figure in a paper; what's the best way to 'get a copy'?
Will it be on the publisher's website?
Do I need to draw my own version?
Email the author?
And, finally, how does the answer vary for (a) those wishing to republish the figure in their own work, (b) those not wishing to publish the figure e.g. for student coursework.
Getting a copy of a figure is easy: Use the marquee tool in your favorite PDF viewer. Getting permission to reuse it is a bit more complicated.
Ask permission from the copyright holder first. Give complete information on how the figure will be used (e.g., will you profit from using it?). If you are going to modify the figure, state that it was adapted from the source. Also, you usually need to include a copyright statement with the figure (e.g., (c) 2012 Copyright holder's name) as well as mentioning the source of the figure.
Many publishers have a copyright permission page on their website that may indicate when you do not need to seek permission. For a similar question, see http://meta.cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/385/am-i-allowed-to-include-a-figure-from-a-pnas-paper-in-my-response
@JeffE maybe things have changed but the last time I tried that in adobe reader I got a crappy low res bitmap. Whereas by loading the pdf into inkscape one can often get a nice vector version.
@PeterGreen And that's one of many reasons why Adode Reader is not my favorite PDF viewer! Either Preview or Skim on the Mac produces a nice vector version.
As (apparently the majority) of the publications is published as *.pdf, inkscape is good scalpel; even if you have to find the right page of the article to import first. Note however, some of publishers rasterize the figures included in the pdf (300 dpi for the ones in colour, for example) even if the original figure was provided as vector file *.(e)ps or *.pdf. Thankfully, inkscape incorporates a "trace bitmap" option, too. For diagrams, curvesnap or engauge digitizer (equally freeware) may be worth to mention, too. And in general: don't forget copyright clearance and proper citation.
It seems that all answer are pertaining to copying the figure directly (i.e., screenshot or inkscape). Does the answer change if we were to recreate the figure from scratch? Perhaps with some style differences? I think if the figure displays an illustration of a concept, that shouldn't matter, right?
@justhalf Simple redrawing a figure from scratch, to meet current standards in graphical representation, for example, would still require a proper citation as "adapted from... ", because the concept was not developed by you. Adressed differently, what is the novelty in copying you want to convey? Starting from a blank canvas and copying the sunflowers by van Gogh is not the same as his original work to reach the result (to pioneer something). As an analogy: Fouzhou's ascend of Mt Everest was not the first one, yet his route differed significantly from the one by Norgay and Hillary.
@justhalf Using a diagram and to add numerous new data, to highlight something not (yet) visible / accessible earlier may add novelty, then changing the proper citation into lines of "based on..."
I'm not arguing against the citation part, but more for the copyright issues, because that's the more delicate issue. Are we violating copyright by taking inspiration from certain figures or graphics?
@justhalf Copyright is tied to laws, laws vary from country to country; and as I am not a lawyer this delicate question "is there enough destinct novelty, to justify this a to be own (new) work" should be adressed to someone who actually is.
Yes, but looking at the tag of the question, which includes "copyright", I feel that these should be addressed in the answers.
Unless the paper is available under a very permissive license, such as Creative Commons Attribution, you will need to seek permission. (There may be other legal possibilities, such as fair use or fair dealing, but that's a little subtle. See this story for more information on that.)
The copyright owner is the person you need permission from. Who that is will generally be marked on the published paper (often it is the publisher, and sometimes the author). If the publisher holds the copyright, then it is still polite to ask permission from the authors as well, although this is not legally required.
Big commercial publishers will often have a department for dealing with this, typically with a name like "Permissions". If you can't find such a department, then you can try just writing to the journal in question (look at their web page to try to find e-mail addresses).
If you are lucky, they will quickly approve your use of the figure. If you are not lucky, they will ask for money.
And, finally, how does the answer vary for (a) those wishing to republish the figure in their own work,
There are definitely legal issues here.
(b) those not wishing to publish the figure e.g. for student coursework.
If you never make the work available to the public, then it is hard to imagine that the copyright owner will ever learn about it or complain (and they would look foolish if they tried to sue someone for using their figure in a homework assignment). However, you still have a moral obligation to cite the source of the figure.
At least in the US, using a figure in your coursework that will never be published falls under "fair use". You do not need permission, but you definitely should cite.
In many cases it's acutally not at all clear that fair use applies to reprinting a figure in your own paper, and there's genuine debate on this among knowledgeable people (see, for example, the comments in the story I linked to). There are cases where you can make a very compelling case for fair use, for example if you are criticizing or commenting on the figure itself. However, most cases are less clear-cut, and many publishers will be unwilling to reprint figures without explicit permission (they don't care enough about establishing that this is fair use to want to risk a legal fight).
@BenCrowell: That's bad advice. If you are planning to use the figure in a publication, then it is required to secure permission. Failure to do so exposes you to all sorts of bad consequences, including possibly retraction of the publication!
How would this answer change for the use in a thesis? Or would all the same rules apply as for a paper?
Leaving the difference between copyright and -- depending on the location -- separate right of exploitation aside, during paper submission often the copyright is transferred from the author to the publisher. Hence, even re-use of a figure, by the same authors but in a journal by a different publisher may be impossible without prior copyright clearance. Sometimes it was a formality. Still, proper citation of the first location the figure appeared is the safe way to go.
The linked story is about a Wiley representative who managed to bully a blogger into removing a picture. I don't see how this implies that the issue is legally any complicated, i.e., that the representatitve's claim has any merit.
In addition to the answer by @AnonymousMathematician, it's important to remember how to cite a figure from another paper in your own. This link gives a good explanation on how to do so: for publications using the APA style guide, for instance, it should be in the format
Figure #. Description/Note. Adapted from “Title of Article,” by F. M. Author and C. D. Author, year,
Title of Journal, volume, p. xx. Copyright year by the Name of Copyright Holder. Adapted [or Reprinted] with
permission.
I edited this because different publishers have different guidelines. In some cases, you can say "Reprinted from Ref. XX with permission," and the longer copyright notice isn't required.
In case some one wants IEEE-related answer (similar to what other responders have said), see page 17 of this IEEE presentation:
Reuse of Published Materials
You must cite and acknowledge any published materials that you make re-use of
Examples: Diagrams/figures from an existing
paper
Extracted and re-used => must get permission from author/publisher (copyright owner) and cite and acknowledge
Redrawn with modifications => should cite and
indicated “adapted from” or “based on”
This includes your own prior published work!
The prestigious American Institute of Physics (AIP) has a FAQ page that is golden:
https://publishing.aip.org/authors/author-permission-faq
Answered questions include:
When do I need permission to reuse material
Must permission be in writing?
How do I obtain permissions?
What is a credit line and where does it go?
What do I do with the permissions once I receive them?
Continuing with aeismail comment under ElCid's answer,
I edited this because different publishers have different guidelines.
In some cases, you can say "Reprinted from Ref. XX with permission,"
and the longer copyright notice isn't required. – aeismail
The AIP states the following:
[...] The original publisher will provide you with their preferred wording
for the credit line (in most cases). A credit line consisting only of
“Used with permission” is not sufficient. An example of a typical
complete credit line appears as:
Reproduced with permission from J. Org. Chem. 63, 99 (1998). Copyright
1998 American Chemical Society.
Note that even when reusing material in the public domain (for which
obtaining permission does not apply), you must include an appropriate
credit line, which states the original source. An example of an
appropriate credit line for material in the public domain follows:
Reprinted from A. H. Harvey and J. C. Bellows, Evaluation and
Correlation of Steam Solubility Data for Salts and Minerals of
Interest in the Power Industry, NIST Technical Note 1387 (U.S. GPO,
Washington, DC, 1997).
https://publishing.aip.org/authors/author-permission-faq
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.945180
| 2013-09-02T10:11:35 |
12374
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Cf Ayfa",
"DoubleYou",
"Dreamer",
"c0defreak",
"debray",
"fedja",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1202",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31237",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31239",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31247",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31253",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31364",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7974",
"jhoyla",
"luis_1991"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8176",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12374"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Application of standard techniques to new data: is it publishable?
I have been working at an internship this past summer, and have applied a relatively standard technique (formal analysis of a security protocol) to a new (company internal) protocol. The company are pushing me to try and get the analysis published in an academic journal. The results do not highlight anything of particular note (a few caveats and gotchas but nothing with substantial security implications), but simply provide a rigorous mathematical underpinning for their security assertions.
Is this something publishable? I feel it isn't because the only new bit is the protocol which was simply given to me (and is being published in its own right). If not how do I make the results of the analysis available? Obviously the analysis needs to be made public and peer review is vital (because otherwise nobody would trust the security claims). Do I just put it on the company website and hope people in the know stumble across it? Can I email appropriate people and hope they look at it?
I make my living as a mathematician off applying standard ideas to new problems and I do not see much difference. Just make sure that the paper is interesting and has some twist and that you make it clear that you do not propose any new methodology there.
You might consider sitting down with the people arguing for publication to try and understand why they consider it to be (potentially) publishable. It's possible, for example, that this new protocol addresses some issues not addressed by existing protocols; or addresses them more efficiently, or robustly, or is otherwise better in some way. In other words, it's possible that the protocol by itself (without your security analysis) is not publishable, and your security analysis by itself (without the novelties of the new protocol) is not publishable, but the two taken together may possibly be publishable.
The protocol is publishable on its own merit. The analysis merely demonstrates that they have carefully considered its security and thus they can call it secure in marketing bumf.
In that case you could consider writing a technical report of your security analysis and leaving it to your manager to decide whether to submit your report for external publication.
I suggested this to him but he wants me to publish it myself.
I think the question to ask would be: Does this paper make a contribution? --- i.e., Would someone working in this field benefit (learn something useful) from reading what you've done? If the answer is "yes" then it's potentially publishable; if not then it isn't. On a related note, the publication venue you choose should be one where the potential beneficiaries hang out.
Obviously, without the details, I cannot say for sure, but I'd guess that Yes, it is publishable.
If more senior people think it is publishable (and it seems they have some experience with the scientific process even though this is an industry setting), then I tend to trust their judgement over yours. Often, when starting out, people tend to think that only major breakthroughs can be published; when it is very much not the case. This is a fairly common occurrence with young researchers: that they are too publication shy. (Others are too quick to think something is ready to be published).
It is obviously novel that this particular protocol has these properties even if the protocol itself has been published already (or is published separately) or the techniques to get to the result are also not novel. The question is whether it is interesting and non-obvious enough. If it is really a trivial thing, then it may not be worth publishing even if it novel. Alternatively, if the protocol itself is not very interesting or used, then it may be deemed not interesting, which is a different criterion from non-novel.
Given the above, the quality of the actual paper (as opposed to the raw analysis) will also need to be taken into account. It is more publishable if you can tie these particular results to a wider framework so as to locate it into a larger body of work. Again, it is hard to say for sure what this might be without knowing more details.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.945592
| 2014-05-03T02:02:55 |
20182
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"A Emilio Wills",
"AmadeusDrZaius",
"BCLC",
"Ben Bitdiddle",
"David Z",
"Guido Ambasz",
"JDQ",
"JeffE",
"Martin Argerami",
"Mohammad",
"Nick Stauner",
"Raphael",
"Sarah Haskell",
"The Dude",
"Trevor Wilson",
"Vivek Subramanian",
"badroit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10518",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14559",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55104",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55105",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55106",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55138",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/55140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7222",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8937",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91845",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91855",
"vadim123"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8177",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20182"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Would it be considered cheating to ask for homework help on the internet, if I openly acknowledge the help received?
Say you have a homework assignment and you're struggling with it. You ask a question about some portion of it on a site like physics.stackexchange or math.SE or stackoverflow.com, etc.
You then cite the help you received in your homework, as well as including a link to the post which helped you.
Given that you are removing the "dishonesty" part of the equation, is this still considered cheating? Or would a professor just not give you credit for the part which they feel you didn't do on your own?
Is this a homework question for an ethics class?
It's not cheating if you cite your sources. Whether getting help will preclude you from getting the credits is the teacher's decision.
@Chris Thanks for the info. I don't actually post to physics.SE (though I am interested in physics) - I was just using it as an example.
Thanks for the answers everyone! I think the most important things that have been mentioned here are intent and making sure it's clear that you ask a good question. As a graduating senior myself, it is not so relevant to me specifically, but if I am ever a professor I will keep this discussion of homework in mind.
The only person who can answer this question is your instructor.
@Jeff I agree, that's why I accepted vadim's answer even though the other ones gave great insights into arguments for and against.
@JeffE: IMO, we can all answer this question. Any given instructor may be an autocrat, but no class is a complete island unto itself. Many of us are instructors and can speak to policy in general, and most of us probably have some opinion on the ethics of the matter, which may be the intent of the question, rather than to seek prognostication on the outcome of any personal attempt in any specific class.
There is no such thing as "policy in general". Standards necessarily differ from one country to the next, from one field to the next, from one university to the next, and from instructor to the next. Of course we can argue about whether a certain activity should be considered cheating, but that's not what OP asked.
@JeffE Perhaps I should have said "should" instead of "would". Nick is closer to what I intended to get from the answers. Perhaps it could be rephrased to "Would you consider it cheating to cite homework help received on the internet?" or "Would most professors consider it cheating to cite homework help received on the internet?" I doubt there is a big consensus on this issue, but I was looking for what the most common view was. But I'm glad that you and vadim have emphasized that one should not take opinions about this as permission. Someone less conscious of this than me might have done so.
Yeah, editing to something like "Would it typically be considered cheating..." (or "Should it..." or so on) would probably make your meaning clearer. JeffE is right that, for an individual student who wants to know what counts as cheating on their specific assignment, the only valid answer comes from their instructor or course policy.
Someone did this in a class I was TAing. The professor told me to give them a 0, even though the website only helped them with part of the problem, and they did significant work on their own. Personally I thought this was silly and they at least deserved credit for the part they did solve.
@JeffE do i have to ask my instructor if I'm allowed to ask a relative for help (say a relative took this same course or even major as me) and if I cite if I do? i mean if not then it would be pretty weird to make a distinction between asking help on stackexchange vs asking help from relatives. if so, then ok just checking.
@BCLC When in doubt, it's always better to ask.
@JeffE To add some context to this question, when I asked it, I was referring more to asking about concepts in homework, not whole homework questions. At that time, I avoided asking other people even about concepts in homework (in person or online), but was questioning whether that was a necessary limitation. Posting entire homework questions verbatim wasn't what I had in mind, but seems to be what many people assumed in their answers. Personally, I never asked for help online - I just struggled and turned in homework late for less credit instead (when I should have gone to office hours).
This depends a great deal on the professor and course in question. Better to ask first if you plan to do this. Also, check the syllabus if there is a stated policy regarding help on homework.
My personal policy is that I do not grade homework, so my students are encouraged to get and use help from whatever sources they like.
Darn... lucky students you have.
I looked over the syllabus for one of your courses and saw that you give 12 exams during a semester. I wonder why other professors don't do the same. (Maybe not 12, but more than a midterm and final.) It seems like a much better way to assess student progress (and is more cheating-proof), and it lets them get whatever help they need prior to the exam.
@AmadeusDrZaius: here are some reasons. 1. Exams take time, so you might not be able to cover all of the syllabus. 2. Sometimes students are seated tight together so policing cheating is harder, and you have logistic problems like the students who finish first bothering the rest when they pass through. 3. The more exams you have, the more you have to deal with problems like students who missed an exam for legitimate reasons. 4. You penalize students for not understanding part of the material in September, even if by December they master it perfectly.
(Continued) 5. Because the exams are close to the timr when they were covered in class and they are shorter, they are necessarily simpler. So they do not help the students mature the concepts, and they get the impression that the longer exams will be equally simpler. Disclaimer: I finished a week ago a course where I gave 8 quizzes, a midterm and a final, and assignments were not handed in.
@Martin Re: 2 - tell students to stay seated until the end, 4 - homework also penalizes students for not understanding the material in September. Glad to hear you're trying to make it work despite the difficulties.
Agreed about homework, but you cannot compare it with an exam. With homework you have (at least in my classes) one week to deal with it. If you are responsible, you would determine early whether you get it or not. And you have office hours, free tutoring, the textbook, your classmates, and the internet to ask for help. So I wouldn't say it is equally easy to lose marks in homework than it is in a quiz.
@Martin "So I wouldn't say it is equally easy to lose marks in homework than it is in a quiz." At the two schools I've been to, collaborating with/asking help from students was considered a form of cheating (if not cited). And if cited, would often lose you the points for that section. That's part of the reason that I believe homework shouldn't be graded - you shouldn't be constricted from consulting multiple sources, including the internet, because the professor is often not available and textbook lacking. Homework should be about learning.
I agree about homework. Actually, I think that for each multi-section class the list of homework (not to be graded) questions should be the same for all sections, even along the years. That way all teachers have a common anchor and you have less variety among sections.
I think it is acceptable, but you might considering asking your professor first.
I have cited help from cross validated and stack overflow before with help on modeling in R. I tested my data for heteroskedasticity using a test (Breusch–Pagan)that the professor did not mention in class.I provided a link to the discussion in my assignment. I did not receive negative marks, in fact, he actually complemented my work in front of the class for "going the extra mile" and using alternate resources and finding a test he did not mention in lecture.
I think most professors want you to learn, it shouldn't matter how. Now if you post you data and someone does all the work for you, that is a different animal..
I would say that it also depends on how you asked your question online. You should demonstrate in your homework that you have understood the procedure you're outlining as your answer, and then acknowledge that you received help online by providing the link where you asked your question. If I were the professor, I would click the link to see the question. If it were a question along the lines of "Here's a problem. What's the answer?", then I would give you no credit. If your question clearly showed some effort and understanding, and that you made sure you properly understood the answer(s), I would say it's ok. But most importantly of all (I think), you should admit in your question that you're working on a homework problem. That way people will try to help you rather than just give you the answer.
The way the question is asked is indeed very important, as you point out. It also occurred to me that there is a danger that someone will post a complete solution as an answer to your question, even if you intend only to get hints on a select portion. Given this, I think it's important not to post the problem in full if possible... since we can't control what others will post.
As vadim123 says, it depends on the professor.
What I have done in the past (when outside help was not expressly forbidden) was write that I obtained help from someone on the internet or the tutoring center because I was stuck. Then I would go to great lengths to explain the concept in such a way that the professor could see that I had gained mastery of the concept, and I put some work into the problem. Sometimes I would do additional problems too. Other times I would turn in problems I had worked several times, never arriving at a reasonable answer, and ask the professor for help. As I recall, I was always given credit for doing the work. Your mileage may vary.
There is a difference between asking for help and cheating, and I think it comes down to ones motivation. By doing the additional work, it should show that your goal was not to just get an answer to turn in, but to gain understanding of the concept.
I think that there are two dimensions to this question:
- 1) Would it be considered cheating by your professor?
- 2) Should it be considered cheating?
The answer to 1) depends on your professor, university, curriculum, etc. If you are unsure, it's probably best to ask your professor. My personal experience is that lecturers actually like it when a student stuck with some homework exercise approaches them (as long as you show them that you actually thought about the problem and tried different things and don't just ask them for a solution). At my university most professors state at the beginning of the course how they expect the students to do the assignment - e.g., discussing it with colleagues is allowed (but you have to be able to explain your submitted solution in detail); using other sources than the course material is allowed (but you have to cite it properly), etc.
The answer to 2) very much depends on the personal code of ethics. I strongly think that it should not be considered cheating, as long as (i) the student can explain the solution in detail (ii) other material is cited correctly, and (iii) the student didn't use the solutions of other students from previous semesters. After all, the job of a student is to understand things - being able to ask the right questions at the right places is actually a very important skill.
I think that the other answers do not quite answer the question that was asked. My answer is no, it is not cheating to turn in a homework assignment that cites a website like Math.SE. (This is assuming that you put quotation marks around any text that you copy; otherwise it could still be plagiarism.)
Of course it would be a good idea to ask the professor beforehand whether this is allowed, but failure to do so would not constitute cheating any more than attempting to turn in a homework assignment late without first determining whether this was allowed would constitute cheating. As long as the student makes it clear that the homework uses outside sources (or was turned in late,) the professor has the choice to accept the homework or not according to his or her policy.
Keep in mind that if citing outside sources in your homework is a violation of the professor's policy, then the penalty could be significant (just as for failing to turn in the homework on time.) However, it is still not something that the professor could reasonably report to the university administration as cheating, nor is it something that a reasonable university would consider to be cheating.
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, the relevant definitions of "cheating" are
1a: to practice fraud or trickery
2b: to violate rules dishonestly.
In both definitions, dishonesty is a crucial element (and one which the OP has explicitly ruled out.) In fact cheating, plagiarism, falsification of data, etc., are often collectively termed "academic dishonesty," making this condition explicit.
I should add a warning that, if your professor sees your question online, he or she might assume that you are planning to cheat. (The allegation shouldn't hold up without a submitted assignment as proof, but it wouldn't be wise to risk it.)
According to my understanding, this is not consider as cheating if student explore and search by the help of second tutor or professor. There are many websites offering the same services and provide your proper platform for online tutoring and homework help like udemy, tutorvista and StudentLance.com Actually, some time student could not get the teacher point of view and needs something different for better understanding especially in Mathematics.
Asking for help on the internet may be considered cheating, depending on how much help you got versus how much of your own research you did.
Not crediting help received on the internet may be considered even more unethical, verging on plagiarism.
If you're going to incorporate other folks' answers in your own, it's polite to acknowledge their contributions. At the very least.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.946733
| 2016-02-17T07:04:17 |
63526
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Akoth Jackie ",
"Bashir And Nadia - Vaughan",
"Bestpersonalizedgifts",
"Captain Emacs",
"Celo",
"CrepusculeWithNellie",
"David Ketcheson",
"Debtanu Gupta",
"DisgruntledMuppet",
"HATEthePLOT",
"KaiSqDist",
"Mamduh Bhutt",
"Maryam Mirzalou",
"SHBET spam",
"Savy Achaya",
"Teusz",
"enthu",
"faustus",
"ff524",
"gnometorule",
"hah747",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177974",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177975",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177984",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177985",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177989",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178009",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178019",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178021",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178029",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178032",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178045",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178791",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19581",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45025",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49334",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"micmonstercom",
"spam174876"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8178",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63526"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Should I agree to teach a class for my supervisor even though I don't get any acknowledgement for it?
I'm not contractually obligated to teach in my postdoc position, but she just asked me as a favor... I don't mind of course, but I'd rather be formally acknowledged as co-teaching on the syllabus, etc. It's good for my CV, etc.
Is it expected that I comply with my supervisor or am I within my rights to expect formal acknowledgement?
What exactly are you being asked to do? Teach the entire course? Teach a class session or two while your supervisor is traveling? Teach half of the class sessions while your supervisor teaches the other half? Something else?
If you do it, you can put it on your CV. Future employers are not going to ask for a copy of the syllabus. They might ask you about your experience teaching the course.
If you would teach the entire course some form of recognition is un-avoidable in several universities, as you need to be formally accepted by the department / faculty / school as an examiner. Teaching is one thing, being the responsible examiner is another ..
and to verify, you are being paid for this correct? 2. are you lecturing, or tutoring? 3. are you contributing any original course material?
I am being ask to deliver lectures that collectively add up to 1/3 of the entire course. I suppose my supervisor can still be the examiner, formally... Yes, I am being paid for this (though less time for research), no tutoring, contributing original material, yes.
if you're delivering 1/3 of the lectures, then the course outline that they hand out at the start of semester will have your name on it. it's essentially unspoken that you'll be acknowledged, so it's a tad peculiar that you ask "or am I within my rights to expect formal acknowledgement?" ... it's not an either/or type scenario.
This already has too many answers, but I can't help myself: academia entirely runs on people doing stuff they are not contractually obligated to do. This generates a lot of problems along the way, but that is how things stand. "It's not a formal requirement that I do this" is not likely to be a satisfying answer for your supervisor. If the amount of lecturing is not a huge burden, and you feel like it will not make a huge dent in your productivity, then it is probably a worthwhile thing to do (if only as a favor to your supervisor); if you feel like the amount asked is a large burden, see if you can negotiate to reduce it. I also agree that you want to get something in writing. I would phrase it as "I want to be sure I understand what needs to be done for the class. If it's writing, it's less likely I'll forget or misunderstand," rather than making it seem like you are suspicious.
+1 for de-emphasizing "formal requirement." The professor is likely not just lazy, but expressing trust in and appreciation of her Postdoc. It's a lot of extra work, but another step in seeing the Postdoc as "ready to join the ranks."
For people who like teaching, this is a great opportunity. Having teaching experience can be the selling point in a job interview that will make you stand out from the others. However, if it is really research you want to do and do not really enjoy teaching enough to be confronted with it before you become a professor, then you might concentrate on doing good research. But if you do not, in principle, mind doing it, go for it - experience is best gained early.
If you have an interest in academic positions this is a golden opportunity that you should not pass up. You will have actually taught some reasonable portion of a class in your field and will be able to discuss with the interview committee how it went, what you would change, how you would teach such a class at your prospective institution. It will go a long way in helping you write your statement on teaching philosophy. It also will let you know what you are in for - preparing lectures the first time through is an incredibly time consuming task.
If you have no desire to be in academia, well, that is something different.
Frankly, I think your adviser is being very nice to you.
The answer to your questions depends: First what does your supervisor asks you in specific? Teach an entire term or just one or two sessions when she is unavailable? Has the course already started?
I would see it this way. If you just have to substitute her for some sessions, do it. A helping hand is always welcome.
If she asks you to lecture an entire course, mention it in your CV -- even if you don't have any obligation to give classes at your current position. It has been stated (imho orrectly) that there is a difference between teaching and examining; you should definitaley check back with exam regulations what your role will be.
A last thing: If you are to give an entire lecture, be sure that it counts towards your working time (the actual course, preparation and follow-ups) -- or is compensated adequately. I work in academia and (in Germany) there is the habit of giving out lectureships that pay absolutely nothing for your efforts.
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post - you can always comment on your own posts, and once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post. - From Review
I know. However, I cannot yet comment under questions/other answers. Above that. The question is in my opinion very complex so that other persons cannot give a final answer to it, only provide input so that the person who asked, can make up his*her mind.
I've seen before that a professor was listed on the syllabus, but someone else was actually teaching in the classroom, so it's not unheard of. If you're a co- teacher, list it on your CV as such. If you're the sole teacher, list it on your CV as such. Just 2 things to consider:
Get your exact role confirmed in writing, either in a letter or an email. If only one person can confirm you did teach and that person gets hit by a bus, we're now down to 0 people.
Make sure you can balance the additional workload somehow.
My two cents: you should totally do this; it's a great experience and good for your CV. It could be just slightly better if you were correctly acknowledged.
Don't be hung up on who gets the credit. Besides, you are already getting paid for the work you are doing.
Why shouldn't you? You will get great experience and learn a lot while you are preparing for the class. In my mind, I don't really care what kind of benefits the professor or the supervisor is getting. This is a great opportunity for you. On the other site, if this really bothers you, you may follow the University rules but not recommended. :-)
Don't do it. From own experience and colleagues' experiences: Some universities don't consider your teaching experience if you don't show a student evaluation. If you don't get credit for teaching, the only thing what remains is to show your productivity with publications. (Since for proposal writing you won't get any credit as well as postdoc). Focus on your research or negotiate that you get credit for your teaching (student evaluation etc), because good teaching will take a lot of your time, if you do it for the first time.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.947476
| 2015-05-05T17:20:20 |
44872
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Alexander",
"DCTLib",
"David Ketcheson",
"Evorlor",
"Piotr Zolnierczuk",
"Pyem",
"Zion",
"aeismail",
"fredfeng",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123136",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123138",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123142",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123143",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123144",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18171",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31255",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7390",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"john Brisby",
"liang",
"nxkryptor",
"somerandomdude"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8179",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44872"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Does the choice of programming language affect paper acceptance in mechanical engineering?
I have published papers in the field of mechanical engineering, combustion, engines, etc. Previously I relied on MATLAB for most of my data processing, and C++/Fortran for computations. I duly cite languages used.
Recently I switched to Python for its great comprehensive library, plotting capabilities, support and above all I don't have to struggle with the licensing issues. Now I am worried if citing Python would affect paper acceptance, since it is based on an unconventional approach.
Will using an unconventional programming language increase my chances of rejection?
Unconventional? http://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/176450-python-is-now-the-most-popular-introductory-teaching-language-at-top-us-universities/fulltext
May be conventional in different fields, but I still don't understand why I don't see computational fluid dynamics code written in Python.
@nxkryptor: Because Python is slow.
Most of these are well-known and widely used:
http://lorenabarba.com/blog/cfd-python-12-steps-to-navier-stokes/
http://www.pyfr.org/
http://fenicsproject.org/documentation/dolfin/1.0.0/python/demo/pde/navier-stokes/python/documentation.html
https://github.com/clawpack/pyclaw
https://github.com/mikaem/spectralDNS
I understand what you mean by unconventional. I'm also a mechanical engineer and have some experience in CFD. I know that some people in this field are a bit rigid (for lack of a better word). I think you should be fine using Python. Python may be slower than C++ but so is MATLAB, and most people in CFD seem to accept MATLAB.
The short answer is, no. I've never experienced or heard of a reviewer caring about what language was used for code in a science or engineering paper.
In any case, I don't think Python is "unconventional" in 2015. Here are some well-known and widely used codes that can be used for CFD with Python front-ends:
http://pyfr.org
http://fenicsproject.org
http://github.com/clawpack/pyclaw
Note that all of these use Python in combination with lower-level languages for performance.
I'll also mention the educational course CFD Python.
I think Dropbox is written in Python too
Any answer will likely depend on your field and the specific journal or conference you submit to. Programming languages are tools, just like your literature database frontend. As long as your tools are not manifestly unsuitable to the task or to the venue you submit to, I can't imagine anyone holding the tool against you. If you write your high performance computation in COBOL, I'd say this is a case where the reviewer might question your grasp of the field.
This, of course, does not hold if you submit to a journal or conference that explicitly addresses a particular programming language or paradigm. If you submit a paper that exclusively relies on Haskell to the R Journal, you likely will be rejected.
(And Python specifically is sufficiently hip nowadays that I don't think it will raise an eyebrow, except for possible performance problems, as per @aeismail's comment).
One case when the language may be questioned is when you are doing performance profiling and compare results with that others have achieved. For such cases, you usually get into least trouble when using that the majority uses. To compare the performance, the algorithms must be implemented on comparable platforms, not Python vs Assembler.
This one. A related thing that "does not fly" is comparing the own Python-based implementation against a C++ implementation of another approach for the same problem, finding out that the other implementation is a bit faster, and then claiming that the own approach is better because Python is inherently slower.
Present it as a proof-of-concept code and you ought to be okay. If you believe it's beyond that, then use the standard languages for your field. Nothing wrong with Python, our computational physics friends use it and develop impressive libraries for it. (It's interesting to see comments from a few years ago when Python was the new kid. By contrast Python 3 pretty much dominates some areas now.) The goal isn't always performance on a particular problem, sometimes the mark of great code is the ease of adoption by others.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.947838
| 2015-04-20T06:30:55 |
43886
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Charles Gaudreau Jackson",
"Eliton Scardin Perin",
"ForestDwellers",
"John",
"Md Geto Alam",
"gnometorule",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/119112",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/119113",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/119114",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/119137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/119275",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18259",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4384",
"jakebeal",
"knytt"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8180",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43886"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What GRE verbal score is needed for a non-native English speaker to get into math or applied math PhD programs in the USA?
I am an international student whose native language is not English. I am planning to apply for a Phd program in math or applied math in US in the future and general GRE test is a requirement.
From most posts here, I know I should put more attention in related research experience and GRE test only matters when it's low. But I am wondering what it means exactly. I know most universities have a minimum score for TOEFL speaking session but didn't find any information about GRE general test.
My classmates told me that based on previous record, in order to get admitted by a top program (top10 or 20), both verbal (V) and quantitative (Q) can't be bad. For Q I should aim at 140 but they are not sure about V. I also checked some forums such as mathgre. I found a lot of local applicants got verbal score higher than 135. To achieve that, I must put a lot of effort which will reduce my time about research significantly.
Hence I want to know what kind of gre general score is acceptable for international applicants who plan to apply for top theoretical phd programs? Based on my understanding, most programs usually higher GRE subject score for international students, will you usually have different language requirements for local/international students (except toefl) when you review the application materials?
@jakebeal I don't think that is a duplicate. I am focussing on what it means by "low gre" and whether there is difference between gre requirements of international students and local students. Hence I don't think it answers my question.
I'm not sure that any general answer exists, as different universities are likely to weight their judgements differently.
Just to add a data point, in my old field (quantitative but not math) the GRE verbal was disregarded. Of the other two, one (quantitative) served as a cutoff (at the school I ended up, below 90%, and you were out). The other factored into your admission as an also-ran. Sufficient English proficiency was deduced from your TOEFL, but - based on some of my classmates - this cannot have been very strict. If your writing style in your question represents your English, I wouldn't sweat it. My field didn't require a GRE subject.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.948055
| 2016-05-23T16:48:11 |
69167
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Barbara Rosciglione",
"Cedric",
"Commercial Solar Energy Ltd",
"J.N.",
"Jeff",
"Moritz",
"Vaibhav Gandhi",
"Zhou Yang",
"amit singh",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13581",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195447",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195448",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195449",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195772",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/195774",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22893",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54701",
"koolhead17"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8181",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/69167"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is there a tool like the Open Science Framework that can be run on a private server?
I am very impressed by the Open Science Framework. Unfortunately, for some projects I cannot put any data in a cloud especially if it is not encrypted. Are there similar tools which allow me to keep my data in its present windows like folder organisation but with similar features ? E.g adding files by drag and drop and adding annotations, as well as a wiki, etc. They do not necessarily have to be free. Although I would appreciate an open source project and the possibility to donate.
Moritz,
Jeff here--I'm the co-founder and CTO of the Center for Open Science--developers of the OSF. First off, I'm happy to hear that you like the OSF. While this doesn't answer your question necessarily, you have a few options if you'd still like to use our service:
It sounds like you're interested in encryption of data at rest, which is something we don't yet offer for OSF storage, although all data is encrypted during transmission. Of course you could encrypt the data before uploading it, but that's probably not an ideal solution. With that said, Amazon S3 (one of the services we connect to) offers encrypted buckets (so you'd get encryption of data at rest in a cloud service), and we make that option available via the OSF. Alternatively, you could install Dataverse on your own server and connect that to the OSF. Owncloud and Gitlab connections are coming soon--both storage services you can also host on your own machines. These latter services don't offer encryption of data at rest, but they wouldn't be hosted in the cloud.
Depending on your needs re:storage, there are a few other options that I'd be glad to talk to you about. For example, I haven't tried it, but I think you could install the open source Minio server (which has an S3 compatible API) and connect to the OSF via our S3 add-on. We might need to make a few tweaks with regards to authentication, but we could look into adding that to the feature queue, or we always appreciate pull requests if you have developer time. You mentioned a donation, so if you did have some money for something like this, we could see if someone in the community would be interested in a bounty/grant. Alternatively, you could directly hire a developer or an intern to make the necessary changes and contribute code back to the code-base--making that add-on available to the rest of the community.
So, lots of options, and we're happy to help support community-initiated endeavors like this. Feel free to get in touch with us at support at osf dot io or reach out to me directly at jeff at cos dot io. Hope to hear from you!
Hi Jeff, thank you for the reply. I will talk with our IT about the options and get in touch.
Please do. Looking more at Minio, this might be a trivial change to our S3 add-on because the authentication API is S3 compatible as well.
We have holidays until monday. I will contact you next week.
@jeff I am from team Minio & will be extremely happy to help with whatever way we can. :)
@koolhead17, that's outstanding. I'll shoot you an email.
@jeff just replied, happy to help. :)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.948346
| 2012-05-30T14:36:42 |
1816
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Abe",
"Andrew Maurer",
"KDN",
"StrongBad",
"blackace",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/344",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4466",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4467",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4468",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4469",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4470",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4479",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"nickrobison",
"noir1993",
"user1593063"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8182",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1816"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Do interviews require taking vacation days?
When interviewing for a new position, is it common practice to count the days spent on interviews as vacation days?
It wouldn't seem unreasonable to count these as vacation days, except that I could also see them as being work days. If I were only visiting to give a lecture and speak with faculty in another department, it would seem like work, and presenting at a conference is certainly not vacation.
A few follow up questions - does it matter that I am a post-doc (e.g. would it be different from a faculty, in which case interviewing for another position would not be in the interest of the current employer)? Would it be different if I were interviewing at a company rather than a university? Does it depend on the country? I am in the U.S.
(this is related to the question related to Do presentations given during interviews count as invited talks?)
You should ask your advisor, but it is reasonable for an advisor to allow you time (potentially several weeks or months) to essentially be away from the lab and your research in order to interview for jobs. In my opinion, this is a concession that is reasonable to give as a reward for hard work during previous phases of an advisee's research. If not, the advisor likely does not have the advisee's interests in mind. That could come back to bite him/her later when attempting to find new advisees.
On the other hand, if you're spending a lot of extra leisure time on the trips that is not part of the interview, then it should probably be considered vacation time.
In most cases you will not take all of your vacation days and work more than the required number of hours, so it shouldn't really matter. As a post-doc, you should ask your advisor.
Are you implying that, If I work nights and weekends, I should never have to take a vacation day?
@Abe who is making you take vacation days? I am not a good role model, but when I don't work on a Sunday, I count that as a vacation day. The HR bean counters have different, but unclear rules, I believe that most academic contracts in the US and UK state how many hours a week you must work, and do not mention not how many hours a day or how many days a week you need to work. If you put in 37.5 hours in each and every 7 day period, then I don't see how anyone who counts vacation days could say you took vacation.
@DanielE.Shub But what if you work Saturday and Sunday and use Monday to go to the mountains?
@gerrit as I said, to Abe, I am not a good role model, but I consider any day I don't work a vacation day.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.948578
| 2012-03-06T00:29:07 |
589
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Amy",
"EFH",
"JeffE",
"MostlyHarmless",
"Water Dragon",
"b1_",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1330",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1331",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1335",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1337",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1495",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1496",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1497",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"melhosseiny",
"petermeissner",
"r2k0",
"stopple"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8183",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/589"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
What should be included when inquiring about the status of my application?
I am currently applying for research and faculty positions. After an initial phone interview, how can I politely ask for feedback on the status of my application?
What are the necessary, optional, and unwise topics of such a letter?
As a concrete example, here is a quick draft:
I am writing to follow up on our discussion a few weeks ago about the position in (My Field) at (Your Institution). I remain very interested in the position and would appreciate the opportunity to work with you and the (XYZ) group.
In particular, have you been able to narrow the list of candidates, and am I included? Is there any additional information that I could provide to support my application?
I also appreciate that you sent me a copy of your unpublished manuscript. It promises to make an important contribution to the field by providing the type of robust approach to (The Method) that is required. I would like to learn more - would you be willing to share the supplementary information with me as well?
The only necessary component is the line "I was wondering about the status of my application".
Asking whether you can provide additional information is unlikely to help, as the question is too open-ended. It would be an excellent question to ask at the end of the interview phone call, as well as in the follow-up "thank you" email, but beyond that it appears desperate, which is typically not a good characteristic of an applicant.
The comment about the unpublished manuscript is unrelated, and therefore pretty neutral. It just as well could be sent in a second email.
It's worth mentioning that inquiring about the status of your application is pretty similar to habanero sauce; use judiciously, and very sparingly, and it's often best not to use it at all.
Actually, I think the comment about the unpublished manuscript is ethically fishy. Just ask about the status of your application; don't try (or appear to try) to butter up the person you're asking.
@JeffE - Maybe, I can see it being interpreted that way. I would just send it in a separate email, sent at least two days before/after the follow-up email.
As someone who has been participating in more of these hiring discussions recently, and been responsible for filling some of them myself, I would encourage you to use extreme caution before sending out such emails.
Faculty search committees usually consist of faculty members who are already quite overworked, and who have to deal with potentially many candidates who may all want to pester them with questions. If somebody starts acting like a nuisance, they might consider that person "not a team player" and reject the application on those grounds alone.
However, there are a few times when it is appropriate to ask about such deadlines:
When you have received an offer from another institution, but the institution you're writing to is a higher-perference choice. Then you are doing two things: you're making sure that you get an informed decision, plus you're also letting the other guys know that if they're interested in you, they'll need to make a move quickly.
If you have a major update to announce. This might include a change in location (new position, new mailing address, etc.) as well as status updates—you've earned a promotion or a major award. Then it would be OK to mention this in an email.
It is well past the "standard" deadline, or a promised deadline. Then you're just following up on an arrangement, and it's hard to argue against this.
However, you should never ask if you are included on the list of finalists. That's considered both rude, as well as unfair to everybody else involved. Like eykanal, I think the last paragraph in your excerpt is always superfluous, and should not be included in an email requesting a status update. (You could and perhaps should send it as part of a thank-you note to the interviewer.)
+1 you wrote a much better version of what I was writing at the same time!
They'll call you if they want to call you.
In general, the only appropriate times to contact a potential employer following an interview are:
Immediately afterwards, to thank the interviewer for their time (and reiterate your interest in the position). Do this within 24 hours of the interview.
If you have another offer somewhere else. In that case, it's appropriate to ask the status of your application so that you can have the opportunity to consider both.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.948940
| 2013-02-05T21:49:26 |
7809
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Artem Kaznatcheev",
"Suresh",
"blackace",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4467",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8184",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7809"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Statistics on readership and posting habits for academic blogs
Although this stackexchange seems to be a little hostile towards metrics (especially when they are about research productivity), it is still sometimes fun to indulge in a little bit of arbitrary measurement and quantification. Sometimes it can help you set targets, or let you know what is possible. In this case I am curious about blogs.
Having a web-presence is important, but how do you know if your academic blog is doing a good job?
From my own experience, I have noticed that my blog gets a lot more readership and mention than any of my papers. I usually find this encouraging, and at times it helps me increase productivity by incorporating blogging into my research work-flow and feeling like I am able to communicate with people before having complete results. Sometimes even receive feedback (although my blog is not at the level of regular commentators, and nowhere close to the comment activity I see on popular blogs that I follow).
However, getting more mention than my papers is not a fair standard. In fact, I have no standard by which to decide if I am doing an alright job blogging, and what I should aim for to improve the ability of my blog to engage other researchers or interested readers. Having some hard data is also useful for converting people new to blogging to the online community.
Are there any statistics on typical readership, posting rates, and commenting frequency for small (non-superstar) academic blogs? I would be especially interested in statistics that are broken down by area, since I expect a nutrition or cancer blog to inherently get more readership than one dedicated to Stone-duality. Of particular interest to me would be information about blogs in theoretical computer science and/or mathematical modeling.
"This stackexchange seems to be a little hostile towards metrics (especially when they are about research productivity)". I can say so many things in praise of this stack-exchange just for that. Generally a good topic though don't get me wrong...
I think it's interesting to consider the relative value to society of blog posts relative to more traditional forms of content distribution, such as book chapters, text books, journal articles and so forth.
Obtaining Benchmark statistics
RSS counts: Many blogs, particularly popular ones, show their RSS subscriber count. You can use the Explore Search feature in Google Reader to search for blogs you know. This returns the number of Google Reader subscribers. This is less than the total reader count, but it can give you a rough ball park.
Page views: Some blogs occasionally post their site statistics. Alexa can provide a very rough estimate of the popularity of a site.
Comments: It is straight forward to look at other blogs to get a sense of how many comments they typically get.
My rough rules of thumb
I've been blogging since 2008 and have kept an eye on RSS feeds and page views over timeon my own blog. I've also picked up information from other blogs that I follow.
My main observations are that it takes time to produce content, get indexed by Google, obtain RSS subscribers and so on. These would be my rough benchmarks for academic blogging. In the fields that interest me (e.g., psychology, statistics, R) I can think of specific blogs that fall in to one or other of these categories. This helps to inform the benchmark. Anyway, these are just my casual rules of thumb; of course, they aren't anything definitive.
RSS subscribers:
0 to 10: Not popular
10 to 100: Just getting started
100 to 500: Moderate levels of popularity
500 to 1000: Relatively popular
1000 to 10,000: Popular Blog
10,000+: Superstar blog
Annual Page Views
0 to 1,000: Not popular
1,000 to 10,000: Just getting started
10,000 to 50,000: Moderate levels of popularity
50,000 to 300,000: Relatively popular
300,000 to 2,000,000: Popular Blog
2,000,000+: Superstar blog
What does a page view mean
It is a little difficult to know what a page view means in terms of achieving broader blogging goals. Only a proportion of page views correspond to a person reading the entirety of the page. And only a proportion of those page views have any meaningful impact on the reader. In order to get a sense of what these proportions might be, I reflect on my own browsing. For example, I might be searching to diagnose a software error, do a tutorial on something, or get a review of a product. It might take a few search results to find what I'm looking for. That said, perhaps something between 1 in 10 and 1 in 2 search results provide useful results.
In summary, even if only 1 in 20 pageviews helped someone in some meaningful way, if you're getting a hundred thousand page views per year, that's still 5,000 instances of people being helped.
I used to track my stats compulsively, but no longer do so. this is mainly because I get lots of readers through an RSS feed, which doesn't directly impact traffic. Sometimes I'll monitor the relative hit rate of specific posts, and I have seen dramatic jumps (for example if I do business meeting blogging, or if I post on something controversial).
As a rule of thumb, the more technical the post, the less traffic it gets. The more buzzwordy, the more traffic. I had some thoughts on deep learning recently and that got huge traffic in comparison to some of my more technical posts.
Now, because of G+, twitter, and blogs, my "visibility" is diluted across all three media, and while I'm sure there's some way to monitor all of them, I haven't paid that much attention. Ultimately, I blog because it's fun, and the more I get distracted by audience response, the more I find myself distorting the things I post about.
Any memory of typical stats from when you tracked them? Especially the early days of your blog?
Not really. In the early days I recall getting around 200-250 visits per day I think
I can't say much about statistics, as I have not come across any, but in my experience blog readerships are usually small and most likely by specialists in your area. However, I view a blog as free advertising for my research, as blogs are generally more highly ranked than academic papers by google and the like. I also view a blog as an ideal platform to put your research into laymans terms. From my blogs I have had an out of the blue invited talk, and also requests from numerous researchers who I hadn't met for copies of papers or general queries about my work.
I personally find maintaining a nice website and blog well worth the effort, and I try and spend a couple of hours a week on new content, but usually concentrated when new articles are published. Ultimately it's all about raising the profile of your research, and having more accessible material is always helpful, even for specialists.
I don't know if it is the answer you are looking for, but I would be cautious with looking at blog views (or even likes/tweets):
First, they may be superficial. You don't even know if someone actually read it (maybe (s)he entered just because of a sexy title, or a nice picture, or - misleading keywords).
Second, they is are measure of popularity, not necessary quality, with a lot of mechanisms making scaling exponential (e.g. snowball effect).
Personally, I often look at stats of page visits of my various sites... but I cannot make much sense of it. But what I find important is:
How often I can send someone a link to my post, so it save my time of explaining something once again?
How much I learn something from readers, or make new contacts through it?
Do I hearing feedback, especially from strangers or people I don't know very well?
Moreover, then I can compare blogs to regular articles on this ground. Still it's apples to oranges... but now they are quantized fruits. :)
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.949589
| 2019-10-13T02:48:16 |
138443
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"GrotesqueSI",
"JeffE",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"anonymous 090",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/114793",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36744",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82614",
"joojaa"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8185",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138443"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Stamp of electrical department on letter head of recommendation letter
My referee is a pioneer of my university in my home country. I am applying for PhD in Australia. My referee has signed the letter of recommendation in hardcopy form but he hasn't put a stamp of his name on it saying that letter head needs no stamp. I have mentioned on letter head that he is Professor and Trustee. I have asked electrical department to put department stamp on it and they agreed. In this scenario is it likely that my chosen university in Australia may question why the pioneer and professor hasn't put his own stamp? Is it likely that the Australian university would contact my referee for it? Note that I am applying for a highly competitive scholarship in Australia.
When I assess PhD applications, I rarely notice the stamp on referee letters. I tend to focus more on a student's transcripts, which must have an official stamp.
What's a "stamp"?
How exactly does a stamp help? I mean laser engravers are very common (you can find them in libraries... and 2 in my workshop), and laser engraving rubber is easily available. Faking a stamp takes literally 10 minutes of design work and 10-15 minutes of laser time, neither of which requires any specialist skill and cost is less than 20 euros.
Australian universities do not use or expect stamps. However, they may be familiar with the practices of universities in Asia and notice inconsistencies. I suggest this is unimportant.
What do you mean by inconsistency here? Do you mean inconsistency regarding department stamp and not professor and trustee stamp on lor?
No, I mean they will have seen hundreds of similar documents and will know what the documents usually look like.
I'm at a UK University and we don't have individual stamps, nor do we put any official stamp on reference letters. I've written dozens of recommendation letters for students applying to Australian Universities and none have had a stamp. Almost all of those students were admitted, many with significant funding. Listen to your Prof, you're fine.
The problem is that my another referee who is associate professor in another university has put his own stamp, while professor has not.
I don't see how that is a problem. Again, Australia does not use personal stamps so they won't notice either the presence or absence of a personal stamp.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.949809
| 2013-04-23T09:02:16 |
9571
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Bob",
"Ethan Holshouser",
"Jay Cobb",
"JeffE",
"KC McLaughlin",
"MasterOfBinary",
"Piotr Migdal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23479",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23480",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23481",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"pwmartinson"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8186",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9571"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it ok to send an email informing about your new paper?
Several times in the past, after publishing a paper, I have sent email to several people which I thought might be interested in the results obtained in the paper. Usually I have emailed some of the people whose result I was citing in my paper and to people who were working on related problems.
I such a practice ok, or do people consider emails like this too intrusive?
When I did this in the past, some of the people answered to me with a brief email (along the lines of "thanks for letting me know"). In a one or two cases the answer indicated that this person is interested in similar emails in the future, if I have some updates on that particular topic. And in one case I was even asked about possibility of collaboration on some problems.
So from these answers it seems that it was ok. But if there were some people who did not like receiving such emails, they probably did not bother to answer.
A related question: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3456/advertising-ones-publication
I think there are two important factors to keep in mind when writing unsolicited email, which could be taken as spam by the person who receives it:
Whether you believe, in good faith, that the receiver will find the information useful. That test is not as easy as it may seem, because what seems obvious to you (“this guy in field Y will be happy that we're developing somewhat related concepts in field X that may generate a new vision of his field”) may not be to him (“why is this X specialist writing to me to promote his recent work I don't care about?”). Messages need to be tailored, so that people can immediately see how your paper can be of interest to them.
The frequency of such messages: if you write 5 papers a year on a given topic, and send a nice informative email each time, that is a lot of mail! Consider doing this only once in a while, maybe for high-profile articles or reviews.
Now, regarding whether it's accepted practice (and common practice): I receive a dozen such emails of this nature per year, from colleagues in my field, and every time I am actually interested in their paper. I have not yet received spam of that sort, i.e. notification of new papers I couldn't care less about (I receive lots of spam job applications, on the other hand).
I also do it myself, once or twice a year: sit back, think about my recent papers, and ask myself “what colleagues do I have that may be interested in this and that?”. Usually, I then write a few different emails, depending on the specific interests of the colleagues in question, so that the email is personalized. I also use that occasion to ask questions to them , if I have any of relevance, asking their opinion on recent developments (by them, me or other groups) in our field.
Yes, I think this is absolutely acceptable, and indeed if you are at the beginning of your career, highly encouraged. When I was a graduate student I was shocked when my advisor asked me to e-mail my paper to most of the famous people working in the field. I was even more surprised when several of them wrote back with very substantive replies.
To make sure you're not being intrusive (which I recommend if the recipient is famous, and/or you don't know him/her personally), word your e-mail in such a way that suggests that you would welcome, but don't expect, a reply. i.e., "If you have any comments I would be grateful to hear them."
+1 for "highly encouraged if you are at the beginning of your career"
As is indicated by other answers, the practise is acceptable in general but there is a fine line when it becomes intrusive.
In addition to what has been stated already, I would add that if your paper is published in a journal that is well known to anyone in the field, the paper is less likely to come as a (pleasant) surprise. If it is published somewhere where it is less likely that many would normally find it, then the information is more likely positive.
Another factor is how you write your mail. If you send the paper to persons who do similar research you could point out the common interest from your side and use that as an "excuse" to provide a copy of your paper. It is easier to accept getting stuff if the there ios a clear reason or coupling explicitly stated in the mail.
The worst that can happen is otherwise that someone tells you not to send more material, I doubt anyone would get annoyed to the point where it may affect you negatively (unless you persists despite wishes to the contrary). Despite internet access, RSS feeds etc, I still find that I miss good papers, particularly from journals more peripheral to my subject.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.950188
| 2014-02-18T12:08:59 |
17097
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Pete L. Clark",
"Talo Agalliu",
"ham",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46104",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46105",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46127",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46186",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"lux",
"user1234",
"yippii"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8187",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17097"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Acknowledgements and reviewer selection
For some reason, I was always under the impression that people that are included in the acknowledgement section of paper are not contacted to review your paper because they would be predisposed to give a favourable review. However, after reading the discussion in this question it seems like it is standard to send papers out for review to people in the acknowledgements section if there is not another conflict in place (like being from the same institution, for example). Which is it?
Do editors send a paper out for review to people in the acknowledgements section? Can I suggest a person I acknowledge for helpful comments as a potential reviewer (assuming there aren't other conflicts of interest)? If the field matters then I am interested primarily in mathematics, theoretical computer science, and biology.
The acknowledgement is there to thank people for their help in the work. It is not a place to provide information to the editor on who may have conflicts of interest. You list such persons in a cover letter with an explanation for why there is a conflict. This will make the situation clear to the editor. Persons in the same department will pretty much be excluded by default but if an obvious connection is not present it should be pointed out in a letter. It seems a little odd to thank someone without there being any connection to the work so I would not recommend trying to suggest such a person as potential reviewer. At the same time a person who ha a conflict of interest should decline to review with the excuse that there exists such a conflict. I would say such behaviour is good etiquette and good ethics.
I know there have been instances where a person received a strong reject review on a crap paper by a high-ranking scientist and then used the name in the acknowledgement thanking for input on an earlier version of the manuscript. The manuscript was almost the same but the signal was the high-ranked scientist approved it and so reviewers were unwilling to reject it. Hence the acknowledgement is not a place where a seasoned editor would look for valuable information.
For some reason, I was always under the impression that people that are included in the acknowledgement section of paper are not contacted to review your paper because they would be predisposed to give a favourable review.
This is certainly true in my field (software engineering). I was also reasonably confused by the underlying assumption of the question you linked. It certainly does not seem to make sense to me to ask people that are clearly closely related to the authors for fair peer review.
What does happen a lot in practice is that authors mentioned in the bibliography of a manuscript get asked to review a paper, especially if the editor is not from the same field and does not know any experts in the field by heart.
Apparently, this is particularly common for grant proposal evaluations (at least in Austria), as the people assigning reviewers there are usually not scientists themselves. Hence, they rarely have deep insight into who the big players in a field of study are, and instead select persons that are not obviously related to the proposal authors and have published a healthy amount of related papers cited in the bibliography of the proposal.
+1 for a good answer. I have to admit that in my mind I was confusing one of the two instances of this that I spoke of with what you talk about in your answer: really more than once I have been chosen, poorly, as a referee based on my having a paper (of very limited relevance) in the bibliography. This practice is the next step on the chain: it's not ethically problematic or inappropriate in any way...it's just evidence that the editor did a rather superficial job. My speculations as to why both practices exist are the same as yours.
I think you're talking about my comments.
Unfortunately I am speaking from direct experience. I did have the occasion to think more carefully about this since seeing your question, and at the moment I can remember exactly once when this occurred. (I have refereed probably about 40 papers over the years, and I can't tell you that I went back over all of them...) So once is only once. But this one case is awfully distressing: it was at a very famous journal, with a very famous editor, and the acknowledgment in question was very far from random or frivolous: the paper was, in fact, a continuation/improvement of a recently accepted joint paper between the author and me! So in my mind this somehow "counts twice". But do other mathematicians know for sure that this happens? I would be very interested to know.
Let me also add that it almost never happens that I get asked for a list of recommended or excluded referees: I think once or twice out of about 30 submissions.
It it tempting to speculate more broadly about why this practice -- which I think everyone here agrees is not kosher if authors do not clarify/disclose information about potential referees -- may in fact exist. But actually I have some academic work of my own to do tonight (and not so much "tonight" left). So maybe later...
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.950960
| 2014-03-16T21:12:32 |
18221
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Asheshwor",
"Dominador Awiten",
"Guilherme Derze",
"JeffE",
"Mark Meckes",
"Matthew G.",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Recipient",
"aeismail",
"anonymous",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49372",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49375",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49376",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"reBourne"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8188",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18221"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Submitting paper to arXiv as an undergrad
I wrote a rather extensive research project for one of my courses, and would like to submit it to arXiv. But, I am not entirely sure about the copyright/other issues behind it. Is it acceptable for a student to submit their term papers online, and in doing so can I, as an undergrad, claim affiliation to my university?
I'd sit down and have a chit-chat with the professor who supervised the report. They'll have a good feel if it's suitable for submission. arXiv might not even be the best place for it -- could be worth submitting to a conference/journal.
@Matthew: Submitting to the arxiv is not incompatible with submitting the paper to a conference or journal.
@PeteL.Clark true-- I was just suggesting that arXiv might not be the only destination.
@BenCrowell I'm an arXiv moderator, and I've never heard arXiv's purpose described that way. ArXiv's purpose is to make research papers freely and easily available, period.
@BenCrowell: I agree with JeffE. There are fields (string theory, for instance) which uses arXiv in place of traditional journal publication.
Maybe we can agree that, in some areas, the principal use of the arXiv is to distribute preprints which will eventually be published in journals.
In any case, the OP should be aware that the attitudes of journals toward previous dissemination, via the arXiv or otherwise, vary a lot by field. As Matthew G. said, you should discuss this with the professor who supervised the project.
I will leave the question of whether or not you should submit the paper to arXiv versus another venue for discussion elsewhere. However, I do agree with the comment that you should talk with the professor who gave you the assignment about your plans, as he or she may have constructive criticism for you.
In general, if your work represents an original contribution, and you feel comfortable with sharing it with the public, then yes, you can go ahead and submit it to arXiv. You should note, however, that in a number of fields, papers cannot be submitted until you have been endorsed—that is, recognized as a valid submitter by someone who has already themselves submitted a number of papers in that area. If the professor of the course is someone who can endorse you, then that should be sufficient.
It is acceptable for an undergraduate student to publish.
However, please consult it with someone in the field (to make it a decent publication - both in terms of its content and form).
Copyright/authorship - it should be not an issue (unless it contains notes from the course or something). In case of doubt - ask your lecturer/TA.
Affiliation is a bit more tricky (especially if your program is not directly linked to a research department, or - is linked to many). Two typical choices are: one related to your program or one directly related to this course.
In many cases, the university will be happy to have one more publication with their affiliation (or won't care). In some, there are some strict rules when you can add their affiliation (e.g. you need approval of a prof.).
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.951303
| 2015-09-29T11:49:22 |
55202
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"AliceD",
"Andrew is gone",
"Has QUIT--Anony-Mousse",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"damian",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17690",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23423",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27825",
"xLeitix"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8189",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55202"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Should self-citations be excluded when calculating the h-index?
The Hirsch index, or h-index is a widely used citation statistic that, arguably, accurately reflects the impact of a scientist. It takes into account the number of publications as well as how often those papers are cited. For example, an author with 4 publications each with at least 4 citations, has a h-index of 4. Another author with 200 publications, each cited only once, has a Hirsch index of just 1, simply because the papers are not cited more than once. A possible confounding factor in this index are self-citations. If the latter fictional author would have cited all his previous work in his latter 100 papers, their h-index would sky rocket to 100.
Google Scholar nicely provides the h-index and at my institution they use Google Scholar to calculate the h-index for every researcher. However, Google Scholar includes self-citations, while I have heard colleagues from other institutions say that a h-index should not include self-citations, for reasons illustrated above.
Interestingly, the widely used journal impact factor (JIF) from Thomson Reuters does include self-citations (Shema, 2012).
My question is: should the h-index include or exclude self-citations? Is there a consensus reached on this topic? If there is no consensus, should the h-index then not be accompanied by an identifier to clarify which of the two methods was adopted to calculate it?
Reference
- Shema, Sci Am blogs, 2012
I think your example is incorrect ("...with one publication cited 4 times, one cited 3 times, one 2 times and one 1 time has a h-index of 4..."). He has 2 papers that are cited 2 times or more, thus h = 2.
What do they then use that h-index for? Your description that it accurately reflects the impact of the scientist is not at all widely accepted (and as far as I recall, it is mathematically only barely better than pure citation count on average).
Google Scholar also includes citations from some Bachelor theses and the like, and opinions on whether or not these should be counted vary (and are possibly dependent on the purpose of the respective statistic). As such, mentions of "the h-index" should probably always be accompanied with a statement indicating what kinds of citations were counted to begin with.
@TobiasKildetoft - that is why I say "...arguably accurately reflects..."
@O.R.Mapper - there are guidlines for that: http://www.harzing.com/pop_hindex.htm, citations should be included only when they are from indexed sources afaik. You are right that Google includes a lot of dodgy materials
@AliceD: Indexed by who? In CS, for instance, DBLP is often considered the authoritative database of indexed works, but even that doesn't always cover everything that is considered relevant and worthy work by specific subfields. Note that the page you linked to lists the statement "It only includes citations in journals that are listed in the ISI Thomson database" as a disadvantage.
@O.R.Mapper - good question! In my field (STEM) I would say those sources that carry an impact factor, or are about to receive one.
@AliceD: Conferences, which are the main publication venue in various CS subdisciplines, do not commonly have a commonly agreed upon "impact factor". There are such things such as the CORE conference rankings, but they are rather incomplete and also, CS has very specific conferences and workshops for subfields, which means that a ranking is usually just meaningful for a particular topic, not as a global value.
Requiring an impact factor would be a bad idea, as it would exclude arXiv citations, and those should (at least for most purposes) be treated the same as citations to anything with an impact factor.
@O.R.Mapper - CS have many conferences with impact, especially the IEEEs. But, however interesting, I think this discussion is irrelevant for my question.
@O.R.Mapper indeed. It's not unknown IME for an h-index calculated using Google Scholar to be ten points or more higher than one calculated using Web of Science (etc), because of the difference in what's included both as a publication and as a citation in the various databases.
Why the downvote?
In some domains, journals are just too slow, and play little role. Some people now publish to arXiv to avoid any delay; then eventually push it to an appropriate venue. At the same time, there is also a lot of useless no-impact material on arXiv... OTOH Chinese authors apparently spam anything with an impact factor, because that is what is used for their evaluation, salary = papers x JIF ...?
There's no firm consensus on whether to include self-citations. (For example, the original paper by Hirsch discusses how one could correct for self-citations but doesn't include this as part of the definition of the h-index.) The reason is that it doesn't matter: the h-index is a crude tool, and if your decisions make delicate enough use of it that the outcome may change depending on whether self-citations are included, then you are using it wrong.
For example, you mention a hypothetical case of someone whose high h-index comes primarily from self-citations. In a case like this, someone on the hiring/tenure committee should ask "Gee, why does this candidate have such a high h-index when the rest of the file gives little or no evidence that their work is influential or important?" Then a few minutes of investigation will reveal the truth.
There's nothing special about self-citations here. I know a case of an eccentric researcher in mathematics who gets a lot of citations from followers of his publishing in marginal places. The total number looks impressive, but if you look at where the citations are coming from, you find only rather weird-looking papers published in places you've never heard of. To keep from being misled by cases like this, you have to do some due diligence when you see a surprising number, and if you're doing that already then skewed h-indices from self-citation are not such a great threat. (In practice the skew is generally pretty small, too.)
The net effect is that if the hiring or tenure committee is just paying attention to numbers like the h-index, without any perspective or further investigation, then that's a major problem with their methodology. If they do notice oddities but feel compelled to give credit for a high h-index anyway, then that's an even worse problem.
In practice, different websites for computing h-indices can give substantially different values, depending on which sources they count citations from. If you care about specifying a well-defined number, then you need to tell exactly how the h-index was computed (which goes far beyond just whether self-citations are included).
First and foremost, I recommend reading the related question: "Why is it said that judging a paper by citation count is a bad idea?" That question may help relieve some of your concern about the importance of having an answer for this question.
Now, turning to H-index: to the best of my knowledge, there is no consensus as to whether self-citations should count or not count. Saying whether self-citations are included might be useful, but then it would also be useful to know quite a bit more about how the database for computing an H-index is being constructed.
My own thinking on pros and cons goes as follows:
Omitting self-citations means you get a clearer picture of whether other people are paying attention to one's work.
Self-citation is also entirely appropriate and legitimate and at moderate levels can be a good indicator of a healthy and ongoing research program.
Defining self-citation is not entirely obvious, when co-authors are taken into account. Consider the following: if A and B co-author a paper, and then B cites the paper, should that count as a self-citation for A too? It's not A who is citing, but the citation still might be "discounted."
Finally, precise values of H-index are not very valuable in any case, since bibliometrics are not very good at evaluating scientific impact.
Given all of these things, I personally think the best thing to do is to count self-citation in H-index and mark it clearly as such.
On top of that, there is also the practical issue that all the common tools for calculating the h-index (as far as I know) are unable to detect self-citations. As such, it would be very annoying to calculate an h-index value without self-citations.
@xLeitix - Scopus does it with and without
Self citing is a common thing in medicine where good number of the papers are simply case reports and reviews. A faculty can co-author with large number of students and trainees and keep citing his/her previous papers. The publication numbers can be unreal, citations become mathematically multiplied and h-index will be high. I came across authors with average 3 papers per week and most of papers cited their own previous papers.
I agree that bibliometrics do not reflect scientific impact, it simply bedazzle those who look at volume rather than quality. How many times NIH reviewers count publications as a measure of candidate. Jobs in academia is the same.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.952033
| 2014-08-08T11:03:52 |
26953
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Cioslous Kumar",
"Davidmh",
"Egbert Castro",
"JeffE",
"Mr.Mindor",
"MyAdvo",
"Nicole Lewis",
"Olorun",
"Rajilesh Panoli",
"Sayed A.",
"Shreya Gupta ",
"Voo",
"Wrzlprmft",
"enthu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/186243",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3934",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72395",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72396",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72415",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72426",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72462",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72516",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"user143763",
"เดอะสุ แอแฮร่"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8190",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26953"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How many references should be included in the bibliography of a Master thesis?
Surprisingly, I have not found a similar question to mine - all I found was a question about the maximum number of citations per sentence.
However, I am more interested in the total number of citations that is considered normal for a paper (to be more specific, a Master Thesis, which in my case will be around 60 pages of content.)
I heard that about 1 - 1.5 multiplied with page count would be a good number of sources cited.
I am asking because I am a little worried that I might have cited too many sources.
What is your field?
Quantitative Finance / Risk Management.
Cite as many as you have to. Some papers have referred to no references and some have referred to more than fifty or sixty. There is no general rule.
Swedish has a very appropriate word for it: lagom. Just the right amount.
A simple example to show why this is not possible to answer: Compare a paper about some original research to a survey about a new field of research. Both of those are perfectly fine to write about, both will get accepted by journals and to some degree you can write master theses about both (well you can, I don't say you should). But the number of citations you'll have for both of those will be at opposite sides of a rather large spectrum.
Read that as Quantum Finance :)
I might have cited too many sources. — This is simply not possible. The only possible point of concern is whether you've cited each of those sources appropriately.
There is no definite answer. It really depends on how much previous literature exists, how much of it you have reviewed and cited appropriately, and (loosely) what the word count of the document is. Page count can misleading, as some theses have many more figures and tables than others.
No one is going to skip to the bibliography, think negative thoughts, and say "you have too many references!" without reading the document. If no individual part of the thesis could be considered as having too many citations, then the thesis as a whole has an appropriate number of citations.
These related questions have answers as to how you can decide if a particular part of the thesis has too many citations.
Maximum number of citations per sentence?
Is there such thing as too many references for one paper?
In addition to the other answer, this question is based on some slightly questionable premises, as seen in the sentence "the total number of citations that is considered normal for a paper (to be more specific, a Master Thesis, which in my case will be around 60 pages of content.)":
In the communities of CS that I am familiar with, a Master Thesis of some 60 pages is not a paper. A paper is usually a document that concisely describes something on typically 5 to 15 pages (depending both on the paper type (short, full, journal, poster abstract, ...) and the layout. Hence, a Master Thesis is not comparable to a paper.
Papers published in conferences (and maybe to a somewhat lesser extent, in journals) are usually bound to a very strict upper page count limit. When you have lots of interesting stuff to tell, there is only so much space left for references and you often have to skip citing some sources that you would have liked to include. Such a restriction usually doesn't exist in graduation theses such as Bachelor or Master theses. There may be a rough guideline for the expected number of pages, but exceeding that by a moderate amount (in the case you presented, I'd frankly say 80 pages instead of 60 is ok) if the content is worth it is not necessarily a problem - least of all if the extra length is caused by "additional info" such as the appendix or references rather than the core document.
Lastly, there is no normal number of references because each topic is different. For some Master Thesis tasks, there may be a number of default works that should always be listed in the initial exposition of the general topic, which in itself already fill a page of references, whereas other Master Thesis tasks might not have such a "default list"; the general exposition is done with very few or without any references.
I just completed an M.A. thesis in English literature, and I mean just. I tend to be light on the number of sources I use and I like to have favored sources and work it to exhaustion.
My thesis is about 30,000 words, about 50 percent more than the minimum at my institution. I have 27 secondary sources and six primary sources. The institution requires 20 sources, I don't if that's 20 secondary or 20 total, but what I did will give you and idea what you need to do.
I'm not just out college. In fact, I am senior citizen age. My writing ability is equal to that the people who write the journal article and equal to that of a professional historian too. Reading the journal articles I have had to read to do my seminar papers and my thesis, I have seen many that are excessively heavy on sources. Some are light on sources but seem nevertheless to be good articles.
How you primary sources you cite might depend on your topic. It could be only one. Conceivably, it could be none. For a master's thesis in literature, the minimum might be one secondary source for each thousand word. In imagine, in that case, that it might be double than many for a doctoral disseration. In that case, the number secondary sources for doctoral thesis would have to be around 150.
How many source might depend on the individual and how that persons works their sources. But I would still say, expect to be required to have 150 sources or close to it.
My thesis was low on sources in part because I first outlined a theory and then applied that theory to the characters of four novels without much reference to outside sources.
The number should be N, where N is the exact number of papers that you have really read, understood and (mostly) relevant to your thesis.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.952638
| 2014-09-08T21:11:25 |
28216
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Cora Allen-Coleman",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"M S Kemmouche",
"QuickName123",
"Stuart Hemming",
"Thomas M. Tolfree",
"enthu",
"ff524",
"greyxray",
"gspr",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76454",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76455",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76456",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79784",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80056",
"user76455"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8191",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28216"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How often should I review my notes?
Many years ago I was studying with the Open University. During that time I bought a revision aid. The basic principle was that you wrote out all you knew about a topic immediately after learning it. The note pages were marked so that they could be referenced against a sort of calendar. The idea was that you read through your notes something like the next day, again a week later and again something like 4 weeks later.
I recall that the thinking was that the frequency set coincided with the way your brain moves stuff from short- to long-term memory.
I'm just about to start studying again and I wondered if anyone might know what the frequency for reviewing one's notes might have been.
Are you asking about what is a good revision frequency from a scientific perspective? Or are you asking about what revision history was used in the particular software that you used to use? If its about software, I imagine it would be important to know what the software was called.
I'm really asking about what a good revision frequency might be. As I said, I'm about to start studying again and would like to give myself the best chance of making a decent fist of it.
Although this question is about Academia and learning, Your question seems opinion-based to me. Learning habits differs from one to another. Some people learn fast, some other need more frequent revisions. There is no solid advice here.
Are you looking for an answer based on personal experience, or research with supporting citation? If you're mainly interested in the latter, you should [edit] the question to say so, and also add the [tag:reference-request] tag.
@ff524, I'm looking for an answer based on personal experience. As I've said, I'm about to start studying again and am looking for a as much of a leg up as possible.
There are several algorithms for scheduled repetition of information on flash cards. It's possible that the software you liked uses one of these. This Wikipedia article on spaced repetiton discusses Pimsleur's graduated-interval recall and Leitner system, among others. This isn't the easiest topic to search for, but the Wikipedia article calls it "spaced repetition", and includes a list of alternative names. That should help you do further research.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.952983
| 2014-01-15T04:34:22 |
15793
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Amadan",
"Apache",
"Aru Ray",
"BeyondProgrammer",
"Boring Loop",
"Eric Lippert",
"JRN",
"James Snell",
"JeffE",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"Mahmood Dehghan",
"MirroredFate",
"Nico Burns",
"Populus",
"RLH",
"Raphael",
"Rob Volgman",
"Robert Jones",
"Secret",
"Thomas Wagenaar",
"Trylks",
"Wakem",
"Walter",
"aeismail",
"atconway",
"costrom",
"danagerous",
"doug65536",
"dreftymac",
"ercfre",
"fweaks",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10832",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10847",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10859",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10863",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10865",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10893",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10897",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10905",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10907",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10986",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11004",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1442",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41286",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41287",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41290",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41302",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41344",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41395",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41402",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41451",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41492",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41537",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4399",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7571",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9308",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/948",
"keshlam",
"oscar231",
"p3nchan",
"penelope",
"railsdog",
"user10815",
"user13107",
"user41402",
"user41451",
"wishfulpinking"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8192",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15793"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Should I challenge my professor who thinks he's always right?
One of my professors has been in the IT development fields for over 40 years. He thinks he is up-to-date with all the latest research and technology. But I believe he's not.
The problem is - he hates when a student (like me) dares to point out his mistakes or flaws in reasoning. Or when a student suggests a better (modern) solution to a problem.
How to deal with such a situation - should I keep challenging him or keep quiet until the end of semester? I don't want to lose grades (he's been known to give lower grades to students who asked him too many questions he wasn't able to properly answer).
Perhaps your professor is not against you pointing out his mistakes, but is against you pointing out his mistakes in public. He might take it as a sign of disrespect. You might want to communicate with him in private so that he doesn't lose face. (Although I personally have no problem with students pointing out my mistakes in public; in fact, I encourage them to do so.)
Usually I don't care about examples, but this question would be far more interesting with examples. As a matter of fact, I have hear about something similar wrt a boss being wrong and the employee telling the story is who was actually wrong...
What is the whole point, when you know you are at the losing end ?
Don't challenge the person -- that is confrontational, and generally will not lead to a productive outcome. If you believe there is a more "modern"/better alternative, then you could just ask about it in a way that lets him do his job -- instruct with what he knows. But be careful, you might just get tasked with "Please research a qualitative comparison of the two solutions, and come prepared to present to the class at the next meeting".
A lot of professors are annoyed by different perspectives not because they don't appreciate them in general but that they have an agenda to get through in class. You might find if you talk to him outside of class, he is different because he is not on the clock.
The type you represent is one I hate most during a class. And I guess I'm not the only one. (As others said, you could always try to talk with him after the class is over. If he does not care or just not open to your opinion, leave him be.)
Two factors that have not yet been addressed by any of the answers to this question: (1) A professor may give 'glib' answers that are technically not 'correct' from an in-depth perspective, because they intentionally want to keep things simple for undergraduates. (2) The best time to challenge the views of an individual professor is when you yourself are a professor and your challenge is i)rigorous; ii)well substantiated; and iii)unambiguous. There is a hierarchy within academia that pretty much guarantees that your views will carry little to no credibility until you complete your credentials.
@shwetaG: never argue with a professor — This is one of the few times I wish I could down-vote comments; like many other professors, I actually prefer students to tell me when I screw up.
@JeffE: It's not a problem for a student to question a professor. However, it is a problem if a discussion becomes a heated argument or a fight.
Show a bit of humility in your approach and consider the possibility and perhaps probability that he or she is right in the light of longer experience in the field. By all means ask why and explain your reasoning, but do it tactfully.
You're asking for advice on how to handle a situation without stating what your goal is. Is your goal to change the professor's behaviour? Convince him you're right? Graduate on time? Don't make us guess what your goal is; if you want advice on how to achieve a goal, state the goal.
When I was still in school, and I found mistakes in assignments/tests/exams, I would do it with the mistake in place, then do it again with the correction but as a separate answer (box it or something). Also I tend to ignore minor mistakes profs make during class, but if they do make bigger ones, I wouldn't go "Sir you're wrong..." I would try to make it look like I'm asking a question and he will figure it out... If it's a matter of opinion (which seems to be the case for you), the prof is always right :P
I can share an experience from college. I went to a school of natural resources. My environmental issues class teacher thought I/we were crazy when I pointed out we should use hemp fibers to make paper and other material. I pointed out that his own teachings said to be open to new ideas. This was back in the early 90's. That same semester Job Strobel, a tobacco farmer in Southern Ontario, was granted one of the first licenses to grow hemp for fiber. We plastered my teachers door with the news article. He apologized for calling us crazy next class. :) Depends on how you approach it i suppose.
It depends. When I was undergrad, I greatly appreciated the professors that could admit when they were wrong (since everyone, sooner or later, is). "Is that 2+2 really 5?" would suffice for them. But I also had one prof that I used to argue with mercilessly, because he was utterly unqualified for the subject, and spreading a bunch of factual misinformation. Example interaction: "That theorem seems wrong. If you substitute 0 for that x, you're getting 1=2." - "The theorem must be correct, the book says so." I had background in the subject, and considered it a duty to other students who did not.
Then again, it was not in US, I had a considerable reputation with the other faculty, and he knew he could not take revenge upon my grades without risking to expose his own deficiency as a professor. In general, though, a competent professor can always fail you legitimately (by posing a question he knows you can't answer), so being confrontational is not usually a good idea. He was not a competent professor, and I couldn't work up any degree of respect for him, so confrontation it was. After a while, the class thanked me, recognising that they were learning more from me than from him.
In my experience, grade paranoia is usually misplaced. As long as you remain civil and are right, there is no issue. But then, that's in CS in Germany; I've been told that student-professor dynamics are entirely different in other fields and even worse in other cultures (e.g. India).
I love it how almost everybody here, and especially @JeffE, think that because they have the right attitude and a well-functioning environment, it's the same for everybody. Some of us come from countries with not-best educational system. We can't get out (cost, family values, cost), and we have to finish because that's the best there is and the only thing we can do to help our future. I saw an old, outdated professor getting all the funding over younger, eager, good professors, just because the the old important people with money still remembered the old professor from old times.
@penelope: There's always a way to deal with these situations. If you're afraid of a direct challenge, phrase it as a question. "Why is it X? Can't we do Y instead?" or so on.
@penelope I can tell you that it's like there EVERYWHERE. Except for geniuses, who would still need some luck finding a good mentor to bring him/her up, seniority plays a big role. Recent generations (including mine) have been brought up to think that being right is the most important thing, I would like to disagree (so does this guy: http://www.ted.com/talks/ric_elias.html). Regarding your example of older prof getting funding, maybe younger people should consider building their own network of friends in order to surpass their predecessors? Yes the old prof had to work to make connections too
@Populus And building new connections would be grand if there would actually exist a wide-spread practice of funding from external (e.g. non-government) sources. It would work if the funding committees were not made of same, inert people as years ago, who still remember a name from years ago. If the uni was not pressed to state an old name or risk their finances. Mind you, he's getting by nicely these last few years, but with very "modern" and unconventional funding schemes. I'm not saying he'll not make a name for himself in time, but it will take a (very) long time due to system inertia.
Not enough points to answer, but after years of questioning profs I developed a technique: "So, it seems to me like we could use x for this. Would that functionally be the same? Could it be better? Would it be worse?"
From that, there are four basic answers he can give: "Yes", "No", "I'll get back to you on that", or "This is not relevant." If you feel he does not give a sufficient answer when saying "No," discuss it with him in private.
As far as grades are concerned, you are in college. You can appeal always appeal to a higher power if you think you are being mistreated.
One more thing: always ask your question from the position that you are wrong, you just don't know why yet. This will save you a lot of pain when you are wrong, and it forces you to keep an open mind. If you start with the assumption you are right, it is far harder to understand the explanation as to why your way might not be best.
I can tell you from personal experience it's probably best not to argue. I had an almost identical issue my senior year in college. I was given advice by my grandmother in that she said, "he (the professor / head of IT) is so tenure in his ways and beliefs, you are not going to change him, so don't bother." This is probably true in your case as well. There are always forums like this one to 'debate'; doing so with a professor may not have a favorable outcome.
@penelope while I agree with you that there are some real problems wih cliques in academia I find your initial comment needlessly confrontational (in particular, your digs about age and 'family values'). I should also point out that shwetaG is the one who made a blanket statement which contradicts the statements of a significant number of people (see for example here: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14291/how-should-students-react-to-inaccuracies-in-professors-teaching-without-causin/14292#14292).
It seems to me that both of you are assuming that because you have the wrong attitude and/or a poorly functioning environment everybody else must as well. The evidence rather suggests that professors who accept students who question them are not uncommon (of course, I accept that such folks are probably over represented on this site). Some anecdata: I have found such (excellent) teachers IRL both as a student in India and in the US.
You are probably suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's okay, many students suffer from it.
When teaching a subject matter that involves critical thinking and logical reasoning, a good teacher can lead her students to a problem, explain it and equip them with all necessary facts and logical tools to solve the problem themselves. Consider this when talking about these issues with your instructor.
Short answer: Probably not.
As you pointed out, you may lose out on grades by challenging this professor. A larger problem, in my opinion, is when you (the student) approach the class with an attitude of discovering the professor's many mistakes. With this attitude, you also lose out on the opportunity to learn from his expertise. While this particular professor may not be as modern as you would like, it does not mean you cannot learn from him!
Keep quiet until the end of the semester, except when you have a valid question. And don't approach intending to prove him wrong; approach intending to find out how you can learn from what he knows. Ask questions because you want to learn, not because you want to prove the professor wrong. If you believe you know a better solution, it might be appropriate to ask "Would this solution also work? If not, why not?" Ask, don't tell. Your professor is human too, and most of us have a hard time always responding graciously to a smarty-pants student who thinks they know more than we do!
I guess you're right; it's not worth trying to prove your point because no matter what (I should assume) a professor wants me to succeed.
The professor probably doesn't give a damn about your grades. They're your grades and he has other students that, if you start messing up their grades, will be a different story. If you think he's wrong then there's no need to wait but "Ask, don't tell" is a good policy to follow up after the lecture/lesson (an email with references to books or good sources and ask why he disagrees with that source.)
It worth 100 upvotes. Great.
Furthermore, assume you are right. Then what's the big deal? Just sit there and be right.
@JonathanLandrum: The big deal is, all the other students are learning wrong. In some situations, "Sit there and be right" is safe, but selfish and unethical choice. (I wrote a specific example of this in the question comments.)
@JonathanLandrum that defeats the purpose of education.
@Amadan I think those occasions are few. I mean, if the instructor is writing "2 + 2 = apple" on the board, by all means, interject. But it could just be a case of the student not actually understanding the subject fully. Or it could be the instructor wants to teach it this way first, and then show the "correct" way next. I can think of numerous examples of this in Chemistry, where students are first taught about double bonds, for example, and later taught that there is really no such thing as a double bond.
@user13107 see my previous comment.
@JonathanLandrum you raise an interesting point about teaching the wrong way first.
+1 @Amadan same reason I point out mistakes in material.
@JonathanLandrum I had the opportunity to be seated on third-world schools and unfortunately lot of what is taught are SIMPLY wrong, perhaps partly due to brain drain -> therefore lack of good professors :(
Have you ever seen a skit on The Chapelle Show called, "When keeping it real goes wrong"?
Trust me when I tell you that every class in every semester has a student that thinks he or she knows it all.
It can be hard to stand in front of a class and have all the answers. Sometimes when I've stood up there and say something, I've felt rushed to give an answer so I don't look stupid, and it just came out all wrong so I looked (or felt) even more stupid. Then I just walk around for two days realizing how stupid I am.
Even the best professors can be wrong, but the better ones will at least correct themselves in the next class or send out an email explaining something further.
The best way to handle the professor isn't necessarily to try and show them up in class, but to either go to office hours and ask for clarification. If you still think they are wrong, explain where you found the answer and show them.
If its worth the time to engage them at all, then that can be best way to do it. If they don't respond well in that situation, then its not worth your time and you should just keep quiet and focus on your grade.
Believe me, as an undergraduate I've battled many worthless TAs only to have the head of their department say that they have to back up the TA because that's just how its done.
When I got to graduate school, it was a different ballgame and I really put a professor through the ringer with the department when she tried to give me a bad grade because she was incompetent. But when I did that, I slowly went up the chain, documented every conversation and interaction, highlighted the syllabus, noted changes she made mid-semester to the syllabus, and then made a formal complaint. In turn, the professor was reprimanded by both the head of faculty and head of graduate studies, and my grade was fixed. But that was a serious slog to get through.
Never challenge a lecturer. Ask. If it's something that isn't directly related to PRECISELY the point they're currently teaching, ask during office hours rather than in front of the whole class.
Praise in public, criticize in private -- and criticize by asking "would this have been another answer, and if so why is the one you showed us better", rather than by acccusing.
Quoting Dean Inge: "There are two kinds of fool. One says 'This is old, and therefore good.' The other says 'This is new, and therefore better.'" Before demonstrating yourself to be the latter type, politely make sure you understand what was actually being taught and why. You may have completely missed the point he was making.
(Note that this is just as true when working with a boss, or even when you're the boss. Start with a discussion rather than assuming one or the other side is inherently true and that there must be a winner or loser. In the end, the boss does have the final say, because they have to consider more than just the technical merits of that one point, but you're a lot more likely to have a pleasant and productive experience if you try to work with people rather than against them.)
One more thought: "who thinks he's always right" is more of a comment about your attitude than about that of the instructor. Of COURSE he thinks what he's teaching is correct, or he wouldn't be teaching it. That doesn't mean he can't be wrong, but it does mean you need to respectfully justify your objection if you want it (and yourself) to be taken seriously. And unless the error is a simple typo/"thinko", that's likely to take more time than should be sliced out of most lectures. Talk to him afterward. He can always announce a correction at the next lecture if you convince him that one is needed. And if you can't convince him, ask yourself why not rather than assuming he's just being an ass.
IF it's an outright mistake, certainly. But that isn't how the question was phrased. And even then, it should be phrased as a question, because the odds are at least as great that the error is the student's rather than the instructors. Hopefully more so, if the instructor is at all competent.
When facts clash, I assume one of the following is true: a) I am wrong, let me learn why; b) The other is wrong, let me confirm that; c) There is a misunderstanding, let's clarify. It is not about winning or losing; it is about detecting which of these is true, and what insight one can achieve in cases a and c (or learning what one can safely ignore, in case b).
Right. But "challenge" is the wrong word for any of those. Challenge is explicitly confrontational, especially given the characterization of the professor stated at the beginning. I say again: Don't challenge. ASK. It accomplishes all the same (legitimate) goals without pitching an emotional grenade into the conversation. And unless you think he has MISSPOKEN, and the accurate statement is life-and-health critical, take it offline rather than disrupting the whole classroom and the whole flow of his presentation. Grant him the dignity of letting him (appear to) correct himself, if needed.
I agree with "don't challenge, ask" thing. About disruption, I'll often factor in the size of the class - I'd have no compunction in speaking in a class of 10, but I'd only react to big things in class of 200. However, "dignity"... screw dignity. Nobody is infallible, and people who try to appear infallible instantly lose my respect. I'm fully with @BenCrowell: letting falsehoods and errors slide is a bigger obstacle to education than a quick "Shouldn't that be a 4? - Oh, right you are!".
"Shouldn't that be a 4" -- Certainly; if it's a typo, it should be corrected immediately. "Shouldn't you use an entirely different approach" -- take arguments over the content of the class offline UNLESS it is very specifically being run in seminar/socratic mode -- in which case the instructor will generally have said right up front that he welcomes questions even if they diverge from the lesson plan. If you have to ask the question, you know the answer.
@keshlam: Okay, a non-typo example (~1990, high school): "Output peripherals include card punchers, printers, plotters... Monitors? I guess, but that's a passing fad. They're useless, you have to copy everything by hand before it disappears. That won't last long before people realise how stupid it is to pay all that money just to have to use their pen again. Don't bother with monitors in the test." (much more relevant to OP's question, I suppose, than the maths example)
One can always find exceptions; there are bad instructors out there. However, those few individuals are incurable, and interrupting the class to argue with them is more likely to prevent anyone learning what they can teach than to improve overall learning. If you can't work with the teacher rather than against them, drop the class and tell the department head why, and let them try to find a better instructor. Don't try to take over teaching the class; that isn't your role or your responsibility or something you can actually do effectively from a student's seat.
... He's entitled to his stupid opinion, the whole class already knows it's a stupid opinion, and from the student's point of view all that's immediately important is that that his opinion will not be on the test.
Let me put it like this, he is the teacher and you are the student. Ask yourself if the things he is wrong about, are really worth mentioning. If not, then it is probably best you keep quiet, and don't compromise your grades. There are always going to be people like him. If you keep trying to challenge him, you may very well become a 'right' fighter yourself, like him.
...and as a student, it is your job to challenge every aspect of the material presented, rather than taking your professor's word for everything.
In class is not necessarily the right time or place to challenge the professor, though. This is especially true if doing so will confuse other students further.
@RobVolgman Sometimes this is the case, but I find it is more often the case that the professor getting it wrong is confusing. People are left trying to work out how something works when it doesn't.
It depends on whether this teacher is dangerously wrong or not.
If his teaching the wrong things to everyone then he needs to be challenged. Challenging him in class won't help. Talk to him in his comfort zone and find out what you can. If he is genuinely a bad teacher, you need to find your campus support network and work out how to escalate the problem.
But in this case it sounds like he is a good teacher, trying to get through a lesson as others have said, but not necessarily completely up-to-date or good at putting down smart-arses.
In this case, learn what you can, he might have old ideas that are really great! When you can teach his class, critique it.
This depends a lot on the country and university specifics. However during my studies once happened for me to observe students replacing professor they deemed it is not competent enough for the particular course.
The student group should apply to university management asking to replace the teacher as not good enough. Of course, such application must list multiple factual errors in presented material, uncovered topics that you consider important for the subject, examples of undelivered information that you think would be highly relevant to the given lecture and the like. Significant number of students should apply so it would be difficult just to represent this as a personal conflict.
If the teaching person is not a head of laboratory / department but instead is under supervision of another competent professor, you may also talk to his supervisor. Some universities concentrate on research so deeply that teaching may be delegated to somebody more junior and less experienced.
If you cannot find enough arguments or supporters for this procedure, the professor is actually competent ...
Consider the situation as something like you're going to paint an abstract image - you're free to sketch whatever you can imagine but there has to be a meaning or purpose for what you're doing. The point is this: your professor is probably unaware of what you consider as "flaw" in dealing with his students, as such, serving as his "shadow" could make him realize such thing. But if he is aware, then the problem is not to think about the ways to harmoniously deal with him; rather, you should adjust with the kind of classroom atmosphere that he wants.
It's indeed "abstract" because no one else really knows the best way to have the kind of learning environment or teacher that you want other than you...
It's his job to instill to his students he knows everything so they will listen and follow him. All you would be doing is damaging what he is trying to build with his students.
It won't go well for you, nor offer you anything positive in the course and most likely harm your grades. If you know more then most, then instead of using it to attack your teacher, do something that will equally give you what I believe you do want from the teacher -- "His respect, & knowing you are very knowledgeable" -- by offering assistance to other students who do need help.
This way you get to show your intelligence in the field, your teacher will love the help in class with most teachers already being spread thin, and he will most likely shine on your grades better. Even if "YOU" do make a mistake, because of the effort at assisting others, he may overlook it when grading.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.955082
| 2014-07-02T17:44:56 |
24288
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Dan Khan",
"Discrete lizard",
"Editor Musekiwa",
"Erika Taylor",
"Hada Gallo",
"L Platts",
"Linux-Fan85",
"Liêm Phan",
"Mayumi S. Silva",
"Sail Away",
"Suraj",
"Veronica Nomzamo",
"Vicky",
"churchill",
"coltongrainger",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18130",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65132",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65133",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65146",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65147",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65931",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72232",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72233",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72252",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9117",
"user18130",
"yash jain"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8193",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24288"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it best to avoid all interactions with disreputable or predatory conferences?
Potentially predatory publishers and journals (as listed on Beall’s list here) are springing up more and more often, but they do not always stick to journals and publishing articles. Some host conferences, workshops, or other events with reputable chairs and directors.
If the publishing agency behind a conference is fishy or believed to be predatory, but the conference it hosts is chaired by reputable names, is it still best to avoid the conference?
Has anyone had experience going to a conference or workshop like this?
Re: conference it hosts is chaired by reputable names : note that one of Beall's possible criteria for listing a publisher as predatory is "includes scholars on an editorial board without their
knowledge or permission" (or, includes scholars on conference committee without same). Do these "reputable names" mention this conference on their own web pages? Are you sure they know they are listed as chairs?
I have emailed one of the chairs asking a question about the conference, so I am waiting for a reply. I've done a bit of googling and it doesn't seem like there are any references to the conference on either chair's professional website. It is definitely not looking bright!
Update: I have emailed both chairs now, still awaiting a reply.
There's a rather vivid write-up from an attendee of an OMICS conference at: http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/09/12/conference-attendee-to-omics-i-want-out/#more-2225. Obviously, this experience might not be repeated at other conferences, but it gives an idea of how things might go.
Very interesting write-up: thank you for that.
Update: No response from either chair...
Publishing in predatory journals looks bad on your resume. It suggests that your work was not good enough to publish in a respected journal/conference, and, frankly, you're better off not publishing the work.
Why would you spend your time and money to attend one when there is no shortage of good, legitimate conferences? Your time is valuable. Stay away from anything that you even suspect might not be first-rate.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.955343
| 2016-02-20T19:02:10 |
63716
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Boaheng Anthony",
"David Ketcheson",
"Hela Kaoual",
"Jianyu MA",
"Law Firm Legalam",
"Spammer",
"Xemttbda 90phut",
"Zenon",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13572",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178586",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178664",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178665",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178696",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/257",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"user10853"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8194",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63716"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How can I get sufficient guidance from an advisor who's always travelling?
How can I get the most out of my advisor's knowledge if s/he's always travelling and out of office?
We communicate by email, but I find it uncomfortable as I am new to the field I am working in and sometimes questions/answers are not very clear.
Skype / Hangout? You can share the screen which is useful to show doodles live.
@Zenon Thanks, I am aware of these technologies. I understand my question is both wide and narrow enough but I meant strategies more than technology especially that his time is limited as he is both a research and works at a company and is always attending conferences. So it is more about strategies to make the most of his time and knowledge.
Not a good answer, but: work hard to use email more effectively. One of its virtues is that it allows asynchronicity, so your advisor's hectic schedule need not be such an obstacle. But your own careful, well-thought-out questions, and follow-ups for clarification, become more important. I realize sometimes it's the very vagueness of an issue that is the problem, but/and one can/must work to capture sufficient specifics to communicate in useful language ... rather than "uh, well, I'm confused, ..."
Find other students, postdocs, or faculty who can help you.
Some possibilities:
Consistently-scheduled discussion-by-video (Skype, Google Hangout, whatever). Treat these as you would any meeting: send a good agenda in advance.
Collaborative workspaces, e.g. a Google doc where you and your advisor can leave comments to get issues resolved
A bug tracker, even if that's an idiom both you and your advisor understand
Someone else deputized to triage and help you over simpler problems, so that your advisor knows that whatever reaches them is important and/or troublesome
The goals here are to ensure that you get what you need as conveniently as possible for your advisor and as quickly as possible for you.
I had some success via sharing a git repository with the LaTeX source to the thesis-in-progress, with a branch in which I added commits for my suggestions to be cherry picked or not by the advisee). Students recorded daily (or so) progress reports in a wiki, which I looked over from time to time.
In a time previous to git, we interacted via email (I printed out a copy, and sent a detailed email with suggestions).
The above requires more or less independent work by the student, and is hard on discussing alternative courses of action, or techniques to apply, brainstorming, whatever. So this works best when the thesis work is nearly done.
Note that someone who is permanently on the move probably has their hands full with both the job to be done at the current location (if you the superstar invited for a week, they'll fill your agenda to the brim to make the most of the visit, and invite you to all sort of social activities "so you don't get bored" and to show off with the visiting dignitary), handling domestic issues far from home, and assorted travel-related activities. I.e., they will have precious little time available to guide advisees, and thus will probably make terrible advisors.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.955649
| 2015-05-15T07:24:52 |
45443
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Howard Berger",
"MrMeritology",
"Souvik Mukherjee",
"Spammer McSpamface",
"Touchdown",
"VAJean",
"Xiaoyan Qi",
"anonymoose",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/124840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/124841",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/124842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126455",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126465",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17564",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20358",
"inez"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8195",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45443"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How can I obtain the necessary quantitative knowledge for admission to a masters in business analytics?
I intend to pursue a masters in business analytics in the United States. However, since this is a highly quantitative program, I doubt I will stand a chance to be admitted given that my undergraduate degree is in accountancy.
What are the options available for me to obtain the requisite quantitative knowledge? I think the Quantitative Studies for Finance program offered by Columbia University would be suitable but it is quite pricey.
Are there similar programs in other universities or alternative modes of study that can give me sufficient quantitative background to apply for grad school?
I don't think a Quantitative Finance program would be ideal preparation, given your undergraduate degree in Accounting. It's overkill, meaning you'd spend a lot of time (and money) to learn things that you won't need or apply to Business Analytics and NC State.
Instead, you could assemble the necessary knowledge and skills though a series of undergraduate courses, and even some on-line MOOC courses. The basics: single and multivariate calculus, linear algebra, probability and statistics (based on calculus), a basic programming course (one of Python, Java, etc.), a mathematical programming course (MatLab, Mathematica, R, or Python + NumPy + SciKit). To this base you could optionally add one of the following: Data Science MOOC, a Decision Science MOOC, a Business Process Management or Total Quality Management MOOC, or even a Data Visualization MOOC. These MOOC courses will give you some knowledge of how the basic knowledge is applied to business analytic problems.
I did think of going the MOOC route. But the NC State and other university require courses taken for credit. So, that rules out MOOC courses, doesn't it?
@inez Not necessarily. You have all the credits you need from your undergraduate degree. Everything I am suggesting could be taken for non-credit, or credit -- what ever is available. What you can show through your application is that you got additional training to bolster your quantitative skills. These should also reflect in a higher Math GRE score, too. (Not that Math GRE covers any of these topics.)
It really depends what kind of analytics masters program you're looking at.
For quantitative finance, you'll need a solid background of probability theory. It'll also be essential that you know the basics: i.e., calculus (single and multivariable), linear algebra and a decent amount of measure theory.
Good luck!
thanks for your feedback. I would like to do a masters in business analytics like the one offered by North Carolina State's Institute for Advanced Analytics. What kind of programs can I enrol myself in to gain the necessary college credits?
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.955919
| 2020-08-20T09:55:52 |
154156
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Jon Custer",
"Our",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51585",
"magu_"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8196",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/154156"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it ok to start looking for other postdoc positions?
I'm currently doing the first year of my postdoc. My contract is coming up for renewal in a few months and my PI has asked what my plans are for next year. I told him that I was hoping to stay in his lab for at least another year, but he's told me he can't yet guarantee my contract will be renewed.
I've heard from other people in the lab that my PI normally holds off from confirming that he'll renew your contract until the last minute, where he'll then try to add some extra clauses in the contract that demand the postdoc to complete certain projects or papers by a certain date.
I'm relatively confident that my PI is intending to renew my contract, as he's pushing me to write some grants that would start next year.
But as he can't promise anything yet, is it ok for me to start looking for other postdoc positions in case he doesn't renew my contract? If so, should I let him know that I'm looking for other roles?
Thanks!
The PI sounds awful.
IMO, it is ALWAYS ok to look for other positions; you aren't liable with anything except what is written on your contract. Unless your contract is renewed, I would consider a to-be-a-jobless person
Actually, it sounds like it is essential for you to to look for alternatives. It is improper for the PI to hold you in jeopardy and he should be more clear.
But your career is at risk if you just "hope for the best". You also need to "plan for the worst". It is more than OK.
Whether you let him know or not is a matter of your judgement of his personality. But it might be fine to say (a) I'd love to stay, but (b) I recognize it may not be possible and need a backup.
A postdoc is a transitory position. Looking for your next job and career step is not just okay, it's essentially what those positions are for.
+1. I specifically ask the potential candidates about their long term plans during the interview. Having a good plan (even outside the lab) is a definite plus. So no need to be shy about it.
You need to plan ahead for the sake of your own career, as well as your financial and mental well-being. There may be certain cases where a PI genuinely can't let you know until the last minute whether they can renew your contract, such as if they are waiting for the outcome of a grant. It seems that this is not the case here however.
You could try politely speaking to or emailing the PI setting a reasonable deadline after which you will apply for other positions. E.g.:
"My contract is ending in December. I really hope that it will be possible to extend my contract here, but appreciate that you cannot commit to an extension at the moment. If it does become possible for me to stay, please let me know by the end of September, after which I will start submitting applications for new positions."
However if I were you, I would consider whether I want to work for a manipulative PI. If they want you to work on a particular project or paper, they should be upfront about it.
These days one should start sooner rather than later. September sounds late to get a position lined up by early December (early because of the holidays that likely would slow down getting everything signed sealed and delivered).
I would recommend having an honest conversation with your PI ASAP, making it clear that:
(1) You'd be happy to stay and continue and expand your research with them;
(2) If the contract extension cannot be guaranteed, in the current uncertain funding and political climate you need to start looking for alternatives ASAP;
(3) This would drain some of your time and attention from the current research, which you would not like but, well, these things do use up your mental energy;
(4) If they cannot guarantee extension, you'd appreciate their advice on which other PIs might have funding available and would be good to contact, or which funding opportunities to pursue;
(5) Because it's important to both of you that by the end of your postdoc you have a first-author publication, if they cannot guarantee extension, you need to discuss which of your current projects to focus on. Also, whether you could take some aspect of your current research as your own to develop independently in the future.
Basically, make it clear that you need to know the contract situation and plan accordingly --- and that it is also in the PI's best interest to let you know early.
Best wishes from a new PI who's had his former postdoc positions extended repeatedly, and who is being very clear to his current lab members about their contract situation!
Yes, you should look for another job. In any contract negotiation, you should always consider your "best alternative to negotiated agreement" (sometimes referred to as a BATNA). If your advisor comes to you with a new employment contract and you have a choice between staying on or being unemployed, you will probably sign.
If, on the other hand, you have two offers, you can choose which one you like best. A second offer also gives you the confidence to negotiate better terms, avoiding unpleasant projects, for example.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.956342
| 2020-08-23T15:32:01 |
154288
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"N A McMahon",
"Nitrogen",
"Our",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128645",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85243"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8197",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/154288"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Should I finish my undergrad in 3 years (this year) or 4 years? Which option is better for graduate school application?
Chemistry major, I can graduate this year with a high GPA (3.95+, with 2-3 graduate-level class) decent research (2 year+, started in freshmen year) and likely 2 publications (one first author, one second author, both on journals with IF around 6).
My biggest concern is the recommendation letter. Having one less year is really hard for getting recommendation letters. I stayed in my school for my freshmen summer research. Also this year because of covid. So I may end up with only one strong recommendation letter from my research advisor.
Does the fact that I can graduate in 3 years outshine the recommendation letters problem?
Or It's best for me to just take another year for getting more publication and get a summer research position so I'll get a recommendation letter from professors in other university?
Hard to understand that you can't get good letters with that GPA, etc.
Nobody cares how long it took you to graduate from your BS.c, so whatever you decide to do, make sure that it will make you will have a bigger bag by the time you graduate.
@Buffy I worry about letters from professors who only taught me in the class are not as good as professors that I did research with. Also the letters are limited in only one university (I had no interns in other universities).
If this is for US study, don't put extreme importance on anyone item. Build a complete picture of your likely future success. And, it might be a mistake to "waste" a year just for something ephemeral. There might be other reasons to do another year, of course.
There is no benefit to graduating in less time except getting a year ahead. No one will be impressed by a 3 year graduation.
It's more important that you show proficiency in courses related to your intended area of study, and obtain research experience.
If someone's option was to graduate a year early or do a research project, I think the answer is obvious: stay and research. You have some research experience already, so your decision seems mostly between applying right away for grad school or gathering more experience for awhile and then graduating. The choice is entirely yours, there is no "best" answer.
The reason that I want to graduate in 3 year is I want to start my graduate program as soon as possible. I spent a ton of time in the lab and I definitively love workin in lab. I think I'll let the admission committee to decide wether I'm proficient enough. Since I can always switch back to 4 years maybe I'll decide after the application result next year.
@Nitrogen Seems reasonable - like I said, that's your trade-off to consider.
Another thing to consider is how covid is effecting applications, whether it will be harder to start with covid going on or after (since there may also be a flood of students/postdocs at this time as well, or a change in the amount of funding avaliable). I do know covid's placed hiring freezes in some US universities. But someone more knowledgeable than me should be answering this aspect.
Outside the US 3 year bachelors are normal (so I was initially confused by why finishing in 3 years kept being brought up). If you do another year (having completed the chemistry component) you could look taking courses in other fields. More advanced knowledge of maths/physics/biology could place you in a more unique position and might give some insight in future research/position your for a particular research field. Worst case they become weird courses you did in undergrad that you surprise your lab with your breadth of knowledge. Edit: specifically programs in EU, UK, Australia, Canada
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.956679
| 2015-04-02T23:38:13 |
42845
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Aban",
"Abe",
"Bitwise",
"JeffE",
"Kimball",
"Matlab Assignment Help",
"Michael Paul",
"Nobody",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Saqib Naseeb",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"Yagamifyed",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116071",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116072",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116073",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116085",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116086",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116089",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/344",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/532",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"seteropere",
"user116072",
"user90465",
"will",
"xLeitix"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8198",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42845"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Mentioning times cited, F1000 citations in CV?
I am applying for a faculty position and want to highlight the quality of my publications.
Are any of the following appropriate in an academic CV:
citation rate (citations/year)
F1000 Recommendations
separating a 'monograph' from other 'articles'?
If so, how should I do it?
For example, should I just put the information parenthetically at the end of the reference, like:
Author (Year) Title, journal, vol, (> 10000 citations; 2 F1000 recommendations)
note: this question Should I put my h-index on my CV? is similar, and some of the ideas from that question apply here. However, it is not a strict duplicate because the h-index addressed there is a single metric for evaluating a candidate; my question relates to publication-level metrics, and which are useful to provide within the reference list of a CV.
I've never heard of F1000. If I haven't heard of it, others may not either, so they will find it odd if you cite it.
I do not know how recruitment people will interpret this but If you have to include it; maybe h-index is useful?
Closely related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17990/19607
@Kimball I would go as far as calling this a duplicate.
@CameronWilliams: I would hope no-one takes the citation number indicated by Google Scholar overly seriously, given that it is highly distorted - it includes "citations" found in bachelor theses and the like, if the university's digital library catalogue happens to be indexed.
it includes "citations" found in bachelor theses and the like — So what?
@O.R.Mapper: I actually find such citations just as useful as ones in journals. I shows real impact.
@WolfgangBangerth: So, all I have to do to lift a paper from 0 citations to 5 citations is offer 5 Bachelor theses that are somehow related to said paper, if only by a single sentence?
@O.R.Mapper: Yes. But if your paper has only 5 citations, it's not particularly good anyway. If, on the other hand, your paper lists 100, 200, 300 citations on google scholar, then it is clear to me that you cannot have achieved that number by simply offering lots of Bachelor theses.
@WolfgangBangerth: The ratio of peer-reviewed papers compared to student theses among those citations should be checked in such cases, and it is of course very possible the high citation count points to a truly notable work. My concern is that student theses such as Bachelor theses, irrespective of whether the cited author offered/supervised them themselves or not, lack almost all of the "natural restrictions" that normally limit how many peer-reviewed works contain citations for a given paper. It just doesn't seem right to add up and compare numbers that are subject to very different factors.
@O.R.Mapper: I guess we may simply have to agree to disagree here. I see the distinction, but I think real impact implies impact across the board. If a math paper is so abstract that it is simply never relevant to Bachelor theses, then it isn't relevant to anything outside the innermost core of academia either. To me, this seems like a problem.
@WolfgangBangerth F1000, or the Faculty of 1000, is largely specific to life science, and I believe it is quite well known. This is a forum of experts that recommend papers of interest in their respective fields and score them. I think many people would consider such a recommendation positively.
@WolfgangBangerth enough to merit mention in a CV?
Conventions may vary somewhat from field to field, but I'll answer with respect to the fields covered by F1000, where people tend to be more interested in citation metrics than in many other areas.
First of all, I wouldn't include F1000 recommendations. I don't think that people take F1000 all that seriously and listing this information smacks of trying too hard. Under most circumstances, I'd suggest that one not include the citation counts either. As discussed in a recent question, the CV is not the place to do a sales job. If your citation metrics are strong, it is indeed good to bring this to the attention of the hiring committee, but you should do so in your cover letter and/or research statement rather than on your CV. Better yet, have one of your letter writers present this information. You could even get them to report the F1000 figures if that is really important to you. Nor would I list an h index on a CV, no matter how good it is. You could mention it in a cover letter, but again it is something that looks much better coming from one of your recommendation letters.
All of that said, if you really have a paper with >10,000 citations as in your example, this is so exceptional that it would merit a note alongside that paper on the CV. Even then, I wouldn't list citation counts for all papers but just for this one. Even a paper >1000 might merit mention on a CV if you are early career, but I wouldn't list anything in the low hundreds on the CV.
I'll conclude by noting that there is a nice economics paper by Harbaugh and To, entitled "False Modesty: When Disclosing Good News Looks Bad", that deals with almost exactly this situation. From their abstract:
Is it always wise to disclose good news? We find that the worst sender with good news has the most incentive to disclose it, so reporting good news can paradoxically make the sender look bad. If the good news is attainable by sufficiently mediocre types, or if the sender is already expected to be of a relatively high type, withholding good news is an equilibrium. Since the sender has a legitimate fear of looking too anxious to reveal good news, having a third party disclose the news, or mandating that the sender disclose the news, can help the sender...
+1 For the last paragraph. Recently, I commented on a question http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/42679/546 saying the OP has too much ego by stating he is a student at the most prestigious university in somewhere. That comment got expectedly high up-ticks. Now I know why.
It's quite common and very helpful to provide a link to your author profile in services like Google Scholar, Web of Science, MathSciNet, etc. This makes it possible for someone who wants to look up your publications to find them without confusion with other publications by authors with the same or similar names. They can also look up citation counts and other bibliometric statistics. I've seen these included on many of the CV's that I've reviewed recently.
Citation counts and statistics like the H-index change rapidly, and including them might come across as overly boastful in a CV. I haven't ever seen these on any CV that I've read.
Books and monographs should generally be placed in a separate section of your CV apart from the peer reviewed journal articles. It's also appropriate to have a section for conference proceedings papers and other lesser forms of publication.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.957394
| 2014-04-15T15:38:23 |
19368
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Aksakal almost surely binary",
"Amir Sasani",
"Andrej Istomin",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"Gaile",
"Mark Fantini",
"Nishat",
"Robert Columbia",
"Robert Furber",
"Suresh",
"badroit",
"bone",
"felixo",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11469",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52841",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52843",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52850",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52851",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52894",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83266",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9750",
"reirab",
"user3129108",
"vonbrand"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8199",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19368"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Pedagogical reasons for time-limited exams
Reading the various questions about open-book and closed-book examinations got me wondering:
Is there any sound pedagogical reason for a time-limited examination (closed or open) at the undergraduate/advanced UG level ?
I understand that there are many good logistical reasons, including:
classroom management in a big group
a desire to prevent cheating
and at (say) the elementary school level, I understand that timed tests (say of multiplication tables) create a certain level of felicity with manipulating numbers that helps with more complex tasks later on.
But at the UG/advanced UG level, it seems to me that deep understanding is usually more important.
Note: This question on the unreasonableness of the prescribed time limits is related, but not exactly the same (i.e it takes as given the existence of time limits and merely questions the actual time span set)
Yes, but even in music performance, it's not speed that you're testing. If the music calls for speed, then yes, but if you're playing an adagio ?
@Suresh I think you mean facility, not felicity. Unless you think multiplication tests make the students happy about times tables (which would be somewhat contrary to my experience).
Or better: Automaticity.
Is there any sound pedagogical reason for a time-limited examination (closed or open) at the undergraduate/advanced UG level ?
For many subjects, yes. For others, no.
I had an exam for a subject in school called "technical graphics". It involved drawing parabolas and projections and so forth on a big sheet of A3 paper with pencils and protractors and compasses. It was widely-regarded to be a subject of skill more than knowledge: the exam was timed and you had to accurately and quickly and carefully draw up four or five questions. A small inaccuracy becomes compounded through the rest of the drawing. Given unlimited time and some basic knowledge, nearly anyone could ace the exam since acquiring the necessary knowledge was easy; but acquiring the skill to do the timed exam was hard. And it was the skill we practised in class. Was this skill useful? Was it a learning outcome to draw quickly? I would say yes, of course; if I were to become a draughtsman (leaving aside CAD et al. for the purposes of the analogy), learning to draw quickly and accurately would be important to my livelihood. And it was the tightly-timed test that put emphasis on this learning outcome.
Likewise if I were doing a cookery lesson, cooking quickly would be important. If I were doing a programming lesson, programming quickly would not be as important, but it would still be important. And so we get into the usual varying shades of grey.
Generalising, we can define different types of learning based on the two main types of memory targeted: procedural memory (residing below the level of conscious awareness) and declarative memory (facts and/or knowledge that can be consciously recalled or inferred from other such facts/knowledge). Some subjects – like technical graphics or cookery or programming – put a strong focus on development of procedural memory alongside declarative memory. Other subjects – like biology or history – emphasise declarative memory far far more than procedural memory.
As such, I would say that the importance of a time-limited exam for a subject is correlated with the emphasis on procedural learning for that subject. A teacher may then wish to consider whether or not procedural learning is important for their subject or not.
This is a very nice answer. And yes, the key is to figure out whether that kind of learning is important: I suspect that for some topics, it's not, even though time-limited exams are used.
Absolutely! I think time-limited exams are extremely overused.
Another obvious area where time counts is emergency medicine - one can't simply let a patient bleed to death while working hard to remember how to apply a bandage.
Oooo. What an intriguing question.
My "answer" is that there is no pedagogical reason, merely practical ones. This is based on the attached study (1) that shows the difficulty with assuming only learning disabled students benefit from more time for exams. Apparently the "time doesn't matter" idea is called the Maximum Potential Thesis.
I certainly am guilty of writing questions that push student time limits to the max... essentially creating a reading exam in addition to a biology one. Student recall of vocabulary and definitions should be quick. But my main learning goal is thoughtful, connected thinking rather than fast thinking.
Zuriff, G. E. (2000). Extra examination time for students with learning disabilities: An examination of the maximum potential thesis. Applied Measurement in Education, 13(1), 99-117.
Seems like you design tests to work agaisnt your main learning goal.
One example of "a reading exam in addition to..." is the WorkKeys tests that are sometimes used by workforce development centers. At first glance, they only seem to test basic reading and math skills, but they are strictly timed and are intended to simulate decision-making in the workplace. If you have an impatient customer waiting for you to dispense gasoline into his '10 liter' tank, you don't have until next Thursday to figure out how many Imperial gallons will fit in it - he will find another gas station.
I design exams to be finished in around an hour and a half (one class block here at UTFSM), but allot three hours (two blocks). To give students some leeway in arriving late (bad bus connection?), and to give time to check their work or correct mistakes. The exam should not (or rarely) be a rush.
Open book exams
A particular reason for time limits is the open book exam. Such an exam without any time limits would allow the student to simply study all the relevant topics on the spot, and be useless for evaluation; however, an open book exam with an appropriate time limit will separate students based on their knowledge and obtained skill, while allowing the benefits of open-book exams for subjects where people aren't expected to memorize everything but use reference material as needed, and in those disciplines where you should teach students a habit to always doublecheck and verify in case of doubt, instead of guessing, e.g. medicine.
In essence, the time limit is a tool to check if you need to look up 5% of issues or 95%.
This is correct. A properly designed open book exam tests higher-order mastery and broad knowledge over rote memorization of individual factoids. If you are competent to practice medicine, you can occasionally look up dosing recommendations when you haven't prescribed something in a while. Most doctors I know don't actually memorize everything. If you don't have a broad medical knowledge, you may not know where to look for dosing recommendations, and probably don't have the necessary background knowledge to know how to use them or when they are or are not applicable to the present case.
If you ask me, the "evaluation" doesn't interest me (too much, see later). I'm interested in them learning. If it is during the exam, so be it (I fondly remember some courses in which I learned a lot during exams... by design). On the other hand, it is my responsibility to certify that who passed the course did learn what they were supposed to learn. A fine line to walk.
I am not sure if in the field of Pedagogy there is any study on the topic, but in the field i studied (Electronic Engineering), doing things fast is very important. Not only you need to be able to understand a topic, but you need to be able to solve problems in a restricted time period, as is the case in the real life profession. When you are working on a project and you need to design something, or are presented with a problem in a system, the engineer in this case needs to be able to identify and solve the problem in the shortest time possible. It is basic competition, "The fast drives out the slow, even if the fast is wrong".
I don't see why. I've heard this rationale, but it never made sense to me. If you're being asked to produce an answer in one hour, then no one is simultaneously expecting that answer to be the best one possible.
Of course is not going to be the best one possible, but the student should try to to the best they can with the limited time that they have.
I'd be interested in hearing of actual work scenarios where the exam conditions are replicated.
@Suresh, I'd be interested in hearing of actual work scenarios where unlimited-time exam conditions are replicated. I think I might like to apply!
@badroit indeed :). But at the risk of taking your comment seriously, the purpose of teaching is to help students learn material. "recreating real-life scenarios" is a side issue. So the arguments are not symmetric: it's perfectly fine to have unlimited-time exams IF that creates a better learning experience, but justifying a time-limited exam in terms of "real-world" scenarios is what requires justification.
@Suresh, the purpose of undergraduate education is not the same as basic education (k-12 in US). It is not simply to help students to learn the material but also to prepare them for future jobs. If you are studying computer science, then you are going to be a programmer. This job requires certain level of performance. You can't spend unlimited time on any given assignment at work.
The discussion reminds me of a documentary I saw about Andrew Wiles where he worked in secret for seven years to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. That got me thinking about what I would work on if given seven years no-questions-asked ... it might even be something useful, who knows. @Suresh, yep, my comment was intended only as a counterpoint. But besides proving Fermat's Last Theorem and the likes, I do struggle to think of work scenarios that are free from short-scale time constraints.
Btw, let's be clear that "unlimited time" is a strawman. We're really talking about a 1hr exam vs (say) a 1-week takehome.
Wait, no one is questioning a 1-week takehome exam, but we go back to the same: You have only one week , a limited amount of time. The teacher can't just say, so this is the project for this semester, handle it in whenever you can.
"The teacher can't just say, so this is the project for this semester, handle it in whenever you can."
Umm... Isn't that basically the idea of a term paper or term project? I'd say those are pretty standard, at least judging from both my graduate and undergraduate experiences.
As an engineer, I would rather disagree with this answer. I would much rather hire an engineer who takes somewhat longer to think his designs through and then verify that they're correct than one that just tries to whip something out quickly. Sure, time to finish is not unlimited, but I've never encountered a real-world scenario that even remotely resembled a time-limited exam in my engineering career. Exams that are designed to put 'time pressure' on students are testing a skill that is irrelevant in most fields rather than actually determining whether students understand the material.
@reirab, you are probably right, although in software development, the standard practice seems to be that the project manager comes and says: "This just came in, customer want this and that feature. Please do it for tomorrow, no testing we release directly to the customer. If you are a good programmer, then you'll do it right and ther's no need to test right?" And so you have a limited time to think the best way to do what they are asking. I could be a little biased btw.
@bone, Yeah, that does happen sometimes, but that's bad management. It's specifically one of the reasons that I look for employers where the management are actually engineers, not some guy with just an MBA trying to manage an engineering department.
@Suresh, most education should prepare/evaluate for later "real world performance". And very rarely isn't time an issue in the "real world". And also very rarely required to solve every problem without considering external sources (from the textbook through standard reference texts up to latest research reports).
It is often the case that a problem can be solved in multiple ways, some of which involve more "brute force" and some of which involve deeper understanding of the material. The "brute force" approaches are often also much slower than the approaches involving deeper understanding.
Time limits are then one tool that can help to distinguish the depth of understanding that a student has for the material, by making it difficult to accomplish with "brute force" methods in the allotted time.
I had personal experience with this myself as a teaching assistant for the introductory artificial intelligence class at MIT. Many of the things that we taught in that class and the questions that we used to test for them had this property. Students who understood the material well typically finished tests with lots of time to spare and left early, while the ones who were struggling to rediscover the material during the exam came to complain to us afterward about the lack of time --- not the most pleasant thing for any involved, but one that we found no good way to address in the time that I was a TA for that class.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.958657
| 2017-10-15T00:09:49 |
97353
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft",
"Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні",
"Elizabeth Henning",
"Jared Andrews",
"PLL",
"Rapidturtle",
"alephzero",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27625",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5595",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78836"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8200",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97353"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
Is it common that marker TA make the marking scheme instead of the professor?
I had a course in which the instructor let the markers make the midterm marking scheme and had students ask the TAs to resolve any marking issues instead of talking to him, though the instructor provided sample answers. As far as I know, many TAs are inexperienced and I think leaving the job of making marking scheme to TAs may be too much for them. IMO, making marking scheme should be the instructor's duty. I don't know if it is common in university.
This might vary by country, but in the US, if the graders are undergraduates--which shouldn't be the case for midterms--then I would say that it's unusual to allow them to decide on the grading scheme. If the graders are grad students, it's quite common. At many schools even first-year grad students are the instructor of record for a course.
My daughter's a TA in math at a university in the US. She just got done grading a pile of exams. Don't know if she had to decide on the grading scale or not.
I graded plenty of midterms as an undergraduate TA. I didn't set the grading scheme, though.
The schools I have experience with have policies against undergraduates making signficant grading decisions--such as for exams--about other undergraduates.
When I was an undergrad, back in the '90s, my department would hire undergrads to grade the exams for the big gen-ed course in our field. We worked in small groups marking a single problem on all the papers, and the group set the criteria for the grading—but we had to get it that scheme approved before we could use it.
From my personal experience, both as a student and TA I would say that this is quite common in the US, particularly in large, lower level courses. Many professors find such courses boring to teach and will hand off as much as they can to the TAs. For some courses, the TAs may even give regular lectures.
As a TA, it's not all bad though. They often write portions of or all of the exams, which allows them to make sure students have a firm understanding of the most important material. They also likely have a better grasp of where students are struggling and will focus on those areas during recitations or review sessions. Students tend to feel more comfortable approaching them, assuming they're doing their job appropriately.
Regardless, if you truly feel like the TA is marking unfairly and isn't doing an appropriate job explaining their grading scheme when you ask them about it, you should take it up with the course instructor - particularly if others students are voicing concerns over the same issues.
Actually, I am the marker. I just feel that some students' questions are not up to TAs to resolve but my instructor insisted that TAs MUST meet with students to resolve any marking issues. I just disagree with my instructor's regrading policy somehow.
Well, you should speak with your instructor with as explicit concerns as possible. Ultimately, it's probably going to be your call though, so all you can do is try to be as fair as possible and learn from the experience, particularly if you have several students with similar concerns. Many institutions will provide TA training for grading as well - you might check to see if your institution has a workshop or something. Rather surprised it wasn't covered in your training though.
The positive attitude to being offered responsibility for something is to take it, not to run away from it. You can't avoid it for ever, so start taking it right now!
@JaredAndrews Actually, I didn't get training before being a TA. That is also the reason why I think the instructor let me decide too much.
@Rapidturtle: I suspect you will get much better results not by telling the instructor “We are not trained for this, you should be doing it!” but instead by telling them “We are not trained for this, please can you help us do it?” The latter option shows that you are enthusiastic and willing to work and learn, so is more likely to be received positively by the instructor; and assuming they do help, it gives you valuable experience and training on a new skill. If they don’t respond positively to that request for help, then you are on more solid grounds to voice your concerns externally.
As someone not from the US (I'm a PhD student in Hong Kong) - yes, here too. TAs are only graduate students, however. Before we were allowed to take on TA work, we had to take a "Certificate in Teaching and Learning" course where it was explicitly shown to us how to create a good grading rubric and grade fairly, among other things.
Don't think that everything the instructor does will automatically be better. TAs have more time to spend on the course, usually. In my case the professor is so busy that practically all his sample answers, when he does have time to make them himself rather than leaving it to me, contain multiple errors! (Of course I also make plenty of mistakes, but they usually become apparent while grading and get fixed before the students see them.)
In my experience (two large state universities in the US) this is unusual. My experience was that the TA or TAs graded the midterms and finals, but the professor reviewed the exams before the grades were officially recorded and before the exams were returned to the students.
Now, about the grading scheme. For exams, the professor gave the TA(s) the grading scheme, which had been built into the exam during the design phase. For homework:
For a large course with multiple TAs, the more experienced TA(s) would set up the grading scheme, and the less experienced TA(s) would ask a more experienced TA for guidance when unsure.
For a smaller course with just one TA, the instructor often provided guidance. If not, the TA could set up a grading scheme, and if in doubt, could check with the instructor.
Tip: If I were in your shoes, I would request an assignment, for next semester, to a large course, where you'd be part of a TA team, and would learn by doing, alongside at least one more experienced TA.
|
2025-03-21T12:55:48.959239
| 2017-09-10T16:49:53 |
95747
|
{
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"authors": [
"Chill2Macht",
"Code Whisperer",
"Danica",
"Dawn",
"Frank Hopkins",
"J. Doe",
"Marko Karbevski",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Nate Eldredge",
"PLL",
"SH7890",
"Sasho Nikolov",
"Strawberry",
"TheWanderer",
"bash0r",
"einpoklum",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22916",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25217",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33951",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4034",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42750",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48776",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56688",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57981",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61897",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69345",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79758",
"jamesqf",
"jiggunjer",
"laszlok",
"mathreadler",
"polfosol",
"tonysdg",
"tpg2114",
"user812786"
],
"include_comments": true,
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"provenance": "stackexchange-dolma-0000.json.gz:8201",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"sort": "votes",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95747"
}
|
Stack Exchange
|
How do I know that I have truly lost interest in research and should drop out of a top CS PhD program?
I am a second-year CS PhD pre-candidate in a top PhD program. During my first year, I published a first-author paper at the best conference in my area, which I know is a big accomplishment. My advisor is famous in his area and also very caring and supportive, and my labmates are great too.
The thing is my second project didn't go very well, which caused us to change the entire story right before the deadline. I worked more than 70 hours per week and gave all I could, but there was not enough time to get everything we need in a good shape, and my advisor was frustrated with the progress and pointed out problems that I hadn't seen everywhere. I continued to work, but found myself too frustrated and suddenly lost all interest in research, stopped caring about papers, did as best I could to avoid talking to anyone, and want to leave this place and never come back. I know most PhDs somehow have this feeling, but I notice that this time it's quite serious:
Forcing myself to work resulted in a breakdown every night with the feeling that all I did was nonsense and meaningless.
My first paper has now become a joke, laughing at me that I could never publish with my own efforts.
I have no intention to participate in lab communication and truly don't want to talk to anyone. I can't even bear to hear others typing due to the feeling that I am the only one who doesn't make progress.
How can I know if I truly have lost my interest in research (and should drop my Ph.D.), or if this is something that I can overcome? After all, if this is the best I can do, why not go somewhere else and use my skills to actually contribute rather than wasting everybody's time? I am so tired of receiving new tasks at 4 am or 11 pm due the next day. I would highly appreciate your advice!
Imagine your future life away from research and the academic context. Does that bring you joy or sadness?
Counseling can help a lot with things like this. Maybe it would help to look into that before doing anything irreversible. Also, there may be a possibility to take a leave of absence, so that you can go back if you change your mind in a year or so.
" receiving new tasks at 4am or 11pm due the next day." Is this the norm in top phd programmes?
@MarkoKarbevski In mine (which is a top program), I would have been fortunate to get that much advance notice. Usually it was "Hey, this report was due 3 weeks ago and now they are mad, I need it in a couple hours" -- and that was the first we (students) had been told about it.
@tpg2114 And I hope that your answer was: "Then you should've told me 6 weeks ago. Now you're welcome to do it yourself"
@MarkoKarbevski Not in my experience, except maybe very rarely in front of a deadline, but then you should yourself already know that work needs to be done and it's not the expectation that you start working at 4am on something. Also, if you miss a deadline there is (nearly) always another one waiting, even if it doesn't feel like it before you failed it (because for many the deadlines are the main motivator, so they have to 'be real').
This seems more an issue of burnout than of interest or disinterest in research. Get professional help! Psychologist etc. and/or talk to the respective university counselor if there are any.
@MassimoOrtolano: While I concur with the sentiment, as a student who has an advisor similiar to OP's (or at least so it seems from my reading of the post), that's rather unhelpful advice and frankly aounds like a great way to earn a 1-way ticket out of the department.
For what it's worth, the way you feel is very common at this stage in a PhD. Talk to fellow students, and seek counseling. Take a vacation if possible.
@tpg2114: What makes you think it is a "top program", when (if your comment is typical) it seems to be run by people who are either unable to manage, or sadists who enjoy abusing those under them.
Highly applicable to your situation: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2219/31917
You just need a break, a sufficiently long one. If you felt the same afterwards, then don't waste your time anymore.
Wow forcing yourself to work to breakdowns every night. You will make a really staunch defender of the way things work once we let you in. :)
When you have to ask this question. You have truly lost interest
@tonysdg If you cannot tell your advisor "No." or "OK, but I will need more time." to unreasonable requests you should want to get out of there. That is not a top program, but a toxic program.
I will stop just short of saying that you clearly have depression, but these thoughts sound like the type of extreme statements one thinks when they are depressed. (E.g. your first paper is not laughing at you, it is somewhere between an inanimate object and abstract concept. Also the isolation and loss of interest are classic depression)Unfortunately, if your brain is working against you, it won't matter whether you quit or not, because you will still be depressed. Talk to a doctor and try to get a prescription so you can have the opportunity of seeing things with a non-depressed perspective.
To be honest, this pretty much exactly sounds like my last workplace in industry before joining academic forces. I'd say it's not research but your environment that frustrates you. A change is needed, indeed. But maybe you can save (or recover) your passion for your field in the process.
I was putting the finishing touches on an answer when this got closed :/ the tl;dr is that I've been there (dropped out of a top CS PhD program), but I knew what my alternative was and actively chose it, rather than going along with the depression voice of "just give up already, you're not good enough". Highly agree with recommendations for counseling - they will help you evaluate your situation more clearly. It gets better!
If available, I would immediately seek out the university counseling services (as mentioned in a comment by @Nate Eldredge ) The things you are mentioning could be symptoms of depression. Or, you may just need some strategies for coping with failure. Often people with your accomplishments haven't experienced much failure in their lives!
Taking advantage of the (usually low-cost or free, if you are in the U.S.) counselling services at the university will help you sort out which of these things it is. Your counselor can also help you come up with strategies to make well-reasoned life decisions for yourself (or with your committee). Regardless, don't make any rash decisions.
In the U.S., it is very common for PhD students to deal with these issues and to seek out counseling. An informal straw poll in my PhD cohort revealed that 90% of us had done so, and approximately 60% were on anti-anxiety medication or continued treatment regimes at any given time. The older students even began to organize a yearly workshop to talk about stress and how to get the help you need!
An update: This 2018 study finds that graduate students are 6x more likely to experience depression and anxiety, compared to the general population.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/03/06/new-study-says-graduate-students-mental-health-crisis
A word of caution: having counseling services is maybe standard in the US universities, but it might not be commonplace everywhere, and it might not be generally common for PhD students to seek out counseling. The OP doesn't specify their country (though we can guess that they are probably from the US). See also this discussion.
Good point! Specified US in revision. I Saw "top CS program" and good grasp of English, and my mind said US. But obviously that is not a certainty, I apologize.
No need to apologize, it's a great answer ;-) Coming from another culture, I find the results of your poll astonishingly high. When I was a student, no one of us seek counseling (actually at that time, about 20 years ago, there was no local counselling service), but we surely supported each other. Among my PhD students, I daresay that no one has ever seek counselling either.
I have put some thought into it and I realized that my cohort was a bit of an outlier. Among the students in general I think the percentages may have been closer to 60-70% and 40%. International students were definitely less inclined to seek out counseling services, but also felt the stress. One of the international students actually led/organized the pro-counseling workshop for the department. I think her attitude was "This is an American thing, but it is really helpful and we should not be wary of it!"
60%!! There is something profoundly wrong with this system!
@MassimoOrtolano: your difference in experience may well be a matter of age as well as the culture you come from. Increase in the availability and usage of mental health services has been a big trend over the last couple of decades — at least in the US and much of NW Europe, and I guess many other places too though I haven’t seen it myself.
@PLL You're right. For instance my university setup the counseling service probably around 10 years ago. I'll search if we have any public statistics on how many PhD students access the service.
@Strawberry the problem is part drug legislation part culture.
Some amount of burnout is very normal, especially just after working really hard for something that didn't pan out the way you hoped it would. The timeline isn't totally clear from your question, but if this just happened, give yourself some time to relax and cool down! Take a few days off from research: go for a hike, cook a good meal, whatever. Then, when you're ready, ease yourself back into it: maybe talk to your advisor about putting this frustrating project aside for a bit and trying something else out.
If, after a while, you still feel this whole thing sucks and you don't want to do it anymore, then it's worth thinking more about that. Especially if you think the high levels of stress and/or feeling bad about things are more persistent, definitely look into meeting with counseling services if they're available at your university or elsewhere. Or you might eventually end up deciding that you're better off dropping out of the program: many people do that, and for many of them it's the right decision. But now, in the aftermath of an unluckily bad experience, isn't the time to make that decision.
I can't even bear to hear others typing due to the feeling that I am the only one who doesn't make progress.
If you can't talk to a counselor right away, it also sounds like you could do some reading up on impostor syndrome. It affects all of us, especially those like me who really aren't good enough to be in academia, but more so at times when things happen to suck.
I am so tired of receiving new tasks at 4am or 11pm due the next day.
If this is your advisor constantly giving you research tasks to do immediately, this is something you should talk to them about. In a CS setting, this kind of request is only at all reasonable if it's very infrequent. Most things should be predictable farther in advance, or not be so urgent.
"do some reading up on impostor syndrome. It affects all of us, especially those like me who really aren't good enough to be in academia"....Ah the irony.
@SH7890 Yes...though of course that doesn't mean there's not some truth to it too.
You are right about it being common for Ph.D. students to wonder if it's worthwhile continuing. Every single doctoral student I've talked with has had the same thought at one point or another. I completed a doctorate myself and was in that place several times...especially after submitting my research project as a conference abstract in the spring, trying unsuccessfully all summer to get it to work, and at the point I was going to get in touch with the conference organizer to tell him that I was not going to be able to attend I had the key breakthrough. Sometimes I wonder if I would have had that breakthrough if it weren't for the pressure and urgency and sleepless nights and frustrating days.
"Bad planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." I have worked in IT for 30 years and the only time that getting tasks at 11 pm or 4 am due the next day is even remotely acceptable is for a production problem. Are you getting those tasks as part of a research assistantship? If that's the case, you have to ask yourself if it's the job or the program, and if the former if there are other options. I was never paid for research and worked my way through teaching recitation classes and later lecturing. It might be time for a talk with your advisor to clarify expectations, as well as with your committee and department secretary (or other graduate student liaison that helps you to navigate the process) to get advice and keep you focused on what I would assume is your goal--finishing the degree.
Get an appointment with your thesis committee (advisors) or PhD support office (if there is one) stat. These things can happen, but you need to address them with counselors immediately, before they get out of hand.
Whatever you do, don't make a rush decision. Good luck!
Your expectations were set based on the great success of your first paper, and now you're frustrated that you've put so much more work into a second paper but it failed in comparison.
This is a life lesson - not in your career path, but in workload management. You burnt out and exhausted yourself. Had the 2nd paper turned out brilliant, you probably would have gotten away with it, because the feeling of accomplishment would validate all the extra effort. But it didn't turn out so well - you are feeling the stress collapse inward now that it isn't bolstered by your high expectations.
There are two very helpful things you should do. First, take a vacation and get away from work for at least a week, preferably two weeks. Second, you should set your next project up to be something small, easily manageable, and something you enjoy. You need to learn workload management, and that will prevent 80% of the burnout you currently feel. Very few people can sustain a real 50+ hour workweek in an intellectual field. Most (notably doctors) have a lot of mentally de-tuned time, which allows them to manage long hours better. The supposed 'executive' 60-hour workweek includes meals, exercise, travel, and sometimes even family time in that 60 hours. The Americans’ Use of Time Project has estimated that people who claim to work 55-59 hours per week actually work about 42-47 hours (http://fortune.com/2012/10/16/how-hard-do-executives-really-work-today/).
You won't hit a home run every time you're at bat, so don't set yourself up to always be at bat with all the bases loaded. Give yourself some time to recharge, and bat some easy singles against the warm-up pitcher.
First: stop working 70 hour weeks
I find it sad how little attention academia pays to the huge amount of research into productivity[1]. Working absurdly long hours does not make you more productive but does kill your creativity, ramp up your stress levels, and sooner or later makes you burnt out
Second: take time off
You have holiday entitlement as a PhD student, use it now. If you're in Europe you'll likely get a sensible amount and can take a couple of weeks off. If you're in the US, you're probably restricted to a smaller amount but you still have entitlement you should be using. In your state, a break is necessary.
Third: learn to say no to completely unreasonable requests
I am so tired of receiving new tasks at 4 am or 11 pm due the next
day.
Any task received outside of normal working hours should be considered unreasonable. Reject them. Any task received without reasonable time to do it is unreasonable. Stop accepting them. Write back - in work hours - with what you consider a reasonable timescale in which you can achieve it, taking into account your other work.
Fourth: seek support from the University
Your university will have student support and counselling service available to you; find out what they are and use them.
A PhD is a long and hard process, and research is - by its very nature - a hard slog, with variable success and, sometimes long, periods of failure. If you knew how to do it already, it wouldn't be research. It is normal, therefore, for PhD students to have periods of doubt during their PhD programme. Before deciding whether you wish to leave, take the time to get yourself into a clearer mental state so you consider it properly.
[1] For an enjoyable introduction read The Mythical Man Month and Peopleware. Actually, if you're in CS read them anyway.
Aside from the very good advice of getting counseling and balancing your work and life(!) a popular saying comes to mind: When you fall off a horse, you've got to get back on.
Probably you need some well deserved rest first, but IMO the best way to get rid of the sour taste of your previous experience is to venture into a new project. This will allow you to rediscover why you're doing what you do and help you keep your mind off your previous disappointment (this will require effort!). A variation of this idea is that if you eventually decide to quit, try to do it with a good taste in mouth.
If there's something I've learned during my PhD is that personal growth is as, if not more, important as the actual technical aspects of it. In this case you're dealing with a major disappointment. However, it's within you to make this a valuable lesson and demonstrate to yourself that you can overcome this and other obstacles that might (and will certainly) come in your life.
A few points in addition to other useful answers:
The negative experience you've had is not with research in general, but with a combination of a certain project, a certain advisor, and the settings of being infinitely overworked and pressured for a certain period of time. So you've been depressed and demotivated by that not by "research" in general. And while you should certainly avoid being in that situation again, don't confuse the specific with the general.
Also, even if you decide you've had with your current project; or with your advisor; or with your university; or with your sub-discipline of CS - that does not mean you should necessarily quit.
Note that the fact you've not exhausted all options does not mean that you absolutely have to stay. If you don't find a setting in which you're satisfied to work (after some emotional recovery and some attempt at reconfiguration); or if it becomes clear to you there's something else you want to be doing - it's perfectly justifiable to quit and go elsewhere, even if some people frown upon it.
You did not say anything about why you're doing research in the first place. That's enormously important in my opinion. I'm against being in a Ph.D. program just looking to get ahead. Do you not have something concrete that interests you? That you want to discover or get to the bottom of? Your Ph.D. research should be about doing that. And that should be your key motivation - not chalking up merit points for publications or conferences etc.
When I was feeling down due to my research not going well, I found my teaching work to be rather consoling and satisfying. I'm not sure what it's like for you, but if you haven't tried that, consider it.
"[I] found myself too frustrated and suddenly lost all interest in research, stopped caring about papers, did as best I could to avoid talking to anyone, and want to leave this place and never come back."
This sounds exactly like a psychological reaction - avoidance of people, and seeking ways to not think of the upsetting thing. I would say absolutely, seek counselling help, and view these as appropriate and mature steps to take, because this is something that could also be playing out in other times and places, causing you distress.
I can't say if you have actually lost interest, but I don't think so. I think it has hit you hard and the reaction against that perceived lapse might be misinterpreted as lack of interest.
It's a very common reaction to avoid that which we feel we have done wrongly, and this sounds much more like that reaction. Also to feel that taking the pressure off is acknowledgement of a kind of failure - it isnt.
The good new is that when that aspect is looked into, many people feel renewed vigour and energy on resuming.
Speaking as a person who reached burnout and left, to the islands no less. I truly believe in retrospect, the greatest life lesson would have been to push the doctorate thru. I did change course in life and my degrees are not directly relevant to my current path, yet they will always have tremendous value. You did succeed in the first year of the program, this is not your first week, you have significant time (and success) invested. Get this doctorate, you don't necessarily need this doctorate or any other to eventually succeed in whatever career path you choose, but this doctorate and all its prestige and benefits will be there for your life. The great lesson you are going to learn here is not about subject matter, it is about your inner self. Can you push thru after major disappoint, learn from failure, regain composure and conquer seemingly insurmountable pressure, or will you run, give up by saying you lost interest? Either path you choose will define you for life, your inner self, and only you will be experiencing the consequences every single day thereafter.
Speaking as a person who reached burnout and instead of leaving, tried to "push through". Next thing I knew I was in hospital for a week. Then I left for good and never once have I missed the "prestige and benefits" of the doctorate I didn't get.
Burnout is a serious issue. Working 70-hour weeks is detrimental to your health even before burnout (which is just round the corner anyway if you do it continually). You're picking between your health and "this doctorate and its prestige and benefits".
Note I'm not saying you need to leave for good. Maybe coming back after a break is going to work for you. But I'm pretty sure you need to stop killing yourself with 70-hour weeks, and think it likely that you need weeks or months off.
Just get your PhD and leave afterwards. Most published research is irrelevant anyway. The science community has a serious problem with their "accomplishment" metric: h-index / number of papers etc. They do not allow for failure or dead tracks which, however, are quite natural if you are doing real research at the brink of current knowledge.
"Just"? That's not a "just". That's incredibly difficult, emotionally, in such a situation. You don't "just" get PhDs.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.