How should I phrase a question about an *ordinary academic matter* to a Professor? Question: Suppose you need to communicate with an academic about some ordinary academic matter that falls within the scope of the ordinary activities of an academic.  Perhaps this is a standard administrative or pedagogical matter that academics deal with commonly as part of their job, or some other question that would not be regarded as being out-of-the-ordinary for the academic you are dealing with.  Examples of the types of matters I have in mind are the following (non-exhaustive list):

Asking for advice on an academic topic;
Asking for a review of my mark in an assessment;
Asking an academic to teach me something in their field of expertise;
Asking to apply for/withdraw from some academic program or course;
Asking about the present status of an application or assessment task;
Asking if an academic is interested in research collaboration;
Turning an academic down for a position/research topic, etc.;
Following-up on a matter where we have already had previous contact; or
Thanking an academic for their help on a matter.

We all know that academics are basically demi-gods, and so communicating with them requires adherence to strict protocols, similar to kowtowing to an Emperor.  With these kinds of examples in mind, what is the method of communication and the magical words to use to prevent a major diplomatic incident when communicating with a Professor on a common academic matter?

Note: This question is a variation of this canonical question about how to ask a Professor a question.  That question is presently used as a duplicate for many questions on Academia.SE, but it is not an ideal duplicate for questions about matters that are ordinary academic matters that fall within the scope of standard academic work at a university.  The present question is designed to give a canonical question about communicating these matters.

Your confusion on this matter is understandable, but despite your misgivings, it might surprise you to learn that --unlike a divinely-sanctioned emperor-- there are no special protocols required when communicating with a professor, especially in relation to a standard academic matter.  All that is required is basic courtesy and clarity, as would be standard in any professional communication.

Whether you are communicating by email or directly in person, it is important to remember that there are no special magic words that you need to say when dealing with basic academic matters with a professor.  Be as clear and polite as you can, and get to the point about what you want.  Basic courtesy with pleases and thank-yous will be sufficient to ensure your communication goes well, and being clear and succinct will help your professor to deal with your matter without having to waste a lot of time.  Many administrative matters (e.g., reviewing a mark, applying for a program, etc.) involve the application of university policies, and it will be helpful if you have already read the relevant policies prior to communicating with your professor.

Emails: Many of these matters can be dealt with by email.  Composing an email to a professor is no different to composing any email in a professional context.  You should be clear and courteous, and get to the point of what you want to ask them.  Ideally you should use a level of formality that would not be out-of-place in an office context.  It is good practice to use the person's academic title (Prof, Assoc Prof, Dr, etc.) and spell their name correctly; this is easy to do, since academics almost always have a university web-page with this information, and a quick web-search will find their information.  If you are not familiar with how to write an email in a professional context, there are many, many, many, many websites that give tips on how to do this.  Some general tips are:

Write your email in a professional manner;
Have a clear subject line that tells them the topic;
Remind them who you are (unless they know you well);
State your request clearly, and give relevant context;
Make your request consistent with administrative procedures at your university; and
Ask your professor if he/she requires any further information.

Professors are generally quite informal in their email communications (with some exceptions), and they are also used to dealing with young students who have not been in a professional environment before.  This means that the bar for communication is low; if you fall short of the ideal standard of professional communication, your professor is not going to be angry at you.  Just try to be clear and polite, and you will be fine.  It is good practice to get into the habit of professional writing while at university, and these situations offer you a good opportunity to practice your communication skills.  If you would like special help with this, go to the academic-skills center at your university and ask them to teach you how to write a professional email.

Direct meetings: Emails are generally the best method of communication when dealing with simple administrative matters.  This is because they give both parties a record of communication and they allow the academic to deal with the matter at leisure.  Nevertheless, for some academic inquiries where a back-and-forth is required, it might be quicker and easier to talk directly to your professor in-person.  Depending on how important the professor is, it might not be easy to get much time with them.  You might require an appointment, or it might be possible to just knock on their door and ask to speak to them, or see them after class.  (If you are in a course with this professor, they probably have set consulting hours for the course when you can come and see them.)

Dealing with academic matters in a direct meeting is similar to email.  Be clear and polite, and get to the point about what you want.  Remember that you are talking to a busy person with lots of things to do, so you want to help them to understand what you want and deal with the matter quickly.  There are generally no special formalities required, but it is good practice to communicate in a professional tone.


How to gracefully exit my postdoc position with 1 year left in contract This is my 2nd year in the lab with 1 year remaining in the contract. The PI is a nice guy and well-funded, but he has completely shifted his focus to his business and clinic trials. For example, I just waited a month for him to start revising my manuscript. I'm unable to get any instructions or ideas from him.  Now I've finished the only paper and have no promising project in hand, I want to quit and find a new postdoc. But I don't know how to ask my PI for a reference letter. What should I do to avoid burning the bridge? I think he even expects me to extend the contract for another 2 years. I don't have any job offer yet, but I feel like I should tell my PI before sending out resumes.

Tell him you want scientific variety, geographic variety, etc.  I wouldn't get into the "he doesn't have time for you".  Just indicate you are interested in new things.  Tell him this is a natural break point since you wrapped one thing up, so it's not even like there is a huge dislocation.  Tell him you plan to continue working on current contract but looking for other things, very actively, at same time.

[Keep soaking up the current salary. Do some things to keep him/you happy, but it doesn't sound like there is huge supervision, expectations, anyways.  Assuming there is no new major project, figure out how to dust off some minor aspects and get some "cheaper" papers done that pad out your resume, build off of last project.  Helps you out and the advisor at least sees some pub count even though you aren't solving more Millennium Prize problems. If he gives you a new big project, I would be OK doing that, but keep looking for next spot and be willing to ditch it if you need to hop to another assignment.  Be able to write up incomplete work...there is an art to this and it is not as sleazy as it sounds.  In fact a lot of work is wasted because people don't write up incomplete work and it sits for years instead or gets redone.]

Ask for his assistance.  He'll either give it or won't give it.  I suspect he will at least give his blessing.  In any case, once you have told him, you just execute your plan and start looking for things.  2:1 anything you come up with ends up needing some time to develop and there is a natural dovetail with current contract end and new contract start.

Personally, I think a postdoc (or senior grad student) should be relatively independent and capable of starting, executing projects on own.  And of writing papers that just need a rubber stamp from the advisor who attaches his name to pad his CV.  (Definitely work on your paper writing...publications are how people keep score in academia and a PI is expected to be able to write a paper without someone above them.)


Why are cumulative tests typically weighted so high (U.S.)? Is there an academic justification behind most U.S. classes weighting exams at very high percentages of the overall grade in a course? So if a student does exceedingly well throughout the course in all projects, but bombs both tests, their grade is drastically skewed towards the exams rather than the coursework leading up to the exams.

Full disclosure, this happened to me this semester. I have a 97.75% on our projects throughout the course (4 major projects, each taking ~20 hours to complete). However, I admittedly bombed the final and did fairly poorly on the midterm (37% and 70%, respectively). Projects in our course are weighted 60%, but the remaining 40% is entirely midterm/final. My final grade for the class is hovering around 80% before the curve.

I want to understand the mindset behind these weights though, and where the idea of heavy cumulative exam weights came from? In other words, if I've demonstrated the understanding of the material to almost perfect standards, but I failed to represent that on a test, how does that translate to me being given a grade that doesn't really represent a strong understanding in the subject?

Cumulative tests show that you understand everything so far; they are meant to help students who perform poorly on the first exam, so they can do better on the second one, since they will have an idea of what to expect on the second one. It is uncommon when a student does worse from one test to the next.

Also, going back to projects, some professors don't value homework/projects as much because any student can copy / get help for their projects. Some professors I know would even give 100% for homework/projects just for turning them in, as they are meant for students to practice and learn by themselves. They are meant to help students prepare for tests. Because of this projects and homework are not a good (trusted) indicator of how a student is doing in a class.

By the looks on your grades, most likely you still don't know the topics of your class, if it was a more strict professor / class, just for failing the cumulative final, you would have failed the class as well, as this would be an indicator that you (maybe) cheated on your projects.

Cumulative tests are usually weighted high because in order to do the last topic you need to know the previous topics as well.


How to deliver google scholar alerts at specific time I get google scholar alerts at all times of the day. This irritates me because it comes up as an email, I dont have time to read it, and then I forget about it.

My only reading time is Friday morning so it would be great to get my alerts at 8.00am on Friday morning as that would be consistent with my workflow.

The question is therefore can I get my alerts delivered on Friday 08.00 and not before then- a kind of weekly digest?

Create a filter to add a label to the emails.

Then every Friday you can read all the emails marked with that label!


Does it make sense to get an LLM in preparation for "law school?" Someone I know thinks he wants to go to law school and pursue a career in law. One way for him to "find out" is to pursue a one-year LLM degree after graduating college. He has two reasons for feeling this way.

1) Some of his older friends have started, then "aborted" law school programs. Going for an LLM instead of a J.D. would put only one year at risk instead of three. Of course, if he later decides to pursue a J.D., he would have spent four years in law school. Which leads to the second point:

The LLM would enable him to take some, not all, of a first year law program, such as legal writing, contracts, and property, as well as some electives to discover his areas of interest. Given the rigors of a law school program, that would lighten the burden of going for a J.D.later on.

Would pursuing the LLM at a state school (where he is getting a 3.8 GPA) help or hurt my friend if he later decided to pursue a full blown J.D. law program at a good private law school? His idea is "soften up" a law program, but he fears that with a master's degree, he will be held to a "higher standard" for admission.

No. It does not make sense to do a LLM before a JD.

The length of the program is not the relevant thing to consider.

The standard course is to do a JD -- which is a first degree in law -- before a doing a LLM to gain specialized knowledge. Usually a JD or equivalent is required for admission into an LLM program.

I understand the confusion since usually a doctorate (JD) comes after a masters (LLM). Note that, outside the US, the first degree in law is often called a bachelor of laws (LLB), which makes more sense.


Can editors review a manuscript and make a decision if they cannot find any reviewers? I had submitted a manuscript to an International Journal few months before. It is already 5 months. But the status is still showing "under review". Since it is getting late, so I contacted to the Journal stating the current status. I got a reply that they have contacted a number of reviewers, but no one shows interest to review it. At present they have sent the manuscript to the editor.

So whether an Editor can reject it most probably? or can review my manuscript to make a proper decision?

The editor certainly has the power to reject an article without having it reviewed.  If they can't find a suitable reviewer, this is probably what would happen, unfortunately for you.

In some cases the editor might have the authority to accept it without an outside review, but this would depend on the policies of the specific journal.  Anyway, if they were planning to do this, they probably would have already done it.


How can I make an informed decision on whether to do a PhD in engineering or not? About me:

About to start final year ChemE

Top of class/grades

Have completed 6 month co-ops in pharma and biopharma

Liked the work but think that I would much prefer development or research type work

I need to make a decision over the next month to either:
Take a graduate program/job in pharma or biopharma
Do a PhD (I have been talking to my professor who has agreed to take me on or else give me a reference for another college)

Take the graduate program and do a PhD simultaneously (difficult option but I know people who have done this)

I am really attracted to the idea of doing a PhD in a biopharma/biotech related space. I do not know if I am interested in academia afterwards or if I would prefer to work in industry. That said, I do not know much about the roles available to PhDs in industry.

I have heard that a PhD can give you more 'work freedom' and also a higher chance of working in cutting edge areas. Also the idea of working in a startup or starting my own company at some point is something I am interested in.

My problem is that I do not have the tools to decide what is the right decision for me. I would apprecaite any input or experience anyone has with this, or alternatively any advice on how I can make the right decision.

Thanks in advance. If I am missing key information here, apologies. I will add it in if it comes up in a comment.

Does your uni have guidance councilors? Probably you can easily get an appointment. Maybe they will be glib about it, but it can be helpful data.

At least two aspects: What job can you get that you could not get now? And is it worth while spending at least 4 years, maybe more, getting the degree to get that job? If you want to be an academic then PhD is probably indicated. If you want to be in industry then consider going no farther than the master's degree. Or stopping at the bachelor's.

Carefully scope out what it will cost you to get the PhD. Not just your university fees. But to live for that time. Scope out what scholarships you can get. NOTE! You must apply for most such scholarships. You do NOT get automatically considered for the bulk of them. Ask the support staff in your uni and the uni you are considering going to what scholarships exist and how to apply. Find out what it costs to live in the city you are considering. Find out if the uni will give you work while you are a grad student. Or if you can maybe get contract work in the industry relevant to your study subject.

Send out a few resumes to potential employers. Maybe the offered starting salary will turn your head. And at worst, you may get some interviews that will be good practice. And polishing your resume is good practice also. Tune it to the potential employer.

The difference between what you could earn in 4 years, and the payments you would need to make, will be substantial. And you will then be 4 years ahead for the rest of your job life.

Many academic areas have some equivalent of "Physics Today" which is the one for my area. Such magazines give stuff that is along the lines of "proff so-and-so has just finished big-name-project blah-de-blah, isn't it pretty?" And they have a ton of adverts for various things somewhat related to the subject.

But importantly, once per year they have lists of PhD students who recently graduated, and where they went.  So, what you should do is have a look at where grads from a school you are interested in eventually went. And if those destinations seem good to you, great, go ahead. If they bore you or worse, look elsewhere. One of my cohort in PhD went to work at the Science Center, and now spends his time teaching high school students about static electricity. After a PhD in particle physics. Sigh.

You may need to ask the librarian at your university what the correct magazine is to check, and how to find it. And you may be able to get lots of back issues on-line, free or nearly free.


In the AI field, is it worth it to publish a paper that gains the same results as another but with a different method? So over the last few months, I've been working on an AI model that could classify a skin lesion as cancerous or not using only an image of the lesion. At first, I thought there's no way that I could achieve anything more than 70% accuracy but after tweaking with my program for a long while, I was able to reach an accuracy of over 95% which is definitely an improvement compared to my first tries.

The other day, I was talking to a professor at my local university whom I've written a paper with and showed him my classifier. He told me that I could write a paper on it which had never come to my mind because I believe an accuracy of 95% is not nearly good enough and the methods that I used weren't new, cutting edge methods that could have a huge impact in the AI industry.

Fast forward a couple days, I found all the papers related to classifying skin lesions using ML and DL and I actually found quite a few but they all are vastly different from my model(different hyperparameters, the different architectures, different models, etc) but the accuracy in all of them are pretty close to mine(they were all very close to 95%).

My question is, do you think it's worth it to even try and write a paper about my work or is it pointless and won't help me in the future?

P.S: I've already read a similar question but that was about research in math which is VERY different. In math, the solution is sometimes more important than the finding but I'm not sure if that's the case with AI.

By the way, I'm 14, so I'm not sure whether I can do this independently or not.

Thank you so, so much!

As you say, applying well-studied tool X to well-studied problem Y and getting the expected result won't lead to a groundbreaking paper. But not every paper is revolutionary, and many such papers are published, particularly in AI. It is true that professors and other senior researchers try to avoid publishing such papers simply because they have limited time and need to invest it on higher-impact ideas. Only mid- and high-tier papers really count when calculating, for example, tenure decisions.

But you are not a professor, you are 14 and this is presumably your first long-term project. Writing something up and getting it "out there" is highly worthwhile, both so you can practice writing publications and so that you have something citeable when you apply to college and beyond. Even a low-tier publication, or putting it on the arXiv, is pretty darn impressive at your career stage.

I assume this is why your professor recommended that you write up something to publish. Either that, or he thinks the work is more significant than you realize. Since he is familiar with your work and we are not, I would defer to his advice in any case.


Confirmation review (upgrade from MPhil to PhD) chair can ask a lot of questions Recently a friend o mine has her update meeting and there were two examiners and a chair.  Chair has asked much more questions than the examiners and he put her in a hard situation and eventually the examiners decided to fail her based on the chair comments.

Does really a chair there to ask questions or just modareta the meeting? My friend wants to  make an objection to their decision mainly because of the chair approach and role.

Does it make sense?

The point is: Who asks the questions really makes no difference if your friend doesn't know the answers.

You seem to make the inference that the process was unfair because the wrong person asked the questions. But that's the wrong attitude. The process would have been unfair if your friend had been well prepared, had known the answers, and was rejected nonetheless.

Let's assume the chair had only taken the role of the moderator. Then there are two outcomes: (i) The other members had asked more questions and would also have found out that your friend did not know the answers; in that case, they would probably have come to the same conclusion. (ii) The other members had not asked questions, it would not have been as apparent that your friend did not know the answers, they may have admitted your friend to the PhD program, and she would struggled a lot because she is not well prepared.


How to find out who funded a study / research? It has been proven that the source of funding can have an influence on the results of a research (funding bias, well documented here and here).

When we check for pieces of research, for example through the Pubmed database, how can we check the source of funding? (And check for possible financial conflict of interest?)

Reputable journals might require authors to disclose funding sources, but as noted, this practice, reputable journals notwithstanding, is inconsistent.  Beyond this, there are no standards for determining what is a reputable journal.

As to the comment that two citations do not prove the point, the literature is replete with studies demonstrating funding bias; a few examples: Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality, Lexchen, Bern et al; Avoiding biasing the conduct and reporting…, Hillman, Eisenberg, et al; Systematic review of empirical evidence of study publication bias, Dwan, Altman et al.


Teaching using bad material This semester, due to an increase of students enrolled, I was assigned to teach an introductory course. The course had been previously taught by two lecturers, who taught a different half of the course. The two do not know well the other half, so they developed the teaching material independently. This semester two lecturers were added and each of us teach the whole course.

It turns out that the slides for the second part are very superficial and contain some serious mistakes and omissions, and so do the tutorials. Mind that the errors are on basic definitions upon which the rest of the material is developed. Also the textbook is horrible because it is aimed at business students and is very wordy with many examples but little clear explanation and definitions.

I spoke to the lecturer in charge of the first part, who is also course coordinator, and we agreed that it was too late to change the slides and we would do something for the next year. However, the other lecturer must have been informed of my complaints and turned nasty to me, even though I have been careful not to criticise the person but only the material. Therefore, I really do not feel like helping them with comments and suggestions. Mind that it is not an ego problem here, I don't give a damn about proving my colleagues wrong, I only want to do my job and move on.

In any case, I have now to teach five weeks of material containing mistakes. Should I follow the material and teach wrong things or should I warn the students of the mistakes on the slides and teach the right stuff?

Personally I would prefer the second option (for ethical and selfdignity reasons) but that may create problems in the exam when students have to answer questions on the wrong defintions. Also, the students may be confused and the reputation of the course would be damaged. Lastly, I do not want to talk to the head of department now because it is too late and we all know what happens to whistleblowers.

As a compromise, given you are staying with the existing slides, consider saying things like "For purposes of this course, the definition of X is [what the slides say] but many people use [more conventional definition]". That way, the students know what they should assume during the exam, but have been warned that they will see different definitions in the future.

In thinking about contributing to updating the slides, you would be doing it to help future students, not to help the instructor who wrote them.


If a journal not indexed in SCI nor in EI, is it worth publishing in? After looking up the journal name (Journal for Internet Technology and Secured Transaction (JITST)), I discovered this journal was not listed in either the SCI or EI indexes.  Is this journal worth publishing in? More generally, how do I judge journals that are not indexed?

There are good journals that are not listed in the SCI, so this alone does not mean that the journal is bad. However, an overly long list of topics including non-descript terms like "web-service" and "Future technologies" looks bad. Also the sentence "Our journals’ impact factors have been compiled by Indexing Citation Board (ICB)."  is pretty suspicious, when you find out that ICB is actually "Infonomics Society’s Indexing Citation Board (ICB).". A review process of 4 to 6 weeks is also not hinting at serious checking. So even if this is a serious journal, someone tried really hard to make it look like trash, and I would definitely not consider publishing there.


In STEM fields, are ten-year, funded PhDs an exceptional case or more common than we think? All of the below information is regarding U.S. universities.

From what I know, it seems that the standard length of time to be funded for a PhD in a STEM field is about 5 or 6 years.  (I've personally seen plenty of students get funded for a 6th and final year, for applied math topics.)

So I recently learned of a 10-year funded PhD (one student I know of and have spoken to, but not sure whether it was a program consisting of multiple students).  This would be at a Top 5 school in the STEM field.

FWIW, it was an electrical engineering topic.

Is this an exceptional case?  Perhaps the project was exceptionally important and the student was funded for 10 years without any issues?  Or, is it actually more common than we would think?

(Note that I am not talking about TA'ing for ten years.)

I don't have any data for lower-tier programs, but I'd like to ask the question, just in case there are some interesting / surprising answers.

I am assuming that the research ended up taking longer than anticipated instead of the possibility that the program was known to take ten years to complete.  After all, I have never heard of a PhD program that lasts longer than six years.

In the United States, long PhDs (taking more than 10 years) are a minority of STEM PhDs, but not exactly "exceptional" either. See image below, which shows percentage of 2006-10 doctorate recipients taking six years or less and more than ten years to complete their degree (via data collected in the Survey of Earned Doctorates):

(Image via MLA Office of Research blog)

In many US departments, if a student is making progress towards the degree (not just wasting resources), is a contributing member of the department, and funding is available, there is no general reason why the advisor can't continue funding if the degree takes longer than expected. Without funding, the student is much less likely to complete the PhD, which is an undesirable outcome for both the student, the advisor, and the department.

(In some parts of the world, there may be regulations that make it impossible to keep funding a PhD student for that long. Even in the US, some departments may set a time limit on PhDs, and/or on eligibility for some sources of funding.)


To stick or to switch topics I'm currently starting my PhD and I'm contemplating whether I should stay with my current advisor and topic or switch before its too late.

Current subfield

The recent work in this subfield has been very cool and my advisor's strong track record in this area was what attracted me to his lab.
I don't have much of a background in this field. I feel like I'm struggling when I do research in this field, and I'm not sure how effective I would be if I went into this long term. (I don't think I'm playing to my strengths if I entered this subfield).
I have heard from others that academic job prospects in this subfield are lower than other areas.

Other subfields

I feel more comfortable with other subfields and I think I would be playing more toward my strengths even in certain other subfields where I have less of a background.
The labs in other subfields are more popular amongst grad students, and I suspect each student gets less attention than they would with my current advisor.

Any advice on whether to stay and switch? Is it best to wait and switch, or switch ASAP.

Let me react to some specific comments

I don't have much of a background in this field. I feel like I'm struggling when I do research in this field, and I'm not sure how effective I would be if I went into this long term. (I don't think I'm playing to my strengths if I entered this subfield).

If you're just starting your Phd, I'd be surprised if you were an expert in the field, no offense. There is much to learn, and most early grad students - good and bad - feel they're struggling. The important question is are you struggling because it's complicated (good!) or because you don't care about the topic (bad!). If the latter, consider switching.

I feel more comfortable with other subfields and I think I would be playing more toward my strengths even in certain other subfields where I have less of a background.

One's comfort zone is seldom where significant progress is made. Again, if it's an interest issue, consider changing, but if you just feel overwhelmed by a new research area, consider embracing it - you will learn a lot. Moreover, perhaps you can bring your 'other sub fields' strengths to bear on your current subfield. Some of the best students I've known have used analyses and thought processes foreign to their immediate field.

The labs in other subfields are more popular amongst grad students, and I suspect each student gets less attention than they would with my current advisor.
Any advice on whether to stay and switch? Is it best to wait and switch, or switch ASAP.

If you're set on switching, do it asap. Just make sure your motivation is sound. You want to be able to stand out, for sure, but every field is going to have difficulties. It's a Phd.  If it were easy, everyone would have one.


Is it a mistake to talk about hobbies in a job application? According to Sean Carroll, a famous cosmologist and tenured professor,

  Don’t be too well known outside the field. I hate to say this, but the evidence is there: if you have too high of a public profile, people look at you suspiciously. Actual quote: “I’m glad we didn’t hire Dr. X; he spends too much time in the New York Times and not enough time in the lab.” And that’s the point — it’s not that people are jealous that you are popular, it’s that they are suspicious you care about publicity more than you do about research. Remember the Overriding Principle.

According to an opinion piece by Manil Suri published in the New York Times, in science it is also not appropriate to talk about hobbies. Manil Suri is a famous scholar, his description of the situation in academia is worrying, and gives the impression that behavior is constrained and under close scrutiny. Being too expressive of personal identity can be viewed as running counter to scientific neutrality. In competitive venues, where complete immersion in one’s field might be the promoted ideal, the mention of an extracurricular pursuit can even be seized upon as a lack of commitment. I remember a young mathematician at a prestigious research institute sharing his love for piano playing after hearing I wrote fiction. “Don’t tell anyone in my department I own a piano,” he requested in the next breath. This is a shock to me because I perceived the STEM field as most openminded.

Am I hurting my chances by answering honestly about hobbies and extracurricular and social engagement activities? I work in a STEM field.

There is a time and a place for everything. When evaluating your application to determine if you’re going to be one of the half dozen or so people who might get on the short list, your hobbies aren’t going to rate very high in the decision-making process, unless they suggest that they’re going to pull you away from your work too much.

But I’d also rather not work with a potential colleague who is so focused on their careers that they give up being someone you want to work with. Having hobbies and interests that have nothing to do with your daily job make you a better person, and it’s something you can talk about during a phone or in-person interview.

In the specific case you’re asked, then that means it’s something they decided they do want to know about and you should answer candidly.


Indecision between PhD and industry First a little bit of background.

I am a graduate student (Bachelor) who will finish the Master degree in June or July at most. I am working on my thesis at my university with a professor which I know quite well. I am getting a Master of Electronics Engineering, thus my thesis includes some practical work and I got to know a lot of people at the Information Engineering department. I think that the work they do here is great and valuable, and so is the people.

Meanwhile there's a friend of mine who works for a quite big company near my local university. They are hiring young graduates for open-ended positions and I am very likely to be hired if I do an interview. My friend was with me at the university for five years now, we did much work together and I'd love to work with him, plus he tells me that the work environment is great.

The problem is that I would love to teach. Some people think I am quite good at what I study and quite good at explaining things to people. I love the idea of spreading knowledge, helping students understand things and pretty much all what's involved in the teaching process. To achieve this I will need to apply (and hopefully win) for a PhD, that I thought I can do at my local university because of what stated in the first paragraph, and because my girlfriend is currently studying here too so moving is an option that I'd like to avoid for now.

What keeps me to just jump in the Academic world is the fact that in my country (Italy) things seems to be a little stagnant, there are great people in their forties that are still associate (or researchers!) while some old professors (very, very bad at teaching) hold more than one chair. And of course from the economic point of view there might be a gap as high as 10x between industry and academy, but happiness can't be bought of course.

My question then is: given the fact that I am sure I would love to become a professor but the road might be hard (too hard maybe) would you advise me to take a PhD (that's three years here) and at least try the academic path or leave it already and hit the job market head on? Are there many downsights in starting an industry career after a PhD?

First, we have 26 questions tagged phd+industry. Nothing that is a direct duplicate, but I'd still recommend you browse through them. This question and this question appear especially relevant.

Second, it will be hard for us to really answer your question, because we simply are not in your position. Yes, staying in academia and getting tenure is hard, and most people drop out. Until you get tenure, you will work your backside off. If you really love it, you can take the risk, but be prepared for a long, hard slog.

Third, that said, a couple of specific comments. You write that you love to teach. On the one hand, that raises a bit of a red flag to me, because teaching is not necessarily the top responsibility for a professor. Publications are far more important. If you want to become a professor, you will spend a decade writing papers and doing your teaching "on the side"... because you won't be able to get tenure based on your teaching alone. You can relax the research part and concentrate on teaching after getting tenure.

I am not familiar with the system in Italy. Im Germany, there are universities of applied sciences (used to be called Fachhochschule, nowadays Hochschule). You'll apply for a professorship there if you have a Ph.D. and at least five years experience in industry. Then you will do a lot of teaching. Teaching load at Hochschulen is twice as high as at "regular" universities and very applied, and conversely, you are really not expected to do a lot of research. If something comparable exists in Italy, this may be a potential career route for you.

Then again, if you just like to teach, you could try to go into industry and get a job as a trainer. You won't need a Ph.D. for that (in fact, you'd probably be overqualified with a Ph.D.). However, note that trainers are often on the road a lot.


Do I need to take the TOEFL Exam? I studied in the US up until the 6th grade, came back to India, completed high school here and finished a bachelor degree in computer science here in India. All my education in India was completed in English only. I am also a US citizen. I want to pursue a masters degree in the US. Do I need to take the TOEFL exam or not?

The safest course of action would just be to take it.

Each department at each university has its own policy on the TOEFL.  Usually international students from non-English speaking countries are required to take it, but there may be exceptions.  It is common for there to be an exception for students who have attended a university in the US, but that does not apply to you.

So you'd have to check the policies of each department where you want to apply, to see if they have an exception that does apply to you.  Or, if there is no written exception that applies, you could contact them directly, explain your situation, and ask them to waive the requirement (of course there is no guarantee that they will agree).

So unless you can verify that every department you care about will accept you without a TOEFL score, you had better take the exam.


Should I agree to review papers as a postdoc? I am a post doc in mathematics, and was just sent a request to review a paper. This is the first time it happened to me. I never heard of this journal before, but it is a Springer journal, and upon checking the editorial board it looks like a respectable journal. Also, the paper looks quite interesting, so it appears that I shouldn't worry about it being dubious.

I wonder however, if this is a good time in my career to do such a job. Given that I am a postdoc, constantly in the run for the next job, and probably this will take some of my valuable research time. Is it normal for postdocs to review research papers? Should I accept it? If so, should I mention the fact I review for this journal in my C.V?

Yes, reviewing papers is an integral part of your job now, and a very beneficial one at that!

It's true that the first papers you will review will take you quite a bit of time, but it's a sound investment (unless you consider dropping out of academia next month). You'll improve your reading and ability to read between the lines. It will help you gain a wider view of what others are doing in your field, because it will force you to really go through the paper in depth, not just skim over it as we are so often forced to do when a paper is not at the core of our own research.

Moreover, it will give you invaluable experience when you write your next papers, because you will be able to put yourself in the reviewer's shoes! You will see better what could be problematic for a referee in the presentation of your work.

As for whether you should list it on your CV: yes!


Is it acceptable to paraphrase or include reviewer's comments in revised manuscript? When you submit a manuscript and receive the reviewer's comments, some of these comments are really useful, and might improve the manuscript with some critical comments.

If a reviewer provides a very useful comment that is very detailed and a few paragraphs long, is it acceptable to simply paraphrase said comment in the revised manuscript? The reviewer has described a concept very well and it is difficult to improve this description.

It would be acceptable to paraphrase the referee's comments, although if you do so, you should take care.  First, the paraphrasing should be thorough.  You cannot quote an anonymous* referee directly (since you do not know their identity to cite them), so what you put in your revised draft should not include any specific extended phrases used by the reviewer, of the kind that would normally need quotation makes.

Second, you should point out explicitly in your reply letter with the revised manuscript that you have followed the referee's way of describing the subject matter carefully.  Make it clear that you have done so because you though the explanation in the referee's report was exceptionally clear.  The referee is likely to be flattered, but in the unlikely event that they have some problem with your having done this, they have been warned and can ask you to make further changes.

Third, you should include an acknowledgement to the anonymous reviewer.  This person has made a minor but specific contribution to your paper and deserves credit at that level.

*I have assumed the reviewer is anonymous.  If not, things probably do not change very much, although you have the option of simply contacting the reviewer to ask whether they are okay with you paraphrasing them this way.


How to deal with disagreement with advisor regarding research proposal and direction? I am currently writing a proposal for a new research topic in my field of system biology. This proposal will determine what I will be working on for the next couple of years.

However, I am running into disagreement with my advisor on the viability of the research proposal. I think he is completely in the wrong on this one and I cannot convince him otherwise (after talking to him), and the research proposal is due soon.

Essentially, his vision is that a new method X (of a class of methods) might work "better" than exisiting method Y on our problem. So I should do research on method X for the next two-three years. I should put into my proposal that method X could work "better" than Y.

However, I am convinced that there is no evidence that method X will perform better than method Y on our problem.

My argument is that

Comparing method X and method Y is like comparing apple with
oranges. Method Z is the one that should be compared with method Y.
But it is already known that method Z does not yield benefits as
compared to method Y. In fact, they are the same, just different order of execution.
There has been no evidence that any method X
has performed better than method Y for any related problems.
In fact,
some instances of method X is the same as method Y. So the problem is ill-posed.
Other researchers are already aware of method X, but they do not use it. We can all guess why.

I think the line of research is fundamentally wrong and I cannot convince myself to write up a research proposal on something I disagree with and imagine spending the rest of my research career on. I almost feel like he is trying to fail me, because I read his rationale for pursuing this problem (benefits of method X) and the rationales were wrong or very hard to arrive at a conclusion at the present moment. Plus he is definitely not an expert in method X in any sense.

I am lost as to what to do. The proposal is due in 5 days and I cannot bring myself to write a single word. To be honest it feels like I am writing utter bullshit. I do not have time to quickly check method X (because it is an entire class of methods with some variations) and to compare with method Y in order to come up with evidence that it is indeed better.

Is there anyone out there who had these sorts of disagreement with their advisor on a research direction and how did you solve it?

I have regularly had problems with my supervisor regarding scientific direction. I have always known that I write much better than I speak. About 6 months into my PhD I reached the conclusion that its possible that I am not able to coherently convince my supervisor regarding my ideas and reasoning.

This has in fact been pointed out to me by my PhD advisors and also the examination board. In their words, I have an extremely unstructured, abstract and convoluted line of thought. Although, I may reach at the same conclusion, my process is not easy to understand for other people.

So what did I do?

I adopted the show them before telling them process. So whenever I wanted to introduce new ideas to my supervisor, I would generate data for the same, create a presentation and then speak to them. This mostly meant that my supervisor got the point.

In you case, that may not be possible because your application is due in 5 days.

In that case, I would suggest you write up an alternative draft containing your vision of the proposal. Do this, but also complete the proposal your advisor wants you to write. Before submission, when reviewing the drafts send both proposals to him in a politely worded e-mail asking him to review both.


Publishing into journals as an independent undergraduate researcher I'm an undergraduate student looking to publish 2 papers in materials physics on novel research. I've lead the project on my own as an independent research, but have worked with the departments and faculty to gain access to several of my universities labs to conduct the research. I have no clear supervisor or adviser for the project though, and have a few questions regarding the submission of papers to journals as an undergraduate.

Would I be discriminated against due to the lack of qualifications
Is it appropriate for an undergraduate student to submit a manuscript to a journal.
What journals have low to no cost for manuscripts, the project is self funded and I doubt I'll be able to financially support the extraordinary fees I've seen from some journals.

I understand the paper can be posted on ArXiv or ResearchGate, but that nullifies the legitimacy of it being called a publication. The professors I've spoken to have suggested the paper could be submitted to well ranked journals, and wish to have it published in a well respected journal.  Frankly I'm just unsure how I should approach submitting my manuscripts as an undergraduate.

Editors don't normally look at your "qualifications" when evaluating a paper. It is actually unprofessional. The work should stand on its own.

You don't need degrees, or specifically advanced degrees to submit. Again, the work...

The costs are a different matter. I can't know the policies of all journals, but for some, at least (I hope it is still true), the following applies. First try to charge the funding agency of the research. Second, to charge the submitter's institution if available. Third (maybe second), charge the submitter. Fourth, if no one pays, absorb the costs internally.

I'm especially not certain of the fourth point, but it used to be true for some reputable journals.

My advice would be to submit the paper to the most appropriate journal, ignoring costs. But also ask your department if, in the eventuality that it is accepted, they would pay. If they say no, submit anyway.

Deal with the issue of getting a personal bill only when it arrives. Possibly just by saying it is impossible for you to absorb the cost as an unsponsored researcher. If they then refuse to publish it, you have at least benefitted from some review of your ideas.

Journals normally expect that researchers have some funding and that the funding includes covering page fees for the resulting research. Funding agencies benefit from being mentioned in the papers produced. But that doesn't apply to you and journals may still be able to make exceptions "for the greater good."


How to compensate students who face technical issues in online exams I am teaching a college level course, and a few students had technical issues during exam 1 (held online) and where not able to complete various parts of the exam.  One option that I could think of is to use their grade from a future exam (also held online) as their exam 1 grade. Designing another complete exam 1 is not an option in our case.
But I am wondering if there are better alternatives.... could you share your experiences regarding dealing with such issues?

I guess this answer won't be popular, but my strong suggestion is that you rethink student evaluation from the start. Exams aren't the only way that you can assess student learning and they are a poor way, in any case, to assess real competence in a field like CS. Add in all of the ways to creatively cheat on online exams and it quickly becomes a near impossible task to validate results.
Some ideas, but I don't have a comprehensive list:
Assess in smaller units more frequently so that "high risk" isn't a factor.
Make the grading scheme somewhat forgiving, so that a few bad answers don't have a large effect on grades.
Take "time to finish" out of the equation as much as possible to account for technical glitches.
Lessen the importance of "question - answer" grading in favor of things like projects that require deeper and more comprehensive knowledge.
Use questions that don't have trivial answers than can be quickly looked up. Likewise don't reuse questions that might have archived answers.
Lessen the importance of "individual work" at least somewhat. Effective teamwork is an important skill in many fields, including CS.
For some students it may be necessary to provide a communication channel to clear up misunderstandings. But make it global. Everyone should see every question and its answer.
For some student issues it may be necessary to talk to professionals skilled in the various communication difficulties that arise (dyslexia...).


Is it ethically unsound to accept a graduate admission offer then later withdraw? Note: Similar questions exist on ASE but those pertain to funded programs.

I have been admitted to an outstanding MS program and waitlisted for admission to another outstanding MS program. Both are unfunded. The first's response deadline is 04/15, and the second said they may not be able to let me know the final decision before then. While the first program is outstanding, I find better fit in second program (mainly research interest, location, and tuition rate). My question is: would it be ethically unsound to accept the first offer prior to the 04/05 deadline, and if I find out thereafter that I am accepted to the second one, decline the first? Since there is no funding involved (as in a Ph.D. program) I would not feel as bad about it.

It depends on what your ethical principles are. For example, if you self-define ethical behavior in terms of whether other people act that way, then it could be. "Accepting" an offer of admission means that you tell the university that you intend to enroll in the program, although if a jet plane crashes into your head and you are hospitalized for 5 years, you may be unable to make good on your word, due to unforeseen events.

In your case, it would be dishonest to accept and then decline, because the acceptance would be a lie (you don't intend to pursue the MS, you intend to pursue the MS if there isn't a better alternative, and this fact isn't unknown to you). An honest acceptance would be a conditional one, telling them that you provisionally accept subject to a change, owing to getting the second offer. That then allows the first institution to withdraw their offer, or to accept your conditions. It also allows them to extend an offer to another candidate, whom they might not be able to make an offer to (in time) if you accept under false pretenses.


Is a math bachelor the right choice for me? I am currently a student in high school, who plans on going to university.
As of now, I am planning to pursue my bachelors degree in mathematics in the UK and then go on to do a PhD in computer science in the states.
As long as I have been alive I have always loved doing maths and physics. But during the last couple of years, I have really gotten into computer science and can picture myself working in the field.
However, whenever I think about just doing a bachelor in computer science, I end up feeling like I am betraying my principles and throwing away the chance to acquire a proper mathematical education (Not to mention my disappointment in myself for not pursuing a career in theoretical physics (which just doesn't seem like it will pay the bills)).
As to my question, is it advisable for me to go through a math degree before pursuing a PhD in compsci? Or should I just get a degree in compsci in the first place and take some math classes on the side?
(In the case that it matters, I would also like to someday work outside of academia, perhaps pursuing a research or development job in the industry.)
Thank you for your answers in advance. I am really looking forward to reading them.

This can only be a partial answer and some perspective. Your idea of a math degree in UK followed by a CS doctorate in US is feasible. It is fairly common to enter a doctorate in US from a different field. But expect there to be advanced coursework as part of the doctoral program.
Taking a CS undergraduate degree isn't really essential, though it will give you some necessary topics. But doing that with "picking up" some maths would probably be pretty hard. And maybe not very satisfying if you can't devote enough mental energy to it.
But, you can stay flexible and there is no need to nail everything down at this moment. You will have plenty of chances to change your mind later. If you start in math, you might well decide to continue in that. Likewise CS.
Another point. You say physics "won't pay the bills", but in academia there isn't a tremendous difference in salary between different technical fields. It is harder to get a position in some fields than in others, but seven years from now the market will almost certainly be different and it is hard to predict these things so far in advance.
The best advice you can get is whenever possible, do what you love. Not everyone has an opportunity to do that. If you can manage a set of choices and follow a dream without compromising for money, then your life will probably be happier.


Cancelled Summer Program due to COVID-19 I am sure this question has been asked in some capacity on this site. I am a first year graduate student. I was contracted for a summer program that would have looked very good on my CV about 6 weeks ago.

However, due to the spread of COVID-19 the program was cancelled. Is there any way I can express this on my CV (possibly have an asterisk next to this activity)? If not, how should I explain the situation when applying for positions next year (because, now it is unlikely I will have anything noteworthy to put on my CV for this summer).

Thank you

List it as an achievement.

Awards and Achievements

Selected for competitive summer program, Summer School on ABCDE. Scholarship awarded; attendance cancelled due to COVID-19.

I think this is completely appropriate, for the same reasons as argued on this related thread. Note: I added "scholarhip awarded", but obviously you should not put that if there was no scholarship :)
In general, the purpose of your CV is to brag as much as possible; include everything that sounds impressive, even if you personally don't think it's that impressive. For instance, if you got accepted to two programs and only could attend one, I would list both. It's the same thing here -- the fact that COVID-19 is the circumstance is just a detail, not relevant to whether the acceptance is appropriate to list.


Modify the submitted manuscript to journal I submitted my manuscript to journal. one week after submission I found out that 2 references must be added and a little modification is needed. we sent them an email,but any answer have not been received yet(Maybe due to chrismass holiday). My manuscript status is assigned reviewers. please answer following questions: 1. is it possible that the editor didn't answer because the manuscript sent to reviewers and the editor decided not to let me modify it before the reviewers announce the review result? 2.If the editor removed the manuscript in the profile,whenever I resubmit the modified version,Is it necessary to change the title and abstract?someone told me if i resubmit the modified version with the same title and abstract,they will reject it. 3. is this mistake which leads to email sending to editor and resubmit the manuscript, decrease my chance for acceptance? I have too much stress . Thanks

I think the best course is just to wait for the reviewer reports. Probably they will suggest some changes. Make additional changes at that time and submit them with the revised manuscript. Otherwise it will just be confusing, even chaotic, for the editor and reviewers. Let the process run for a bit.

I'm assuming that the changes you want to make wouldn't make the difference between acceptance (with revision) and rejection. If you get rejected, revise and submit elsewhere.

But don't do things likely to confuse the editor.


How can we change things so more researchers are willing to share their source code? This is a followup to  Why are CS researchers reluctant to share code and what techniques can I use to encourage sharing?. That question specifically asked how one can succeed in obtaining researcher's source code.

As discussed in the answers to that question, the reasons largely boil down to competitive advantage and people thinking their code is not good enough. The former issue is difficult to address. However, one could try to address the latter issue, making the reasonable assumption that this behavior stems from the surrounding academic culture. There may be additional aspects of the academic culture that discourage code sharing, and which do not relate to competitive advantage.

So, one could instead ask the general questions what concrete actions one can take to change this culture? Or, to put it a little differently, how can I help change the academic world so that more researchers are willing to share their source code?

In the long term, this will only happen if you change the culture (just as you say).  How do you change the culture of a field?  Very slowly, and only with enormous effort.  You talk to other researchers.  You articulate your values, and seek allies who share your values.  You patiently make the case to your fellow colleagues, perhaps by writing opinion pieces.  You don't harangue or attack them; instead, you gently lay out the reasons why it is good for science and good for them to share their code.  Remember, in all likelihood you all share the same common values: the love and dedication of science and the pursuit of truth.

You lead, by acting as a model for how you would like others to behave.  You do what you think is right, and set a good example.

You try to persuade referees and program committees to value and reward researchers who do share their source code.  Recognize the amount of extra effort this takes, and (if you believe it is valuable) reward it accordingly: bump up your rating of their paper correspondingly, and make the case why others to do so.  When you write letters of reference or evaluation for another researcher, if they share their source code, give them kudos and explain why the hiring or promotion committee should view this positively.

Ultimately, this is not something that a single individual can change.  Only the entire community, acting as a whole, can make this kind of change.  Individuals can catalyze and facilitate that change, but like any other kind of reform, it takes extraordinary patience and effort, as well as buy-in from your colleagues.  It's not unusual for this kind of change to take a generation or two.  But keep your chin up: remember, you're doing this because you believe it is good for science and good for your field!


When is it appropriate to wrap text around an image in a scientific paper? I am working on a paper and the prescribed style dictates that we should use a single column of text; however, we have some relatively tall and thin images. If they are included in the paper in line they would take up the better part of a page with significant empty space to the sides of the image.

I realize that there are several possibilities to circumvent this situation

Rotating the image is possible sometimes
Shrinking the image so it does not take up as much vertical space
Creating graphics comprised of multiple images side by side to create a more favorable aspect ratio

However, if none of these options are possible is it acceptable to wrap the text around the image? If so are there any examples? Would this be a convention that differs between disciplines?

This is going to largely depend on the style guides of the journal(s) in question. If your long and tall figures are the best way to display the image, wrapping text around them is one feasible solution. The editors of the journal will be able to best guide you on this.

I would submit the manuscript in a clean and readable format, then let the editors decide how they want to format your graphic. I have never heard of a journal rejecting a paper solely because the graphics where of unusual dimensions.


Highlights in springer journal I have submitted a paper in springer journal which stated in the instructions for author to provide highlights in supplementary material. I forgot to provide at the time of submission and 3 days have now passed. If I email highlights to the journal now, I fear they could say my submission as inappropriate for the journal  as it is in admin processing stage. Is submitting highlights really essential for successful publication? What can be the consequences if I don't submit highlights now.
Moreover, the journal says in instructions to send highlights in 3 page PPT. Does it mean 3 slides of powerpoint only?

Good news—the highlights are not so important that their absence will make a big difference to whether your paper goes out for review. Just wait and see what happens next. If the editor likes the work, they will request you add the highlights at a future revision stage. All that said, it is generally good to follow their instructions.


Would leaving my current PhD program ABD be a red flag when applying to other universities? tl;dr: I am considering leaving my current PhD program ABD, after four years, several publications and a strained relationship with my bully advisor. How, when and do I explain why I'm leaving if I apply to other PhD programs (in different European countries) and would it be considered a red flag and mean an outright rejection?
Wider context: I am a PhD student in an STEM field at a European university, currently in my fourth year.
Over time, I have become increasingly disappointed and disillusioned, and I have been pushed around, bullied and slaved away for minimum pay. My relationship with my advisor is becoming worse all the time. They are a very self-absorbed person and a bully, but very well connected in the University. I have worked very hard for them not only on my PhD but on numerous other tasks that are not even related to my job. I completed all the formal requirements for graduation but my advisor keeps stalling because they need someone to work for them cheaply and the PhD dissertation is strong leverage.
Now I decided I am ready to leave my job and my PhD without graduation as it has become apparent that they will not let me finish no matter how much more I do.
I was thinking of applying to other programs, but it will be obvious that I was already a PhD student, as I can't just leave it off my CV and the publication track record will also be there. My question is, will quitting my program ABD and applying to another be a red flag? Do I mention anything about why I'm leaving and when? I have no intention of bad-mouthing my advisor to anyone (except obviously you strangers on the internet), so how do I explain my leaving without coming across as a whiner and a quitter? Or should I just give up and get a regular job?
P.S. I read this question which might be a duplicate, but there the student quit while having a relationship and contact with a specific advisor at the new university, while I am just thinking of applying to several calls where I do not have any personal connection with the people hiring. If people here think it's still a duplicate, I will agree.

The first order of business is making sure that you cannot graduate. If you have more than 10 papers published in non-predatory journals, you are objectively ready to wrap it up. I would suggest contacting former PhD students of your advisor to know how they "escaped".
Assuming you will not be able to graduate, look at your exit options. Your division of the job market between academia and "regular 9-5 job[s]" is to black-and-white.
Most large companies and some midsize companies have R&D laboratoires where research jobs is at least as intellectually stimulating as in academia; compared to academia, you trade some freedom, both intellectual (the cool topic you worked on is not funded this year because of company priorities) and physical (you need to be on premises at fixed hours, and you might even need to follow a dress code) in exchange for better working conditions (on average a better salary, better work/life balance; in experimental sciences you have a better-equipped lab with dedicated workers). That might or might not suit your taste.
For whichever position you end up pursuing, I strongly advise you rehearse what you will say at an interview. You will have to "badmouth" your current advisor; hop over to the Workplace stackexchange and read a few questions on that topic; the quick summary is to keep it as factual as possible. For PhD positions any reasonable interviewer would think that you should have defended with that number of publications, so I would point at that and say you disagree with your advisor's decision not to let you defend; avoir bringing other concerns if not asked. For industry positions the interviewer might not be familiar with PhD programs, so I would rather say something vague about an unsound work environment.
For PhD positions, your CV will probably be tossed out without an interview a few times because it is atypical, but if you get to the interview your chances look better than average since you demonstrated an ability to do research, write papers/grants etc.


Presenting on a conference as a Master Student... common or unusual? I am a master's student of Linguistics and am just finishing my first year of the master's programme. For one of my term papers I am currently doing an empirical study, on a topic I think is really important and with striking results. While browsing on the Internet I found a CfP for a conference on a field of research into which my study would fit perfectly.

Now my question is: Is it weird to submit an abstract in hopes of presenting on that conference, even though I am only a master's student?
Do I have any chance at all to present there or do most conference-organizers immediately dismiss master students because they are not experienced enough? (It is not a student's conference or anything similar)

I just don't know anyone who is experienced enough with these sorts of things to ask them...

I don't have experience as for the linguistics conferences, but from my observations I can tell that while master students' papers are not common, they are not unheard of (especially, but not limited to, as coauthorship with master thesis supervisor).
There are three remarks that I can make in your situation:

If the conference has double-blind review policy you should be judged based on the merits of your work and your academic status would be irrelevant.
Did you try talking with your supervisor about the paper: maybe she can suggest a coauthorship to increase the acceptance chances?
Generally my advice would be to submit the abstract: what do you have to lose?

Good luck.


What does a taught Master's admission board consider important? I am currently in my last semester of BS degrees in Computer Science and Mathematics. I am in the middle of applying for a number of taught Master's programmes in both the US and in Asia, most of which are 1-year and full-time.

My grades are fairly good, with a cumulative GPA of ~3.7 and a major GPA of 3.9+ in CS. Unfortunately I have no research experience (that's why I chose to apply for taught Masters in the first place) and frankly have not much besides grades to show admissions.

So my question is: besides having strong letters of recommendation, what can I do to increase my chances?

I understand the "correct" answer differs from institute to institute and from country to country, but some general pointers are very much appreciated.

So my question is: besides having strong letters of recommendation, what can I do to increase my chances?

Not much. You're applying right now, so there's no time to make your application look stronger.  However, in math at least, no prior research experience is expected for master's programs, or even most PhD programs in the US.  Your GPA looks fine to me.  I don't think you should have trouble getting into a good master's program in the US (in math or CS) provided you're coming from a quality school and have good letters.  You could also consider sending out some applications for PhD programs if that's what you want.


Advice on adding user stories to Masters thesis For my masters project I utilized user stories as a means of requirements gathering. I have roughly 100 of these along with the acceptance tests to go with them.

I'm currently writing my thesis and detailing the methods I used to gather these requirements. My question is: Do I include these user stories as figures in text or add them to my appendices, or not at all?

I don't like including large amounts of "raw" data in a thesis, paper, or any other printed medium, because it does not contribute to the main text, and if you've already summarized the essential data in the thesis, then you don't need to explicitly include the data.

That said, you do want to make the data available in some medium. Perhaps you can make it available as an online repository (perhaps your school allows for "attachments" or "supporting information" to be included with your thesis. You could then scan the surveys (or bundle them up into a single file if they were generated electronically, etc.) and post them somewhere that readers can access.


What is the fate of an accepted paper in Springer conference but not being presented? I have sent a paper to a conference whose proceedings are published in Springer and that paper got accepted there. But I am not able to attend the conference. Then what would be its fate? Does that come into digital library? Second, do conference proceedings contain my paper? Third, will this publication count as a valid publication?

The comments above are the answers you want. I am just reiterating them here because I think the question deserves an answer. If they accepted your paper, it means the conference organizers think it's interesting. You should mention to them your inability to attend, and if you can't for any reason publish it elsewhere, you could ask them if they are willing to review your contribution and publish it.
Conference organizers often serve as editors of the conference proceedings, so it's entirely up to them to publish it anyway, or not. And they typically do not have any special incentive to go one way or another, so do try!


Typical academic leave notice period? I was wondering what is the average notice (leave) period for academic positions (eg lecturer/post doc/teaching fellow).
I have just received a 14 month contract stipulating a 3 months notice by either party which effectively makes leaving the job early for new employment impossible. is this normal university practice?
The companies I have worked for before had an employee notice period of 2 - 5 weeks and 2 months employer notice.

UK University.

Thanks

It seems to me that for a position with teaching duties, the main question is: leaving during the year versus leaving at the end of the year. Suppose you teach a semester course and you give your notice in the first month, then 3 months sounds a bit short. It might be that they want to make the schedule for the next year 3 months before classes start and want to know what teacher are still there next year.
My advice would be to discuss this with the university. However if you are looking for a job that you can quit at an arbitrary time within weeks/a few months, then teaching might not be for you.


How to formally report database literature search results? Years ago, I seen an interesting article that made reference to database search results. The author run a few queries through PubMed and reported on the number of records. This was a neat introduction to the wider discussion on the state of the scholarship in the given field. I'm interested in doing something similar. I would appreciate if someone could point me to out to papers or notes on how such findings should be reported. For example let's say that there is x amount of articles on Term A and y amount of articles on Term B. Consequently, the one could assert something on the lines:

  Contrary to common expectations, it seems that relatively little is published on Term A in relation to the Term B. For example, both terms appear only on n occasions in the Database D.

I'm interested in how to state such results in a non-confusing manner, in particular I would like to know:

Where and how would it be appropriate to search the nature of the query
Presumably, the date when the query was applied should be stated as well?
Should the reference be introduced to the bibliography? If so I would be grateful for sample entry in APA or any other common style

This sort of thing is pretty standard when it comes to meta-analyses, since each begins with a search for relevant studies. Generally, descriptions of the search query and its results are included in the methodology section of a paper; in addition to including the keywords used in the search (and, preferably, the reasoning for their inclusion), the start and end dates of the search should, as you mentioned, be noted. A diagram may also be helpful for readers to indicate the way in which you selected studies for analysis from the initial pool of results, and the languages in which the studies you assessed were written.

There are many papers that demonstrate this; as an example, "Psychosocial factors and chronic spontaneous urticaria: a systematic review" published in Allergy states the following:

  We first conducted a search of the PubMed and OVID/Medline databases
  using the keywords ‘urticaria’, ‘chronic urticaria’, ‘chronic
  spontaneous urticaria’ – given that the definition of CSU was not
  clearly established in early studies, we also included more general
  terminology such as urticaria and chronic urticaria, but excluded
  articles clearly assessing physical or acute urticaria –
  ‘psychopathology’, ‘stress’, ‘depression’, ‘anxiety’ ‘life events’ and
  ‘axis I’ and ‘axis II’, including full-text accessible articles in
  English, French and Spanish. We then performed a meta-analysis that
  included all these studies (see Fig. 1) from 1 January 1935 to 1
  January
  2012. After two reviewers (M.B.S. and I.B.) independently evaluated all potentially relevant studies, we conducted statistical analyses
  using Stata® version 12 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).
  Methodological quality of included studies In order to assess the
  quality of the aforementioned studies, we employed a standardized
  measure specifically tailored to this systematic review, based on the
  Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) (8). This approach included the appraisal
  of external and internal validity, as well as biases common to
  observational studies specific to CSU and psychosocial factors. The
  independent reviewers mentioned above evaluated the study quality
  separately and resolved the differences in opinion by consulting a
  third reviewer (A.R.) (Table 1).

To sum up:

Databases searched
Search terms used (potentially alongside their justifications)
Dates of publication included in search
A diagram which explains how you winnowed these studies down to the relevant ones (and a table for the ones you decided to include in your paper)
As a bonus, if multiple authors are responsible for assessing studies for inclusion in your paper, include how these decisions were made/conflicts resolved.

I've bolded some of these ideas in the paragraph above to give yo a good idea of how this works.


A potential collaborator applies for a grant on his own: what should I do? In response to a solicitation in an area of my expertise, I approached a known expert in a different field; I had thought of a way to apply that field to solve the problem.  He liked my idea and set up a meeting with him and his postdocs; over time, we went through several rounds of written communication, proposal outlines, research plans, and revisions amongst us.

Midway through, I learned more about the solicitation and concluded that it wasn't a good match; we discussed this, decided not to apply, but that the plan was good and that we should look for other sources of funding.  As we did this, we continued to do some revisions together.

A while later, he sent me an email that he found a good source of funding, that he has a good relationship with the source and doesn't really need a partner for it, and that he is going to apply without me.  I was quite upset, but, seeing that he was telling me and not asking me, and that I had no way to stop him, said "okay, makes sense, please send me a copy of the proposal and keep me informed."

In truth, his proposal was advanced far beyond what I had last worked on.  But, the core idea was mine; and I have the records to attest to that, not to mention that his postdocs could verify that as well.

Assuming he gets the grant, I have no desire to get a share of the funds.  At this point, he can do the rest of the work without me.  He really is an expert and manages a very large, very prominent research program with lots of high profile funding.  And rightfully so - he produces results.

What I would like is coauthorship.  After all, the entire approach is my idea.  I thought of using his area of expertise to solve a very high profile problem of growing importance in my field, and described to him in detail why all the indigenous methods to my field are failing, and why an approach drawing on his expertise could succeed.

What is the right way to handle this? I won't be satisfied with an acknowledgement at the end; I'd like to be one of the authors.  I'm happy helping with the research further though I'm not sure he feels he needs me.

And, moreover, is this type of behavior acceptable? Do I have any leverage here? Do I need it?

CLARIFICATIONS:

To clarify, while I certainly didn't do the research yet, it was more than just giving him an idea.  I sent an outline, discussed the plan, and spent hours revising and iterating on their research plan.  I'll be equally clear that the final proposal was very high quality, and went far beyond what I had worked on.
From the responses, it seems this falls into a grey area.  So let me revise my question: Given that he's probably going forward with this, what's the best way to approach him and ask to be a coauthor? I'd be happy being involved with the research itself, but I'm not sure he wants that.  He'd probably be best off career-wise keeping it to him and his students (and, mind you, this is a researcher who puts a lot of effort on career advancement - he's an equally talented businessperson, albeit in academic research, as scholar).

I am somewhat surprised about the answers so far. The behavior of the professor as described seems at least a little unethical at best, and downright exploitative at worst. If a more junior researcher comes to you with a good idea and some first steps towards a concrete research plan, and you answer with (basically) gee, good work, now please excuse me while I do this research with my own students, I have a hard time seeing how this would be in any way considered fair. Asking the OP to be happy because he "helped progress science" after all is ... ok, I have literally no good word for this expectation. As we all know, reputation is the currency of science, and it sounds like the OP was badly short-changed.

Whether the professor "needs" the OP or not is, to me, not really the important question here. The OP had the original idea, so it is unlikely to assume that he would be entirely useless in the remainder of the project. Hence, cutting him out of the research basically right from the start seems really awful. The least you can do is take him on and give him a chance to contribute to the research - if it then turns out that he or she actually lacks all the relevant knowledge to contribute from the project from then on (unlikely), you can still decide together to part ways later on.

  And, moreover, is this type of behavior acceptable? Do I have any leverage here? Do I need it?

I wouldn't consider it ethical at all. Whether you have any leverage is another question - likely no, as (as correctly noted above), just having the idea by itself does not warrant co-authorship (but you should have been given the chance to do more), but it is kind of too late for this now.

  I'd be happy being involved with the research itself, but I'm not sure he wants that. He'd probably be best off career-wise keeping it to him and his students (and, mind you, this is a researcher who puts a lot of effort on career advancement - he's an equally talented businessperson, albeit in academic research, as scholar).

As I said, it is a bit late to ask for co-authorship of a thing that's already been written without you. If you don't actually want to be involved in the rest of the project, I am not sure what you can realistically ask for. In this case, I am not sure if you can get much more than an acknowledgement that you brought the idea to the mind of the professor.

(that being said, I wouldn't touch a collaboration with this guy anymore for the rest of my life)


Comparing career prospects across fields in Applied Math A professor casually mentioned that when submitting abstracts to a conference in some fields in Applied Math (such as numerical PDEs), it is highly likely that they will be accepted (unless the work is garbage) - unlike some "other fields" (like computational neuroscience).

By this I understand that those "other fields" are more competitive, but I am not sure if I am interpreting this correctly. In general, how does this affect career prospects on the long run? Will it be likewise a lot harder to get an academic job in such "other fields"?

P.S. I am in a U.S. college.

I work in inverse problems, more or less a field of applied mathematics.

Conference plenary talks are prestigious.
People are invited to also give other talks. This might carry some prestige, but I am not really sure.
People give contributed talks. This gives little prestige, but is a good idea for other reasons. Typically, for small conferences, all or most contributed talks are accepted, though it might be different in larger conferences.

The thing to learn is that conference talks are of minor importance. Publications in journals count far more. This depends on academic field.


Related work in an article (This is a junior researcher's question.)

Scientific publications contain a part discussing related work and the context of the paper. However, it is not clear where to put the section discussing related work of a paper.

Where does the section on related work belong in a scientific publication? Is there any universal standard, or is it arbitrary?

If you're writing a conference paper, put it in the same place as it appears in the conference papers you read.  If you're not reading any conference papers, you're not ready to write one.

If you're writing a journal paper, put it in the same place as it appears in the journal papers you read.  If you're not reading any journal papers, you're not ready to write one.

If you're writing a dissertation, put it in the same place as it appears in the dissertations you read.  If you're not reading any dissertations, you're not ready to write one.

If you're writing a $PAPER_TYPE, put it in the same place as it appears in the $PAPER_TYPEs that you read.  If you're not reading any $PAPER_TYPEs, you're not ready to write one.

Also: Ask your advisor.


Is it acceptable to use Mathematica to derive results in your research? While doing research in statistics, sometimes I came across complex integration that I can't or don't want to solve analytically.

Is it okay to use Mathematica to solve the integration and use the result in my research? Do I need to report this in the academic article? My qualm is that perhaps I am supposed to be able to solve these things by hand.

(Some context: I'm from the social sciences and thus unfamiliar with what's permitted regarding these tools.)

Is it okay to use Mathematica to solve the integration and use the result in my research?

Of course it is.

It might be useful, though, to make the Mathematica code employed for the calculations available to others, either through a public repository or by a note in the paper suggesting to contact the author(s). This will allow reviewers or other readers to check your calculations, or, possibly, reuse or extend them.

In a paper where I made extensive use of Mathematica, I wrote the following note at the end:

  To those interested, the authors can provide the Mathematica notebooks of the full calculations developed in this work.


I have multiple journal articles, but I do not enjoy conference presentations. Is it bad for my job prospects? I'm currently a Phd candidate, and I have managed to publish several articles in major journals in my field ( it is within social sciences). I am not quite sociable; I am the kind of person who prefers to work alone and spend time researching and writing. That is why I am not into the practice of presenting at conferences.
I am sure I can have like four conference presentations towards the end of my PhD. Do you think it is bad for my job prospects (to get a faculty position) that I do not have many conference presentations and that I tend to prefer tp work on publishing journal articles.
I would really appreciate your feedback.

[I am talking from a STEM perspective, not from social sciences, but from what I hear from humanities, interaction may even be more important there than in STEM. However, take it with a grain of salt:]
A faculty position involves interacting with people and giving lectures regularly. Where will you get the practice from if not in conferences?
Assuming even that you get a faculty position. Where will you get your networks that you'll need for tenure and promotion, if not by meeting colleagues at conferences and explaining your work. Yes, some extraordinary scientists may actually achieve faculty positions by their journal papers alone (I am aware of such examples), but they are extraordinary people and very rare.
Better, you face your challenge and get used to learn how to present good talks. We all had to develop this skill and I promise you it will come handy at some point.


Need suggestions on quitting a computer science PhD Seems it's the second time that I came to ask a question here. But this time the situation is quite different for me.

I've completed my B.S. 2.5 years ago, and entered a PhD program in a top notch school. My advisor is a domain expect in my field and he treats all of us very nicely and friendly, and he does know a hell lot of both academia and industry. I just received my master degree and interned at a uprising company in Silicon Vally.

However for academic work, I'm not doing that well. The past 2.5 years I only published in a workshop. In the meanwhile many of my friends have published top conference papers. I feel really stupid that I can't do so. Since my mathematic background is not well to understand some papers, I tried to digest the math while I'm on free time. And now I could understand most of the papers that I read.

The problem is that, I can't think of new ideas. Every ideas I try fails, constantly. I'm don't know why my mates could do so well in publishing. Because of this, I seriously feel a lot of pressure. Everyday when I wake up, I can feel the heart beats like dumb. However during the internship in the previous summer, everything is so smooth and I enjoyed the life there.

In theory, my advisor could let me graduate even if I don't publish. But I really do not want to let him down and waste his funding. The question is, shall I quit my PhD now and receive the offer if the pressure continues? Any suggestions?

Well i have been in similar situation like yours. I chose not to give up and that is why i was able to defend my PhD last month.

It was very frustrating.I switched advisers 4 times. Would you believe that? I was recommended to be expelled from the PhD program. My situation was much worse than yours. I was almost thrown out of the PhD program in 2010. How i was able to change this? Just like you, i interned in Silicon Valley in 2009 and 2010 where my manager sort of liked me and he stood for me. He and even his manager wrote two letters in my favor supporting that i should not be expelled from the PhD program. They argued that i should switch topic and adviser and continue PhD program. All i was looking for was a good adviser who could trust my skills and luckily i got it.

After that, it was fine. The moral of the story is " i did not give up in circumstances much worse than yours." Does your current adviser like you, have trust in you, have confidence in you? If so, don't worry. Regarding publications, choose mid-tier conferences first to raise your confidence and then go for top-tier conferences.

And now on communities like stackoverflow and various forums for hardware and software, discuss your ideas with experts, shape your ideas here. Talk to your contacts in the industry as to what do they think of your problem or in their opinion what are the hot problems to solve.

Another lesson is be pro-active. Don't procrastinate or live in your own world. Get up


Referee reports not coming It happened the third time to me and I start wondering what is going on? I have submitted two papers since May last year (11 months) and didn't get any answer. I wrote to the editors and they answered to me the following:

One of them said that it was very hard to find a referee for the paper and finally they succeeded to find a person willing to referee the paper.

Yesterday the other editor told me that the two referees where the paper was sent "eventually didn't write a report. We are now trying to get a report from a third referee".

In the last two years I noticed a very long delay in receiving reports for my papers. It also happened to a reasonable journal, JA, to receive a favourable report  after some corrections are done. After I sent the corrections back I didn't receive anything back for six months. When I wrote to the editor, he wrote to me that the referee refused to answer emails and then he sent the paper to another referee, starting practically from scratch the reviewing process. The paper was finally rejected after 9 months.

Please help me concerning the following matters. Although I never commented on referee/editor's decisions it seems that something has changed. The community does not want to referee my papers anymore. Once I got a first rejection on the reason that the table of contents is not symmetric.

My question is the following:

Is anything I can do with respect to this matter? What should I write to those editors. I have asked clearly when should I receive report on my paper and didn't get any clear answer.

Finally it is my work and cannot be just deleted as some people/referee like, but these delays somehow have ruined the scores for my ongoing research grant.

Maybe I should add that most of the journals I am talking about are well established journals in the field, some of them being in the top (first quarter) of the AI/ISI ranking etc.

As always, one needs to look within oneself. Ask yourself the following questions:

How broadly interesting is your oeuvre? In my experience, difficulty in finding a referee often indicates that the field is very narrow, and the editors are looking for a referee to check whether a paper is a breakthrough in the narrow field. Otherwise, the paper is rejected.
How well-written are the papers? Especially the introduction - if the prospective referee's eyes glaze over when s/he reads it, s/he probably won't want to referee the paper. I realize that the author is not the best judge for this, but show the paper to a friend.
You can usually get papers published quicker if you submit to a lesser journal (and I assume that it is ALREADY published on arxiv.org). The optimization problem (quality vs speed) is for you to solve. From a careerist standpoint, the journal weighting is very nonlinear: a single paper in Annals of Math is worth essentially an infinite number in, say, PAMS (no insult meant). If you are already established, then you might not care. If not, you might.

Just one man's opinion (though I am active on several editorial boards, so the opinion is somewhat informed).


NSF proposal dwell time during COVID19 pandemic I would like to hear your experience in the dwell time of the current NSF merit review process during the COVID19 crisis.  Per NSF data, they met their 75% performance goal to provide a decision within 6 months for the past years (except for 2017, due to the relocation to new headquarters).
Our proposal (in the CS discipline) was submitted in November 2019. It's now almost 8 months but still, no acceptance or rejection.  As far as I know, the review panel has already met, but nothing else.  Anyone facing a similar situation?  Thanks :)

I have heard from a colleague for an NSF DUE that it has been 8 months and they have not received any news yet.