Should previous final exams be released to students? In general, you can find the past exams for the past 15 years or so at my school. However I had one prof in Calculus III who chose to withhold his exams. This was the only instance in which a prof has chosen to do so in my two years at university studying engineering. His justification was that he didn't want students studying exams rather than the actual course material which I find to be interesting.
As a student, I notice that solving past exams from the same instructor as practice can be helpful for a couple of reasons:

it helps you get accustomed to the instructor's style of exam so you're less nervous when you're writing the actual exam. I find that even seeing the familiar cover page helps in calming me down just before an exam starts.
it  helps you figure out what type of questions the instructor likes to put the focus on (i.e instructor A prefers to put conceptual questions, instructor B hasn't put a question on the laplace transform in 5 years so maybe I'll study that later if I have time, instructor C always has a 2nd-order circuit as question 1, etc...)

Of course, the 2nd point is exacly why my calculus instructor chose to withhold his exams. But at the same time, some students may benefit if they use them responsibly as challenging practice problems without jeopardizing their learning experience (i.e someone with the mentality of "I know instructor B hasn't put a question on the laplace transform in 5 years, but I need to study it anyway because it's important"). Most of my other instructors release their past final exams, but do not post full solutions (or full solutions to just last year's exam). A few have chosen to release just the final answers to the questions without the full solution.

Is it better for the students if the instructors released the past final exams? What about full solutions (or just final answers) to the finals exams? Are there studies that show if one strategy is better than another?

I understand that the answers and arguments may vary depending on the field so I should add that I am particularly interested in an answer for the fields of mathematics, science, and engineering.

I don't have an opinion on releasing solutions, but the exams should definitely be released.  Some students will have access to them through previous students, one way or another. Making them officially available makes sure everyone has the same access.


Grant applications with overlapping deadlines: listing other grants one has applied for? Often, when applying for grants, one is asked to mention other grants one has received, one has applied for, and one is going to apply for. Whereas the first point is simple, how should one handle the second and third point (other grants one has applied for, and is planning to apply for)?

My case is that there are two big grants I would like to apply for, both offering enough money to keep me going for a number of years. For both grants one has to apply in spring, and the decision is made and announced towards the end of the year. The grant would be for research and salary starting from next year.

Both grants ask the applicant to list which other grants they have applied/are going to apply for. What is the effect of listing the other big grant, if both grants can cover 100% of the costs? Does it decrease the chance to be accepted, does it affect the money that is paid out (in case of variable grants)? In general, is there a benefit of listing the other grant, or is there a risk in doing so? Are there retributions when not listing other grants one has applied for, or even applying despite not saying so during another grant application?

This is how I do it and perhaps this could work for you too. Usually I list the applications that I have already submitted and that are under evaluation and I specify the budget size and what the funding will be used for (PhDs, postoc, own salary) and in particular I specify for for each of them if it is related or not to the current application. I also mention somewhere what is the priority, e.g. that if both the current application and one of those that I have applied for already -and that is on the same topic - will be funded, then one of the two (usually the smaller in terms of budget or prestige) will be not be maintained or will be withdrawn. It's a bit difficult to list applications that you plan to do but haven't written yet, because in principle you might not manage to submit them. So usually I avoid doing that unless I am 100% sure I will submit it. I also think it's pretty normal to submit similar project ideas to different councils and in different formats, and this simply shows that you are active in the hard job of fund raising so for me is a positive sign. In general it's always good to be transparent when it comes to applications.


Statement of purpose: One-for-all or one-to-one? This question is about statement of purpose (s.o.p).

I am not sure that whether it is advisable to write exactly one s.o.p. for all the schools or to write for each school exactly one s.o.p.? Does this really matter? Would the reviewers of a school judge applicants by their understanding of the school?

I really need judicious suggestions.

I assume you are talking about a document that is part of your application to universities (e.g. for a PhD), which would be called a research statement here in the UK. Then the answer is simple: you want to maximise your chances of each application. So invest the extra effort and make individual documents to maximise your chances.

Different departments have different priorities, so you want to emphasise how your plans fit to the research agenda of each place you are applying to. While it may be convenient to send the same SOP to each place, you can show that you have researched the place you are applying to and at least modify the SOP to fit to the place you are applying to.


What to do when PhD is becoming hell due to non-cooperation from supervisor? I have a nightmare adviser, who is also the head of the Department. The problems are:

he has too many students,
never reads my chapters,
he is trying his best to sabotage TA or RA opportunities that are my only source of funding,
he discourages me from attending conferences, and
refuses to introduce me to anyone in his network.

The worst thing is that I am an international student in the social sciences in Germany where professors have too much power, and there is no system of redress.

I have a second supervisor from another university, but he does not want to get involved as he is not the primary adviser.

I am three years into the program and have a nearly completed thesis. Without his comments on my chapters, I fear that I will end up with a lower grade (PhDs are graded here) which marks an end to my academic career.  I was the top student in the Masters program and that is why I was offered a fully funded PhD. My adviser was very happy with me until I spoke to him about trying for a job in Germany or in Europe. Since then he is distant because I think he expected me to go back to my Third World country and create links for him.

What can I do?
Should I drop this PhD and apply for another one in the US or Canada? (I am not sure he will give me a recommendation)
Should I complete this PhD in a multi-disciplinary field (Global Studies/Global Integration) and start another one in a related discipline such as Political Science or Geography or another traditional discipline, in Canada or the US?
Should I apply for post docs and hope he will give me a recommendation?

Any other ideas. Please help. I am severely depressed.

My 2 cents :

Graduate as soon as possible, The fact that this is with high or low grades is not relevant here
Apply for a postdoc position in a place where PhDs are not graded (France for instance)
Publish the (very good) stuff that you intentionally kept hidden until your graduation

After step 3 your record will be clean, and all this "hell stuff" will be far from you. To obtain a position in academy, the only thing that matters is the quality of your research (that can be seen in the papers) and of your teaching (for that you requires references), nobody will care about what happen during your PhD.


Writing postdoc fellowship before contacting postdoc advisor? I'm in my last year of PhD (in the US studying biomathematics) and I didn't know how early I was supposed to start applying for postdocs. My main concern is funding. Apparently, the NSF postdoc grant is due in less than 30 days and the NIH F32 series is due in less than 2 months.
These grants all require research statements and some kind of sponsor statement. Since I haven't contacted anyone about postdocs, I can imagine a few routes of action:

I quickly write a research proposal -> send it to potential postdoc advisors along with CV and application -> ask if they are willing to advise me + write a sponsor statement for me within 2 weeks or so
Contact postdoc advisors now -> explain that grants are due in a month or so and ask if they want to quickly draft up something together

Which one is better? Finally, how many postdocs are funded by their own grant?
How many are funded by PI's grant?
Of course I will speak to my PhD advisor about this asap.

I'd write to the potential advisors with your CV and a summary of the proposal. I don't know what the paper work is for these schemes, but I suspect they require a ~1 page summary or abstract. I'd write that as a token that you've thought about it and arn't just trying it on. You might find thought that the sponsoring institution has processes that must be gone through before they are allowed to sponsor people, and that these have deadlines earlier than the NSF/NIH deadlines.


Appeal process for PhD dismissal due to health issues What is the best way to craft the appeal letter based on health issues to have one last chance for taking the qualifying exam? Those health and mental issues have been already documented through a medical doctor and a licensed psychological counselor. Please, anybody has such advices or suggestions to draft the letter in a way that showing how the health issues have a significant impacts on qualifying exam preparation.

If this is in the US, the precise nature of your health issues is protected by HIPAA and is none of your department's business. Documentation affirming only that those health issues have substantially interfered with your academic performance should be issued by your disability services office, who have experience with such things. Medical disabilities are disabilities and as such are legally entitled to reasonable accommodation.


Would the professor be annoyed if I failed two grad school applications in previous year? I applied to two places last year; both failed. I am not sure if I ask the professor to write a letter for me again, would he be annoyed? How should I tell him?

If I tell him that I failed, would that cast a negative impression of me on him?

Two rejections are not so many, especially if you applied to highly competitive universities/departments. Some suggest applying to as many as 10 different places (of course, assuming you find so many research departments that interest you).

Just ask your professor again, I would not expect him to be annoyed. Even though we cannot know for sure how he will react, the uncertainty about his reaction should not block you from pursuing your academic goals.


Is there a term|phrase for a grading assessment that counts the best m of n? I'm assigning weights to different course assessments.

Assessment                    Weight
============================  ======
Assignments (best 5 of 8)       50%
Mid-term exam                   20%
Final exam                      30%

Is there a word or phrase for a grading scheme that counts the best m of n marks? Example: There are weekly assignments worth 10% each, the best 5 of 8 will be counted.

I often see this expressed as "lowest x grades dropped," where x is n minus m.


Is there any field in which applicants to PhD programs (in any part of the world) usually have publications? We get occasional questions here from people who are applying to PhD programs, and are worried because they have no publications. This is puzzling to me, because most of my friends in PhD programs did not have any publications when they applied.

We've also previous agreed that it is not generally mandatory to have a publication when applying to PhD, although it certainly helps. I am interested in knowing if there are any fields that are exceptions to this rule.

Are there any fields of study where (in some parts of the world, at least) most students have publications already by the time they apply for PhD admissions?

By "most," I mean that publications are common enough that a lack of one is seen as worrying, and possibly indicative of some deficiency in the applicant.

I'll point toward the Max Planck School for Computer Science,
IMPRS-CS, if I remember correctly they used to have even stronger wording than the current

  A successful candidate must...  have performed research and published (or submitted for publication) the results

But the MPIs are not the norm. Mostly, you would be fine with just your Masters thesis in math, comp sci, biology, or chemistry.


To share or not to share (your student evals)? It's end of term.  If you're teaching faculty, it means you've gotten your student evals.  We can't be the only ones trying to decide whether, how or how much to share our student evals, e.g., by posting them to the entire class.

Arguments in favor relate to openness and accountability, that it's helpful for students to know that we take their feedback seriously, that we listen to what they say and take it as important.  We’re accountable, just as they are.  It also gives them a check on their feelings:  How did their experience compare with others and how much responsibility lies where?

Arguments opposed relate to confidentiality and privacy, that the surveys were intended to be anonymous and that some of the written comments might be more identifiable than intended if the student knew the comment would be shared, so that at most, only the aggregated numeric data should be shared.  Also, if one instructor shares, that may create unwelcome pressure on their colleagues to share feedback they regard as private.

How are other faculties weighing these issues?  Are you having this discussion?
  Is there anything close to a consensus or a best practice emerging?  Has your institution given you guidance?

Where I worked in Germany, faculty were required to share the statistical results of the survey with their classes, and allow for time for feedback. So I see no issues in sharing results when no student-specific data would be given away. (Note that the surveys thus effectively represented "midterm" evaluations.)

As far as comments, that's a bit trickier. I'd err on the side of leaving out anything that talks about the student instead of about the class.

  I think that X

would be fine, but

  Because I transferred and hadn't studied Y at my old university, this class was very hard

would not, since it might give away some information as to who said it. You could present a redacted version:

  Because I . . . hadn't studied Y[,] this class was very hard

if you want to remove anything identifying individuals.


How to mark student reports more efficiently I have been assigned to mark student reports for an engineering coursework, which mainly involves the use of a software. The main content of each report is around 15 pages. There are 45 reports in total. I am also required to write feedback to each student. I have not been involved in designing the assignment nor teaching the course.

The professor who assigned me this task told me that the marker last year took about 4 full days to complete the markings, and yet I have spent more than two weeks doing this (and not really doing anything else), and I am not yet done. I did need to spend some time familiarising myself with the subject matter and the software in the beginning, because I have never used the software before, but it is not that difficult to use.

Since this is my first marking experience, I am wondering whether it is normal to have spent so much time marking. Is there any strategy I can adopt to complete the task more efficiently, especially in my case where I am not involved in designing the assignment?

I was in a very similar situation this past term. I was also tasked with grading engineering assignments that involved the use of software and a written component for which there were no solutions (mind you they were a little shorter than the ones you are grading). I am familiar with the software so it ended up taking me 5 days to mark.

Jigg has covered most of the bases, I just wanted to add another tip for efficiency:

In an effort to give them good feedback I wanted to write thorough comments. But after I got going on the marking I found that many students were making the same kinds of mistakes and I was writing the same comments over and over again. Eventually I just created an excel spreadsheet that really helped automate the marking that looked like this example:

The totals for points and points available are summation formulas so I didn't need to do any totalling myself. As I graded each assignment, I just compared it to the solutions I came up with and judged how well each of them met the criteria (nothing new). When I saw something wrong I just copied a detailed comment from the comments list and pasted it in the relevant cell. When I was finished with an assignment I just copied the everything in the thick black border into the online comments section, entered their grade, and moved on to the next one. If there was something new (and incorrect) that a student was doing I created a new comment and copied it into the list. Sometimes I also wrote something like "good work" next to the assignment total, just so that there were some positive comments.

Granted this worked really well when the students were all doing the exact same thing, but if your students are writing about different topics, it might not work as well.


Is it appropriate to ask a job candidate if we can record their interview? I am part of a faculty search committee. One round of our process is Skype interviews of top candidates. Not all of our committee will be able to attend each interview (even remotely).

Would it be appropriate to ask candidates if we can record their Skype interview to share among the committee? My concern is that candidates might not feel free to say no if they're uncomfortable being recorded.

In case it matters, this is in the United States.

There may be more issues than you raise here. Some people will say yes and feel intimidated. Some people will say no out of general principles. Some people will say yes and regret it later. Some people will say yes initially but decide otherwise in the middle of the interview.

I suggest that before you implement such a process you game it out thoroughly, developing a lot of what-if scenarios and how you will respond to them. I think an essential element, possibly with legal ramifications (though I don't know), is that you don't disadvantage anyone for giving either answer or for declining to give a reason.

Another possible issue is that some candidates may not be as candid as they would otherwise if they are being recorded. It isn't a case of being devious or calculating, just being cautious. Can my words come back to haunt me?

You will also need to decide what to do with the tapes and when to delete them and how to assure the candidate that you will do so, especially if requested. In particular, who will have access to the tapes and for how long?

Finally, if you develop a policy with a lot of nuances, you should publish it, probably online, and let the candidate have access to it prior to an interview.

But, overall, I'd suggest that in the case you mention of not everyone being available, that you make it possible for a follow up interview rather than taping. There are probably other issues here that I haven't considered.


Discreet way to establish priority After finishing a paper, I'd like to show it to a few people for review. I'd like to establish publication priority somehow. The site arXiv won't do because my paper hasn't been reviewed to that level of quality. On the other hand, viXra won't do because I don't want to look like a crackpot.

Here are some desirable functions. The site:

Lets me upload a file
Lets me share the URL so that anyone can see it who has the URL
Shows the time I uploaded the file in a trustworthy way
Prevents others from modifying it-- it's view only

Bonus:
5. Shows versions of the file, together with their upload times

How many of these can be satisfied? Would a file sharing site suffice? Thanks for your advice.

You cannot establish priority without circulating your paper widely.  Or, more precisely, you can prove that you had the idea first, but that won't help you much.  Academic credit is awarded for contributing to the research community.  If you have an idea and don't publicize it (so few people find out or learn from it), and someone else rediscovers the idea and tells everyone, then they will get most or all of the credit, because the community will have learned far more from them than from you.  Even if you can prove you made the discovery first, you may end up as a footnote or side comment in the background sections of future papers.

This is not always fair, but it's a pretty good system.  In particular, it avoids the nightmare scenario of researchers trying to establish priority while deliberately telling as few people as possible (to preserve their head start for follow-up work).

The fact that the arXiv has time stamps and keeps old versions available is potentially useful for resolving disputes, but the important aspect is that papers on the arXiv get noticed.  That's why the arXiv is a good way to establish priority: the community doesn't consider "Oh, I had no idea that paper was on the arXiv" to be a good excuse.  By contrast, if you post the paper somewhere much more obscure, then not noticing it would not be surprising or frowned upon.

How to handle this depends on the threat you are worried about.  If you are concerned that someone you ask to look over the paper might steal your ideas, then you could cc a trusted mentor who could vouch for you if there were a dispute.  On the other hand, I wouldn't worry about this too much: outright theft of ideas is rare, and why would you even want advice from someone you think might plausibly be a thief?  If you are concerned about staking out credit in case someone else is independently working on similar ideas, then there's nothing you can do except get your paper in good shape and then distribute it.

  If my paper is wrong and I put it on arXiv, I'll look like a crackpot. I want something a lot more obscure than arXiv while my paper is in its formative stages.

Of course it's hard to say without more information, but these comments suggest to me that worrying about credit may be premature.  I'd recommend revising/polishing the paper until it is no longer potentially embarrassing or in a state of flux, and then posting it to the arXiv.


If no funding is available at the time of admission, what are the chances of getting funding later, and when would I find out? I applied to graduate school (masters programs) for an engineering major. It is not the most common type of engineering like electrical (my undergrad field) or mechanical. I applied to about 9 schools and heard from the 4th one today (accepted in all 4 so far). Three of these four are top 10 program (in the specific major) in US. Two of the four are top 15 graduate engineering schools in US according to published rankings.
The caveat is that all four of them have said that no funding/financial aid is available at this moment. If aid becomes available at a later date, we will notify you as soon as possible. Schools I applied to stated, if you apply before certain date you will be considered for funding and I did apply before this date. I read the post on this here and here.
What I interpreted from these two posts is that if they really like you they will offer you funding or sometimes it is offered after you accept to attend the program (does this hold any merit?). I am just slightly disappointed. It is just surprising to me that none of the school offered any funding. One of the school's professor contacted me first, after looking at my application, which I looked at as a plus (and I didn't feel like I messed up our conversation). Another school had a application deadline in January and I got positive news from them at the end of January which is unusually early (this was the most competitive university I applied to).
My question is, if they offered no funding in acceptance letter does this usually hold true or should I even consider that it might change and I might get some funding? Usually how much percent of tuition is covered with funding? Is it true that you get funding as you accept the offer?

I would not be a international student. I could be out of state, but not international. In US.

Yes it is possible, but more likely during the PhD level (it happened to three friends of mine). So basically they got the acceptance letter, they might even gave an initial fee (e.g., for first 3 months); and then, the supervisor worked out how to apply for a funding from the university or put them in a funded project.


Is it unprofessional for a journal editor to be anonymous? An editor of a journal asked me to review a paper but did not provide his/her name or institution, signing the e-mail as, essentially, "Editor of ...". The e-mail seems to be based upon a template. The sender's e-mail address is of the form AbbreviatedJournalName@PublisherName.com

The journal is reputable but not a top one. I cannot determine the editor's name from public online sources or private contacts.  My best guess is that the name of the author of the e-mail is very likely to belong to the list of the editors advertised on the web page of the journal.  I know nobody from this list personally through I've read and cited some of their papers.

How should the editor's decision to stay anonymous be qualified? For example, was it

(un)ethical,
(un)professional,
(contrary to the) commonly accepted practice?

What does this tell us about the editor or the journal?
I would like to know whom I am speaking to before taking any decision. What would be the most appropriate reaction from my side, if any?

In another circumstance, the editor of a different, top-notch journal to which I submitted is unknown to me. I corresponded only with the chief editor, and I know that the manuscript is under review, but that's it.

Is it

(un)profesional
(contrary to the) commonly accepted practice

for the chief editor not to reveal to an author which editor was assigned to the author's submission?
I would be happy to know who is the actual editor of my submission.  Is it possible (and how) to ask for that such that the question is likely to be answered?

How should the editor's decision to stay anonymous be qualified? For
  example, was it

  (un)ethical,

  (un)professional,

  (contrary to the) commonly accepted practice?

  What does this tell us about the editor or the journal?

Or Option D: Likely the result of using editorial management software, with no particular agenda behind it.

There are many reasons why the template can be generic. For example, a purely practical one is that one editor might be handling your submission, but then hand it off to another editor if they think they've got more appropriate expertise, if they need to take leave, etc.

One's interaction with an editor isn't particularly a personal one. They are acting in their capacity as the editorial office of X Journal. And when it comes down to it, it's the Editor-in-Chief's decision that is the final one, regardless of who you worked with, so it's entirely reasonable for the journal to speak with their "voice".

So no, it's not particularly unprofessional, and it's definitely not unethical. For that matter, it's not even a departure from common practice - likely a good half of the journals I publish (field: Biomedicine) in don't necessarily disclose what editor is assigned to your paper.


Will I be accepted into another PhD program if I leave my current group in Europe in which I don't fit in? I am now doing my Ph.D. in Europe and I think I am not a good fit for my research group. It is not possible to change to other research groups in Europe and I was planning to drop out of my program and then reapply to some other group working on a different topic. I need some advice on whether it is possible to do so?

Context: I have had candidates in similar situations apply to positions I offered in the past.

It's certainly possible - you are not a slave to your current group, and there is no law that says that we cannot hire people who have already started (and quit) a PhD elsewhere.

However, in practice, applicants in your situation raise an interesting question for the hiring person. On the one hand, you already have some experience in research, potentially decreasing the amount of training required before you will become effective. On the other hand, people will be wondering what went wrong the first time, and whether the same is likely to happen in your next PhD position.

In truth, most such candidates end up not being accepted. There is normally at least one other highly qualified candidate who is perceived as lower-risk. However, oftentimes this is also because the candidates don't do a particularly good job explaining their situation, and transparency (and plausibility of the story) are key. The instinct of many candidates seems to be to try to keep the topic out of conversation as much as possible, and only provide highly generic answers when probed. This is not a good strategy, as it keeps people wondering - and wondering people make up their own explanations (or they simply decide that the risk is too high).

I feel that before you go back onto the PhD student job market, you may want to head over to the Workplace.SE and carefully study the (many) questions there related to how to, and how not to, talk negatively about previous employment. Your challenge will be to convince your next advisor that you are quitting your previous position for good reasons which are unlikely to repeat in the position you are applying to, without thrash-talking your previous research group. It's certainly a capricious edge to walk.


Is it unwise to get a recommendation for philosophy phd apps from a professor you had relatively early in college? I will be applying to philosophy phd programs after completing my BA in philosophy and while completing a one year masters program (immediately after college) in philosophy. I impressed a certain professor in my third year of college during which I took two classes with her.  If I want a recommendation from her is it important that I take another class during my senior year of college so that her opinion of me will be current? My last class with her was in spring of my third year, and I will apply at the end of Fall of my masters program (equivalent to 5th year of college). If I don't take another class with her, there will be applying after three consecutive semesters of not having her.

I understand that the fact that I will have learned more material means that a letter based on later coursework might be stronger. But I'm mainly curious if admissions committees would partially discount a letter because they thought it to be based on 'outdated' (in my case, by a year or two) information.

thanks

I don't have experience with philosophy, but I can't imagine this part of admissions is too different.  It's pretty common for students to have one or more letters from faculty they haven't had classes with in the past year, so no that's not a problem.  (In fact, sometimes it happens with all the letters, if the student takes time off--e.g., see: If you want to do a PhD in mathematics, how important is it to start immediately after finishing undergraduate studies? )  What's important is that each letter writer should have something meaningful to say about your preparation, talent, attitude, performance, work ethic, etc.  Also, depending on the circumstances, it may be very natural for you to continue to have plenty of interactions with this professor over the next year or so whether or not you take another class with her.

That said, you should get letters from some people you've taken in your 4th-5th year (particularly master's classes if possible).  The main reason for this is you want recommendations which can discuss your performance in more advanced classes, which is presumably what you'll be taking.


How to "know" if I have a passion? Most students encounter a life-changing decision during their undergraduate years. That is either to choose a high-paying career, yet such that they might not be passionate about or a career they like but is unlikely to be high-paying.

It is not unusual to find career advice popping in various internet circles that fixate on the importance of passion. The general rhetoric is "If you have a "sufficient" passion for X, you are guaranteed a "good" career in X and hence a good life."
Now, on some levels, the advice makes sense. Students are usually willing to sacrifice guaranteed-to-pay-well professions in hopes to excel in their own professions fueled by passion.
Now my question is, What is the sufficiency precisely in this context?

To be more precise, say I think I feel passionate for mathematics. Maybe because I am good at it. Maybe because I contemplate on it in my free time. Now when it comes to the actual profession, the "apparent" passion fades away and I am left regretting pursuing the field (something that is not unusual to see with Ph.D. students).
Or say, I feel I like physics and mathematics but I also get easily swayed away by high paying professions like data science.

How can I come to "know" whether I truly have a passion for mathematics or whether I was merely deluded into thinking that because I was made to feel that I am good at mathematics by the relevant education system?

If you were really passionate about something, you'd know because you'd want to do it in exclusion of all else. You think about that thing even if you're bathing, eating, etc.

Having said that I can understand what you're asking because if we define passion this way, precious few people would be passionate about anything that they can actually make a living from. That includes academics - e.g. this question

  I just want to get married, and have weekends and evenings off, and chill out and play board games, and have nice conversations with friends, and have time to exercise and eat good food, and partake in hobbies, and read books and play computer games and watch movies and write a novel or two.

And from there it's just a short way to "I just want to get married and have my entire week off ..."

So now what? I suggest:

Can you imagine yourself doing it as a career? You don't have to like it more than board games, conversations with friends, etc, but you should like it enough that you can do it for upwards of 40+ hours a week. On the other hand if it starts getting painful to go to work every day, it's not a good idea to do it.
Are you good at it? If you are, then you can get results even if you aren't passionate (by above definition) about it.

It may not be a popular position, but you can certainly base your career around things that you aren't passionate about (by above definition). For example, my mother became a doctor because that's traditionally what all good students at her high school did. She didn't particularly like it any more than other careers, but she studied it, did well at it, became a trained doctor, became a specialist, and eventually managed her own department. She would often complain about her work at the dinner table, and talk about e.g. how she would rather teach language at a local high school, but by all metrics she still had a successful career.


Chapter in printed thesis vs. journal article My computer science PhD thesis contains a chapter which is heavily based on an already published conference paper. I have published my thesis online, and fulfilled the requirements for my degree this way.

Nevertheless it is customary in my group to also publish the thesis as a proper book, to get shiny printed copies and to make it available to libraries etc.

Now I was invited to submit an extended version of my conference article to a journal, and since the thesis chapter was already an extended version of the conference article, I used material from there and the journal paper turned out to be very similar to the thesis chapter.

Will the journal publisher (Elsevier) likely accept a paper that has significant overlap with a chapter in a book that is not peer-reviewed, but (by then) is commercially published?

(This question is about copyright and publishing, not about citations and giving proper attribution to the other work.)

(Note: This answer doesn't apply to hard-copy theses provided to your university library as part of your degree requirements. These count as theses for the paragraph on exceptions.)

You're dealing with two separate issues here. The scholarly ethics of duplicate publication and the copyright issues. Let's tackle them one by one.

Scholarly Ethics

Most academic journals will not consider for publication work that his previously been published elsewhere (or is being considered for publication elsewhere); furthermore, the submitting author will usually be required to explicitly confirm that the work is not published (nor being considered for publication) during submission. This is known as the Ingelfinger rule. Subject to a few exceptions, discussed momentarily, the mode of publication doesn't matter: peer-reviewed paper, conference proceeding, book/book chapter, newspaper article, blog post, vanity publisher or predatory journal, it's been published. This doesn't simply apply to the manuscript, it applies to the work (So you can't rewrite the same analysis of the same data and claim the rule doesn't apply). You can read the reasons for (and against) this on Wikipedia.

Now, as I mentioned, there are some widespread exceptions, principally for things that happen in the normal course of academia. So inclusion in a thesis, even one that is made available online, is not usually considered publishing; similarly for conference presentations where no proceedings paper has been published. Expansion of communications into full papers is typically allowed. Increasingly, the use of pre-print servers is becoming permitted. Some journals/fields will permit submission of journal articles that heavily expand a conference proceeding, but in other fields this is a no-no.

Specific policies are set by individual journals/publishers. For example, Nature, Science and Elsevier.*

This means, when publishing, you should publish the peer-reviewed academic version first, then, subject to copyright, you can publish your book.

Minor consideration: (self) plagiarism. You should always reference the first publication of your work in any later re-publication, to avoid accusations of plagiarism (with a possible exception for publications derived from PhD theses). So even if a publisher allowed you to submit a journal article after you published your book, you would still have to cite your book.

*Interestingly, I did once inform Elsevier that a paper in one of their journals seemed to have been previously published elsewhere, and got ignored.

Copyright

Your options for republishing the paper as a book will vary depending on the copyright status of your publication. Here are some possible scenarios (not all will be available with all journals):

Open access publication that leaves copyright with the authors

You can do what you want to republish the article, including republishing it as-is, since you hold the copyright
You probably can't reuse the publisher PDFs for republication, as they will probably have trademarked logos on them
You will need to appropriately reference your original paper to avoid self-plagiarism

Open access publication that leaves copyright with the journal

You may be able to republish the paper under the open access license. This will depend on the license chosen by you/the journal.
You will need to consider whether there are clauses restricting things such as commercial use and the preparation of derivative works
You may find the license too restrictive, in which case proceed as for a non-open-access publication

Publication is not open access, copyright is with the journal

You cannot reuse the article without permission from the journal
You could try contacting the publisher, or using the Copyright Clearance Center to obtain permission
Otherwise, you will need to ensure that your book is different enough from the publication that it is not an infringement of copyright
Typically, this would require completely rewriting it from scratch (not merely paraphrasing), ideally restructuring it and re-drawing all the figures (trying to make them as different as reasonably possible from the journal version)
You may be able to obtain permission for specific components of the paper (e.g. figures) individually via the Copyright Clearance Center. In that case, you could use them as is, with appropriate acknowledgements
Academic ethics still dictates that you cite that your source is your original paper

Summary

Publish the paper first, then the book. You state that the book is merely "customary" - it can wait. Consider the copyright issues before publishing the book - this may mean you have to either seek permission from your publisher or modify your thesis chapter, if it is too close to the published paper. Protect yourself against allegations of self-plagiarism - ensure that your paper is very clearly listed as a source in your book.


Is it considered unethical/bad etiquette to contact another potential PhD supervisor while waiting for a response from my first choice? I have contacted a potential PhD supervisor and currently he is reviewing my work, however this evaluation process seems to be taking too long.

Is it ethical to give my research proposal to another professor (another university) while he is reviewing my work? Will this reflect negatively on me if he finds out about it?
There is a good chance that these two professors are in contact with each other ( though I can't be sure!)

He is the foremost expert in my field and I would prefer to have him as supervisor. I just don't want to lose my other opportunities.

Note : I have already secured funding for my PhD. I am only looking for a reputable school (and supervisor). I am considering two institutions in Europe, in Netherlands and Germany.

Finding a PhD advisor, like finding a job, is not a serial process. You can—and should—have multiple applications out simultaneously. If you get an offer you find acceptable, then you should take it.

If you are concerned about missing out on an opportunity with your first-choice advisor if someone else makes you an offer, then you can send a polite email informing the first-choice advisor something like:

  I would really like to work with you, but I am starting to receive offers of admission from other advisors. They would like to have an answer by <date>. While I understand you need time to make a decision, would it be possible for you to give me an answer by then?

If they're serious about having you as a PhD student, they'll respond.


My paper's content is slightly changed from the abstract I have submitted to a conference, can I edit the accepted abstract on my poster? I'm fairly early on in my PhD research. A few months ago I submitted an abstract to a conference, which was accepted. The conference is coming up soon, and my research has taken a slight turn away from my accepted abstract (still same field, collaborators, etc...--just asking slightly different questions and taking a slightly different approach).

My question is, am I obligated to put the program-accepted abstract on my poster? If I am, should I try to tie my poster content as closely to that accepted abstract as possible? Or can I present poster content that would've been more appropriate for a different abstract?

Or can I use a different abstract on my poster, and thus tie the content more closely to what my current research path is?

What about keeping the original abstract in its entirely, but appending it?

EDIT: I'm in the field of astrobiology (probably most similar to the fields of geology or astronomy if I had to relate it to a more conventional field)

I work in astronomy.

I have never heard of anyone in authority at a conference complain about a slight deviation from a submitted abstract.

I suggest writing your poster on your new direction, with a corresponding abstract.

I would also submit your amended abstract to the LOC of the conference as soon as possible. Mention that your work has taken a slight turn but the main topic and co-authors are unchanged.

If there is time, the LOC can include your amended abstract on any web-page or hard-copy documentation. Apologise for the inconvenience that this may cause the LOC and ask nicely that they make these amendments, if possible.

Even if these documents cannot be altered, I doubt that anyone is going to get upset that your new abstract is not exactly the same that you originally submitted.


Difference between a Virtual issue and a special issue? Can someone explain me the significance of Virtual issues, the difference between Virtual and Special issues? Also, under what conditions does a journal propose for a Virtual issue, does it have any impact on the Impact factor of the journal?

Virtual issues, which are also referred to as "collections" or by other names, are a set of papers that were already published in various issues of a journal and are centered around a single topic. This is usually done to highlight a certain topic or simply to help readers find papers on a topic. This is done on the editorial/website level and that is why it is "virtual" - usually no special content is created for this.

Special issues are issues in which the journal decides in advance about a certain topic, and invites submissions of papers on this topic. Often there is also an invited guest editor for the issue, who is an expert in the field. The final result could actually look similar to a virtual issue (a collection of papers on a single topic), but in a special issue these would be new papers submitted specifically for this issue. Sometimes there will also be some overview piece written by the editor.

Special issues might indeed affect the impact factor of the journal. For example, the journal Bioinformatics sometimes has a special issue in which the papers published are papers that were accepted to ISMB, a major bioinformatics conference. These papers probably get cited on average more than other papers in the journal, so it would increase the impact factor.


Is Notes and Queries peer-reviewed? Notes and Queries is a very famous and very long-running humanities journal, noted for its pioneering question-and-answer format.  It's spun off a number of regional editions, a series of anthologies, and given rise to countless imitators.

I'd like to know whether (and if so, which types of) contributions to Notes and Queries are peer-reviewed.  The journal's own website is silent on the matter—the only reference I can find to the review process is a short statement in the guidance for contributors that professional editing can help non-native speakers of English "ensure that the academic content of [their] paper is fully understood by journal editors and reviewers" (emphasis mine—and note that this statement refers only to "reviewers", not "peer reviewers").  And third-party sources give conflicting or incomplete information on the journal's peer-reviewed status.  For example:

The journal index of the MLA International Bibliography lists Notes and Queries as peer-reviewed, but doesn't indicate whether this applies to all types of submissions.  (Maybe only the peer-reviewed submissions get indexed.)
Various author-contributed reports on the English Literature Journals page of the Humanities Journals Wiki mention a (sometimes lengthy) review process for submissions, but they never mention whether this is peer review or editorial review.
An informal but fairly lengthy review of Notes and Queries by Richard Rohlin (then a graduate student at Signum University) states that the journal is not peer-reviewed.

So what's the story here?  Notes and Queries clearly has some sort of review process, but is it peer review?  And if so, which of its four types of contributions (Notes, Queries, Replies, and Reviews) are peer-reviewed?

Having just had a piece accepted for publication in the journal, albeit without having received copies or even mention of any reviews, I decided to ask the editorial assistant, Alicia Black, whether submissions to Notes and Queries undergo peer review.  This is her response in full:

  N&Q is a peer reviewed journal.  Your Query has been reviewed, though Queries do not always need a detailed review.


Should an undergraduate writing an article for a semi-academic magazine list a university affiliation? I'm an undergraduate student at the University of Waterloo. I'm writing a paper potentially for IEEE Security and Privacy, which is a semi-academic magazine. Basically, papers follow the abstract, body, lots of references format, and read like research papers, but apparently generally exposit some random software gadget produced by the author's research etc, so not a super-academic journal.

My question is, how should I put my name on the paper? Should I just write "Yuhao Dong" or "Yuhao Dong, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo" or something else? I don't want to be misunderstood to be a faculty member.

Grad students often write "PhD candidate" on their websites, etc., so you might consider "Yuhao Dong, BSc candidate, School of Computer Science (or whatever your department is), University of Waterloo".

Edited to add: I was curious, so I checked the author guidelines.  They don't indicate how to specify your affiliation, so I would either ask the editor or look at some articles from the most recent issue and copy their style.


How can I mention a personal tragedy in a statement for PhD? I am currently applying for my PhD in pure math. I am also finishing up my masters. Unfortunately my brother passed halfway through the semester and I received an incomplete in one of my classes because I was absent too much. I also missed the GRE Mathematics subject test which is required. I spoke to the head of the department who said that they will consider my application without the GRE subject test. I don't know if he is going to personally be reviewing my application or if he's even going to remember he said this to me.

Anyways, should I put this in my personal statement? So far I've talked only about my math research interests, experience, etc. But maybe I should add a concluding paragraph that explains my current situation? How can I approach this? I took my regular GRE and though my score isn't awful, it's not great and I just feel like my brother passing in the past few months has tremendously had an affect on me. That being said, I've worked so hard and besides this incident, all my grades for my masters degree have been high to low A's. I want them to know this isn't me at my best. But I also don't want it to be a sob story.

Yes, you should absolutely mention it. If you do not, the program will not have the necessary context to evaluate your application fairly -- which is bad for them and worse for you.

You should also mention that the program already agreed to consider your application without the GRE -- as you say, it's anyone's guess whether they will remember this concession if you don't remind them. In fact, I worry that a well-meaning secretary might trash your application in any case (as it appears incomplete), so it might be worth indicating this in a more visible place or even calling to confirm that your application was passed to the committee.

Now, for how to mention it: concisely. 1-2 sentences is all you need. "I performed poorly during this brief period because my brother died" is all they need to know -- you don't need to dress that statement up too much or say much more than that.

If you go to town making this statement too long, it will sound like an excuse. So, be very clear, direct, and above all concise.
The one thing that might be worth adding is a reason to be confident that you will not continue to have grief-related problems as a PhD student (i.e., give some evidence that things are improving).

I do not recommend putting this in the last paragraph as you suggest. The last paragraph should send them off on a high note ("declare victory" and look to the future). Instead, put this into the relevant body paragraph.

Sorry to hear about your brother.


Does diversity in undergraduate research topics look bad on my graduate school application? I have done 5 different projects in my undergraduate course and all of them are from different areas/fields. My project work during High school is from a different area still. The reason of working in different fields is that I was trying to figure out what exactly interests me.
Having found that, I am interested in doing grad school after I finish my bachelors.
Does the fact that I have done all my research projects in different areas say that I'm not sure what interests me?

UPDATE:If this is sounding vague, I'll clarify. My major is chemical engineering. I've done projects on Synthesis of nanoparticles, Bionanotechnology-Tissue Engineering, Analysis of a thermodynamic cycle, Microreactors and Reaction Engineering.
I intend to apply for a program in Bioengineering/Bioprocess Engineering

Trying out several projects in different areas does not necessarily say that you do not know what interests you. You have to show them that you are interested in several areas and that you wanted to get an insight in order to obtain a wider range of possibilities.
I think that there are few people who immediately find the right area that fully interests them. It is important that you present it that way. Working on different projects brings more extensive experience in any case.
If you have then found the right area, you can deal with it more intensely.


What are the time demands on a PhD student who is helping set up a lab? I am mulling over pros and cons of different advisers and a quirk I have found with some of the newer professors is the issue of lab start up activities. I have seen some anecdotes online about it being a bad deal overall, but I wanted to pose a few questions to the community on academia...

A few questions

What constitutes as normal and what is a red flag for PIs requiring start up assistance?
Are there benefits to being involved heavily with lab setup if you are not really committed to the academia route?
What generates the time sink that seems to overburden most students?
How can you mitigate this impact to time to degree?
Where does one draw the line between beneficial experience vs being taken advantage of?

Any anecdotes, tips or advice on evaluating would be much appreciated

From what I have seen in general for molecular biology labs, there is generally a risk. Some of this risk is connected to the PI and some of it is connected to factors outside their control. I am in my 7th year right now and finishing up but my lab just moved across the country to set up a new lab. While this does not affect me, we have rotation students and I can see the impact it is having on them.

  What constitutes as normal and what is a red flag for PIs requiring
  start up assistance?

This will vary based on the lab's research needs. You can expect to be involved in a lot of organization/inventory, equipment setup, purchasing, account setup, and above all, a lot of waiting around. If the PI has a lot of specific needs within the building, then there may be specialized construction that has to take place. This could take week to months - both for the actual construction as well as general red tape and unforeseen delays.

In general, you should know that your research will almost certainly be delayed. However, there are other ways to use your time that I elaborate below.

For red flags, I would say that you should try to determine the funding situation of the lab and what grants are active. There is no point waiting around if you have to wait even longer afterwards to get started on funding to come through. If you notice that the PI has had the lab space for 3-6 months and still has no progress, that could be a major red flag. On the other hand, the PI could be using that time very effectively to write grants and make connections. This is very situational.

  Are there benefits to being involved heavily with lab setup if you are
  not really committed to the academia route?

This depends on what you chose to do instead if you are not following the academia route. If you work in industry - say R&D or testing for a major company or a career technician, many of these skills may be of use to you. Other potential benefits could relate more to your PI and future research. For example, a startup lab may have a new, enthusiastic professor exploring new areas of research. This can be an exciting environment to be in. There may be new students to change up the dynamic. It might be a great environment to bond with colleagues and so forth. This depends highly on the PI in question.

As NMJD pointed out in the comments, many of the tasks you will be involved in during lab set up could be very useful if you ever decide to stay in academia. You will be ordering equipment, setting up new technology, and budgeting for most of your academic career. This experience could also serve to prepare you if you ever start a lab of your own.

  What generates the time sink that seems to overburden most students?

A lot of the burden comes from waiting time (which isn't exactly a time sink). Setting up labs take a while but it isn't physical labor or time involved that takes the longest. Much of it comes from processing, financial constraint, and red tape.

I would be far more worried about these kinds of issues that may happen after setup:

Delays in setting up animal facilities/breeding pairs or animal
lines.
Cell culture contamination problems in a new building/room.
Weird technical variability in experiments.
Getting used to new department/building procedures
Filling the responsibilities of departed graduate students that took care of the day-to-day in the lab
Lack of mentorship or guidance

  How can you mitigate this impact to time to degree?

Depending on the nature of the setup and how far along the lab is, you may be able to use this time to become deeply familiar with the literature in this field or participate in grant writing. This would be excellent for your training  and is very important. Take some statistics classes - it is far more important than most molecular biologists will have you believe!

Get to know people. Get to know the field and co-workers. Go have drinks with other labs and learn about their research. Find collaboration opportunities. If your program requires you to be a TA, get that out of the way early on. Focus on your classes.

You can use this time to either prepare for the lab post-setup or get things out of the way that would interfere with your research later.

  Where does one draw the line between beneficial experience vs being taken advantage of?

Ultimately, I think you really need to talk to students in the lab or those nearby to get a better sense of what it's like "from the inside". You can only glean so much from the outsider perspective. Just know that in most cases you are taking a risk. But you can offset this by using your time wisely. If it's research you really want to do, it may be worth the risk.

If the trade-off between the time spent waiting and working through the bumpy starts are not outweighed by the research opportunity that could be provided then it is not worth it. If you find yourself wasting time, doing menial labor, and see no end in sight for the start up it's not worth it.

You have to decide if it's worth it and it can be difficult without already being there.

Good luck!


My work was published before me. What should I do? Some time ago I switched departments within the same institution. Before leaving I had an idea of a paper and started to work on it. I shared my thoughts on it with my then-coworkers and they praised it. So now, after I settled things in a new department, I continued to work on that paper and completed it. Before submitting anywhere, I decided to look for a new papers relevant to my work.

To my surprise, I have found a paper with my idea (implemented in a somewhat narrower sense) by several of my previous coworkers, with whom I have discussed it. Without my name on the paper of course. The paper was published a few month after I left, so they probably started to work on it immediately after I left.

Most (if not all) conversations were done verbally, so I don't have any proof that I am the original author, and I also don't know any authority that I can go to and explain the issue.

What bothers me is if I publish the paper now (even in a broadened version of it) it would look suspicious to an external observer, as if we (together with ex-coworkers) are trying to overuse and multiply a single result or even worse that I'm plagiarizing over their work. As we are in the same institution and had previously coauthored some works, nobody will believe similar papers are a coincidence or a an independent inventions. (And they would be right. It's not.) I think that in the worst case it can destroy my reputation and career, or maybe it's a non-issue and I'm worrying too much.

I can see several possible extensions and further research paths to the paper. But if I'll try to develop these ideas and publish an advanced version of the paper, there is no guarantee that they aren't doing the same. They could even had already submitted them somewhere. And if I submit my version, the reviewers may reject it because of its similarity to theirs. This again can be devastating to me.

What options I have, as I see it:

Pretend I don't know about their work, and publish mine as fully original, without citing them. Even if it's still a more general view on the subject and I know I'm the original author, it doesn't seem ethical to me. And we're still in the same institution, what make things worse.
Do more research, make more advanced paper and cite them accordingly. But they may even have submitted an advanced version somewhere. I can't be sure if I'm overlapping with them or not.
Change the field of study completely to not overlap with them in the future. Seems to be an overreaction.
Change the institution and then publish. Will it help? I'd still be their co-author-in-the-past. Seems not to be a solution at all.
Mention them in the acknowledgements. Thank them for praising my work, and cite them through a footnote. After all, what acknowledgements are for if not to thank your colleagues? But I doubt any editor will let it pass.

TL;DR Several of my ex-coworkers rushed to publish my ideas as their own while I was working on these ideas. I worry that my future publications on the theme would overlap with theirs and be considered a plagiarism.

So what should I do? Am I right that my wrong actions could possibly damage my reputation and career?

UPD. Thank you for your answers, I see that I have to cite the paper by the old department researchers (still not sure how: through a regular citation or a footnote in the acknowledgements), but I'm not really convinced and just want to be sure that I would not get into any (more) trouble if I'll continue to do research on the topic (especially in the case when editor/reviewers will get similar papers from different people with the same affiliation). Maybe someone has had such an experience as a reviewer?

Option 2 is the right one.  Do more research that builds on the ideas, advance the field more, and publish that, citing the first paper appropriately.  Maybe they're also doing further work and advancing the field and will publish that too.  If so, great!  That's how science works.  People publish papers and then they and/or others continue building on it.

While the authors of the first paper could have included you in the acknowledgements, the fact that you had talked about ideas with them isn't necessarily enough to warrant authorship and you certainly can't make the statement that "I am the original author." Unless you're accusing them of plagarism, one of the main points of free exchange of ideas within academia is so that somebody can build on those ideas and develop them out into a publication.

Imagine going to a conference and discussing ideas with people (incl. those from other institutions) and then somebody takes one of those ideas back and does all the work that's needed to develop it into a formal research contribution.  They publish it, great.  Then you read the paper in a venue for your field and build on the work, citing it and extending it further.  That's basically how it's supposed to work.

  nobody will believe similar papers are a coincidence or a an independent inventions. (And they would be right. It's not.) I think that in the worst case it can destroy my reputation and career. Or maybe it's a non-issue and I'm worrying too much.

Yes, I think you're worrying too much.  It's fine that you had some conversations with colleagues exchanging ideas, and then cited a paper they published, in your own new extensions of the work.  It is even possible for you to have extensions that are similar to extensions they may be now independently developing.  If your colleagues did a good job of making the path forward from the last paper clear (to an expert in your field), it wouldn't even be that surprising if one or more others were doing a similar extension elsewhere.  Credit your colleagues' publication and move the work on.

If you're concerned about duplicating efforts in expanding the work, you could consider whether or not you want to formally collaborate with your former colleagues on doing that expansion.  Maybe they just figured you weren't interested or didn't have time when you left, but would appreciate having you on the team for further work (if they're still working on it); it seems they like the ideas you have to offer.
It's also possible they don't even know that you feel offended, especially if they're under the impression that these ideas were generally percolating in the department for a while before they actually did the work for that paper.  They may have discussed the ideas with other people in advance, who are in a similar position to yours, some of whom may still be in the department, and some of whom may just feel happy that somebody actually did that work.  It'll be your decision about whether you perceive enough of a breach of trust to prevent future collaboration or not.


Over-taking notes due to: 1) copying sentences in textbook + 2) trying to fit new understandings in previous notes which just makes things messy So I've been having issues lately on note-taking. Written below is a slight stream of consciousness on what I have been doing, my struggles, and potential solutions (I'd like to know about your opinions regarding whether my solutions are good or if you have any solutions of your own)
Currently, I am self-learning my High School Economics textbook in order to have a full review done before my online college classes begin.
Basically, I read the section I want to take notes on. After that, I try to summarize it the best I can bolded words here and there. However, one issue is that I tend to still sort of copy information into my notes. Thus, my notes get a bit lengthy and crammed. I don't want to copy, but many times many of the sentences are worded really well. I think I seem to get stuck into the "better be safe than sorry" mode where I'm unsure if the specific wording is important to memorize in order for me to re-explain it in those specific words for a possible future test. This also inevitably occurs when it comes to taking notes on lecture-slides. If I can kill two birds(copying nicely worded might-be-on-test information on textbooks and/or powerpoints) with one stone, that would be awesome, but at least hoping to fix the textbook note-taking problem first..... Solution: Perhaps I should read the section multiple times, and force myself to summarize in my own words on a separate sheet of paper, and then re-look what I missed/what specific wordings I feel I should use, and then officially write proper notes in an official notebook?
Usually, when I take notes, after reading the section I go straight to writing my notes into my official notebook. After writing all those notes, I'll realize that when reviewing through these notes later I'll make new connections or realize I'm vague or after going into sections some new information will make me re-think the way I've written past notes. Unfortunately, I have this giant block of written text from this section, and trying to draw little arrows to add my insight in order to 'correct' my already-written notes is really hard to do and aesthetically unpleasant. I just get left with this mess. Going onto the next page and making all these symbols to reference certain sentences of passages of my previously-written notes is also messy and unfulfilling.
Solution: Perhaps similar to above I need to avoid going straight into my official notebook and instead let myself just do summaries on random pieces of scratch paper. I need to be patient and possibly do this for the whole unit. Then I go back re-read all the sections, re-read my scratch-paper summaries, and try and write my official notes with any new insights and connections I've made along the way.
Note: When I say 'official notebook' I mean more like my 'main' notebook where it is ago to resource for my notes and where everything I've written should preferably be organized, clear, and not vague. The problems that are occurring above are sort of degrading the quality of the official/main notebook that just make future-reviewing hard or the satisfaction that I have everything clearly written in one single-burst impossible.
I see all these note-taking methods of taking beautiful notes, but for me time is of the essence as I hope to finish reviewing my Economics textbook before college starts. To me the problem is not the aesthetic design of how I take notes.. I don't need the Cornell Method or Mind-mapping.. I'm just trying to fix some fundamental problems that prevent me from taking good notes that I can then use to leapfrog into spaced-repetition, voice recording myself discussing my notes, etc to truly get them in my memory/head and diminish the need for the notes overall (since I hate having piles and piles of un-reviewed notes that I hardly review)
Sorry for this extremely long question and post. I'm really stuck on this and it would mean the world to get some help. If you believe I have posted this question in the wrong place, please let me know. Thank you!

Let me make a few suggestions:
First you want to understand how the mind works in order to know how to optimize your study. It turns out that to learn, we actually need to physically change the brain, reconnecting neurons. For the science behind it see: The Art of Changing the Brain by James E Zull. The implication is that we learn by reinforcement (repetition) and feedback. The feedback is to assure that what we have "learned" isn't actually wrong.
Having a complete set of notes on paper (or in your computer) doesn't imply that you have actually learned anything. You have to make the connections in your brain so that you can both recall things and put them to use.
Reinforcement is actually increased and enhanced if you take notes in your own words, rather than copying them. The original words can give you feedback if you are studying on your own, but using your own words implies that you were more engaged when you were note taking and not just copying without thought.
So, paraphrase and then check.
The second bit of advice is to periodically go over your notes and summarize them in a smaller space. What do we now see, having read a bit more, as the most important ideas in our notes? You can take this to several levels.
Another trick is to use index cards to effectively capture the essence of an idea in a very small space. See this answer to a different question for an explanation of something called the Hipster PDA, which is both an effective tool for note taking and for summarizing. Don't write too much on a card, though. The idea is to filter things down to the essence.
And cards are especially efficient as they can be rearranged (to combine ideas) and also easily carried to help you with the reinforcement. You can carry a dozen cards and review them while waiting in line, for example.
There is nothing inherently wrong with long form copying of sources for your own use, but there are more efficient ways to assure that you actually learn from your reading and not just move it from one bit of paper to another.
Reinforcement and feedback.


Pros and cons on working in an industrial research lab without a PhD I am from engineering, and I would like to know if I am able to find a job in industrial research lab after finishing my master, will there be any advantage or disadvantage compared with entering the same lab after finishing PhD? Possible advantage may be that I have more industrial experience as I enter the lab earlier, and possible disadvantage may be that without a PhD position I cannot be promoted to certain senior positions or lead a project. Are these true? Are there more advantages or disadvantages for this?

For many research positions in industry, a PhD is a requirement to apply for the job. With just an M.S., you simply cannot be considered for these positions. Some research jobs I have seen in industrial labs are available to candidates with either a PhD or an M.S. with several years of industry experience, but I don't see as many of these.

Industrial research labs often also have non-research positions (e.g., staff programmer) that do not require a PhD. However, these positions tend to not be on the research "track": you cannot easily be promoted from "staff programmer" to "junior member of technical staff" in many companies. If you are interested in doing creative research, staff programmer jobs are not a direct path to research scientist jobs.

Smaller companies tend to be more flexible, so that it may be easier to get a research job without a PhD in a tiny company than a large global one.

Of course, this can vary by industry and geographic region. (My experience is in the field of telecommunications and computer networks, in the United States.)
You can find out more about your particular field of interest by going to the "Careers" page of the labs you are considering, and looking up the requirements for the jobs that you would like to do.

However, as a rule, if you are interested in doing creative research (and not just working in a support position in a research lab), you will have more opportunities available to you with a PhD than without one.


Is there a generally accepted format for submitting papers to journals? I believe in Mathematics and Computer Science journals usually accept LaTeX documents. In fact, the AMS has a number of packages and document classes for just this purpose.

What about other disciplines? I'm not particularly familiar with the humanities. Would a Microsoft Word document be unacceptable?

Does it vary from subject to subject, or even journal to journal?

The policies vary entirely from journal to journal about what is considered acceptable. APS journals, for instance, will accept both MS Word-based documents as well as documents formatted with RevTeX, their modified template system. ACS journals and a number of other publishers also offer their own LaTeX- and Word-specific templates for authors to use. Whether the use of the template is required or merely recommended is also a function of the journal. So, as a general rule, you should always check the homepage of a journal before you start preparing an article for submission to that journal.

To some extent, I prefer working with LaTeX in preparing manuscripts, for the simple reason that their plain-text document format makes it a lot less painful to switch back and forth between different templates, compared to a word-processing format like Word or LibreOffice or Pages.


More than one corresponding author for a paper? Is it possible to have more than one corresponding author for a conference or journal paper?

Useful question about corresponding authors:

who should be the corresponding author
corresponding author implied meaning

Being corresponding author does not primarily concern the journal publishing process. The role of the corresponding author is to handle communications with other researchers once the paper has been published, to respond to questions concerning the research as a whole, methods, results. It is typically the most involved person who takes on this task and in many cases it is implicitly understood it is the first author. So for you to take on the corresponding author task means much more than the communication during the publishing process.

I can see reasons for there to be more than one corresponding author, although I have never encountered it. This would be if the paper contains material where two (or more) authors are experts on separate parts and it is necessary to contact each for specifics on their specialty. As I said, I have never seen it and am not sure it has ever been done. Perhaps we might find out through comments to the answer...


What is a referee in the manuscript submission process? Please submit, with the manuscript, the names, addresses (including
  countries), and e-mail addresses of five potential referees who are
  outside the authors' institutions and must not have conflict of
  interest with the authors.

Do you think I should name 5 researchers from a similar area that are not affiliated with my university and co-authors? Is this what referees are?

Yes.

A "referee" in an academic context is

  An expert who judges the manuscript of an article or book to decide if
  it should be published.

You should make sure to find established researchers who are capable of judging your manuscript and who do not have conflicts of interest (e.g., frequent collaborators).

This canonical question may be helpful: What does the typical workflow of a journal look like?. Or the peer-review tag (although peer review is somewhat more general than manuscript refereeing).


Postprint biology repository I recently found out that bioRxiv, the main biology preprint server, actually does not allow postprints to be submitted (even if allowed by the journal) according to its policy. This is in contrast to arXiv (after which biorxiv was modelled) which does allow submission of postprints.

To clarify, preprints are the authors' version of the paper prior to intial submission, and postprints are the authors' version of the paper which was accepted for publication (typically without the editing performed by the journal). The term "postprint" is a little confusing because the paper will often be accepted by the journal but not printed or released yet.

I can understand that these two types of manuscript are different and should probably be tagged differently, but I can't really see a significant benefit in not allowing postprint submission - after all they do provide access to otherwise paywalled information, often before it is actually published.

I would be interested to know if there are any alternatives to bioRxiv which allow postprint submission.

Many of the OSF preprints are postprints. OSF is a platform that unites several preprint servers, and the posting rules may vary from one provider to the other. You can check it here: https://osf.io/preprints/
Also, I can suggest checking individual servers. You can find a comprehensive community-curated list here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17RgfuQcGJHKSsSJwZZn0oiXAnimZu2sZsWp8Z6ZaYYo/edit#gid=0


see/cf. followed by e.g. / for example Consider the following sentences:

foo is bar (see, for example, baz).
foo is bar (see, e.g., baz).
foo is bar (cf. for example baz).
foo is bar (cf. e.g., baz).

Which of these are valid to use, and which is better? Or - does it depend on what we actually instead of foo, bar and baz?

The recent trend in non-legal English formal writing is to just use the English equivalent of the Latin abbreviation, so compare rather than cf. and for example rather than e.g. This also obviates the confusion about what cf. means and the distinction between e.g. and i.e.

On the other hand, using Latin abbreviations like et al. and ibid. for citations makes more sense.


How to enhance my prospects for a PhD? I am looking to apply for a PhD in the CS realm in the next cycle, particularly something with an AI flavor like Machine Learning or NLP. I am a bit of an anomaly in CS as I have undergraduate majors in a very different area (one was history...). I am finishing up a Masters focusing in signal processing at a well-renowned school and have a good GPA and top GREs. I was a CS minor undergrad, but started too late into college so I couldn't have gotten the major, although I took the core courses.

Although I finished undergrad with plenty of accolades (and I TAed in CS for 3 semesters), and I have excelled in the engineering courses at the Masters level, I am really concerned about my chances to get into a great PhD program. (There are a number of reasons why I want to pursue PhD, but at the same time, *for  me*, the time commitment doesn't feel warranted if I'm not working with great faculty at a great institution.)

I have some research experience (an undergrad honor thesis in my majors--I know it's not exactly related--and I'm a co-author on a couple non-CS papers published in IEEE journals from some summer work), but nothing really in depth I've done on my own. My Masters is a non-thesis program so I've had trouble finding an adviser who'll take me on (I want to do a thesis anyway). I've also had trouble finding (and being accepted) to worthwhile summer research opportunities (academic settings related to my interests). I have actually really enjoyed my previous research opportunities, and I know that for PhD admissions it's research, research, research (and some recs). So here are my questions:

How do I find my way into substantive research endeavors?
With my eclectic background, how can I rise above the thousands of CS undergrads with plenty of relevant research during the admission process?
Any suggestions how to sell my academic background as a positive?

NOTE: Of course I think I'm qualified (every applicant does or else they wouldn't apply). I also think that my unique background is a bonus. I'm concerned that those making hiring/admission decisions will feel differently. (edited since first posting)

Thanks in advance for the advice!

Unless I am mistaken, "next cycle" is half a year from now. There are many ways to enhance one's PhD prospects, but many big ones are no longer available to you due to timing.

Robert Peters in Getting What You Came For cites an ETS study about how important various parts of the PhD application are considered by committees, on a scale from 1 to 5:

3.9 Undergrad GPA in major field
3.8 Recommendations from faculty known by committee
3.7 Undegrad GPA in last 2 years
3.6 GRE verbal score
3.6 whether undergrad major is related
3.5 Undergrad GPA
3.0 Educational or career aspirations
3.0 Recommendations from faculty unknown by committee
3.0 Whether applicant is known to the committee
2.9 Academic achievements (papers, projects)
2.9 Quality of undergraduate school
2.7 Personal statement
2.7 Interview
2.6 Work experience
2.6 GRE analytical score
2.5 Non-faculty recommendations
2.5 GRE Subject score (related to program)
1.9 Other test scores
1.9 GRE Subject score (related to undergrad major)
1.6 Particular subscores on GRE Subject

You have half a year. Some of these things, like your GPA, obviously cannot be changed. What you can do is:

Try to publish or present at a conference
Make sure you don't get low grades from any classes you are taking
Make sure you get strong recommendations
Study for the GRE, especially the verbal part
Make contact with faculty at the programs you think of applying to
Research thoroughly the programs you are interested in
Start working on your Statement of Purpose so you have time to edit it


What could be the effect of mentioning a student's weakness in the recommendation letter? I am going to request a letter of recommendation for higher studies (PhD) from one of my faculty (I took two classes and did 3 very good course projects). I have never been good (just above average) in any of his written examinations and has admitted this to him in several discussions. Though in the projects, my score was the highest and I also got praise from him for writing excellent research quality articles for those projects.

I am pretty sure that he would certainly mention my weakness in the letter. I don't think (not really sure) that he has doubt over my research potential. So does that give any negative impression on the reader of such recommendation letter ?

So, if I generalize my question, how does specifying weakness of a candidate affects his chances of admission (if they do) ?

Honesty is the best way. When you admit a student, one of  the things you dread is if you find out someone is not what you thought. The issue is not easy to deal with of course.

If you think someone has a weakness, it should be mentioned. The first thing I think one can do is to point out that it is ones own opinion and possibly also describe the circumstances for why the weakness has become evident. The main point is provide the recipient of the information with as much information as possible to make a well-founded decision. After all, a persons positive traits are easy to describe and it is only the negative that cause problems.

One aspect that weighs heavily is if you would take on the person yourself, and if so, would you then deal with the weakness in some way? Provide possible solutions.

If a candidate has a weakness that you think may affect the persons ability to be considered, you should probably bring it up with the person. This can of course be very difficult and may result in bitter feelings but the question is, are the weaknesses something that can be compensated? If the person does not know about them, then the situation will seem inexplicable when he/she gets a rejection. A constructive discussion may make it possible to elaborate more in a letter to defuse the negative aspects.

In the end, writing negative aspects about a person is very difficult but it is also vital that a letter of recommendation has value. You may not be the only person writing a letter so the picture you provide may be one of many that has to be weighed in at the other end. If the person ends up not being appointed, you cannot take it personally as long as you have tried to provide an as objective appraisal as possible and that includes both positives and negatives. I have included what I sometimes have thought were damaging (but true) comments in letters and found the person was appointed despite them. I have then carefully explained why I think the way I do and tried to see how the negatives could possible be worked around. I have never written a letter where I had to just say, don't employ this person. I have then avoided the task altogether.

So, in summary, be honest, be objective, be constructive, and the opinion will be much valued by whoever reads your letter.


Does a UK degree have the same classification in the US? Does a degree obtained in the UK have the same classification in the USA? So if I had a 2:1 in England would it be a 2:1 in the USA or something different?

The honors degree classifications that exist in the UK (described in this question and its answers) don't exist in the US. In the US, instead of earning a degree of a certain "class," students (usually) earn a GPA on a scale of up to 4.0 points, and that number is used to indicate their performance.

"Honors" like  summa cum laude and magna cum laude exist, but not at all universities, and don't have a standard meaning across universities (or even across departments in the same university). They aren't used in the same way that UK degree classifications are. For example, you won't find an application for graduate studies that specifies that applicants should have graduated magna cum laude  - instead, they may specify a minimum undergraduate GPA.


How long to wait for an optimal/good PhD thesis/program, should settle for less exciting topics? When I started applying for Phd programs I had big dreams and goals on working on certain topics and spending lots of time in the field. I also had in mind some location and universities but I was flexible to some degrees on the university/location. It took me about 1 year to find a program I was (am) excited about and got accepted (top 10 US institution). Along the way I turned down possibilities with good funding because it was not my focus topic of interested.

Now after a year at my current program there are no funds in place and I am considering moving to programs that have already funding in place but in topics that are not my main interest because there is generally more money in these other topics. I am wondering at this point if I should settle for any topic that fits my skills and falls somewhat in my interests or stay in this roulette situation not knowing when I can really start the research I am interested in. I want to get started on a project and work on my thesis but I also am concerned of doing something that might set me on the wrong track or compromise too much (less interesting research field, worse PhD program, less known university, no fieldwork).

Given the current funding situation especially for certain fields, do PhD students these days have to lower their expectations on pursuing their topic of main interest? . I mean these days people struggle to find a regular job. I would like to add that I am also flexible on the questions I want to pursue within my field, I have flexibility but the funded projects are rare.

If you know precisely what you want to do, I am impressed---but not as impressed as the person who will want to hire you! Instead of applying for programmes near what you are want, why don't you write to people in the appropriate discipline and sound them out. Funding can often be found for a bright, enthusiastic student. That isn't to say you are likely to get a big grant, a corner office and be left to your own devices. But with the right supervisor you might be able to get support to design your project.

However you should not really expect things to pan out as you plan them. otherwise it wouldn't be research.

Finally it is not unusual to have a period of "meh" or "second year blues" as we used to call it. So think very carefully before jumping ship.


While in Phd I developed a lot of code that I want to turn into start-up. Can I do this? I was working 3 years on a project, that I came up with on my own, worked on my own, published 2 papers on it. I want to drop out of Phd (or take leave) and do start up at this point using my code.

Can I do it? Or because I developed this code while doing my Phd it cannot be used for commercial purposes?

EDIT: I am in US, top university for CS.

I'm not aware of any blanket prohibition, anywhere, that say that you can't use code developed during a PhD for a commercial venture - but most Universities in the US will have some kind of intellectual property agreement in place to state what the process is for doing this.

You will need to check with officials at your University to see what agreements you are subject to - but you should go a step farther than this. Specifically, you should see what departments might exist that can actually help you.

In the US at least - and I'm sure many other institutions around the world - there are departments specializing in intellectual property, "knowledge transfer", corporate spin-offs, start-ups, entrepreneurship, etc. These can be a rich source of support and networking, if they are available to you, even if you have intellectual property agreements that assign various rights to the University.

Universities want to earn money for these projects, as I'm sure you do as well, and 100% of $0 is $0. Universities often heavily facilitate the process of converting this work into money, and it is not abnormal for even a place that has heavily restricted intellectual rights assignments agreements to assign use rights and royalty agreements that have zero cost for the first $200,000+ US dollars in income. There are often even startup grants available, accelerators (even if they are not called that - places that provide space and equipment to help starting businesses), introductions to investors, showcases, and more. You won't know until you ask and look for them, as where they are located tends to vary heavily by institution.

For the exact nature of the agreements that apply to you, we can't say; I've seen everything from "the student owns their own work" to "anyone funded assigns all rights and ownership to the University", and I'm sure there are agreements everywhere in between. You are right to check them out in advance of a major decision, but this is so specific that you'll need to talk with multiple people are your specific institution to see what applies to you. You may also need to speak with an outside legal professional (lawyer experienced in this area, etc) to verify, but your local administrators are your best first point of contact to see how things work.


Applying to Math PhD programs with an math degree completed online Before I start, I apologize in advance for dumping my neuroses on this community.

So I finished a BA in mathematics online from penn state with a 4.0 GPA (some of the courses I finished were in topology, abstract algebra, real and complex analysis). Through work I've worked on a number of research papers and a few projects that we collaborated on with some engineers to produce software.

I know that I want to pursue a phd in mathematics, specifically in algebraic topology, but I'm concerned about whether I would be considered competitive for a PhD program. I have strong recommendations from my boss at work, a fellow researcher, and one of my professors that I managed to maintain contact with throughout the online program.

I guess ultimately what I'm asking is, if everything else is equal, does an online graduate have the same chance as traditional graduate? Sorry if this isn't clearer.

First, @scaaahu correctly observed some formal complications: e.g., looking at that web page, it seems that the closest thing to a degree in mathematics is a baccalaureate in "arts, letters, and science". It is important not to be even inadvertently inaccurate about your degree.

But, apart from that, the issue I'd anticipate in your situation is not the name of the degree, nor the on-line-ness. After all, one can read books and papers (or PDFs) without being registered at all. The problem arises in how to "prove" to an admissions committee that you have learned things.

In the U.S., even a transcript that says an undergrad got good grades in typical-sounding math coursework does not enable an admissions committee to understand what the student has learned. You should take the GRE (both general and subject test in math) to add data points and to show awareness, despite the fact that there is not universal agreement about the significance of these scores.

The problem is that you will not have letters of recommendation from three PhD'd mathematicians. Glowing letters from people who do not have PhD's in math (or something closely related) are not optimally helpful to admissions committees for predicting your success in grad school, much less gauging your natural talent. Very often these letters of recommendation are of decisive importance for admissions to top-50 programs, at least.


Can I leave my position on "short" notice? Specifics:
-I have completed one year of a tenure-track position at a small school
-I am unhappy in my job. I receive little to no mentorship or institutional support as a junior faculty. My pay and benefits are well below comparable positions in my area. I experience a high degree of stress that is affecting me personally and physically.
-I have been thinking about non-academic jobs for some time and recently received an offer from a consulting recruiter.

Questions:
-Am I being unethical/insulting by only giving ~1 months notice prior to the semester starting?
-I am technically on a multi-year contract; can I legally break this contract?
-I anticipate that my leaving will not go over well with the department and I honestly have no idea how to quit (i.e. who do I tell first?, how do I give notice?, etc.), does anyone have advice?

Thank you!

For the legal consequences, consult your contract. The main consequences in such a situation are likely to be reputational; but if you do not intend to continue in academia, is your reputation among academics really going to affect your career?


May I modify the code/program for my undergraduate thesis project? I have a project for undergraduate thesis. Then, I found this Chapter VBI-6.   Hand and Finger Detection. In the Downloads section, there's code that we can download and launched. I want to use it and have to modify or tweak it to suit my project. The problem is that, I don't know whether it's allowed or not to make a modification to the code presented. Inside, I found this sentences:

  If you use this code, please mention my name, and include a link
  to the website.

By "use", may I tweak the code as long as I refer to the coder? I'm confused because I found nothing about its license inside the code, like, GNU-GPL or MIT...

I'm so sorry if my question is wrong. If so, please tell why and maybe where I can ask it.

That is an ambiguous enough statement from the author about licensing, that I would simply send them an email and ask what they would allow. You can make your decision on whether to use it after you know whether you can.

I would also ask your advisor if this kind of work is acceptable for your project. If the project requires more self-work, you need to know that before you use too much of this code.

Finally, if you do use it, don't forget to cite it.