Vocational vs. Academic Emphasis in CS Curriculum I have been recently thinking about the role of a university curriculum in CS. Computer science degrees immediately offer their graduates a lucrative position in industry; this is obviously making them highly attractive to prospective students who want to get in on the action, and as a result they often care less about their foundational education (say, computational complexity, Turing machines, logic, calculus, proper algorithmic analysis), and more about getting hands-on experience.

I am leaning very strongly against this trend - I believe that at its foundation, our purpose as a faculty is to train computer scientists, not programmers. If they end up being proficient software engineers as a result, this is a bonus, not the main goal. This line of thinking has some very real implications on how courses are taught, what courses are taught and what opportunities we offer our students.

For example, we are at current flooded with requests from other faculties to offer 'low-level' courses to non-CS majors so that their students get the basic training they need in order to code in ML/AI environments. These requests can't merely be ignored.

My question is this: are other CS departments under similar pressure to produce programmers rather than computer scientists? What will be some of the long-term effects of this trend?

I can only speak for the US, and I'll limit my remarks to undergraduate education there. I've been a student or faculty member at a wide range of colleges and universities from tiny (few hundred students) to massive (tens of thousands). Also a wide range of college focus, including liberal arts colleges, specialized focus colleges, and comprehensive universities. Not everything I can say is current, of course, since the participation started in the early 1960s.

Undergraduate education in the US, is normally very broad, encompassing much of the knowledge of "Western" (now broader) thought. The goal is to "produce" an "educated person generally" and one who is well placed for a lifetime of productive activity. There isn't a focus on "training for the job market", but many of the skills are useful there - thinking, writing, analyzing, debating, etc. In addition to the general education requirements, students normally have a major (possibly two) in which they focus more deeply. Computer Science has been a potential major for only about fifty years and the education has changed as the field has changed. Of course, it is still changing at a rate faster than many other fields.

The "hot job market" for CS graduates is an incredibly transient thing. The market runs both cold and hot. Students are a bit fickle about what majors they want to study based on news reports and such. Sometimes it is CS and other times it is Finance, depending on general economic conditions. Other fields don't seem to have these extreme cycles. I can't remember a "hot" market for mathematics since the early Sputnik days. I have also lived through periods in which you couldn't find CS students anywhere.

But, I don't know of very many places in which the faculty that design curricula think of their job as vocational. While most of our students do wind up working in the field, the faculty really wants to position their students for a wider range of option, primarily advanced education. If we don't make it possible for our students to enter an advanced program, we have failed. That, at least, is the perception that I notice.

Vocational education does occur in "Junior Colleges" of course, some of which have that mission (though not all do).

Also, I wonder about a perception that companies simply want colleges to teach students the latest tools and languages. I actually doubt that is true. I think they want intelligent people who can fairly quickly be productive, but who have the depth to grow with the future needs of the company. They don't really want "just programmers", though when you pin down the people who do the hiring that is what they say - since that is their job. What the company really wants is someone who can think, write, analyze, .... More important, that is what they need.

An anecdote. I once had a class of technical wonders who did essentially everything you asked of them. Mixed in was a student with somewhat modest technical skills. My prediction for her was that she would eventually wind up being the boss/manager of the whiz kids since she was the one in the class that always asked "why are we doing this? why is it important?". I still think that perspective is what leads to success. Not just "how does this work?"


English and other translation within single paper I want to to translate my math preprint to Russian. Actually, the preprint is already translated, but I'm in doubt should I include the Russian version together with the English, earlier version of the preprint (available at kolosovpetro.github.io/series_representation_of_power_function). If it's acceptable to combine two language versions of math articles, can you provide some examples?

Is it acceptable to write a paper in English and add a a Russian translation at the end of the English version?

I would think it is probably a mistake to do this. While it is possibly convenient and makes the paper more widely available, it will cause some problems for reviewers. Most of the available reviewers will speak one language or the other only and will either have to trust that the translation is adequate or find some other means. At best this will slow you down. Math especially may be a difficult field in which to do this as machine translation is likely not as good as for (some) other things.

The big issue is, do the two halves, really say the same thing. That can be a bit subtle. It isn't impossible to deal with it, but it would be a strike against the paper in the minds of editors, I think.

Probably not a good idea. Publish in the language you are most familiar with and provide a translation separately.

Carefully mark the translation as a translation and reference the original version within it.


Sabbatical disruption: common annoyance or warning sign? I am a faculty member at an R2 institution in the US, looking ahead to a sabbatical.  On paper, my university has a typical sabbatical policy: every seven years, a semester at full pay or a year at half pay.  However, the administration has recently created policies, apparently for financial reasons, whose effect is to make it harder to actually take sabbaticals.  I may not be allowed to take a sabbatical of the length I had planned, or I may be forced to delay it to some unknown future term.  There is considerable uncertainty as to what will happen in the long run.

I am wondering whether this kind of thing is common.

Teaching loads at my institution are high, and I had been looking forward to sabbatical as a time to focus on my research, which is very important to me personally and professionally.  So I am wondering whether this is a sign that I ought to consider looking for a job somewhere else, or whether I'm overreacting.

I don't really know whether this is the sort of general annoyance that one might occasionally encounter anywhere, or whether it is truly an indication that this institution is not going to be a good fit for my professional goals.  Basically, would it be reasonable to quit over something like this?

I understand that sabbaticals sometimes have to be postponed or restructured due to operational considerations, e.g. whether the department will have sufficient faculty to teach all required courses that term, and that this could happen anywhere.  But the present case is more systemic.

Edit: I should clarify that the new policy is not about increasing academic standards for sabbaticals.  There is already a process for reviewing proposals based on their academic merit, as well as a requirement to report on the results afterward, and I have no problem with that.  The new policy is on top of the existing process, and is based purely on financial considerations; academic merit will not be taken into account at that stage.

I work at an R1 institution and we've had a similar, if not more stringent policy in place for at least a decade. I will say that the sabbatical review, like the tenure review, process is different for different disciplines, but I can also say from first-hand committee experience that the policy changes are stemming from what some might call the abuses by the older, tenured faculty, not young tenure-track faculty.

The internal soap opera at many schools right now is around the senior faculty who teach one or two classes a year, advise two or three students a year, and claim their sabbatical every 5 years in order to re-edit a book they published decades previously. Upon completion of their sabbatical, those seniors submit a one-page memo to the Dean declaring the whole experience a success because they updated the footnotes of said book. Meanwhile junior faculty are teaching 500+ freshmen in each of their 3 classes, trying to publish, patent, and mentor.

Honestly, the process of documenting or time-tabling the work of the sabbatical is meant to provide accountability on both sides. If you are a scientist who needs computing time or a laboratory and the department has committed the resource to you during your sabbatical and then fails to deliver, you have proof of the broken deal. Deans and Vice Presidents of Research are starting to take this seriously, and they are starting to notice when some departments systematically fail to deliver.

The assumption that the policy is meant to or might potentially harm researchers is misplaced. If you see hardworking, grant-carrying faculty who want to finish their  NIH R21 and is denied sabbatical, start asking questions. If you see the guy who only ever shows up for the faculty retreat and hasn't published since the 1980s get denied, go kiss your regents.


Copying the format of a past journal article as a model Is it right to copy the format of past journal articles in one's research as an upcoming researcher?

To give an example assuming there is a research article on "the dynamics of informal urbanism in Asia - the case of Indian cities." Can I pick up the same reasoning, albeit slightly, and apply it to, say, "the dynamics of informal urbanism in Africa - the case of Kenya"?

Will that be acceptable?

It can  be done in an acceptable way. I would frame such an article as a replication: This is what XX and YY found in India. This is what I know about Kenya. So this is how I expect the findings to be different (or the same) in Kenya. Now lets look.

Beware of plagiarism though. Your article will be close to the original, so make sure you don't (unconciously) copy phrases, and cite every time you use ideas from the original article.


Co-advising - how does it work? I was wondering how co-advising works in graduate school, specifically:

Is funding primarily provided by one advisor, or equally shared between two advisors?
Does the student work on two separate projects in parallel or a single project guided by both advisors?

My experience with co-advising is that it most tends to emerge from some combination of the following circumstances:

The student's project has some sort of interdisciplinary nature, such that the "primary" advisor does not have the ability to entirely supervise the student on their own at a technical level.
The advisors have a very close collaboration already, such that it is natural that a student working for one is de facto working for both.
The "co-advisor" is effectively the primary advisor, but cannot technically be so for various reasons, such as not being a primary investigator or being at a different institution (academic or otherwise).

Any or all of these may pertain at once.  In essentially all cases that I have been familiar with, however, the supervision is of a single project, not of different projects for different advisors.

Funding most typically comes from the primary advisor (who usually would not have taken on the student without having the ability to fund them), but individual circumstances can lead to any number of other arrangements.


Should I remind potential mentors to look at my graduate application? An instruction email from one of the graduate schools I applied states the following:

"for the potential mentors you list on the application, after the January deadline passes, it’s a good idea to email them directly with a nudge to look at your application"

Is this necessary and is this a common practice?

It is not "necessary", but, if you are polite and considerate in your emails, at worst it won't hurt anything. Given the ease of application, most departments are deluged with applications, and it is easy to overlook (or forget to return to) any particular application.


As a Head of Department, how can I make my faculty happier? I am HoD for a department with over 30 members.

The dept is socially inactive with only one or two social gatherings per academic year.
No politics or "serious personal issues" among members.
Just teaching while doing some research.

I got a green light from (very) top management to make them happier. But I really don't know how!

It might be uncommon, but just ask them.

You could use a basic questionaire if you want to do it anonymously, or you could talk to everyone in person.

Just showing some activity does not help as long as you are having no idea about the needs and desires of your faculty members.


Publishing a paper without supervisor I recently wrote a scientific article (let's say, about a methodology for predictive analyzes) I would like to submit. The article is beneficial for my PhD as it has close relationship with another paper I am currently writing.

However, I am concerned about its publication:

I don't want to put the name of my supervisor since he has (almost) no knowledge about what I wrote about. I barely think he can even provide constructed critics (if he checks the paper), and I am very unsatisfied about his way of not doing research (only participating to conferences) and taking appropriation of others work. I know, this is probably common in academia but I am the type of person working 8-10 hours everyday (week-end included) to get the job done (plus to get recognition).
To develop the methodology, I needed to learn and implement some mathematical models (and related algorithms) over the last 4 months. However, I have started everything from scratch, which means I am not an expert with 10 years of experience that can accurately see if the work I did requires strong modifications or not.

I am not quite sure about publishing alone since I don't think an editor would be convinced to do it that way. I was thinking about looking for a scientist (in conferences possibly) with whom I can work with so that he could make a proper review about my work (and add his name on it). I am not quite sure about this though, I don't think someone can steal my research (if we consider worse case of doing this).

My supervisor proposed me a post-doc already, I don't really want to envenom our relationship but let's say this is the type of person who (probably) doesn't care about recognition (thus having his name on papers). I may be wrong though.

My question is, do you think I should accept publishing with my supervisor or consider an alternative option?

On one hand, you seem to have a research advisor who is quite supportive of you; he has already offered you a post-doctoral position when you finish.  On the other hand, you are concerned that he tends to attach himself to, and take credit for, work on which he is only peripherally involved.  This places you in something of a quandary, since your advisor has not made a meaningful contribution to your paper.

However, I would suggest that you show your advisor the paper to get his feedback.  Even if that feedback is not useful in terms of the content of the manuscript, your advisor probably has a good understanding of how papers should be written, and where they should be submitted.  Moreover, when other scholars are evaluating work done by graduate students, you are not going to be significantly penalized for having your advisor as a co-author.   Having a paper that is co-authored by your advisor, but with you as the first authors, is not going to be perceived as that different from  a single-author publication.

Perhaps your advisor will make some useful comments, but he will decline to be an author on the paper.  (This happened to me, in my interactions with my advisor, more than once.)  You seem to think that your author is not likely to be magnanimous in this way, which is, in the abstract, unfortunate.  However, as I stated above, having you advisor as a co-author is unlikely to be counted against you in a significant way, and maintaining a good relationship with your advisor (for whom you man continue working as a post-doc) can be extremely important for a future research career.  So I do not think that you have much to lose by showing your paper to your advisor and getting the advantage of your advisor's guidance.


I just submitted my PhD applications. What do I do now? I just submitted my applications to all the grad schools I am considering. Is there anything I can do during the wait to help my application?

Is there anything I can do during the wait to help my application?

I'll answer assuming you are applying to programs that work like most U.S. math graduate programs.  In other words, programs where admissions are decided by a departmental committee, rather than by individual professors, and where there are no interviews or other direct involvement of the applicant after the application is submitted.  For other sorts of systems, I'm not competent to offer any advice.

To a first approximation, there's nothing you can do during the wait to help your application.  It's best to find a distraction and try not to worry about it.  That being said, there are several things to keep in mind:

You should make sure your letter writers actually submit their letters.  Every year, a few letter writers are many weeks late, and this can cause real damage.  Even once you have submitted everything you are responsible for, the application is not complete until enough letters are received.
Getting in touch with potential advisors might help, but it should be done exceedingly sparingly.  If the content of your e-mail amounts to "please look at my application" or "see how great I am", it will only annoy people.  "Please estimate my chances of admission" is even worse.  I'd recommend restricting pre-admission e-mails to cases where you have something genuinely substantive to say.  For example, if you have intellectually serious comments or ideas related to the person's research, then that's always worth an e-mail.  Same thing if you would like to bring their attention to a paper of yours that is closely connected with their work.  A good test is whether you would still send the e-mail even if you weren't applying to their university.  I don't recommend manufacturing a contrived reason to send e-mail, but if you never got in touch with someone whose research you extended, now would be a good time to do so.
It's usually possible to add information to your file if something important comes up (e.g., a paper acceptance or a prize).  This is not worth even trying unless it's a real improvement in your file, and you certainly shouldn't make repeated changes in an attempt to draw attention to your file (any additional attention will be negative).  However, if you get good news you should consider sharing it.  The best news is often financial: if you get a fellowship that would pay for one or more years of grad school, then you should definitely add this information to your file.  It's both a serious vote of confidence from another organization and a real savings to the department.


Should I ask the instructor for a make-up exam for attending a PhD interview at another university (and risk my standing)? I am a first year PhD student at an American university and since I was not satisfied with my present department, I had applied to a few universities last semester (it was my first semester here). My recommenders were all from my previous university and no one in this university knows I applied. I recently received an interview call from one of the universities I applied to. It is a 2 day program, the first day being the interviews and the second day for the faculty presentations and interaction with current students. Unfortunately, the second day clashes with a major exam for a core PhD course I am taking here.

I asked the official of the interviewing university as to what I should do and she said that I could ask for a make up exam in order to attend the second day as well. My question is, should I? My fear is that the instructor could tell about this to other people in my department (or she may actually be bound to do so by some school law?) and that could seriously jeopardize my situation here. I did like the PI for my first rotation here, and might want to join his lab for my PhD in the event that I am not selected by the interviewing university OR I do not like the interviewing university after visiting it.

I thought that I could go to the instructor of this course and ask her if she discuss a matter with me confidentially (keeping the matter confidential at least till the end of this semester), and then ask her about the make-up exam. Is this a good idea?
Another option is to not tell her anything and miss the 2nd day, since the interviews happen on the first day. That way no one would probably know, although I will miss the crucial part of the faculty interviews and student interaction which is so important for me to make my decision.

Is there something else I should consider that I am missing? Any help could be life-saving!

You don't have to tell your instructor why you want to reschedule your exam.  Just tell her you have a conflict with a personal matter and ask if it is possible to take the exam on a different date.

She might say no, but if she does, then she would probably have said no even if you had told her the real reason.  Usually exam makeup policies are either "flexible" or "no makeups except for medical reasons or conflict with another course".  Attending an admissions event at another university isn't any more compelling as an excuse than "generic personal business".

If she does say no, then you're going to have to choose between the two.  It probably makes the most sense to attend the interview and then come back for your exam, skipping the second day of the event.  It's probably not wise to skip the exam - you don't want to get bad grades if you are looking to apply elsewhere.


Fine-tuning parameters for existing methods I'm comparing my method against existing methods by doing some experiments on one dataset.
The existing methods do not provide results on the considered dataset.
My question is: Can I use default parameters from the existing methods? The fact is that there are plenty of existing methods and it will take a lot of time to fine-tune for each existing method.
Thank you.

Can I use default parameters from the existing methods?

Yes, but should you? Default parameters are unlikely to provide optimal performance, so you may like to try various parameters.


Is it possible for me to apply for a student and working visa to obtain a post-graduate degree? I am an HND degree holder and I want to know the chances I have to fund my tuition and my expenses if I apply for a student/working visa from Nigeria and what is the duration?

I don't think a higher national diploma (HND) degree is recognized as the equivalent of the bachelor's degree from a regular university. Consequently, it is unlikely you would be able to use it to gain entry to a master's program in either the US or Canada.

I can't guarantee this is the way it works in Canada, but at least in the US, most students on visas have limited ability to work outside of the university, and certainly are unlikely to earn enough money to cover tuition as well as living expenses—the wages for typical student employment is on the order of $10/hour, and few students work more than about 20 hours per week. (That's approximately $10,000 per year.)


Advisor and co-advisor of PhD with different areas of research I did my graduate studies in Mathematics at two completely different universities, A and B, from my country. During my studies from university A, I had a very good professor X in theoretical statistics. In my studies from university B, I had a very good professor Y in stochastic calculus. Professors X and Y do not know each other and have not worked together before. Moreover, although both belong to a statistics department, their areas of research are not exactly the same. University A is good and is near my home. University B is top ranked and far from my home.

In my country, opportunities of job at university for young researchers are little, so doing a PhD at two different universities would certainly enlarge my possiblities for a job in the future. My question is whether it would be acceptable to pursue a PhD at university A with advisor Y and co-advisor X. I mean, is it acceptable to do most of the part of the thesis with professor Y and some research with professor X, although both areas of research are not exactly the same, but both are from a statistics department?

It is hard or impossible to answer such a question directly, not knowing the culture of both universities and the personalities of the two potential advisors. However, I can give advice about how to maximize your potential for a good outcome.

Pick one of these advisors and universities and approach the person personally with your request to be a student. Either one will likely do. But pick the one you'd most like to work with if the overall plan doesn't succeed. First try to get accepted. Then broach the possibility of working also with the other professor and give reasons why you think it would be helpful to you and that you already know the person. If you get push-back on the idea, yield graciously. If the first person thinks it would be fine, approach the other, giving the current state of affairs and saying why you'd like to also work with him/her. You may wind up in the desired outcome.

If the first seems hesitant to work with you at all, it is then time to approach the other as if it is a first request.

Don't make it seem unnecessarily complicated at the very beginning. And don't worry about the (slight) difference in fields. It seems likely, in fact, that the two people already know one another. Distance is less of a barrier than it once was.

Even better if you have any research ideas that might appeal to both of them. It might work out less well if you are depending on your advisor(s) to supply a problem.

If you are working for one of these people then it might be possible for you to occasionally get advice from the other on a less formal basis, provided the person is interested in you and/or your research problem.


Listing in reference section, but not quoting Can we list papers/Journals in reference section, but do not quote them in thesis. It may happen that I read some papers which are close to my area of work, but I may not use any idea from that paper. So in such case, I may not quote anything from that paper. But since I have read that paper, can I list that paper in reference section?

Many journals require you to reference every entry in your list of references somewhere in the paper. That is probably also a good rule of thumb for a thesis.

The reason for this rule is that people do not typically just read through the list of references by itself. They read through the text, and in places where another publication is referenced, they will look it up in the list of references at the end. If the list of references contains entries that are not in fact referenced anywhere in the text, nobody is likely to ever look at that entry.

In practice, if you think that a paper is relevant for your thesis, then there ought to be a place in your text where you should cite it. If you cannot find a place where it would be worthwhile to cite it, then the paper is likely not relevant.


Is it a good idea to contact professors before applying to grad schools? I've seen some universities encouraging students to contact with the faculty before making applications. For example,  this one. On the other hand I've heard some people saying that they are waste of times because professors receive several such e-mails every year and they don't even have time to look at them.

So, is it good idea to make contanct professors before making the application? Can it increase my chances of acceptance? Can it ever backfire me?

This really only works as a strategy if you have something truly meaningful to say. If you have to force yourself to do it and struggle to come up with something to say in your email, you're not helping yourself. Faculty get tons of email all the time and every year - as you say - get emails from prospective students, many of whom will not be admitted and in whom they invest no effort. So, if you genuinely think you're a good fit for a program/lab and have solid questions in mind to ask the faculty/PI of that lab that will communicate your quality and fit, this may be viable. But, I would definitely not recommend it as a general strategy.


How much detail to include for an award listed on a CV I would like to have a section titled 'Awards/Honors' in my CV and I am confused about how much detail to include for the items in this section. Here are some formats and levels of detail I am considering:

Harry Potter scholarship.
Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Harry Potter scholarship.
Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Harry Potter scholarship: awarded to one student every year for demonstrated excellence in horcrux-gathering.

For certain things, I feel like the first does not include enough context, beyond some very well-known things (such as a Fulbright or Goldwater, neither of which I have received). For some particular names I have in mind the second looks pretty clunky and does not always fit on a single line. The third option is even clunkier, and might be perceived as an attempt to add fluff to inflate the CV. I am personally leaning towards the second option, but I don't know that it adds much value beyond the first option.

Is there an accepted way to list awards/scholarships? Should I even be listing them at all?

Some context. I am a PhD student in Mathematics and I will be on the academic job market this coming year. I am currently based in the US and intend to apply to jobs here as well as internationally if I find any that are interesting. I am wondering both about the CV I keep that lives on my professional website and the one I hope to send as part of my job applications.

Edited to add: The first couple of answers suggest that one might choose the format/level of detail based on the type/prestige of award. If I were reading a CV and came across inconsistent formatting within a section, I would find it quite jarring. Is this something that only worries someone mildly-OCD such as myself (I notice things like en-dashes and em-dashes) and therefore perhaps to not be worried about, or should I be careful about such things (e.g. consistency of formatting) when creating a CV?

I will disagree with Dan C's answer above and state that you should only be choosing between options 2 and 3. At the very minimum, you want to indicate who gave you the award. Otherwise, it's not all that valuable to the reviewer of your CV, as they may not know whether an award is a big deal or not. If it's a major award, I'd default to option 3 if it's "non-obvious" how it works.

So, in general, I'd opt for option number 2, unless there's some specific information that needs to be shared, in which case I'd go for number 3.


What questions should I ask when I visit labs for potential post-doc employment? I am approaching the end of the tunnel and starting to look for my options beyond the PhD. The few contacts I have initiated have been positive so far and I will be visiting some labs in the coming months.

I am wondering which questions would be good ask during these visits. What insights would be valuable to acquire after these visits?

Regarding the talk with the group/lab leader, I am thinking of keeping the conversation/discussion around research interests for both parties, as well as his/her expectations from me and my responsibilities, if I start a post-doc there.

With respect to the group members, I intend on inquiring about the social environment, work ethics/common practices, different competencies that are in the group. Edit: a good advice I recently got from an ex-colleague who's doing post-doc in the US now, was to investigate whether or not there is a tradition of inter-group competition, i.e. will there be another post-doc working on the same project?

Any comments/suggestions based on personal experience?

Your list is a good start, but I would dig a little deeper into the "expectations" item than you may plan. "Postdoc" is maybe the least well-defined role in a research group, and what you are supposed to (and allowed to) do can vary greatly. You need to have a clear understanding in advance whether your vision of the position matches with the vision of your mentor. Concretely:

Ask whether you are supposed to write papers without your mentor. If yes, try to get a feel whether the mentor means it (very few will outright say No to such a request). Try to get a feel for what percentage of joint vs. individual work your mentor expects.
Ask whether you are supposed to write grant proposals. Ask whether you will be the PI of said proposals, or your mentor.
Ask whether you will be responsible for your own PhD students.
Ask whether it will be possible to work on topics that are of interest to you, but of less interest to your mentor.
Try to get a feel for the mode of collaboration your mentor expects. Everything from "you do your thing and ask me for input when you need it" to "I'll tell you which problem to work on, and you report back your results to me" is possible, and you will want to know which one it is.

In addition to that, also ask what your mentor has in mind in terms of your career plan. When you apply for assistant professorships in a year, will he fully support you, or will he want to keep you around for longer? If the latter, what can he realistically offer you?


Post-doc wants to break his promise of including me on author list I am a master student, working for X lab of Y university as a research assistant.

3 months ago, a post-doc(my direct supervisor) recruited me into a project when he wanted to submit his paper within a month, telling me "You can coauthor if you join." Since then I worked overtime to finish exactly what he told me to do, implementing all his new ideas (but none of them worked).
Later he gave up previous submission, had the project updated a bit and now preparing submission to another conference in a month. Last week I asked "Am I on your author list?", only to get "Let me think about that." Project is almost finished currently, in terms of both experiments and writing.

Now I have no idea what to do, his reply sounds like a NO to me. To fight for that, I don't have any strong argument other than his vocal promise. My contribution is not direct, but a part of code he used was written by me (for another project), and I successfully implemented his new ideas.

Given such situation, should I ask him again for this authorship?
Or should I explain everything to PI? If then, how to?

This is an unfortunate situation. If your results invalidate the post-doc's idea, then most likely they will not be included in the paper, unless one can put a positive spin on it (e.g., "an obvious explanation for the observation is Z, but here we show that Z cannot be right and instead we propose that W is the true underlying mechanism"). In this case you have no claim to authorship, despite the work you've put in. In other words, the promise of authorship was implicitly contingent on the experiments yielding positive results supporting the hypotheses advanced in the paper.

If the current manuscript is based in part on the code you wrote, then there is a case to be made that you should be an author. But I'm always of the opinion that writing some code is a weak argument for being an author, unless there is some novelty or substantial effort on your part.

Note that the post-doc said that they will consider your authorship request. You interpreted that as a no, but that seems to me an unwarranted and premature conclusion. You should have a constructive conversation with them to try to resolve the issue collegially. This kind of situations will pop up in the future, and it is a good skill to learn how to address them. Even if you get nothing out of it in the end, just remember that in the grand scheme of things it's not really a big deal and you'll forget it in (hopefully) a couple of months.


Too busy with coursework to do research, can I transfer from CS Masters to a PhD in another school? I just started my Masters in CS at EPFL. I got accepted here with their university wide scholarship as well as a unique opportunity to do research in a lab. My problem is that the course load (typically 7-8 courses per semester) is so much for a Masters degree here that I don't have any time to dedicate to any research. Of course there is the Masters Thesis but that only comes after all course work is finished.  In the mean time I see that the PhD students and other researchers in the lab are working on really interesting stuff and I won't have the time to participate in such work. So I was thinking about just applying directly to PhD programs either at EPFL or ETHZ or in schools in the United States. I wanted to do a Masters to get a better understanding of what exactly I want to research but I have realized that just by picking the research lab here at EPFL I know what field I want to do research in.

I was wondering how common it is for people to apply to PhD programs without completing their Masters studies. How should I explain this in my application, that I am deciding to leave a program? Would it be fine to explain that I am deciding to leave as I want to enter a more research oriented program? How open will admission committees be to that? Will the admission committee be worried that if I decided to leave this Masters program I might decide to leave the PhD program, which I don't intend to?

Any advice in this matter will be helpful. Thanks.

I was wondering how common it is for people to apply to PhD programs without completing their Masters studies.

In most parts of Europe, students typically have a masters degree on entry to a PhD program.

In the United States, it's quite common in many fields (including CS) for students to enter a PhD program without a masters degree. But if you start a PhD program in the United States without a masters degree, you'll just have to do the coursework that would have been part of a masters degree at the beginning of your PhD. The course load may be a little lighter, but in general, you won't have much time for research during that period, just like your current situation.

(If you enter a PhD program in the US with a masters degree you'll still have to do some additional coursework in many cases, but typically not as much.)

See this answer for more details.

  Would it be fine to explain that I am deciding to leave as I want to enter a more research oriented program?

It sounds somewhat strange to leave a masters program in which you will have a chance to do research (once you've completed preliminary coursework) because you want to enter a "more research oriented program." In any program you enter, if you haven't taken graduate-level coursework yet, you'll probably have to do some before you can do research full-time.

It's perfectly understandable that you're eager to get started on research - that's a good sign. But you can't just skip your graduate-level coursework entirely - you'll have to take it somewhere, and while you're busy with that you won't have much time for research.

I suggest you try to look at look at your coursework as something that can help you when you finally get to start on your research. The breadth of the classes you're taking will expose you to methods and ideas that you may be able to use in interesting ways in your research. The following advice is really sound:

  What you think is useful or relevant will (probably) keep changing for a while. Everyone is, at some point during their PhD, forced to take some class they really don’t want to take. Over the past few years I walked into quite a few classes thinking they would be irrelevant or even useless. But I shouldn’t have been so quick to judge (and I really should have taken better notes!). Sure, there are classes whose value I still have to figure out (and maybe never will), but there are also classes that surprised me and others whose relevance became apparent many months after I delivered that final paper.


Is it appropriate for a TA to say "My Students"? I am a teaching assistant for the first time this semester. A couple of friends have asked how it is going, and I have used phrases like "some of my students..." or "my students are ..." when telling them my experiences.

I'm not so concerned when talking to my friends, but in an academic setting (ex. talking to another professor) is it appropriate for me to say "my students" when referring to the students in the class which I am TA'ing for?

I'm definitely leaning towards "no", because I am not the one instructing the class, I am just helping instruct the class, but I'd like to get SE's opinion.

Yes, it is perfectly appropriate to refer to students in a class you are TAing as "my students."

You are teaching them; hence, they are your students. It doesn't really matter whether or not you are the primary instructor.


Automatic failure for not completing all assignments - proper? Related: How to motivate students to complete low-point homework?

One of my undergraduate professors had a similar problem to the OP's in the above question, that is, that students would skip many minor low-point assignments in favor of studying for big exams, and the professor felt that not completing every single assignment resulted in a lower-quality learning experience even though a student's average still might be passing or even excellent.

The professor's solution was a policy that any student who failed to complete  all assignments would be automatically assigned a zero for the course. That is, the student did not have an opportunity to accept a zero for the assignment that was not done - they would instead get an automatic F for the course. There was no requirement that each assignment be perfect, or even good - the requirement was that you had to at least attempt and turn something in for each assignment.

Are there any problems with this strategy from a pedagogical or ethics perspective? Obviously, some universities permit this and some do not, and the instructor in question did announce this policy in the syllabus at the beginning of the course, but I'm asking from a more general or best practices perspective. It seems to me that this is a non-optimal solution, more specifically one that is using an academic assessment system (grades/GPA) improperly as a behavioral management technique. That is, this strategy is similar/analogous to dropping a student's grade from a B to a C because they brought a weapon to class, or (in reverse) restricting a student from attending a campus dance because they did not demonstrate sufficient mastery of Boyle's Law (implementing a behavioral intervention when an academic one such as a lowered grade would have been more appropriate).

Is this a fair assessment of the situation, or is such a strategy a legitimate tool?

Obviously, the minimum level of effort required to constitute "completing" an assignment was vague and something I did not actually inquire into - one might wonder whether or not turning in a piece of paper with "I like pie, here is Boyle's Law, Boyle's Law is great, the answer to all of the questions on this assignment is THREE." would have sufficed (well, it would have been more than a blank page!). That also concerns me - whether or not being able to identify a boundary between making random guesses that effectively constitute not trying at all and an entirely incompetent, but sincere, attempt to complete the assignment (e.g. answers are all wrong, student failed to apply recent best practices covered in lecture, student confused Ohm's Law with Boyle's Law, student did not express all results to two significant figures as insisted upon in the instructions, answer was in French when English was required, student claimed that Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy was invented by Freud in 1543 and is generally considered effective in treating acute alcohol intoxication, student claimed that Orange is the New Black is a prime example of early twelfth-century Anglo-Saxon epic poetry, etc.), matters in determining whether or not such a penalty should be allowed.

This question has nothing to do with cheating or plagiarism.

Note: This was NOT Competency-Based Education (CBE). This was a regular engineering class that just happened to have this odd policy tacked on because the instructor was sick to death of students skipping his little 2 point assignments that he thought were critical. The course was otherwise entirely normal.

In response to @aeismail, yes, assignments could be turned in up until the date of the final exam, at least for purposes of not automatically failing the course for failing to turn something in.

your question needs a step back: is university the place to force students' personal behavior and personal decisions?  if yes, then what is the difference between university and school?

My view is simple: University is the transitional place where students learn to make their own decisions and be responsible in preparation for real-life. This means that there is no one anymore chasing you to "please study". At university you are responsible for your own learning and students quickly start learning responsibility after a little while.

If we are going to keep holding the metaphorical stick and say "you HAVE to do everything as i told you to or else" then when will these students learn to make decisions or realize the  consequences of bad decisions in a relatively safe Environment?

Then comes the 2nd question: Is it for you as a university educator to actually force students to do assignments? why?

If they want to have better learning experience from your class they will choose to do more work. If not then not. It is really not your business, their grades cover their learning. whether or not they choose if your class is worth remembering after the  semester end is their own choice.

Finally, some university professors make me feel they just want to control students. I had various discussions before about why for example you'd be offended of having your student use a laptop in lecture or look at his/her phone (this seems to be more common in the USA instructors than in other countries I dealt with for some reason).

Of course I expect like a million comment now about how you are supposed to "do what is best for them". Except that that they are no longer children, what is good for them is to teach them to be adults. This means: guide them not force them


My PhD Supervisor is founding a startup based on my thesis work and wants me to be first hire. Unsure if want to join I'm a current PhD student and PhD supervisor is in the process of making a startup company largely based on the devices that I've developed during my PhD thesis. My supervisor is trying hard to convince me, but not pressuring me, to join the company as its first hire. If I accept I will almost immediately begin writing my thesis to graduate early as I begin to work at the company.
I will make a modest salary to begin with (A 10K-15K increase in my PhD salary, but probably 30K-40K less than I could expect to make if I was hired at a larger company) and get roughly 2% equity. He is looking for me to commit for a year to 2 years to begin with, at which point he thinks we can bring the company to a roughly 20M valuation if successful.
I enjoy the work I do and have a relatively okay relationship with my advisor, but am beginning to get some fatigue and am interested in getting the opportunity to work on something new. At the startup I would essentially be doing the same work I'm doing now and continue working in the same labs and using the same equipment. This makes it difficult for me to get 100% excited about the opportunity because there is not really an immediately tangible change or benefit that feels like career progression other than the small increase in pay, and potential future payout if the company is successful.
I don't want to accept the offer and within my first few weeks feel like I'm already burnt out on the project. But I also don't want to pass on the offer, find my new job not as exciting (or not be able to find a job at all) and wish I would have accepted the offer. Does anybody have any advice? Thanks.

You may find you are an initial ideas person, not someone who enjoys taking an idea through into practice and commercial success. If so, you need to think in terms of getting money for your ideas, rather than for your follow-through work.
Depending on what contracts you have signed and other legalities, it may be too late to get money from your current idea, but look into it. If the devices are not patented, see if they should be, with you as an inventor. Depending on how much he contributed, your supervisor may also be an inventor.
Your objective should be to be compensated for allowing the new company to use your prior work, for example by granting you equity in exchange for a license. Most start-ups fail, so your equity needs to be high enough to allow for that. The net present value of a company that would be worth 20M in a few years if successful may be 2M, assuming 10% probability of success. 2%, even ignoring the job issue, is not enough if the technical basis depends on your thesis work.
Being underpaid by 30K for at least two years would cost you 60K, and it does not sound like you would take the job for fun. Committing to 2 years should result in higher pay to compensate for loss of flexibility. In any case, negotiate separately on permission to use your devices, and pay/benefits for any job offer.


How to provide information about past students without violating FERPA The instructions for supervisors of an NIH NRSA Fellowship say:

  B. Sponsor's/Co-Sponsor’s Previous Fellows/Trainees Give the total number of predoctoral and postdoctoral individuals previously sponsored. Select up to five that are representative and, for those five, provide information on time spent in the lab their present employing organizations and position titles or occupations. Include this information for any co-sponsor as well.

While the instructions do not say the supervisor needs to provide names, even in the absence of a name, providing the information seem like it is treading close to a FERPA violation. It would be surprising if a reviewer would not be able to identify who the former students from the required information even in the absence of the name.

Do I need my former students to fill out some sort of FERPA statement? If so, can I make it them agreeing to some sort of blanket FERPA release a requirement for me to agree to supervise them?

Intuitively I would think that if signed consents were needed, NIH would instruct you to include them in your application or, at least, to obtain them and keep them on file.
I checked a few universities and found that they publish an email address for addressing FERPA questions.  Also, there is a contact page for the compliance section of the Department of Education: http://familypolicy.ed.gov/content/family-policy-compliance-office-contact-information
On p. 9 of the instructions you linked to, there is a contact page.
I'm not sure if it's relevant, but on that same page, I read:

Collection of Personal Demographic Data
NIH collects personal data through the eRA Commons Personal Profile. The data is confidential, and
is maintained under the Privacy Act record system.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/collection-of-personal-demographic-data.htm

The part of FERPA that looks like it might be relevant is here.
The basic idea that I got about this is that NIH commits to holding the personal information you share with it as close to its chest as your university does.  In other words, it commits to using the personal information you give it for internal purposes only.  My big-picture view of FERPA is that it provides protections to students from having their personal information publicly disseminated (subject to a ton of fine print).


What is a source for Richard Riley's famous quote about preparing students for the future? A famous quote by Richard Riley, former US Secretary of Education, is as follows:

  We are currently preparing students for jobs that don’t yet exist, using technologies that haven’t been invented, in order to solve problems we don’t even know are problems yet.

I have seen this quoted in hundreds of places, but never a full reference. I'd like to use this quote in an article that must adhere to APA referencing - does anyone know of the first place this quote appears?

Generation Jobless by Peter Vogel has this quote at the beginning of Chapter 3, and attributes it to "Gunderson et al, 2004"

Checking this book's bibliography, we can find that "Gunderson et al, 2004" refers to

Gunderson, S., Jones, R. & Scanland, K. 2004. The Jobs Revolution: Changing How
America Works. Copywriters Inc

I would suggest you check there.


APA citation of two articles with no author, no date, and the same title? I'm looking to cite both of the following articles:

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Free_Speech
https://ballotpedia.org/Institute_for_Free_Speech

For web pages like this, my understanding is the citation should look like this:

[Title]. [Web Site]. Retrieved from [URL]

Since both have the same title, how should I distinguish between the two in in-text citations? Should I list both the title and web site somehow?

("Title of the page", n.d.a) and ("Title of the page", n.d.b) would combine:

naming the title in quotation marks "Article Title" due to the unavailability of an author; and
the n.d. (no date) due to the unavailable date; and
the letter that is added to the date because of multiple same-titles and same-dates (a, b ...).

However, your case is special as the first link is a Wiki. As Geoffrey Brent wrote in a comment, in case of a Wiki, you can click on "View history" and find a permalink to an article's current version with a date attribution. You can then link to that versioned permalink with the date. Here is an example of a version history page pertaining to your first link; the permalink to the most recent version (Feb. 2019) is this one: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Institute_for_Free_Speech&oldid=745869 (you can find this link by clicking on the most recent date listed in the version history page).


Waiting for approval from professor to write letter of recommendation I am applying to a university teaching position, and I would like one of my committee members to write a letter of recommendation for me. During my initial interview with the head of the department at this university, I was told that the application may be taken down swiftly depending on several factors. Hence, I'm in a bit of a time crunch.
I have an excellent relationship with the professor I am hoping to get a letter of recommendation from. But they have not responded to my email, and I'm concerned that the delay may make me miss this opportunity.
Since I have a good relationship with this professor, is it safe to assume they will be willing to write me a letter of recommendation, or should I contact the department I am applying to and let them know of my predicament? I have no concern that this professor would write a negative review, but I'm hesitant to assume they'd be willing or available to do it.

Rather than contact the other university, make sure that the professor in question is aware of the time situation. But, if everything else is in place for your application, it seems unlikely that the university would withdraw the position for any single piece of information that isn't completely in your control.
You might want to consider asking an intermediary, such as another professor or the department head, to make contact with the professor to provide a bit of a nudge.
Let the other university know, perhaps, that you have requested the letter from Prof XYXXY.


My university requires that I take attendance. How should I treat students who arrive late to class? I might soon teach at a university which requires that I record attendance of students, as follows:
Attendance is a requirement for the course. A person with at least 75% of attendance is eligible to take final exams. A person with an attendance between 65% and 75% is required to submit a medical certificate. A person with less than 65% of attendance is not allowed to write the exam and has to do recourse.

As the university has no explicit rules on how attendance should be recorded, I am asking about this.

I studied many courses, and the behaviour of faculty in this particular aspect varies from one another. The following are the behaviours of faculties I observed mostly:

Allowing the latecomer into the class at any time and giving attendance to the latecomer.
Allowing the latecomer into the class at any time, asking a reason for being late, and then giving attendance to the latecomer.
Allowing the latecomer into the class, but giving attendance based on the reason the latecomer gives for being late.
Disallowing the latecomer by closing doors or with strict instruction.

So, I came to the impression that it totally depends on the particular faculty. Mostly I observed 1, 2 and 4. I observed 3 very rarely.

What is the recommended and proper behaviour towards latecomers?

This is an answer to a previous version of the question, where it was not clear that recording attendance was mandatory at the asker’s university. Therefore my answer does not cover the specific situation of the OP, but may still help others in a similar situation.

0)  Allow all students in class and do not monitor attendance.

They are adults and they come to learn. As long as they do not disrupt the class they are free to come and go as they please. I do not see which purpose the monitoring of attendance serves. It sends the wrong signal and focuses students on signing the register sheet rather than on the objective of the class.

I do, however, start each class by thanking students who attend and come in time. Latecomers will miss this part.


When I should make my work available? I am a PhD student in computer science. I work on some problem for last 3 -4 months and it work out, but it will not be a complete paper. I am working on one more problem and then i will combine these two problems and make a one paper. I am thinking about writing about first problem.  I am thinking that I should write my work and make it upload on ECCC - Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity or in arxiv.

Questions :

When I should make my work available?
What is the arxiv and  ECCC other than that ECCC is for complexity theory and arxiv is open computer science, mathematics etc ?

I think it is possible to provide semi-generic answers to your questions

  When I should make my work available?

If your problem is interesting (say an open problem or a problem that was not been attempted or solved in the past), then you could make progress on it, write a draft and upload it to arXiv or ECCC. As long as you get endorsement and moderated by arXiv, the document will be online. Yes, when you should do it is a question? --- You should do it when you feel that the community is getting something new (or a revisit) to an existing problem. You work is expanding - to some extent - the existing knowledge about the problem or research. That should be like a visible contribution to the research in your field.

  What is the arxiv and ECCC other than that ECCC is for complexity theory and arxiv is open computer science, mathematics etc ?

As the website reads (at the bottom): arXiv is an e-print service in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics. Submissions to arXiv should conform to Cornell University academic standards. arXiv is owned and operated by Cornell University, a private not-for-profit educational institution. arXiv is funded by Cornell University Library, the Simons Foundation and by the member institutions.[arXiv.org]

There is a process of moderation that happens in arXiv for every paper. Read about it here.


Does it matter that your dissertation has been submitted when you apply to a postdoc position? I'm finishing my fourth year of a Ph.D. in mathematics. I have enough for a dissertation, and by the end of the summer, I will probably have enough for a very nice dissertation. And I plan to finish next year.

I also a couple of published papers not directly related to my thesis, and a few projects that might bear fruits maybe even this summer. So by October, when "application season" begins, I should be ready to apply to schools.

My advisor wants me to submit my work around the time I apply, so I can write in the applications that the thesis has been submitted. However, if I do that, I am likely to find myself without funding and without money for a significant portion of the year, as my university halts your stipend and employment as soon as your work is approved.

His argument is that a lot of universities might outright reject, or at least consider it less favorable, if I haven't submitted my work. As it might signal that I'm not ready to move on. This seems a bit odd to me. But I never sat in the chairs of those who make these decisions.

I also don't know how these things vary between departments, so I'm asking specifically for mathematics.

This answer is specific to the USA.

Your dissertation advisor needs to write in their letter something along the lines that you've written X chapters of your dissertation (or the equivalent in the hard sciences) and that they fully expect you will be able to defend and submit by such-and-such date.

On the receiving side, we know that some students will decide at the last minute to not submit their dissertation and defer graduation. This is usually critically important for international students who will lose their immigration status once they graduate, but it also applies to domestic students as well who might need university health care, housing, or just the extra time to perfect their dissertation.

We all know how this game is played. On the receiving side, all we need is assurance that you WILL be able to submit IF you are given the post-doc. Many post-docs have been burned by recipients who did not finish the dissertation receive the PhD before arriving at the post-doc and turned the post-doc into a pre-doc. Many now have formal language that if you do not submit by the start of the post-doc, your hiring letter will be vacated.


How do I refer to my own work in an anonymous abstract? I am currently working on an abstract for conference submission. The contents of the proposed presentation build heavily on part of my master's thesis.
Since the abstract has to be written anonymously, however, I am struggling to find a good way to refer to the work I did in my thesis.
Some thoughts on a few options I had so far:

Although my thesis hasn't been properly published, simply pretending it doesn't exist feels weird and academically questionable.
I'm worried that, by citing it using my last name while making no connection to me as the author of the abstract, I would make it seem as if I did significantly less work myself, minimize the apparent impact of the presentation, and thereby drastically reduce the chances of getting accepted.
Referring to the previous work I did using "in my master's thesis..." seems like the best option so far, but citing work without providing author and title feels odd too.

Is there any established way of going about this?
In case that makes any difference, I am working in the field of linguistics.

Don't lose track of the purpose of an anonymous abstract. It is there to provide double blind reviewing so that reviewers aren't influenced by the reputation of the author. They aren't intended for final publication and an edited version is what will appear if anything does.
You could cite your own work as by "this author" listing it as unpublished or to appear or thesis, etc. That is sufficient for review. If the abstract is eventually published, it will be in a form in which you correct those references.


Is "liberal arts" a unique feature of American higher education? Liberal arts programs are very common in the US but not in Europe (correct me if I am wrong). As I see here in discussions, the environment of liberal arts colleges is different: for example, student-faculty relationships.

Have such historical liberal arts programs and schools changed the overall higher education in the US or are they just different types of programs.

Are the universities which are not focused on liberal arts influenced by the culture of liberal arts programs/schools?

It's probably not unique, but practically yes the concept of a "liberal arts" college or education is specific to North America. Some European countries have a form of "liberal arts" curriculum at the high school level (e.g. the German or Swiss Gymnasium) where a broad spectrum of "classic" subjects are taught with the purpose of allowing students to join any university education.

But (continental) European universities generally have individual programs for math, philosophy, history, science, etc.

It's actually quite puzzling for people who attended university in Europe to hear their US-educated colleagues say "Yes, I majored in physics and medieval music".


Re-posted faculty position. Worth waiting? (and two-body problem...) I applied for a faculty position at a state research (not so intensive) school in June. Since the position requires both a clinical degree and a research degree, their application pool is not likely to be large.

Then, in mid-August, I emailed a search committee chair to update my CV with a new publication, and the person said he would be in touch soon...  At first, I got optimistic when I read his reply, but decided not to think much about it.

In late August, they re-posted the position on their website...  It was the same posting, so my application materials were still there...  I thought I would get at least a phone interview opportunity but haven't heard from them since I sent my updated CV.  It's likely that they think I am not good enough for their position or do not meet their requirements...? Or internal candidate? or preferred candidate?

I really want to get this position...and I don't know what to do at this point.  My spouse is also in academia, and this might be my only chance to live with him...  Is there a chance that I hear from them this month or November?  Or should I just stop hoping and try to find jobs out of state...

I really want to get this position...and I don't know what to do at this point.

There is not much you can do at this point. The search committee has your application materials, and will get back to you if the position is relevant.

  My spouse is also in academia, and this might be my only chance to live with him...

This might be in your favor. Did your spouse recently get hired? Could they try and negotiate for a spousal hire for you? It is possible that you may be able to negotiate a position for you if your spouse's faculty wants them to stay. It may not be the most ideal position for you, but it will be something. After all, it is more than reasonable that your spouse leaves if you aren't unable to get your career started at your current location. If they want to avoid that, they need to help you figure it out.

  Is there a chance that I hear from them this month or November? Or should I just stop hoping and try to find jobs out of state...

You might never hear from them, you might hear from them tomorrow. We can't answer that. However, you should most definitely keep looking for alternatives, and assume you have nothing from them until they send an offer letter for you to sign. If I were in your position I'd look for positions wherever I can. I would also explore how open my spouse is to relocating if need be.

Good luck!


What is the meaning of "Complete and Send Review" in Elsevier journal under History tab What is the meaning of the "Complete and Send Review" status in the History tab of an Elsevier journal?

From your expanded screenshot, I would guess that complete and send review is supposed to actually mean review completed and sent, i.e., one of the reviewers completed their review and submitted it to the editorial system.

However, educated guessing is all I can do, and only asking Elsevier can provide clarification. It may be a more serious bug. Either way, there is something to improve here, so it cannot harm filing a bug report.


Student research proposal for project continued from past year I'm an undergraduate doing a research colloquium project which is a continuation of one from the last school year. For the first proposal I had an introduction, which told about the disease of interest, and gave a brief summary of the project's goals. That was followed by a section detailing the procedures that were to be done in the upcoming research.

So I was wondering, for this year's proposal, since it's a continuation should I go into the same detail about the disease again, then talk about what I did last year and then what I'll do this year? Or shorten up that background [on the disease part] and just focus on what was done last year and what I will be doing? Do you think it would it be more appropriate to shorted up that beginning part or keep it?

Consider your audience, they will need reminding what this is all about. As this is a continuation of last year's work, most of the initial description (placing the problem in context) is still relevant. The goals and results of the previous work should be summarized, after that you have to state this year's goals.

Yes, the document will probably somewhat longer than the first one. But that is to be expected, you know the problem better, and are not only describing the problem to be solved but also showing earlier results (thus reinforcing your ability to see the project through).


Can I use the work in my journal/conference publications as chapters in my dissertation? At my institution, I am required to publish four papers in addition to my PhD thesis.  Of course my planned papers are related to my dissertation project, but I'm not sure if it could be considered academic dishonesty / plagiarism to use these works to form part of my dissertation.  I'm not thinking about copying them word for word, but I was hoping that I can include summarized versions of those works as chapters in my dissertation.  Is this a common practice or would this be considered self-plagiarism?  Should my dissertation work be completely separate from those other publications?

Supplementing the answer from abatkai:
The rules likely vary by field also. In chemistry, converting previously published papers into a Sandwich Thesis is generally accepted and commonplace. My thesis contained a chapter that was prefaced "Portions of this chapter were previously published as (citation), and have been reproduced with permission. Copyright is held by (publisher of the journal)." This was followed by further copyright information and the statement required by the publisher. My institution also required that I submit paperwork in support of my use of published and copyrighted material.
In addition to consulting your adviser and your institution, you should consult the journals in which you publish. Many have policies in place for this. For example, from the American Chemical Society's copyright faq:

The current ACS Journal Publishing Agreement covers several permitted uses by authors... Permitted uses of all versions include:

Use in theses and collections of your own work


How does a dropout influence one's later scientific career? Dropping out/Take one's leave from college or Master school. It happens and the reasons are almost infinite.

Assuming dropping out/leaving from college but still wanting to pursue the same career and give a come-back after some time off. How will this failure in CV influence the admission to a later program? E.g. admission to some Master program or admission to a PhD in a public R1 university? Will the persons responsible for admission listen to the reasons?
What would help in this situation?

I heard that being expelled from a specific college would be much worse than just droping out but before being forced to leave. So will expulsion have more severe consequences than droping out?

Especially if you are applying for funding, the admissions committee is taking a risk when they decide to admit each student.  If a student comes and does not succeed, the department may have incurred expenses for the time the person was there, and they don't have another successful graduate they can show for it.   Is the reason you dropped out before something that still affects your likelihood to drop out again?  That'll be a question on the committee's mind as they're reading.

Having been expelled before would be a bigger issue, because it means you were a major problem for the previous place and most universities don't want to have people who they think would be likely to cause big problems like that for them.  An applicant with this background would definitely be expected to explain what's changed.

Some departments expect a certain percentage of students to be "weeded out" or not make it through; find out what the norm is where you're applying.  Also find out what the culture is in terms of encouraging people to branch out and try new things, but then be able to recognize when something's not working out and stop going down a path that doesn't lead to fruitful goals (once that's recognizable).  These are important parts of research, and I think most faculty understand that.

In your applications, clearly explain what happened, and how you made the most of it.  Is the experience you gained an asset that can help you now?  Also (this applies more broadly) explain why you want to now go back into academia and into the program you're applying for and why you think you'll be able to make the most of that opportunity, if admitted.

If you just assume your history makes you ineligible and don't apply, you won't be admitted.
If you do apply and explain things clearly, you have a chance, higher than zero.


How important is having research experience in the same department you are applying for? I have a B.S. in math from the United States and am returning to school in the US for a second B.S. in microbiology because: 1) I have no research experience; 2) I have no excellent LORs as a result of 1; 3) I can finish this degree in 3 semesters.

One would expect me to do research in microbiology / bioinformatics during this degree. However, I want to do graduate studies in statistics.

Is it frowned upon to go to the statistics department for research? On the other hand, would LORs from microbiology / bioinformatics have significant weight to statistics programs? When?

I'm asking because I need to be a student for legality purposes otherwise I would have to be paid, and I doubt that I would find a paid position. Microbiology is the fastest and cheapest way for me to get research experience.

If you want to apply to a doctoral program in statistics in the US and you have a BS in mathematics, just do it. There is no real need to take side trips into microbiology or anything else. Relatively few undergraduates in the US have any serious research experience when they apply to grad school. And in many graduate programs, serious research doesn't start immediately in any case. Some places have "warm ups" for the big event (dissertation research) but most have a lot of coursework leading up.

And of course, until you apply, you don't really know your chances.

Math is a pretty good background for statistics, of course. Much of the basis of stats is based on math. You may even have taken a probability and statistics course already.

It is odd, only because of the strange path to a goal. The winding path isn't needed here. However, microbiology might be interesting if you actually have an independent interest in it. But it isn't likely to get you much closer to acceptance in a statistics grad program.

Just. Do. It.

For the record, in Europe this might be different. But that is because both the undergrad and graduate programs are quite different than in the US.

And letters of recommendation is a separate issue, possibly serious. But it might be worth going back to your original math professors and talk to them about how they can help you. It is a hard thing to do for someone with autism, I know, but it is something you need to learn to be comfortable with to have a decent career. Hard doesn't mean impossible.


GRE Math Subject test for admission to statistics grad programs? I am an international student from an unknown school with a sub 3.0 gpa. I am a CS major but I certainly have a deep interest for statistics grad programs. In the future I want to work on algoritmic trading and want to involve with topics such as time series, machine learning and other statistical techniques used in finance.

Some people I have talked with about this issue recommended me to get a PhD from a top 20 statistics program. But I don't have much math classes on my transcript, actually numerical analysis and ODE's are the most advanced math classes which I had. Also I had a traditional probability and statistics for engineers class.

Currently I am self studying through Walters Rudin's principles of mathematical analysis book and plan to involve further with math. I plan to self study undergrad level topology from munkres, abstract algebra from artin, and some advanced linear algebra and functional analysis may be some measure theory based probability etc. I can attend a university for these classes but it would be extremely difficult for me to manage it just because money constraints which I have. I have to admit that I learn better when I self study and I usually try to attempt  most of the exercises in the books.

The problem is that I can't prove that I studied these topics except a good score in math subject gre test. But this test is not a good indicator of abstract math knowledge and most of the test is about calculus.

Does a good score from Math GRE carry a value in MS level admissions to a decent thesis based statistics program with some funding which will help me to get a PhD from a top 20 school later. I don't have any intention of applying to CS grad school because I do not want to get any systems related course as a requirement and majority of the classes I am interested in are mostly offered by math or statistics departments except some machine learning classes offered by CS departments.

So what is your point of view for GRE Math subject test results ? What score you love ? May be I can pay to a college some money for attending to one or two advanced courses such as differential geometry and a grad level real analysis course. If I do well on these courses in what level will they help for admission with some aid ?

I would say that a good score on the Math GRE subject test is always a good signal. That being said, test scores in general have relatively little importance in PhD admissions -- they can disqualify you, but barring that, won't do much to get you in the door. Its something to optimize only after you have optimized the other, more important parts of your application. In your case, it might be helpful to alleviate any concerns someone might have about your math background.

By the way, you might want to check out CMU's PhD program in Machine Learning: http://www.ml.cmu.edu/ -- none of those pesky systems course requirements!


Should I mention the awards I won to a potential masters supervisor? In the last year of my bachelor degree I was required to write a research paper. That research paper won the first award from about 1000 research papers submitted by students in my university.
Also, that paper got published in a top research journal in my field.
Also, in terms of my bachelor degree grades, my grades were the highest in my college when I graduated.

Should I mention these three facts when contacting a potential master’s (by research) supervisor?

Yes, you can (and should) mention that you already have research experience (did you also do the writing yourself?). This is an appealing skill when choosing between master students who want to do their thesis project with a senior researcher. However, I would formulate it more humbly. For example, "I already have some first experience with academic writing and conducting research, so I hope this will benefit the work for the upcoming thesis project. I attached my first manuscript to give you an idea of my previous work."


Hypothesis for an engineering project that can't be tested due to time constraints Question: How can I formulate a hypothesis for an engineering project that I help to develop but probably won't have time to test?

Explanation: The project is to develop a system that will train clinicians to write a certain kind of research data. This type of data will be posted into a community where clinicians can discuss and collaborate on it. I am working on this project and it will be the basis for my master thesis. The value of this project for the company is to generate more of the research data and to thus to create a community that actively discusses its products. Thus, my hypothesis could be something like: The new system will help to generate more research data and support discussion about the company's products. However, I can't test this hypothesis because the marketing and acceptance of the system will take too long. Thus, probably when the hypothesis would be testable (i.e. the first people are using it) I must have already delivered my thesis. I can't think of a hypothesis that only includes the setup of such a system.

Can anyone think of something or give me some hints on how I can come up with a hypothesis or handle this situation?

For your specific case:

You could create a basic version of the system in a short time and conduct a study with a small number of clinicians. Have one group of them use it, and one group not use it. Define metrics that capture user variables (ease of use, tangible benefits) and system variables (how much different features are used, how much it adds to any existing discussion on products etc.). Make small changes in the system to change these variables, and map the outputs. By doing this, you already have an alpha-test, which will help you pitch the system when it is actually developed.

For the general case:

Often it is not possible to test the actual system/design/product in a limited time-frame. A good solution is to identify different parts of the system/design/product, compare these with existing systems and isolate parts that are unique and/or critical improvements. Develop just these parts, and test them either physically or through some kind of simulation. If it is a simulation, do some validation testing to increase confidence. Document everything, and generate sensible statistics during testing. Honestly report all the positive outcomes, the flaws and methods to tackle the flaws.


Is it advised to give a suggestion how to cite in the thesis document itself? I am thinking about including a statement as follows in my thesis (e.g. at the second page).

  Please cite this thesis as "X.Y, My fancy title, Thesis, University of XZ, June 2019, https://doi.org/10.15420/882.2249."

One the one hand this could be very helpful for someone who wants to cite the thesis. On the other hand it might come across as begging for a citation or that I prefer to be cited with a particular citation style (what I do not, of course).

Is this a sensible idea?
If not, is there a preferred way to mention at least the DOI?
If yes, is there a better wording?

I wouldn't include this statement.  Academic authors don't need to be told how to cite theses - they already know.  And I think it does make it sound like you insist on a particular citation style, which may feel awkward to authors who want or are required to use something else.  (I don't see it as "begging for citation", though.)

It is certainly a good idea to include the DOI, but I would just write something like

  Digital Object Identifier:  https://doi.org/10.15420/882.2249

in the colophon or some other convenient place in the document's frontmatter.


Looking for specific examples of University spin-offs where the researchers can earn part of the benefits I have demonstrated that some of the technologies derived from our research are marketable; I have offered services based on them to industry customers and have been paid for that. So as academic research group, I have received income, but which can only be used to buy lab equipment mostly and not for personal use (salary complement, a new mobile phone, etc). Therefore I am thinking to create a spin-off, but the policies of our university in that case do not allow income to go directly to the researchers, so that I feel a bit frustrated about that. From the other side, I can not create a company and manage it in my free time since my contract does not allow to do that, and all technology derived from my research belong to the company. This is a private university and very young (15 years) and there are not many cases like mine. So my plan is to go and talk directly with the main head and tell them I want to create this spin-off, since this will be good for the university, its reputation, and so on, but that I want to receive some part of the benefits in terms of personal (for me) income. For doing this I would like to give them concrete examples that this works in other universities, since I have heard this situation is typical in other academic contexts, etc. Therefore I wonder if you know of concrete and specific examples of spin-offs from universities, where the university allows the researchers to earn some money derived from the incomes.

The policy at my university for managing patent licensing fees and the like, which is somewhat distinct from a spin-off but somewhat conjoined - for example, you could start a spin-off that then licenses the patent, or find a company interested, etc.

Division of Patent Royalties

a) All monetary proceeds from the commercialization of University-owned inventions are the property of the University or its assignee. The University or its designee will collect and distribute royalties, fees, equity interests, or dividends to inventors and the University in accordance with the procedures established by the University.

(1) The University or its designee will deduct the costs of obtaining and maintaining legal protection, for each invention, to arrive at “adjusted income” unless other arrangements, agreed to by all parties that share in the income, are made by the relevant branch campus, research unit or program in advance of the expense and agreed to with the OC. Such arrangements may include contracted marketing, licensing and business development. In such cases, any agreed upon expenses will be deducted to arrive at adjusted income.

(2) The Office of Commercialization will deduct twenty percent (20%) from adjusted income and the remainder will be “net income.” This deduction is directed toward covering the expenses (excluding direct patent expenses) for administering the OC and provides initial funds for patent prosecution for other inventions without obvious commercial partners.

(3) Net income will be distributed according to the following schedule.
University’s portion of the share will be distributed as follows: 30% to the University, 20% to the college and department (or relevant branch campus, research unit, or Program when appropriate) to be equally split between the two

Cumulative Net Income Inventor/Contributor University
$1-$10,000                    100%
Above $10,000                 50%              50%


What to write in first mail to a role-model researcher for PhD position? I have been following a researcher since last three years and have read all most all of his research papers (whichever is freely available). At the same time, I have been continuously upgrading my skills as per his research profile. I have got only one chance to prove my worth. What should I write in the e-mail, should I express my self or proceed as per normal formal applicant?

This is a wrong approach and attitude. The whole thing will result in disappointment 99% of a time, because:

Your Work Should Impresses People Not Your Emails: If you think there is golden secret rule, that make your email irresistible to those people you want to impress then you be wrong. All you need is a good set of achievements.

Finding a Role-Model Without Knowledge: Whatever key points you might think that highlight a good researcher might be wrong because you did not achieved a good sense of research yourself. You might think, well he/she done this or that, and he/she might even rightfully impresses you; however, without knowledge of a field, finding a role-model to collaborate with is wrong.

High Maintenance Supervisors are Worst For PhD Students: Good or bad, you need to make your PhD an impressive achievement, and not your supervisor(s). Now, lets assume that your assumption is right and he/she is the God in that field. These people are mostly are worst supervisors, because they have no time to spend on you. While you might ask him/her about a topic, you think he/she has the mental power and will to answer you? He/she is running around to that class/conference/journal or book deadline/new faculty member interviews and on and on.

Conclusion

Don't waste your time chasing "role-models" while looking for PhD position. Find a supervisor that has time to spend on you. Someone that is always around to help his/her students. If you go with a "rock star" supervisor, then you most likely will be disappointed as he/she has no time to guide you through your PhD.


Should I add the Poster or the article published in the proceedings to my CV? I presented a poster 3 years ago in a small conference and added the poster to my CV and ResearchGate profile. At the request of the conference organisers, I also wrote a short article describing the poster that was published in the conference proceedings one year ago.
I guess it would be unethical to add both the poster and the article to my CV and ResearchGate profile, but which one should I use? Is it better to use the article in the proceedings? And in that case, should I consider it as a poster, an article or a conference paper?
Thank you!

Your CV isn't governed by any legal rules. You can include what you like. But you should label things correctly to avoid criticism.
In this case I see no reason, and no ethical concern, not to include both if you label one as an article and the other as a poster, perhaps with the same title. Partly this is because you were invited to write the article. Therefore they really are two different things unless you just wrote the same thing in the article as in the poster, which seems unlikely.
But, it probably isn't a "conference paper" if it didn't go through the normal review process in its final form.
And, if you only want to include one, then I'd think the article is the more important one.


First time preparing and teaching a course I am a PhD student and I have been given the opportunity to teach a course over a three weeks period (2h per day, 30h in total) at an institution overseas. I feel competent in the field of the course I will be teaching, but in practice it will be my first time preparing and delivering a course (which is not the same as doing tutoring, or being a TA).

What strategies can I put in place to be an efficient teacher? In particular, I am afraid not to have enough materials to cover 2 hours of time for each lecture (but then I realize that if I am thinking that, it means I'll probably be waaayyy too fast, so that's not good). I am also afraid of being unable to read the classroom, and of losing the students' interest too quickly.

Of course, I can prepare a lot of material to cover, then just go on my way, see where I end when the two hours are over, and start from there at the next lecture. But this might be too unstructured for the students, and I have very little time between two lectures to reorganize the material, since I am teaching every day for three weeks.

If you can share with me tips from your experience, I'd be very happy.

Rather than simply preparing material and plowing through it, I strongly recommend taking a "backward design" approach. You can Google that, but the basic idea is to start by thinking carefully about what it is you want students to have learned by the end of the course, and working backwards to what lectures, activities, and assessments contribute to this end. I've found this to be very useful, both for myself and for the students.

As a general idea, keep in mind that teaching and learning aren't equivalent; it's easy to deliver material, but that doesn't mean that it's absorbed or understood, and it's worth thinking about what classroom activities make learning more likely. Your (present) university probably has some sort of teaching consulting group, who are probably worth chatting with. Good luck, and have fun!


How to avoid disrupting the narrative in a scientific paper when you have done too much work I have been working on a project for almost a year now. This project involves the implementation of a computational method to calculate material properties and the application to different material systems. I have also done original modifications to the method during the course of the implementation.

At the moment I am in the process of writing down the details of the implementation and the results of my calculations. I have envisioned that the best way to break down the large amount of work that has been done is to write three papers. Chronologically: 1) one with the improved methodology with pertinent application results, 2) another one with the implementation details and 3) a final one focusing only on application of the code to a very interesting set of systems.

I think that writing papers 2) and 3) will become easier as I can simply refer the reader for details to 1) and 1) & 2), respectively, but I am having quite a bit of trouble finding the right narrative for the first paper, since I want to focus on the big picture of the theory and methodology but the little details of the implementation seem to constantly get in the way. This comes in the way of "we are trying to achieve this big objective A but in the actual implementation we did things a little different by changing B1, B2, B3, ...". This would distract the reader from the main point and becomes extremely disruptive from the point of view of the narrative flow. But somehow, it feels wrong to leave these details out since readers would otherwise assume we use the previous approach, or would simply not know how exactly we carried out the work.

I am wondering what are useful and effective strategies to write papers that can be read smoothly when there is a lot of fine detail involved that has not been previously published.

My field is biomedical so comments may or may not work for you. In our works, sometimes protocols did change along the way and occasionally I need to explain that in the paper. Hopefully these comments are general enough to be useful to you.

The primary goal is to think from the gain of the reader and maximize the gain:pain ratio. You want the ratio to be high: transferring the most to them with them going through the least amount of effort to understand your work. With that reason in mind, here are some suggestions:

Really, very few people reading scientific journals are interested in the step by step saga in how we reach there. I know it may come off harsh but what matters to the researchers during the development process can be drastically different from what matters to the readers. So, cast a critical look and weed out details that are not bringing any gain.
Minimize the "we wanted to do this, but then we ended up with that..." frequency. Try not to start every single sentence with this kind of structure because they sound trivial and never-ending. Instead, I'd suggest setting up a section called "original plan" (to hint that something was changed) and give it a good introduction. Then, you can have a section called "Modifications" to briefly but sufficiently explain major design changes.
One device I found very effective is a graphical schematic. You can consider a graph of the original scheme. Then in the Modification section, use the first graph as blueprint, slightly grey out the contents, and then insert modified components in 100% black. Consider indexing the changes on the graph, and then in the text you can simply explain them sequentially.


Bad first year marks? How are bad first year marks (i.e., ranked around average among my peers) but outstanding 2nd-4th year marks (i.e., top 2%) perceived by PhD admissions committees in the U.S.? What emphasis is placed onto first year marks?

There's no absolute universal standard as to how this will be perceived, but it's definitely better to be in the situation you describe than the reverse (good in general courses, mediocre in the major)!

One of the issues is where the first-year grades are bad. If you have some poor grades in "general education" classes unrelated to your major (for example, an engineer who gets a "C" in American history and English literature), that hopefully won't matter too much if the admissions committee is actually looking at the transcript, rather than just the overall GPA.

Ultimately, it comes down to how rigid the admissions committee is about reviewing things, as you can see in this thread.