How to professionally quit a student job? I'm a CS master student in a German university currently writing my thesis. Three months ago I saw an advert from a PhD student in the group where I'm doing my thesis asking for a student assistant (HiWi) to work on a programming project. I went  and said I'm interested in the job but specified I can only work 5 hours a week since I must work on my thesis. It was agreed  saying "I don't care how much time you will take to finish it".

Since I'm writing my thesis and was about to finish when asked: "how long are you staying here" and I said that I don't know yet and asked why; the reply was "because now I'm concerned that you might leave me if you finish soon" and I mentioned that I will stay to do my PhD.

So I started working. After the first week I noticed that the Phd student is actually quite weird. Once I mentioned that I'm going to use framework "X" for a particular part of the project, and was told: "No I want you to use framework Y, because what if you die then I have to continue doing the project". I didn't like how it was said, but I considered it a joke. Then the weird stuff continued. I won't mention them because it will take too long.

Because of administrative issues they couldn't start my contract for two months, so I worked two months for free. It was said that for the coming months they will put more hours in my contract and I can skip some weeks without working so I can make up for the two months.

However the most annoying thing happened 4 weeks ago. I was told that we need the project done earlier than thought (never mentioned any deadline previously). Then I thought OK I will work twice the time (10 hours a week) for two weeks and then once I finish the main functionalities in the project I will ask to skip two weeks so I can make up and work on my thesis.

Surprisingly after those two hard weeks I was told  that  the project is wanted done by the end of next week! I said that I was already working overtime and was replied "I don't care I just want it to be done by the end of next week because I have a workshop and I need to present it"!

That was the time I made the decision to quit since it was known very well that I can't do this because I have to work on my thesis, also because of the Phd student's weird behavior. However after receiving the shock I decided that it's not professional to quit at this stage since there is a deadline for the workshop. Also I finished 60% of the project and we made the deal to finish only until 70% for the deadline.

However I want to quit after the deadline but I have the following concerns:

The atmosphere in our work group is very familial. I have lunch with all PhDs and postdocs and jokes and everything. I'm now concerned that quitting would make the atmosphere negative between us.
Whenever I think about quitting I remember when I was asked  about how long I will stay because of the worry that I might leave, to somehow not to screw up things. It's the main concern since the project will be 70% done and hiring a new student would be painful since they would have to read what I did and so on and will delay the project.
The professor is also concerned about this project and now I'm afraid that quitting this project at this stage would make my image look bad as a quitter.

So how do you recommend me to quit this job?

Edit:

One way I thought of quitting is to go  after the deadline and say that I won't work for 2 weeks because I need to work on my thesis. Now if  told that I can't do that, then I will tell say "then I'm probably not a good fit for the requirement of this project and I don't want to be an obstacle for its progress. I think it's a good idea to find someone who is a better fit". Then I will pray that the response is "Yes you are right". The issue is that we have a lack of student assistants so he might still want me to work under my conditions, but I don't want to continue working for them!

It sounds to me like you don't exactly need to quit. Remind him of the conditions under which you took the job, and ask him to stick to the agreement. If he can't do so because his requirements have changed, then that's his choice. You might say something like this:

  As you recall, when I accepted this job, it was under the condition
  that I would only work 5 hours per week so it wouldn't interfere with
  working on my thesis. Because of your workshop, I have been working
  far more time than we agreed. I'm concerned that you need more support
  than the 5 hours a week I am able to provide. What do you think?

Note that I said "5 hours per week" twice for emphasis. Give him a chance to respond. At this point, if he promises to stick to 5 hours per week in future, and allows you to take the next few weeks off to catch up on your thesis, then perhaps you might give him one more chance.

However, if he indicates that he needs you to work more hours, or be available whenever he has deadlines, then you might say something like this:

  Unfortunately, I can't work more than 5 hours per week, and it sounds
  like that just won't be enough. Perhaps the best way to solve this is
  turn the project over to someone else. I'll do what I can to ensure a
  smooth transition.

Instead of "quitting", you're working with him to solve his requirements. If it turns out that the only way to meet those requirements is for you to hand off the work to someone else, then that's his choice.

As for the time you worked for free at the start of the contract, I think it is going to be difficult to get paid for that without burning bridges. Of course, you are entitled to be paid, and you could pursue that legally, but you may not want to. In future, remember never to work without a contract.


Doing a habilitation in Mathematics in Europe for a non EU citizen? I'm a non-EU citizen, currently doing a postdoc in mathematics in Europe, and I'm thinking of doing a habilitation. Since my google search didn't yield much, I'd appreciate if you could please answer my following questions regarding habilitation:

1) If I understand correctly, habilitation is the highest academic degree you can receive and people do it for getting a permanent academic position in Europe.
How many years or how much/many publication does it normally take to obtain a habilitation degree?

2) Since you could be admitted as a PhD candidate, but not as a 'habilitation candidate' (but instead, say, as a postdoc) can you publish in your postdoc and write the paper(s) as a book and submit it for the defense of habilitation?

3) Suppose you do a one year postdoc in university A, and a second in university B, can you apply to university B for habilitation? How about university A?

4) If you do your PhD and postdoc in unrelated areas, or say even if you switch from pure to applied math, would that be a problem for getting the degree?

5) (Kind of vague question, somewhat opinion-based too) How much does the chance of getting a European tenure increase if you do a successful habilitation?

I'm starting this by answering some questions for Germany:

  1)  people do it for getting a permanent academic position in Europe.

Note that even being a professor does not imply a permanent position:

junior professorships run 6 years, and according to Wikipedia only 8% of the junior professorships can be considered proper tenure track (applying for a permanent position at the same university without a public job advertisement), for another 4-10% of the junior professorships it is possible to apply for a permanent position at the same university, the remaining majority will not be considered for a permanent position.
"Hausberufungen" ("in house appointments" = offering the professorship to someone from the same university) are somewhere between extremely uncommon (having a fishy taste) and forbidden.
Also regular professors can have a probation period before getting a permanent position.

  How many years or how much/many publication does it normally take to obtain a habilitation degree?

A junior professorship is 6 years and is supposed to be an equivalent alternative to the habilitation, I think that gives a first rough estimate. Besides, I'd recommend that you look into habilitations in your field: they are published in the respecive university libraries and nowadays usually available electronically.

  2) Since you could be admitted as a PhD candidate, but not as a 'habilitation candidate' (but instead, say, as a postdoc) can you publish in your postdoc and write the paper(s) as a book and submit it for the defense of habilitation?

Cumulative habilitations are very common. Again, look at some in your field.

  3) Suppose you do a one year postdoc in university A, and a second in university B, can you apply to university B for habilitation? How about university A?

No idea. But the habilitation is supposed to show that you can teach the whole field and one distinguishing criterion (from dissertation) is that also the presented research must cover some breadth.

  4) If you do your PhD and postdoc in unrelated areas, or say even if you switch from pure to applied math, would that be a problem for getting the degree?

Not sure, but as a habilitation in maths means that you are allowed to teach all kinds of maths I guess that would not be a problem. I know physicists and engineers who habilitated in chemistry (though doing the scientific work in a chemical institute).

  5) How much does the chance of getting a European tenure increase if you do a successful habilitation?

Well, in practice in order to become a professor you either need a habilitation or become junior professor (for 6 years) and then successfully apply for a professorship.

number of habilitations / year is about 1600. Approximately 650 professors are pensioned / year, so  approximately 1/3 of the people who habilitate actually become professor
Update for maths & natural sciences: ca. 160 profs pensioned / ca. 260 habilitations per year => would correspond roughly to a 60 % chance.
roughly 3% (total: 1439) of all professors (43 862) are junior professors, that is aproximately 240 new per year.
Maths & natural sciences: 305 of 7500 = 4%, corresponding to ca. 50 / year.
Wikipedia says that somewher between 1/3 and 2/3 of the junior professors work at their habilitation despite being junior professors.

Here's what the Statistische Bundesamt says about these subjects.


Advisor wants copy of code to give to other student My advisor has multiple electrical engineering masters research students under him. One of them came to me asking for help, saying the advisor asked her (let's call her Jen) to write some code to test out one of his ideas and generate graphs for a paper. Jen is horrible at writing code (her words), so thinking this was a rush job and not related to Jen's research (her words again), I ended up writing all the code. I spent way more time on it than I originally expected to, but it's done, the advisor is happy, and the paper is submitted with everyone's names on it. FYI, this research is completely unrelated to mine.

Turns out, according to the advisor, this is Jen's research topic. The advisor has now asked that I send the code to both of them so they can make some modifications and continue the research. I estimate the modifications to be 10% of the work that I've already contributed. While this isn't Jen's entire thesis, I feel I have completed a massive part of it for her and don't want to just give it all away, just to have to go and then do my entire thesis as well.

Is it normal for code to just be shared (likely without citation) internal to a university? Should I just send the code? Should I question the request? Should I flat out refuse to share it and make Jen develop the code on her own (given there isn't an immediate paper deadline pending)? I don't want to offend my advisor, but I don't know the standard procedure for academia and want to make sure I'm not being taken advantage of here.

Should I flat out refuse to share it and make Jen develop the code on her own (given there isn't an immediate paper deadline pending)?

What would be the purpose of this?  You'll upset Jen and your advisor, she'll have to spend time redoing what you've already done, and you'll have substantially decreased the usefulness of your contribution with no corresponding gain to anyone.  The only reason I see is a feeling that Jen is getting away with something and not putting in enough work herself, but I don't think you should be concerned with this.  Your advisor is aware of the situation and should ensure that she does enough work to justify awarding her degree.  Maybe she is doing great things you are unaware of.  It's also possible that she won't end up doing as much as the average student, but that's OK: she'll still deserve the degree, but just won't get strong letters/references.  By contrast, you'll get glowing reports of how you not only completed a substantial project of your own, but also stepped in to make major contributions to an unrelated project and ensure that it met a deadline.  That will put you in a great position.

  Should I question the request?

I don't see a purpose to questioning it unless you might plausibly refuse to share the code.

One option is that you could propose continuing to collaborate on this topic.  However, you'll have to handle it tactfully.  For example, it would be awkward to try to use the code as leverage to force a collaboration (by saying "I'd rather not give you the code, but I'm happy to make further changes if you let me know what you need"), or if it comes across like you are cutting Jen out of the project by offering to play her role and suggesting you would do a better job of it.  If you'd like to collaborate, it's reasonable to say so, but you should be open and collaborative, and make sure to allow everyone an opportunity to contribute.  (And it's best not to let this distract you too much from your primary project, since you'll have more to gain from a project you have greater ownership over.)


What do statements of interest, teaching, and research mean when applying for an academic job? I'm looking at a job application that asks for the following:

C.V. (required)
Statement of Interests (required)
Cover letter (optional)
Statement of Research (optional)
Statement of Teaching (optional)

I find this confusing because I don't understand what a "Statement of Interests" is supposed to be, relative to the others.  Does anyone know what's expected in a document of this kind?  I'm a bit shy to ask the institution in question just yet, for fear that it's something well-known.

That is a rather confusing request, actually. However, what I think the job offer is looking for in a "statement of interests" is a description of the research areas you are interested in, while the "statement of research" would be a listing of projects you'd plan to start if you were hired.

However, in many job postings, those two items would potentially be conflated into a single statement. So I'd recommend that you contact the department. I'd recommend doing this by phone, if possible—that way, you don't have to give as much identifying information.


Manuscript was accepted for publication but recommended with "Major revision" Recently my invited manuscript submission was finally recommended by the Editors and reviewers for publication after one round of revision and changing the manuscript type. However, I am both concerned and confused that the Associate Editor appended revision comments and declared the MS requires "Major revisions". Any advice on how to deal with this?

I'm going to guess that, assuming this is a reputable publisher, that your "acceptance" was a bit tentative and that you need to satisfy the associate editor. You need to go over your manuscript with the comments in mind and make revisions that satisfy you and will hopefully satisfy her/him. Otherwise you might not get a happy result.

On the other hand, if it isn't a reputable publisher, then they will probably publish anything you give them so long as you pay the fees. But it is still preferable to make the editors happy.

I doubt that many would consider a letter indicating "acceptance" to be a contract and they can afford better lawyers than you can in any case.


Disclosure of history of depression I have studied for eight years at University and have at the moment achieved a masters degree in Mathematics. During my first 4-5 years or so, I suffered on and off from depressions and my performanes varied. I did a bachelors project in physics and was supposed to do a masters there too, but a combined factor of the depressions with a professor who has a bad rapport with students made me interrupt the education. For a year or so I considered whether to leave academia or to actually fulfill the masters, but the experience left such a bad aftertaste that no interest seemed to come in finishing it.

After a while I decided I wanted a masters after all, but it had to be in a different subject - Math. I took some courses and talked to a lecturer about doing a masters project (he knew about my situation).

I finished much of my remaining course work (doing well in most courses, getting the equivalent of As or Bs pretty much all way through) and did a project under him. By this stage I had essentially overcome my depressions and was at full health. The project went really well and is now considered one of the better works done in recent years and several independent senior people have told me that chances of getting a PhD with such a thesis will be very good.
Considering my history though, it has been explained to me that I will not get one at my current Uni. (Guess it would be too talked about, and I am well-known at several departments). I was however enouraged to apply to other Unis.

So I did and only a bit more than a week ago I got an interview. Having had it I thought it went fine, but now after 10 days or so I havent heard back and am believing that perhaps I havent gotten a position (they announced three). During the interview I was asked about why I wanted to leave my current Uni and the answer I gave was that they didn't have the direction of reasearch I wanted to persue (which is true). I think in retrospect that they wanted to now about this history (that I assume my supervisor mentioned in his letter to them).

My questions:

is it wise to disclose my history of depressions? They can obviously see my registered masterproject that was never finished and probably contact the department for more info. If I can convince them that the depressions is not a problem anymore I think it is only good, but to what extent will this be the case? Will it look better to avoid the question altogether?
10 days having passed and no confirmation, but am I really out? (After the 20 minute interview I had a private discussion with one of the potential supervisors and he did mention that my master project was very strong and that they seemed interested in the commite. The discussion felt good)
I wrote an email after 4 days or so, asking how things went. The response was very short and went '' The decision is not quite made yet. We will announce shortly.'' Is it OK to email him again after a week from the first letter if there has been no response? Or would this potentially ruin any remaining chances?

It would seem weird for you to disclose your issues this late in the application process (a week after they said that they'll "announce shortly"). Even if there was some benefit to being honest about your past, it's probably too late to do it now. It would have been a good idea to mention your past problems, how you dealt with them, and how you are feeling now if it would give a better impression of your current state, at some point early on in the process, e.g, during the interview, preferably brought up by yourself, but if you contacted them about it now, it would seem more like a desperate attempt to salvage an application process you think is failing (even if it actually isn't).

Even if it could make a difference between being accepted and not being accepted, you have to then wonder why the commitee haven't brought it up themselves then? If this is the issue that'll be the decider here, then I find it highly unlikely (and highly unreasonable) that the commitee haven't given you least a chance to talk about it from your perspective. So, if they know about it and haven't brought it up, it's probably not what's going to decide whether you are accepted or not, so bringing it up now is likely to have no effect.

But, if there's a next time, and you're sure it will be mentioned in your recommendations letters, then bring it up yourself. But remember, nobody is expecting you to disclose the detailed circumstances of what and why. That's your private life, it's nobody's business. But you should at least explain how you overcame it and how you are feeling now. and make clear that it's entirely in the past now (if that's true, obviously, but I can understand how you may not be fully aware of whether it truly is in the past yourself. Just make sure to act in good faith).


Publishing something in incremental way or as a single paper by waiting for more time? I am currently a post-doc student in computer science. I have worked on one research problem and have got small results. I am doing this work independently so my current supervisor is not giving any feedback. I am worried should I wait for more results or just go with results that I have in my hand. My question is should I wait for more results or first submit a paper with small results and then keep working on the problem and then after that if I have a further results then I can also try to publish in the extended form.

  Question : Publishing something in incremental way or as a single paper by waiting for more time?

Publishing incrementally gives you more feedback from peers as you go. Publishing in a "big bang" way makes preemption more likely since it takes you more time. It would be awful to spend years on a magnum opus only to be beaten to publication by someone else.

However, your incremental results should be significant enough that they stand on their own. You don't want to get the reputation of publishing trivia.

The best of all worlds is that you publish a series of important, if small results, that build to the crescendo with the big bang.

You can also, perhaps, depending on your position, use small (but meaningful) results to introduce newer students to your research and to build a core of researchers in your topic.


Funding after getting an Integrated Masters Degree Im going to get my Integrated Masters Degree in Production Engineering and Management in about 6 months.My next goal is to take another Master's Degree in Artificial Intelligence.The country I want to study is the UK.So will i be eligible for a postgraduate student loan even though I have an integrated master's degree ?

After much searching on various goverment websites, it turned out Find a Masters had the answer.

You are not eligible for a UK postgraduate student loan if you already hold an integrated Master's degree.


Correct use of abbreviation I am writing a scientific paper and I introduced the abbreviaton:
Underfloor heating system (UFH).

Can I now use UFH to talk about the underfloor heating system or do I have to write: UFH system?

I am asking because I have many pictures that are difficult to change were I use UFH (and it should stand for underfloor heating system).

Your abbreviation is a bit misleading because you left out the initial of system, but you want it to mean system.

If you want to write just the abbreviation, I suggest you to use UFHS instead, to comprise system.


Find information about research grant calls from around the world I am based at a southern European university where little local research funding is available. Other than Horizon 2020, how can I find out about programs designed to sponsor research in any country?

Here are several options:

Research Raven. This site focuses on calls for papers and conferences, some of which include funding. Most of the listings relate to medical and healthcare related opportunities.
ScanGrants. This is a sister site to Research Raven, and is "designed to facilitate the search for funding sources to enhance individual and community health....
Funding sources most frequently listed here include those of private foundations, corporations, businesses, and not-for profit organizations. Finding and listing less traditional funding opportunities is also a priority. Federal and state funding sources are typically not included on ScanGrants™ because they are readily available on other sites." Their listing are somewhat US-centric, though.
European Research Council. I am not very familiar with ERC.  The website states "ERC grants are open to researchers of any nationality in the world, any scientific field, any age. ". It seems well worth checking out.
The Wenner-Gran Foundation suppports collaborative research with a focus on anthropology. You have not specified your field, but depending on your circumstance this may be worth looking at.
Conference Alerts will provide you with a free alert system for conferences in your field, for any or all countries. Although this is not a grant-finding/listing service, the individual conferences may have funding available to you.
Finally, this Google search may bring some useful results.


Failing students when it might cause them economic ruin The issue has crept up on me slowly over the last several years. I am increasingly aware of the massive debt that many of my students are taking on, debt which is far beyond the sort of debt that I incurred as an undergraduate in the 1980s. Because of this, in recent semesters I have found it somewhat difficult to fail students. Instead of simply asking myself "does this student deserve to fail this class?", I find myself asking "does this student deserve to have their life ruined?" In many cases (e.g. students who are already on academic probation) this is not much of an exaggeration. It is a very bad situation to find yourself in your early 20s with no college degree but $30,000 in debt. In some cases, I am aware that a decision of mine might be a contributing cause of a student ending up in just such a situation. I can no longer regard a failing grade as a relatively minor matter (like a speeding ticket).

How do professors reconcile their de jure role as guardians of academic integrity with their de facto role of being (at least in part) responsible for their students' economic future?

You are responsible for teaching the students to the best of your ability, and to judge their capacities to use what they have learned.  That judgment is made based on their grades.  So you have several things to think about here.

Are you teaching the best you can?  Teaching does not mean "downloading facts", as I'm sure you're aware.  It means "transferring knowledge, skills, and attitudes".  That "transfer" part is the important bit — transfer means that the student is able to reproduce and use what they've learned.  Is your teaching enhancing this transfer?  This is a tough nut to crack — how do you know?  Are you planning your assessments so that you can really tease out the nuances and to see which students really understand, or are they just assessments because you need to assign a grade somehow?  Your institution might have a center for teaching how to teach, and if you feel that you aren't teaching your best class then start there.  Otherwise, lots of books and resources exist, which I'm sure we can all provide.
Are you assessing fairly?  Fairly doesn't mean easily.  It means that you are creating assessments that actually test understanding and that a student with reasonable ability will be able to succeed at.  It also means to understand their context.  It's easy to make a "really good" assessment that everyone fails because they also have three projects and two midterms in their other courses.  Are your expectations clearly communicated, and are you ensuring that you only assess what you've asked for? (that doesn't mean that you can't expect students to go above and beyond, just that you need to tell them you expect them to)
Are you assessing accurately?  I'm distinguishing this from "fair", but you can treat "fair" and "accurate" as two sides of the same coin.  Accurate means that your assessments are set up so that appropriate weight is given to appropriate topics, and that your tests actually enable students to display their understanding and capacities, rather than whether they memorized the example or found the answer on stack exchange.  Creating fair assessments is challenging, but there is a lot of research and resources available.
Are you giving every student the chance to seek help?  I often find that if students are slipping through the cracks, setting up a regular meeting with them to keep them on track can do wonders.  However, I am in a job in which I'm required to work with students like this, so it's easy for me to do.  If you are a busy research professor who is teaching two courses per semester while juggling other things, it's a lot harder.  Ultimately, the final exam is not when a student should find out they failed the course.  They should know that they are on a bad path long before then, and should have opportunities to get on track.

If you are doing these things, then you are not causing them financial ruin.  It's similarly not fair to say that the students are causing this — you don't know their context and can't make the judgment.  Perhaps they went to a bad high school that just didn't prepare them, or perhaps they are always on the train to another city because their parents are sick and they can't attend classes.  It is not your responsibility to help them in this way unless you are capable of providing everyone the same help.  Which brings me to the most unfortunate reality of post-secondary education:

Not everyone can make it.  For whatever reason, some students simply will not demonstrate that their abilities are up to the standard that has been set.  Notice the wording I used there — I didn't say that they don't have those abilities, but that they will not demonstrate that they have those abilities.  Provided you are assessing them fairly/accurately, teaching the best you can, and giving the help they pay for, then you are providing them with every opportunity to demonstrate those abilities.  If they are unable to do so, then it would be unethical to let them pass regardless of the reason.


Is it ok to add a bit of humor and sarcasm to academic presentations Is it frowned upon to add slight humor and sarcasm to academic presentations? For example, I flip to a background slide and say "This is a typical slide used by researchers in (field) just to show off how difficult their work is." before going through the content of the slide. Is there a difference in doing that in different settings, like a department seminar vs an international conference?

There is nothing wrong with a little humor as long as you can pull it off well.  Lightening the mood is often welcome, especially in settings where the expected norm may be long, dry boring, content (such as a conference where people are attending session after session all day).

Besides making people laugh, a joke or two in an academic presentation can help make you and the audience more comfortable, make your presentation more memorable, and help you come across as a confident, competent presenter.

Of course, there are potential downfalls:

A joke could fall flat, which may be awkward and embarrassing.
Jokes that might come across as insulting can be dangerous (though gently poking fun at your own discipline can be fine--I have no problem with your proposed statement, especially if you make it self-deprecating, such as "I have made this slide extra complicated so I seem important".  I have taken this approach and it usually goes down very well.)
Too much humor can distract from your message.  Use a little humor, and it helps engage people, and they will be paying attention to your serious point.  Use too much, and no one will remember anything but the jokes.

But overall, I say go for it.  Having a boring, forgettable presentation is a much bigger danger than a joke that falls flat.


What will happen to my IEEE conference paper if the status of the accepted paper is "AAR" I have been notified by the IEEE organizing committee that my paper has been accepted for their conference and requested to register. and the status of the paper is AAR. Please see the quotation below.

[AAR]This paper need thorough revision to be accepted as a full paper
for the conference.

I have attached an image of their review process.

What will happen to my paper after the submission of the camera-ready paper? Is there any possibility for my paper not to be published in the proceedings and IEEE Xplore? Or is it guaranteed to be published after the submission of camera-ready paper?

I think the flowchart in your question is pretty clear as to what happens next. But I'll break down the relevant part of the flowchart into words.

You have to make thorough revisions to your paper, and then resubmit. It will then be reviewed again.  As a result of the review, it may be accepted, and it may be rejected.

AAR: your paper's current status - accepted after revising. It's now up to you to make the thorough revisions, and to then submit the revised paper

REV is the status your paper will have once you have submitted the revised paper.

RVI will be its status when the revised paper has been sent out to review. Judging by the flowchart, it will get sent to the same editor and reviewers as before, because a revised paper does not pass through the WFR stage of waiting for review, where reviewers and editor are assigned.

It may then be accepted (ACC), rejected (REJ), or conceivably, according to that flowchart, get returned to you once more as AAR for further revisions.

The flowchart also suggests that whether it's accepted or rejected, you still prepare a camera-ready version. That would seem to be very unlikely: I find it very hard to believe there's any use for a camera-ready version of a rejected paper; only an accepted paper would need a camera-ready version.


Recent PhD graduate, can I change fields and get back into it? I'm a recent PhD student who specialized in field X and have a couple options open in this field for my work. I like the field and it is field with opportunities in academia and industry.

That said, field Y is a passion of mine, it's very different and wouldn't have many skill crossovers. There is a job that has opened up for it that seems perfect for me. I'd love to contribute in the field and I could live off of it, but it wouldn't fit my field. I don't think I could easily find a another job in that field or move up really down the line.

My question is, can I have my cake and eat it too? Is it reasonable to take a job in new field Y and ask the employer if I can collaborate and contribute to field X still? If I have a break in my history of working at it can I get back into it without many (any?) publications?

First, I'm assuming that field X and Y are not totally unrelated. (e.g. Greek literature and high energy physics.)

If you are working in academia this isn't usually a problem. In fact, it's great to have two areas where you can contribute, so that you continue to publish, etc, in area X while starting to do work in area Y. This keeps your productivity up while you get up to speed in area Y.

If you are working for a research lab this can also work, but may be a bit tougher. It depends on how strongly the lab wants you to contribute to the core work of the company. If there is a research lab that is doing work in both X and Y then you can probably find opportunities to collaborate in both areas. If they have no interest in X you need to see if they have flex time or if you can find some connection that would interest them.

But, in the end, the best option is to ask them. You never know what other areas they want to expand into, or what connections they may be aware of that you aren't.


Improving motivation in qualitative research motivation My PhD project has evolved into a very qualitative methodology and approach. As my training and background is very positivist and focused on outcomes, I am really struggling with this shift into a more conceptual endeavour. Initially my PhD was going to involve complex surveys and some interesting statistical approaches (Selecting the Theory Underpinning the Research Project). However, as the literature review progressed, the many assumptions that the field explored earlier seems to to be poorly founded and I find myself keen to challenge and develop a new synthesis of the issues.

It seems clear that that what is required is a more open ended, interdisciplinary approach. Grounded theory, a methodology that aims to analyse data to develop theories seems like a great fit. Grounded theory draws on all sorts of data sources to explain complex experiences and phenomenon which seeems to be what is required in my field. Although I understand the intention of constructivist grounded theory on the whole, I have now lost a lot of faith in my project and have come to a standstill for weeks now.

I am really struggling to believe that my research will help draw clarity that I was hoping to find. Also, I am worried that once I start my research, the interviews and data that I collect will only consolidate stereotypes and biases that I found in the literature review. I will become another researcher that will only contribute further to the ongoing difficulties in the vulnerable group that I am researching. My supervisors have been encouraging, they supervised grounded theory projects before. Grounded theory and intercultural facebook groups have also been encouraging and argued that my experience is common. I feel that I just need to somehow snap out of my reverie and self-indulgence. I would appreciate some advice and perspective on how to get perspective and to get back into a more motivated state.

How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?

Student supervision when student loses motivation to work

Are there any ways to improve perspective taking and motivation in doing qualitative PhD research, rather than quantitative research which seems to be the main discussion in this stackexchange?

Let me try to make two points, one about you and the other about Grounded Theory. First, though, I don't know you and so am extrapolating and I'm not involved with grounded theory other than having evaluated a thesis and a tenure decision.

About you: Many students reach a point in their research at which they start to doubt the value of it. This happens in many fields. But one of the reasons for the doubt is that the student begins to know and understand the theory and so it starts to seem somewhat simple and maybe inconsequential. But that is a sign of growing expertise. What seemed hard at the beginning, now seems less hard and maybe more obvious, so, what's the point. This is the sort of thing you just need to power through, hopefully with the help of advisors. If the advisors are good enough, and actually involved in grounded theory, rather than just external observers of students, then you should be able to trust their advice.

About Grounded Theory: I'd never heard the term until I was asked to serve on the tenure committee of a new faculty member. I reviewed her work and was astounded at the depth of understanding she brought. I became one of her chief advocates through her attaining a Full Professorship. Why?

I was trained in mathematics and later switched to computer science. They are similar to each other in some ways. I've written here in response to other questions about what is required to be a mathematician. It isn't just deep knowledge of mathematics, but requires insight into how a field of study works. It is one thing to be able to follow or reproduce the proof of a known theorem, but it is a completely different level task to be able to propose what might be true with enough confidence that it is worth spending time and effort evaluating the truth. It is easy to make random statements in math and easy to extend things trivially, but much harder to even conceptualize something over the horizon.

But it is just this sort of thing that grounded theory attempts to do. It is very difficult. But, when done well, it will come up with questions worth studying. Integrating the various threads of thought what are unfocused and incomplete into something that can be rigorously studied is a big deal. The world is a messy place. Grounded theory attempts to make some sense of it.

But, and you have pointed it out in the question, it has to be done carefully and rigorously so that you don't just put a stamp of "science" on shoddy thoughts and preconceptions. It is very difficult to look into messy data, even contradictory data, and discern the inner workings. Even to discern what might be the inner workings is very hard. You need to rigorously question every assumption as those may lead to error. But you already know this, and, I suspect, that since you recognize it, are well placed to follow through on the required rigor.

You've chosen a hard path, actually. I wish you well along the way.


Move from my current university or stay with a longer term proposal? I'm currently in a disjunctive regarding my professional life, and I would like a bit of an advice.

I'm finishing my PhD next March (is Japan, so is 99.9999% sure that I will finish), and I have 2 proposals.

One is to move away to US, with a very demanding professor in an experimental environment (I do mostly simulations), he seems well connected there with people in good Universities (MIT, Stanford, UPenn, etc). Yet, he himself is not very well known in my particular field, he is in his own application field though. The University is in California with what I guess is a standard PostDoc salary for a one year Post Doc program.

The other is to stay in my current University, with my professor in a more stable and long term proposal (4 years). The problem, is that my professor was never very engaged in my project, and I got mostly marginal help from him. He was always really helpful, and had good resources (conferences, equipment, etc).

I would like to know the opinion of more experienced people. I would really like a future in academia, so I'm open to any suggestion.

Noöne but you can make this decision, so here are a few thoughts that sprang in my mind when reading your description. I hope they can be of help in your decision-making.

It looks like your option #1 is more of a gamble (which might be a pro or a con depending on your own character!). It seems that you would go to this new group and change your research topic: if so, you have to realize that a one-year position is quite short for learning/adapting to a different area of research. I think it's good for a post-doc to actually pursue something different than he did during his PhD, but it is more risky on a one-year contract.

Second thing: if you go option #1, would you be burning bridges with your current place? Or would they welcome you back after your one year of US experience, if you don't find another post-doc in this new (sub)field? If you think you can pretty much fall back to option #2 in one or two year's time, then option #1 sounds a lot less risky.

Finally, being a rather “independent” post-doc (i.e. working with a professor who's not fully involved) has some advantages if you can handle it and find intellectual support in other ways (collaborations, conferences, visiting positions, …). It allows you to establish yourself as an independent researcher, which is a first step to become a group leader yourself.


The position I applied for was advertised as Associate Professor with Tenure, but now they’re saying it’s tenure-track Associate Professor I am an associate professor, who has received tenure in the US in 2014. After receiving tenure, I moved to Europe to help my family with some health issues, and found an associate professor position in a country where tenure is 'by law' meaning the position cannot be revoked or taken away. I am now looking to return to North America, and have begun to apply for associate professor job openings.

I have applied for a position as tenured associate professor. I interviewed and was told I was selected by the department as their top candidate. However, the dean at the new institution just emailed me that the new position will be associate professor "tenure-track," meaning I would need to apply for tenure within 4 years.

Clearly, what I had applied for is not what I am being offered. In my view, there is a flaw in their advertising. The position description clearly stated "the University of X invites applications for a tenure-track Assistant Professor or Tenured Associate Professor in...."

While I understand that each university has its own interest in mind, this seems like a very bad start of a relationship. If I accepted this demotion, I would probably do so with some resentment. The University in question is academically equal to the one I first received tenure from.

I am seeking advice on how to respond to this proposition and would be very grateful to hear people's opinions.

Based on what you've said,

  In my view, there is a flaw in their advertising. The position description clearly stated "the University of X invites applications for a tenure-track Assistant Professor or Tenured Associate Professor in...."

Well...yes, you're exactly right.  It sounds like the department and the dean were not on the same page when the position announcement was posted.

  While I understand that each university has its own interest in mind, this seems like a very bad start of a relationship. If I accepted this demotion, I would probably do so with some resentment. The University in question is academically equal to the one I first received tenure from.

Again, I agree completely.  You've had two different tenured positions, including one at a US institution of (you say, and I'm going with it) comparable academic quality to the one you're applying for.  You applied to this position and interviewed for it -- presumably taking some trouble doing so, since you now live in Europe and have family there -- based on the information you received in writing that it would come with tenure.  Only at the end of the process have you been informed otherwise.  Well...yes, that's a seriously alarming bait and switch.

In my opinion there is really only one thing to do.  You should respond by calling attention to precisely the facts you mentioned to us, especially that (i) the position was advertised as with tenure and that's why you applied for it and (ii) your last two academic jobs have had tenure, including at US institution X (you don't need to explicitly say that it's of comparable academic quality; I would leave them to claim otherwise if they want to), that you are very excited and interested in the job, but only under the original terms: you are not contemplating making an international move from a permanent academic job to a possibly temporary one.

In other words, I think the issue is serious enough to prevent you from taking the academic job...again, for exactly the reasons you say.  The type of employer who will not be held to what they told you before is exactly the type of employer to cause you N years of deep worry that they might not give you tenure, and nothing in your question suggests that you should subject yourself to that.

I really hope that they respond well to your holding your ground. Good luck!


Am I allowed to provide the Camera Ready Copy (CRC) / Preprint of my paper published in Springer Workshop Proceedings online on my homepage? my work was accepted as workshop paper and the conference was held some weeks ago. Until now, the paper is nowhere published. Last year, the Spriner Workshop Proceedings needed 6 months to publish it. I want to provide the paper now on my homepage and/or research gate and/or arXiv.
Am I allowed to provide the CRC version on my homepage/research gate/arXiv? What do I need to add to this "pre-print", e.g. as footnote? What are the typical Spriner Workshop Proceedings rules regarding providing the own work? And I am allowed to do this before it is officially published by Springer?
Thanks in advance.

Yes, I do not see any reason you cannot. If you like, you put a header or footer that the paper was presented in ABC conference and the official version can be downloaded from the Springer website to save yourself from copyright issues. But I think, even without that header you should be fine. (Still, having that line in header/footer is better).
Putting it on Arxiv is more wise and professional by the way. It can give your work credibility and readability as well.


formulas for writing publishable papers I have started a PhD on a subject I have quite some industry research experience, just to get the title.

My approach to the PhD is to come up with a novel solution or method and tell all about it on a paper (the sexy, the good, and the bad) as an independent observer. However my tutors seem to be uneasy with my approach and they claim that for a paper to be publishable I should omit/minimize the bad things, although they know that doing so is bad science.

I have the impression that people in the academia might have formulas for writing publishable papers. After all, to publish seems to be the only valid metric in Academia.

I would appreciate if someone could point out some of the non-written rules. That would help me to avoid the frustration it causes me the writing of academic articles.

Thanks.

PS: I ask this because I want to avoid ending up like this folk.

First, let me state that in my experience, there is no such thing as a formula for writing papers.  There are too many different types of results to be presented in too many different types of papers.

That said, however, there are most certainly patterns of presentation and argument that emerge as being particularly effective.  In my observation, many successful researchers have some form of such patterns that many of their papers adhere to.  Ultimately, for a researcher with integrity, this is not about chasing a metric, but about effective communication and about having an impact on their research community and, hopefully, the larger world.

That said, I think that the approach you propose of relating your work as though you were an independent observer, is not a good way of presenting, because you are not an independent observer.  An approach of "minimize the bad" is even worse, because then you are attempting to conceal the truth.  Instead, I recommend thinking of yourself as an "honest advocate" for your work.

You are a human being who believes the work you're doing is good and producing interesting results: in the introduction and related work section of the paper, you explain why you think the problem you're working on is interesting and how the results you've produced fit into the larger world.  You must, however, be honest with yourself and others about the strength of the results that you have found.  That means:

Be scrupulous about distinguishing between what your evidence shows and its relationship to your hypotheses: e.g., "the data is consistent with our model, though not strong enough to rule out the alternate hypothesis"
Don't value judge "good" and "bad," but instead report the circumstances under which statement is known to hold or fail.  It's OK if something only holds in a narrow case if that case is interesting and possibly important.
Publish early and often, so that you don't feel like your papers are so high stakes.  You might not get "glamour journal" papers, but you won't need to worry about being scooped, and you can get credit for the knowledge byproducts discovered during your search even if your ultimate goal is not achieved.

More important and more difficult than anything else, you need to be prepared for the fact that you may find your work has been going down an unproductive path and that you need to change your direction.


What date goes on your hardbound PhD thesis? I submitted my thesis in 2013 but passed my viva (the oral defense/examination) in 2014. Should the date (month+year) which I put in, on and around my thesis be,

When I submitted my soft-bound copy to the examiners.
When I passed my viva (the oral defense/examination).
When I submitted my hard-bound copy to the university.

A fourth option is,

It depends on your university.

(Note that I am at a British Uni, so I presume that this is governed by something the British Library said...but what they said, I cannot find...)

This seems to be ridiculously hard to search for, but I apologise if it has been asked before.

This is the kind of question which is best answered with actual evidence. Many American universities have their thesis formatting rules online, and you can find them with relatively little effort. British Universities (Oxford and Cambridge, in particular) often seem not to give as detailed rules. From these examples, it is clear that the rules for which date is used depends on the university.

Harvard University:  "[Month and year of the submission of the completed dissertation to the department, division, or committee and Dissertation Acceptance Certificate was signed]",
MIT: "the date the degree(s) will be conferred (June, September, or February only)",
Stanford University: "(Date should reflect month and year of submission to the Office of the University Registrar.)"
University of Michigan: "year of degree conferral not year that dissertation was finished" (they don't want a month).
University College London: no date seems to be required on the thesis (none is mentioned in the guidelines, and there are theses without dates in their archive).
University of Edinburgh: "Year of presentation.
In the case of a thesis which is resubmitted, the year in which the
thesis is resubmitted should be shown as the year of presentation." What do they mean by "year of presentation"? From their website: "At some point between submission of your thesis and the viva, you are encouraged to give a final presentation of your work to the School, often via a research group seminar series."
University of Leeds: "the year of submission
for examination (Or resubmission where the thesis is submitted following re-examination after referral)."


How to cite an ISO standard where I can only get access to the drafts? I am writing my bachelor thesis and want to cite the ISO C++ standard. However I am unable to get my hands on a copy of the standard, since the library does not have a physical or digital copy. I do get the information I need from the working drafts, and there isn’t much of a change in the chapters I need.

Citing ISO 14882:2014 would be my preferred solution, but since I don’t have the document, should I cite a late working draft of the 2014 standard or even the current working draft?

It sounds like you're at a stage where it is somewhere between important and crucial for your project to have access to the actual standard: if the information you want to cite is in the standard, then that's the core document to cite, and if it didn't make it to the final version, then you may want to revise the text around the citation or even the research or code itself.

ISO standards are indeed not the easiest documents to get ahold of, but that's what libraries and librarians are for. Approach your institution's librarian and tell them that you need access to a document that's not in the library, and they will get it for you (that's their job!) either by purchasing the document for the library, if they consider it a good investment, or via inter-library loan. This can be a lengthy process, so you should approach them as soon as possible, but the upside is that if the standard's text does not change from the draft then all you need is a look at the full standard before you submit, to confirm that your provisional citation is appropriate.

In any case, even if you do get access to the full standard before you submit, I would encourage you to think of readers in your situation, who might have a hard time getting the standard, and I would thus recommend that you cite both the full standard and the working draft:

give the full standard as the main citation, but also
state that the same information is available in a working draft, and give it a separate citation that includes precise information on where it can be obtained.

As to how you actually cite it, that'll depend on the style guide you're following, but you can start with the format in this answer.

If you can't get a copy of the final standard, then it may or may not be appropriate to cite it as-is; for more on that, see Is it unethical to cite a paper or book that you have never looked at?. In that situation, it basically becomes a judgement call between the chance that the information won't be in the document you're citing versus the awkwardness of citing a working draft of a document that's since been Published, and we can't make that call for you.


How to cite a revised second edition? So, I am trying to cite a book in the References section of my paper, and the publication information on the book cover is really confusing, which is as follows:

AN INTRODUCTION TO WITTGENSTEIN'S TRACTATUS
Copyright(c) G.E.M. Anscombe 1959
Printed in the United States of America
This book was originally published in 1959 in the Philosophy division, edited by Professor H. J. Paton, of the Hutchinson University Library, with a second edition, revised, in 1963. It is here reprinted by arrangement.
First Harper Torchbook edition published 1965 by
Harper & Row, Publishers, Incorporated
49 East 33rd Street
New York, N.Y. 10016

How should I cite this book? (say, in Harvard style).

Great question!

Among other challenges, citing this book is not easy because it is part of a series, and the publisher's name is very similar to the series name.

Publisher: Hutchinson & Co.
Series: Hutchinson University Library (Philosophy)
Series editor: H. J. Paton

I prefer the Chicago Manual of Style, 17th ed. (2017) (hereafter, Chicago), Notes and Bibliography format. I consulted Chicago to write the citations below.

I would cite the book in a note (footnote) like this:

  G. E. M. Anscombe, An Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus, 2nd ed. (1963; repr., New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 27–29. Citations refer to the 1965 Harper & Row reprint.

If I were to cite the book a second time, I would use a shortened citation ("short form") like this:

  Anscombe, Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus, 34.

In the bibliography I would cite the book like this:

  Anscombe, G. E. M. [Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret]. An Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus. 2nd ed., repr. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. First published 1963 by Hutchinson (London). Page references are to the 1965 Harper & Row reprint.

Notes

Professor Anscombe preferred initials instead of her lengthy given name, but since her full name appears occasionally, I chose to provide it in the bibliography.
I made up the page numbers for the note citations.
The names of both publishers are not required for the note, but should be included in the bibliography.
Chicago states that "2nd ed." is enough, i.e., "rev." (revised) is not necessary because most readers assume that a 2nd edition includes revisions.
Chicago advises against citing the series name and editor in most instances.

Sources consulted

AbeBooks.com
Google Books
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Chicago Manual of Style Online
WorldCat.org


How to handle a situation where you are part of 2 competing projects? I am part of 2 collaborations which are more or less competing (in a friendly way though). Since I am the only one direct connection of these two groups (apart from the topic of course) that has now put me into a somewhat strange situation:

Both collaborations are about to submit a paper to an important journal in our area. In one of papers I am actively involved in the writing process, in the other I am actively involved in correcting what has been written by a collaborator. Particularly in this journal, I have the feeling that the paper which is submitted later might be rejected as being no longer the first one - although both papers are using different approaches to get to a similar result. (Of course, I might be wrong and everything goes through smoothly).

My question now: being part of both collaborations, can I tell the other collaboration that their colleagues/competitors are about to submit a paper where I am also involved ? Or would that be ethically not OK ?

Not sure if it applies to your field, but in some cases it is appropriate for researchers to publish simultaneously when they are working on something so similar at the same time (especially with a consistent finding but a different approach, like you suggest is the case here).

Some journals may consider the two papers side-by-side and publish them in sequence in the same issue, or they may be published in different journals. Typically there would be some acknowledgement in each paper of the presence of the other, or a third brief review/editorial possibly coauthored by some of the authors of each paper.

There's a great blog post that talks a bit about the process for simultaneous publications from the Vice President of Editorial at Cell Press (for those outside of biology, this covers some of the most respected journals in basic biology research): http://crosstalk.cell.com/blog/how-papers-from-different-groups-get-published-together

I'm not sure about the ethics overall, but it seems like the issue is being a part of both teams like this in the first place...you would have been aware of this way before the state of writing the actual papers. I think you certainly should have spoke up earlier in the process, at this point you may have already entered the "damage-control" phase, especially if the outcome ends up negative for either of the two groups (i.e., if they are unable to publish or end up publishing in a much lower journal).


Citing/Attaching unpublished papers in a Research Statement/Profile for a faculty job I am a young academic and don't yet have any first author publications (several 2nd authors, though) but have several either submitted or very near being submitted. I am in a quantitative/scientific field.

My question is about whether it's OK to describe (and cite) finished research projects that are not yet published in a research statement for a faculty job. On a similar question, if the application requests copies of papers, can you attach "in process" papers?

Thanks for any opinion/experiences.

Yes!

Your task is to make the strongest possible case for your expertise as a researcher.  Your case would likely be stronger with a few first-author publications, but having compelling first-author work in the queue is certainly better than not having compelling first-author work in the queue.

In fact, even if you have first-author publications, your research statement must describe your ongoing research agenda, in specific, credible, and compelling detail.  Faculty hiring committees are just as interested in your future research plans as they are in your past research accomplishments.  Preprints and submitted papers that support that agenda are definitely appropriate.


How to Offer Review Services A booknote of mine was just accepted for publication. I've been in contact with the editor throughout the process, and want write an email thanking him, and also indicating that I'd be happy to be considered as a potential reviewer in the future. What would be an appropriate way to phrase this email?

"Dear Editor,
Thank you for accepting my booknote for publication. I'd be happy to be considered as a potential reviewer for your publication in the future.
Best wishes,
user82138"

Perhaps this is facetious, but as far as I know there's no special code that needs to be invoked when communicating with journal editors. Concise, plain English will certainly suffice.


Can I trivially change a definition still citing the main reference? I am going to directly use the following definition of reconfiguration (as a quotation) from A Dictionary of Computing as follows.

  The process of redefining and in some cases reconnecting the units of
  a multiple-unit computer system. This procedure may be accomplished
  automatically, manually, or by a combination of both. The purpose may
  be to provide different system functionality or continued operation
  after the failure of one unit. If done automatically the latter case
  would represent a fail-soft situation. See also configuration.

However, this definition only considers computer systems. So, I need a more general version of the definition referring to all kinds of systems. To fix the issue, am I authorized to simply eliminate that computer word in the definition and still citing the source dictionary?

If you are using quotation marks, you have to maintain the sense of the original quote, even if you excise or reword elements for clarity in the context of your document.

In this case, it is clear that they are considering only computer systems, so it is not a trivial modification. I would thus say that your options are:

Use the narrower quote, then explain that you are extending beyond computer systems.
Find another quotation source that is more general
Don't use a quote at all in establishing your definition

Personally, I would go with the latter, since reconfiguration isn't a particularly obscure or specialized concept.


How can I encourage my advisor to adopt better work practices? I'm a second year PhD student.  In general I love my advisor, but recently we've run into some small bumps in the road while working on a paper together.  He's controlling the "master" copy and I send most of my contributions and comments through email for him to incorporate.

A few days into the process, we had a conversation that went something like this...

  Me: "Hey, so I cited a few papers you might not have seen.  How do you
  keep track of your references?  I use JabRef to keep up with BibTex
  entries, but I can export those citations to a bunch of different
  formats..."

  Advisor: "What are you talking about?"

  Me: "Like, when you need to
  make your references section... how do you keep track of all the
  papers you've cited in the text? Refworks? Endnote? Zotero?"

  Advisor: "What?  ...I use
  the 'copy/paste' method."

I was baffled by that answer.  I know he's been doing this for a long time with good success, but I cannot fathom someone who has been collaborating with so many people for so many years is still at the level of manually formatting each entry in a Microsoft Word document and then copying/pasting over whenever that reference is needed elsewhere.

Any suggestions on how I can help bring this faculty member into the 21st century without seeming presumptuous?

Turn the tables.  For your next paper, you maintain the master copy.  Make sure all the infrastructure is in place, including a fairly solid draft of the paper, before you involve your advisor in the writing process at all.  Use whatever version control and reference system you find most useful.

Your advisor may simply refuse to use your tools; fine, you can still incorporate their emailed inputs.  Or they may just need someone else to figure out the infrastructure and teach them how to use the tools, instead of figuring it out themselves from the manuals.  Either way, you'll have some extra work to bring your inexperienced (and possibly resistant) coauthor up to speed, but that's a standard part of the student-advisor relationship.

In the worst case, your advisor may simply refuse to give up control of the master copy.  (Never mind that it's already too late.)  In that case, you may need to encourage them to look for another student.


Start the PhD research before taking my masters? I was thinking about getting my masters in November 2015 or May 2016 (An 18 month masters) but I was wondering if its possible to start my PhD research from now, I have an idea of what my research would be and I think it will save me time when I actually apply for PhD, I understand that a lot of changes will come once i finish my masters and enroll for PhD, but the question is; is the research that ill start now would be acceptable and valid for my PhD?

I actually did what you are proposing, skipped my MS and went straight for a PhD in genetics instead. Also, based on my experience I had a bunch of concerns for you but I can't post much - the program insists I have untoward motives because I don't know your income situation, not that I want to know at all!  Great. Last time I'll post here.

There are positives and negatives to this decision and in the end, you may not think going straight for a PhD is worth it.  First and foremost, will you be paid a stipend while obtaining a Masters?  If so, will it be the same amount as you would make while working on PhD, and are he conditions the same, i.e. will you be a teaching assistant the entire time for both degrees or will the PhD allow you to focus mainly on your research with little other responsibilities for the stipend?

What they did to me was blatant "carrot" manipulation.  I was offered a lot more to enroll in a PhD program and skip the MS.  And hey, they had already accepted me as an MS candidate, they just targeted me as good slave labor :) I think I should have stuck to my guns and gotten the MS first.  The classes in my case would have been identical and wouldn't have been repeated moving onto the PhD if I had stayed at the same institution - find out about that as well - what is the curriculum like between the two degrees?  Will any classes have to be repeated, especially if you change institutions?  If you have a good idea where you want to be as well as what you want to be doing (and you are stating that you do know what you want to study), ask the second institution (or the first one if you plan to stay) about repetitious classes.

As far as continuing on the same or similar track of inquiry, make certain if you plan on staying in one place they are good with that plan.  But honestly, if you are getting two degrees, take advantage of the switch.  Use your Masters to gain extra skills (by classes or experience) that you may not have planned on picking up if going straight for the PhD.  The broader your education, no matter what the field, the better you will see the big picture and its underlying minutiae simultaneously.  A broader knowledge base can only aid you in designing strategies to solve problems and make testable connections between superficially disparate subjects. If you switch institutions, you might find it even easier to stay inline with your original goal.


Approaching unresponsive high level research professor as an undergraduate without any program I am currently a freshman at an American university double majoring in CS and Econ. There is one professor in my university that I am looking to work with, as his main research focus is algorithmic game theory, something that for obvious reasons holds great interest to me.

However, I do recognize that it would be difficult for me to keep pace with his research, being highly theoretical in nature. However, I have written to him multiple time about meeting with me for a few minutes to talk about his research or to advise me about what next steps I may take to best prepare myself for that kind of research with no response. I even tracked him down once, after the 1st email, and asked him about this, where he told me to email him as he is busy. However, it has been months without any reply.

I'm at a loss for what to do; what further steps can I take?

Well, faculty-student research is a two-way street, and for whatever reason, it certainly doesn't sound like this professor is showing a lot of interest in working with you.  This is not necessarily anything about you or your abilities; he may just be busy with other things, or not very interested in working with undergraduates in general, or too disorganized to keep track of potential research students.  But any of those would suggest that this is not someone that would be a good research supervisor for you at this time.

If you did start a research project with this professor, you'd be counting on him for actual supervision: advice on what to learn and what to work on, feedback on your progress and on your products (papers, code, etc), availability to meet to help get you unstuck when you are stuck on a problem, signing necessary university paperwork, collaboration in writing and submitting papers if you get that far, and so on.  You can see from many questions on this site how frustrating a research experience can be if this sort of support is not forthcoming, and it will be especially important in your case since it's apparently your first time getting involved in research.   And the fact that he is already so unresponsive to something as simple as "I'd like to talk about research opportunities" is reason for serious concern that he'd be similarly unresponsive when you really need his participation.

I would suggest that, at least for now, you move on and look for research opportunities with other faculty members - ideally, someone with a record of working successfully with undergraduates, and who shows clear interest in working with you.  I think these are more important than a perfect fit of research interests.

You have plenty of time to consider approaching this professor again in a year or two.  In the meantime, you might try to talk to other students he's supervised (either undergraduate or graduate) and find out how the experience was.  This may give you some ideas about how to get his attention more effectively, or it may convince you that you don't want to work with him at all.


Is there an online engine like Google Scholar which allows me to sort the papers by citation count? I could not find a way of sorting the list of relevant publications on Google Scholar on the number of citations. It would help a lot as I prefer to start reading well-cited references before moving onto less cited and more recent ones.
I am not looking to use a reference manager as I look for papers in diverse fields, many of which I do not go into depth.

There are at least four freely available databases which have this function. In random order:

Lens: In Lens, instead of the default Sort by Relevance choose Scholarly Citations (highest)
Microsoft Academic: In Microsoft Academic, choose SORT BY MOST EST. CITATIONS
Dimensions: In Dimensions, choose Sort by: Citations
ScienceOpen: In ScienceOpen, select Sort by cited by count


Is having recommendation letter writers from the searching institution valuable? I am applying for junior faculty positions this fall. I know professors at several of the institutions where I'll be applying, but not in the same department to which I will be applying. Are letters from people at the same institution where I'm applying more valuable than an equivalent letter from someone at another institution?

Also, what if I do know someone in the department where I'll be applying. Should I rely on their input into the search process occurring naturally during faculty discussion, or would an explicit letter of recommendation from that person be looked upon favorably or disfavorably?

1- The seminal point in the effectiveness of a letter of recommendation is neither the affiliation of the recommender nor his relation to the university, in which you are keen on applying...

The best letters of recommendation have always been composed by fellows, who know the applicant, deservedly, to count his/her personal and scientific characteristics and to pinpoint the unique factors, could which be effective to distinguish the target applicant among the others. Now, if you take a letter of recommendation from someone attending in the target department, where he/she could not reasonably convince the reader upon his knowledge about you, the weight of the letter would not be high. Instead, your contentment to give a letter from one of your resident professors might be more influencing, as they would assess you, in a better fashion.

2- Explicit distinction of an applicant's case would be more assuring, because that "faculty discussion" maybe will not happen on the right time to be fruitful for you. Therefore, you better to stick to the more reliable choice, i.e. explicit letter of recommendation.


Writing the Absolute and Relative Average in an Application Form In the application form of a master's degree program I'm applying for, I've stumbled upon this:

Please indicate both the absolute and the relative average of your previous degree.

What does this mean? I'm not quite sure, but I don't think my transcript of records indicates a relative average, so what should I do?

O.P. says in comments that they solved their own problem:

  Problem solved: They were basically asking me to write the exact GPA as mentioned on the transcript of records (for example: 4.8 out of 5) and then also calculate the percentage of it: 4.8 out of 5 = 96% –


Assessing quality of research groups within math departments as a prospective PhD student? First, let me quickly say that I've read as many related questions on this site as I can find, and I believe my questions haven't been directly addressed yet.

I am currently selecting between a few PhD programs in mathematics and have read many different accounts of how to best approach the process. There are several top answers here that suggest that one should try hard to attend the program with highest prestige, as long as this doesn't directly compromise your ability to pursue research in your field of interest (or land you in an area in which you are unhappy). Most posts then qualify that statement carefully, reminding the OPs that measuring prestige is not the same as comparing ranks on USNews (in multiple threads it is suggested that there is little difference between schools that differ by 10 points).

My questions are:

1) Are the AMS groupings generally a better indicator of a program's quality than differences in USNews ranks? Is it an unwise move to attend a Group II school if you are admitted into Group I schools, given that your ultimate goal is to work as a research mathematician?

2) How does one start to compare programs' strengths, specifically in their subfield of interest, without resorting to some kind of online ranking? Which metrics are reliable indicators for the strength of the specific research group in a particular department?

Honestly, I wish I wasn't thinking so much about my future in these terms. I come from a humble undergraduate institution, and many of my options represent a positive leap forward, for which I am very grateful. However, I can't help but feel the pressure of the competitiveness of the academic job market (all hearsay to me). When I read that hiring committees pay close attention to these numbers, I feel like I ought to do the same.

Thanks for any insight

For both your questions, I will posit that the key factor is whether the group in question is doing "high impact" work. For example, are their papers interesting and often cited? Are they working in very "popular" areas? Do the respected researchers in your (sub)field know the names of the senior group members?

To your questions:

I am not a mathematician, but I do know that the rankings will be at the level of the "department average", where faculty hires will be based on the "group" or even the individual. So, a high-power group in a third-tier school is better than a lower-power group in a higher-ranked school.
The factors listed above are perhaps the "true" criteria -- but, as an undergraduate, you are probably not in a position to judge your prospective advisors' work. This is why the rankings are so useful. If you have anyone at your current institution that you trust to be well-informed as to the state-of-the-art in your (sub)field, you may want to ask that person for some advice as well.


What is the most an international student could earn at a US grad school? I haven't gotten any offers yet, but I just got an e-mail from one of the biggest names in my field (engineering) who urged me strongly to apply to his school. This, along with a few other factors, makes me feel it's likely I will get admitted to one of the top schools if I choose to apply. This is humbling, exhilarating, amazing, etc, but the caveat is that I have a family to support.

We have barely scraped by for too long now and it would be really nice to give my spouse some measure of financial comfort. So, counting everything including stipends, scholarships, allowances and every other trick in the book, what would be the most one could hope to get from a place like MIT, Stanford or Princeton?

I think most people here understand how valuable a PhD in engineering from MIT is in terms of future prospects in both academia and industry. Would it be crazy to consider supplementing ones income with a loan in order to live decently, if not doing so would mean being forced to decline the offer altogether?

I can't answer your question directly (probably no one can), but I have some first and second-hand knowledge. This applies to CS/engineering in the US:

I've had several friends that went to Cornell, Princeton, and Stanford and they have told me that they make around $28,000-$34,000 for a 12 month salary. However, the cost of living in places like Stanford is very expensive, so you need to adjust for that (there are calculators online).
You can do an internship at a company or lab and make around $30,000 in a single summer.
Most funding agencies and departments won't allow you to double dip. So receiving external funding (e.g., a fellowship) would replace, not supplement, your assistantship with your department.

In ideal circumstances, this means that you could make 25k (9 month salary) while at university and another 30k during the summer, for a grand total of $55,000 before taxes.

Of course, you have to be careful because internships aren't guaranteed and you may have to relocate to another city/state for them (often paid for by the company) which might pose another challenge for your family.


Should a letter of recommendation be customised for each university when applying for a masters program? I've just graduated in Brazil and I plan to apply in some different Master courses in US. I plan to apply to different universities and I did not want to ask my professors to write many different letters.

Should the letter of recommendation be specific to the university I am applying to or  can I use a generic letter for all applications?

Never hold your own recommendation letter (looks unethical), let your current lecturers send the recommendation letter to the universities directly (via email for example), that you applied for.

Most universities, ask for two recommendation letters, by asking the information of the lecturers (e.g., email, address, phone, etc.) who do that for you. So the recommendation letters will be sent by your lecturers (e.g., email, mail, online form, etc.) to the universities you applied for; without you seeing/holding the letter.


How to apologize for declining an offer from a potential PhD advisor? I sent many emails to prospective PhD advisors looking for a position in their research groups. Recently, I got two offers from professors in different universities and I choose one of them as his research interests fit  more with my experience. Now, I have to apologize to the second one that I won't to be able to work with him. How to do that without leaving a bad impression ?

The best thing you can do is be honest and explain the situation. You thank the second professor for the offer, explain you accepted another offer and wish the second professor well with their future research.
This is a common situation and the second professor should be understanding.


How to report GPA, if minimum letter grade credits not reached? How would a graduate student, at the University of California, Santa Cruz, report their GPA, on fellowship applications, if they have not yet accrued enough letter grade credits?

UCSC seems to not report a formal GPA until the student takes 25 credits of letter grade classes. This excludes credits received from pass / fail classes, which count toward graduation but not toward the 25 credit letter grade GPA threshold.

It seems the National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship states:

  What GPA do I enter for my school if I just started attending? You can
  enter 0.0 as your GPA – reviewers will understand that you have not
  yet received a GPA for that school and will not view it negatively.
  Link: https://ndseg.asee.org/faq/academic_background_section

Will follow-up if I receive any formal statement from the UCSC Office of the Registrar.


Potential disadvantages of a math postdoc in Europe vs US I am a mathematics Ph.D student in the United States, and recently received a 3 year postdoctoral offer in Germany, which I have only a few weeks to accept or decline. The offer is very good (high salary, travel funding, no teaching unless I want to) the PI is basically the top person in my field, and the position also solves my 2 body problem (my SO has a similar offer from the same place), so I am tempted to accept it.

However, I have sometimes heard that an American doing a postdoc in Europe is at a disadvantage applying for permanent jobs since European positions are often restricted to EU citizens and American schools are less likely to hire someone who did a postdoc in Europe.
Can someone (on either side of the pond) offer perspective on whether my concerns are valid?
I need to accept or decline the position before offers for US postdocs are sent out.

I'm aware of a few potential issues applying for academic jobs in the US after a European (or non-North American) postdoc. These won't necessarily come up in any given job, but they're the problems I've heard of people having. (Specifically, I know of different people who've had each of these problems individually.)

Many American schools are reluctant to hire someone who doesn't have adequate teaching experience, and especially at least some experience teaching service courses (courses to non-majors), since that's such a large part of the job in the US. European postdocs often have less or different teaching requirements.

Many schools can't afford to fly people in from Europe to interview for position, and will therefore officially or unofficially discount applications from someone in Europe.

There's still some variation in how people write recommendation letters, so a European writer is more likely to write a letter which comes across as negative to Americans.  (More specifically, in the US, almost any negative comment in a recommendation letter, even a very mild one, is taken as a hint that the problem is much worse than is being said. In Europe, I'm told it's more common to include mild critique of an applicant in an overall positive letter.)


Reasons to do MS before applying for US PhD? I'm a Software Engineering (BS) graduate with first class honors, and I want to attend a US PhD program on artificial intelligence (international applicant).  I know MS is not a prerequisite for a PhD in the U.S.

However, I'm considering doing MS at a local university (not in US) for the following reasons:

Publish some papers under my name during that time
Get recommendations from good professors (Currently I don't have anyone who is aware of my work)
Obtain good mathematical background
As sneak peek on doing "independent research"

Do you think the above given reasons are good reasons for me to follow MS or do you think that is a waste of time?

Appreciate your opinion as I'm confused on making a decision.

I think you have already listed many good reasons for completing an MS before a PhD.

For one, it can give you an introduction to a field of study on a graduate level. That allows you to be introduced to many of the more prominent people in the field, some of which you might find out are worth studying under. In that case, it would only help you when it comes time to apply.

If you publish and then subsequently present at a conference, then you can meet with a lot of other faculty from schools you're interested in, and you can strike up a conversation. In turn, you can stay in touch with that person and visit them later when it comes time to apply for the program. They may in turn vouch for you during the admissions review.

It is common for PhD students to have already completed an MS, even if its at another school. And, virtually all programs will take that into consideration and credit you 30 hours of coursework towards a PhD completion, so long as the courses are directly relevant to the PhD program.

I learned halfway through my first year of PhD studies that as far as my university is considered, there is no differentiation between a MS and a PhD student, we are all part of the Graduate College. So all of the MS hours are in effect graduate hours, and thusly they are also PhD hours.


How to recognize/ judge whether the PI/ recruiter has selected me as post doctoral fellow? I applied for a position doing interdisciplinary research work in my field. The PI contacted me, took my interview and told me he would contact me again for my presentation. My interview went for one hour.

After three months the PI returned and asked me to present my work on Skype. My presentation went for one hour and I answered all possible questions except for my experience with in vivo applications. I answered that being a foreign national I was not allowed to handle in vivo techniques. Finally he mentioned that he would get back to me.

I am not sure whether he selected me as post doc fellow. How can I recognize if he selected me?

There is a very easy way to recognize when you have been selected: you will get a signed letter offering you the job.

If you haven't got one, then you haven't been selected (yet).

Everything else is irrelevant. I can understand that it's tempting to try to guess from subtle cues, but it's really a waste of time.


If I get an article published in a journal as an undergrad, but the research is low-quality, can it hurt my chances for admission to a PhD? I'm an undergraduate psychology major with an opportunity to publish in a peer-reviewed journal as a second author. However, the research is fairly low-quality (it was previously submitted to a journal and rejected with very critical reviews). Would having this research published with my name on help or hurt my chances of getting into a PhD program?

A low-impact publication will not, in itself, have that much impact on your chances of getting into graduate school.  Graduate admission committees will pay a lot more attention to your letters or recommendation.  In terms of graduate admissions, the most important impact of having done research is that it should involve you working closely with more senior academics, who will them be in a position to give you strong graduate school recommendations.

Whether the research you do as a undergraduate gets published or not, what is key is that your research supervisor (and possibly other senior people you may have worked with) will know you well enough to write you a strong recommendation.  If your research was done under the supervision of a prominent, respected researcher, that person's letter will count for more.  On the other hand, if your supervisor has a poor reputation (being known for shoddy or crackpot work, for example), their evaluation of your potential will be weighted less strongly by the people reading your application file.  If the low quality of your publication is a consequence of having worked with a rather poor senior researcher, that is something of a cause for concern, although the best course of action is still probably to get the strongest letter you can from your supervisor, even so.


The limits of plagiarism Suppose I write an introductory article to a subject into a journal and I use ideas from a textbook in another language. The paper is not a translation of the book chapter but clearly relies on it. I cite that book.

What does count as plagiarism and what doesn't? What are the limits here?

Following the exposition does?

Plagiarism is taking the ideas of others and presenting them as your own, whether in their own words or not. By citing the other work you avoid plagiarism, but not necessarily all problems. If you are doing a translation, of the other work, present it as such. I can't give advice on whether that is always valid and it might require some permission of the copyright holder of the earlier work. I suspect that it does, but copyright rules vary widely around the world and, in many places, are a bit more generous for academic work and research.

Even in a single language, quoting from another work, with proper citation, and paraphrasing the other work with citation avoids plagiarism. But there are limits that are usually a matter of civil law. The more you "use" the shakier the ground gets, but that is a copyright issue, not plagiarism.

But if it is clear what is your own and what is adopted/adapted from another, you at least avoid plagiarism.


Is it a good idea to email to potential grad advisor with personal website email domain? I was reading about email etiquette. Dos and don'ts when you are sending mailing your professor. One of them was about email domain. I was wondering if it is a good idea to use personal website domain? (eg. email@sadafnoor.com)

(Does the professor really look at those things? Seriously?)

Nowadays, I really don't think it makes any difference whatsoever. You are free to use whatever domain you like, so long as it's not somehow offensive or insipid (for instance, if the choice would be considered a curse word or epithet). If there's something potentially offensive, your email could get blocked by a spam server or filter.

Otherwise, though, it really doesn't make a difference. I'm not going to judge a student more or less favorably because they use an email address that isn't a school-based address, or if it's a "vanity address" like the one you've listed.


Which would be more beneficial when applying to theoretical physics PhD programs, Math M.S or experimental physics M.S.? I am graduating this semester with a bachelors in physics. My goal is to do theory in my graduate level course work. The problem I am in now is that I missed the deadline to take the physics GRE (I'm taking it in April) so I also missed the deadline to apply to most graduate schools. Fortunately, I was accepted to pursue masters degrees by both the math and physics departments of my current school. My plan is to do one or the other and apply to other schools next semester. My question is which one will be more beneficial to me? Our math department is all around phenomenal... but it won't say "physics" on my applications. Our physics department is good, but it is completely geared towards experimental nuclear physics, which is not my interest (and there is no non-thesis option). Every day now I have been swinging back and forth; math... physics...etc. So, which one would be more beneficial when applying to schools with top theory programs, Math M.S or physics M.S.?

If your MS in physics will be experimental and you want to do theoretical physics, the math route could work. But we are basically guessing at how an admissions committee will see your application;  so I encourage you to keep asking. Hopefully other answers here will help.


How do people manage recommendation letters? A good academic job normally needs excellent recommendation. Due to the rapid growth of higher education, there are too many vacancies (in new or expanding universities) and too many applicants (growing number of graduates). As a result, each vacancy receives many applications, and each applicant need to apply for many positions.

This is how the matchmaking system works: keeps submitting applications.

Although, online systems are replacing hardcopy applications, still many universities prefer application by mail, and more often, they ask for recommendation letters to be submitted by mail. I have seen this very common in Europe.

Thus, each job-seeking scholar must ask his/her colleagues, professors, etc to submit tens of recommendation letters by mail. Owing to the fact that every famous scholar has/had many students/colleagues. Therefore, a part of this schedule must be devoted to writing recommendation letters for others.

Considering that people need recommendation for other purposes such as grant proposal, admission application, fellowship, etc; this matter must be more serious.

Even in online systems, a busy scholar may receive emails for completing recommendations on a regular basis.

My questions are:

From the applicant part: isn't it bad/rude/harsh to ask a colleague/professor to write tens of recommendations for you to find an academic position. And keep asking for recommendations for prospective proposals?
From the reference part: isn't it annoying to deal with repeatedly recommendation requests? Ignoring a recommendation request may have bad consequences for the applicant, but it is not easy to see recommendation request every day checking the emails, as an old student/colleague is strongly seeking a new position.

No it is not rude but there is a matter of fatigue in the end. the professor might just say "enough" at some point. Usually the letters will also be fairly similar so that each is largely composed of the same text but with smaller alterations tailored to the specific job application. Another trick is to ask the applicant to write a basic text covering what the applicant wishes the letter to cover. It is then easier to use that text and make modifications as one pleases.
Hopefully the applicant has more than one person to ask for references. Writing such letters is, at least in my sphere, something you are supposed to do, unless it inflicts severe effects on other activities. Yes, it is annoying at times,particularly if the request is such that one needs to complete the letter "yesterday". Hence providing some time will alleviate the discomfort.