How much does an undergraduate degree matter for an academic career? I'm a PhD student, in medical physics at a very good collegiate university in the UK. I did a four-year undergraduate masters' (in physics), and I'm just finishing a four year PhD. I'm now at the awkward stage of applying for grants, junior research fellowships and postdoctoral fellowships -- and I'm experiencing an awful lot of rejection letters, often after being shortlisted and interviewed.

My question is this: how much does my undergraduate degree actually matter at this point in my career? I wrote two articles (on computational biology) as an undergraduate  that were published in  good (impact factor ~5) journals, and by now my publications list has eight items on it (excluding conference proceedings), including a PNAAS article (albeit not first author) and several articles in the main journal in my field. I've won prizes, lectured, and got a teaching qualification. Yet I still keep being rejected for positions that are 'appropriate' for me to apply for.

When I speak to older (successful) colleagues about their experiences, they often drop things like "Of course, coming first in the year at [Cambridge/Oxford] helped me get my Junior Research Fellowship, and even the Tutorial Fellowship later" into conversation, and the vast majority have a very good degree. I didn't do fantastically in my undergrad degree -- I narrowly missed out on a first class degree (69.96%), largely due to one bad exam. I really can't help but think that the reason I'm finding it so hard to get funding is because I didn't come first in my year -- but I'm up against people who presumably have successful publication histories and did.

If there are a large group of equivalent, good, candidates for one position, do funding bodies and interviewing committees look at what's different between everyone? Is the fact that I'm objectively a second-class physicist holding me back? If so, what can I do about it? Or is it the case that these funding bodies do some sort of crazy weighted sum, whereby one-tenth-of-a-nature-paper is equivalent to being first-in-year? How much of a hinderance is it being -- as I was -- in the top 20% of your year, as opposed to the top 10%? Does the importance of your first degree erode over time?

I realise that I should feel pleased to be shortlisted where -- to give an example -- 283 people apply for one position, and I was in the final six. Yet 'feeling pleased' won't pay the rent next year, and I'm really starting to despair. Should I accept that this limitation is always going to hold me back in my chosen career path, and therefore just go and change it?

Aside: I'm also concerned that, being an interdisciplinary person -- an MRI physicist -- I'm going to come across as being "too medical" for a physics position, and "too physical" for a post in a biochemistry department. In practice, my research ranges from Schrödinger equations to talking to cardiologists, and I believe that either location would be appropriate. This, however, is a whole other kettle of fish!

I will give some answers from an American point of view (in math), but probably this is widely applicable.  The answer in short is that your undergrad degree means essentially nothing at this point.  It's only role was to get you where you are now.

Now, for some of your secondary questions.

  If there are a large group of equivalent, good, candidates for one position, do funding bodies and interviewing committees look at what's different between everyone?

Yes, but your undergrad degree is weighted almost nothing in these considerations.  About the only case where it can help is if someone on the committee knows you from undergrad and has a positive impression from then.  The primary consideration is your research (both how good it is and how good of a fit it is) and expert opinions of your work (e.g., recommendation letters).  Secondary considerations may be where you've published, how active you are in giving talks/going to conferences, impressions of committee members who know you, previous awards you've gotten, and other professional activities.  (I'm assuming the things you're applying to don't involve any teaching.)  Once you've gotten to the interview stage, other things like how good you are at communicating, how enthusiastic you are and how you get along with others come into play, but no one will care about your undergrad degree there.

  Is the fact that I'm objectively a second-class physicist holding me back?

If people think you're objectively second-class, it's not because of your undergrad.  Maybe you are, maybe you're not, but it's all about your research and maturity now.

  Should I accept that this limitation is always going to hold me back in my chosen career path, and therefore just go and change it?

Only if you want to.  Right now, funding is scarce, there's a lot of competition, and it is hard to get fellowships/grants.  The difficulty varies by situation--some fields have more opportunities than others, and for people who are in between established fields, like you may be, it can take time to find your place.  Almost everyone has to struggle, and it's easy to get discouraged.  It's how you decide to deal with it that's important.  If you want to fight for your place in academia, then do it--your undergrad is not holding you back.  If you want to look for an "easier" career, that's your choice.

PS If you're worried about how fit you are for academia, and it sounds like you are, you should talk to your advisors/mentors.


What are the potential consequences of responding in kind to a rude lecturer? What are the potential consequences, if any, of being rude and abrasive with the lecturer of a course I am taking? Could I face disciplinary action? Could it affect the way my work is evaluated? Is there a serious risk of me alienating myself with other people at uni, if the lecturer speaks badly of me?

Context.

I wrote to the lecturer and course responsible for a course which I am attending. The email I wrote contained a simple request, presented with common courtesy: could you help me determine whether I am eligible to take the exam in your course? The answer to this question would depend on the quality of the work I have submitted, feedback on which I have not received from our class instructor since I could not attend some classes due to scheduling problems with my part-time job. This I explained to the lecturer in my mail, in which I also added that feedback on said work was not present on the course website either, as is usually the case, and that I would've asked the instructor, except you have not presented us with any contact information for him (and during the classes which I did attend, I did not think of asking the instructor for such info, since I expected it to be on the course website if need be).

To my surprise, I received a rudely brief reply. I was merely told that this is my own problem, as I have decided to not show up for classes, regardless of what reason I may have, and that I should find a way to sort it out with the instructor.

I have some previous experience with this lecturer from another course, and as my perception of him is that of a lazy, unprofessional and unambitious external lecturer who probably only is in his current position due to the unfamiliarity which the administration and other key professors in my department have of the content he teaches, I couldn't stop myself from responding rudely. My reply was short, but it did contain sentences such as "let's hope the instructor has more of a clue of what's going on in this course than you apparently do" and "since my request bothered you so much, perhaps you should learn to use the basic functionalities of the course website. It's actually fairly simple stuff, but if you can't figure it out, I'm sure the office ladies in the administration can clue you in". I also said that I would make sure his rudeness would be reflected in my course evaluation.

Note.

I am not asking whether he really was being rude here, or whether my response was appropiate. The question(s) is(are) as stated above. Your opinion on my behavior or his is irrelevant.

No, we cannot answer the question without evaluating your behavior first. Your behavior was, simply said, stupid. Let's go item by item:

1) Are you enrolled in the distance-learning program? If not, then lecturer perhaps has the right to request that you attend all of his classes, unless there are valid and provable reasons (e.g. medical). In that case, scheduling conflicts mean that either you drop your part time job or you drop the course. I, as a lecturer, am extremely annoyed when someone presents part time job as a reason not to attend class, since the government in my country pays about 5000 EUR a year for his education. Being "free" for the students it does not mean that nobody pays, taxpayers do.

2) On your comment that the lecturer has his position only because no one else is familiar with the subject he teaches. Well, this is perhaps the reason why they tolerate him, and you should acknowledge this: the school thinks that this subject is important part of the curriculum and perhaps the lecturers familiar with the subject are difficult to find. This is one more reason not to annoy him, because he is clearly valuable to the school, although you may think otherwise.

3) Your comment was rude, because of the items 1) and 2) (especially due to 1). Perhaps everything you were asking him was clearly explained during the lectures you were not present at. Lecturers in higher educations have relatively large freedom of modifying and adapting their course as they see fit, even beyond the "official" requirements that are set on the web page. It would be perfectly normal if the university in general requires students to be present at the lectures, but the individual lecturers are less strict -- but then suddenly, due to low attendance, at a start of the next year, decide to enforce the rules.

Now on to your answer. What can happen in this case? Any lecturer has the freedom to ask you anything related to his course during the exam. Yes, he may ask you questions from the lectures you have been absent from, and then give you bad grade if you struggle with them. It is very rare that lecturers would go for any kind of the administrative action against the student, because their freedoms in lecturing and exams allow them to pursue more efficient means of retaliation, if they want to.

So you could only hope that he is 1) forgetful and will not remember the incident or 2) he is above the average professional and will examine you without prejudice even if he remember the way how you treated him.

And please note, it is very difficult to claim a prejudice and report him to administration - he has the right to ask you the questions from the lectures you missed - some will even argue that it is understandable to check whether you master the matter that you did not hear during the lectures, and assume that you know the rest.


Is it appropriate to ask a professor for publication opportunities? I am an undergraduate engineering student. Last summer I was working on a project in a lab that was not particularly novel - it had already been published by another group, and it mainly involved implementing that group's results with minor changes. This summer, I have been given the opportunity to work in a different lab. I presume that I will be given the opportunity to discuss various projects with the professor when this job begins. At that time, is it appropriate to ask whether I can contribute to a publication, and if so, what is the most tactful way to do so?

There is nothing wrong with asking about the contribution to a publication. This shows your interest and that you will work for it. Also, you have nothing to lose. Think what's the worst that can happen if you ask! They'll say no, right? So, what happens if you don't? You still won't get the experience you want and the publication! So, your best bet always is to discuss your interest.

How to ask? Just show your interest in the project and that you are willing to work for it. Since you are an undergraduate student, you may face some skepticism at first, but if you show dedication, that'll prove your sincerity.


Can academic teaching and quality research go hand-in-hand? [Long]

I have been working in a very well known university in India. I am a faculty member in the department of Computer Science. My appointment to the university is somewhat temporary given the condition I have to finish my PhD within x-years (Please ignore x for the time). If I can not finish my PhD within this duration, I have to leave the job and/or PhD.

Given the following conditions, you could see that it is difficult.

This is one of the premier and oldest university in India which is very well known for its quality teaching.
The university also expects top quality research for acceptance of the PhD thesis.
All the faculties of the same level as mine, are one of the back-bone of the department(s) of the university.
All the faculties must contribute towards institutional development in addition to quality teaching and research/PhD.

I can understand that this is a good sign that we can learn teaching/research with time. However, for me it seems very tough. I have been planning for a full-time PhD somewhere abroad with a stipend. However, I am tensed about future opportunities post PhD.

I understand that PhD students are given some amount of teaching load as a part of stipend policy. But, this academic teaching load is really incomparable and is too high.

Considering above facts, how to manage these two things together?

[Short]

Can academic teaching and quality research go hand-in-hand given a time-bound on job?

P.S. I belong to computer science and mathematics community and an independent scholar. Research is my passion.

[Edits]

There are two different courses (full course) assigned each with a student strength of 100 (approx.).
The courses involve labs as well.
So, in every 1.5 day, you could assume to have a class for which you need to plan your day properly (such as preparing materials, teaching slides, assignments, lab assignments, surprise tests if any, and few other things)

The point of writing I have been planning for a full-time PhD somewhere abroad with a stipend. is to get advises from experienced persons here on Academia.SE on whether should I go for it or not.

Sure, this is exactly what is expected of tenure track faculty at research intensive universities in the US. It is a lot easier when you have a little teaching experience and a little research experience before diving into the "deep" end, but there is no reason teaching and research cannot go together. In the US a PhD student might be expect to teach a single class in both the fall and spring semesters while a tenure track faculty might be expected to teach 3 classes each semester.


Why does a university course become defunct? What are some reasons that lead to a university course being no longer offered?

I am thinking in particular about the course "Computational sustainability" or CPSC 530M offered in University of British Columbia.

I am guessing the following could be the reasons, but I'm not sure:

Not enough students are interested in the course
The course spends too much money and earns too little
The subject matter is obsolete (e.g. Eugenics theory)

Some reasons we've eliminated courses in my department:

The professor who created the course is no longer at the college or is no longer interested in the material.
College-wide requirements have changed, and the course was created to meet a requirement (such as for interdisciplinary work).
As new courses are added, other courses have to be removed, unless the size of the faculty grows.


What to expect from an HR interview for a postdoc position? I had a successful technical round of interview for a PostDoc position offered by an NGO. Now I am told that I will be interviewed by the HR manager for the same.

I was told that I am technically highly suitable for the role. My question is what would the HR team might be interested to know further. Would they want to know more about personality etc.

Could anyone please suggest what to expect in an HR interview for a postdoc position?

If your technical interviews went well, I would bet the HR meeting will focus on a combination of the following:

Verifying that you meet formal job requirements. They need to make sure they can actually employ you; you are authorized to work in the country (e.g., are a citizen or have/can apply for an appropriate work permit). They may ask you to confirm that you have a PhD, a common requirement for a postdoc position. Depending on how it is funded, there may be more specific requirements, like having a degree in a certain field or conferred within a certain time period. If you will need some sort of background check, they will go over that process too.
Selling you on the job. If they offer you a job, they want you to take it! They may use this meeting to describe your (potential) position and how you would fit into the organization. There might be a specific discussion of the offer you'd be receiving (e.g., salary, vacation, benefits) or just a more general pitch about how this is a great place to work, etc. Some organizations do this even before the final candidate is actually selected.
Checking for fit/compatibility/etc. Pretty self-explanatory. The impressions of the people you with whom you would work should carry more weight, but nevertheless....

In any case, I would take it as a promising sign that you've been asked back. Good luck!


Are there any research databases that accept submission of published articles? My organisation is a research institute that publishes peer-reviewed research articles via its website. Further social media and digital communication channels are also utilised to extend the reach of the published research, and the researchers are individually able to further promote their researchers via networks such as ResearchGate or Academia.edu.  In the latter case, these networks require the individual researcher to be authenticated, and so this cannot be done by my organisation on their behalf.  That is my assumption and the basis for the problem that I wish to address.

The question is: Are there any research databases that my organisation can submit research articles on behalf of the research authors? The fields covered are in the social sciences such as economics and geography, and the number of articles published is approaching 1,000.  The submission method could be manual or via an API or other indexing methodology.

So far, we have been unsuccessful in achieving indexing of the website content by Google Scholar (see related question).
Some possible leads are the Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, DataCite, and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).  I would be interested in any feedback on the potential suitability of these options for our situation.

By research database, I am referring to search engine or index containing listings or full PDF content of published research articles.  The objective of this activity is to further extend the reach of the published research content to the wider community and also to the specific subject communities relevant to the research.

From Wikipedia:

  The Social Science Research Network (SSRN) is a website devoted to the rapid dissemination of scholarly research in the social sciences and humanities.

SSRN allows you to submit full text papers (for example preprints) and abstracts (for example of published and paywalled articles). Setting up an account is free and requires only an email address and password. I am not aware of any API for mass uploads.

In my experience, papers on SSRN are quickly indexed by Google Scholar.


Should I use abbreviations for university names while writing my Statement of Purpose? I am specifically asking for University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. I am writing a Statement of Purpose for the university and have to mention it a few times. Should I write the complete name or can I use UIUC or Illinois instead?

The first time write out the entire name and put the abbreviation in brackets, then use the abbreviated form forward

e.g. I am writing in application for graduate studies at the University of Toronto (UofT)..... UofT would be the best choice because....


How long does it takes to receive a master graduation document (degree) Can any body tell me how long after the Master's thesis defense do it take the student to receive their Master graduation document (degree) in Spain, France, UK or USA?

I'm asking specifically about the degree in paper, the one stamped with signatures, etc (which you can hang in the wall :) ).

For example if the student were to defend their thesis let's say today. How long after that does it take to receive a piece of paper saying something like "University of SUCH Master Degree in favor of SUCH"?

I know Spain, France, UK, USA are very different countries and all systems must have differences. Any country of the previous ones mentioned is good for me. It is a simple curiosity of mine.

It depends on the university you attend and how many credits they require for a master degree. In out university, 30 credits (10 courses) needed to complete a master degree. But finishing time depends on you. You can take all these courses in one year (spring, summer, fall) or do it in two years or even three. Its totally up to you.

The graduation document, I mean the degree, would be awarded the last day of your last semester. That would be your official "master" title date. The will mail the document to your home address. Plus you can also collect the document on graduation day at the end of spring semester. If you have graduated in Fall 2013, you can attend graduation day in May 2014 and get the degree with fancy clothing.


Is it bad practice to study or reference the work of an academic who has fallen from grace? I was recently reading a textbook, written by a professor from an elite university, which I was finding to be very informative and well-written. Excited to learn of other works or talks by this individual, I searched for him on Google, but was extremely dismayed to find the results page full of news articles about his improper personal conduct and trouble with the law that resulted in his being forced to retire from teaching.

I'm now unsure whether I should continue reading his textbooks--they appear to be correct, well-written and insightful, but I might feel embarrassed now to keep them on my bookshelf or tell someone I had studied them. Should I avoid reading and learning from his work? And, more out of curiosity, should individuals publishing work in his field avoid referencing his texts or published research?

I left out a lot of the specifics, so more general thoughts or comments about this are welcomed.

No, it's generally not a bad practice.  For a closely related question, see How does it affect the treatment of a mathematician's results, if that mathematician was a Nazi?.

  Should individuals publishing work in his field avoid referencing his texts or published research?

His published research: for sure no, not avoid references to his research; the linked question covers this well.

As for his textbooks: Most often one is not forced to reference any particular text, as there are other texts that do the same.  (Perhaps "there are other texts that do the same" ought to be the definition of a text rather than a research article or monograph, but there are exceptions to this definition.)  I think personal preferences can and do come in when choosing which text to reference: for instance, I would be happier to reference a text that is freely available online, or if I don't like (academically speaking) a text generally then I might try to replace a citation to it by a citation somewhere else, even if that's a little trouble.  (I remember doing that recently in a joint paper: a coauthor cited a text I didn't like.  I got him to (find and) cite another one instead!) But if Dr. Fallen's text is the unique source for something, you must cite it, and if you unambiguously feel that it's the best source, you probably should cite it.

As for your studying: I see no argument whatsoever against studying the good text of a bad person.  In fact, "bad person" is a kind of reification.  Everyone does good things and bad things; when we say someone is a "bad person," we mean that our evaluation of their actions (that we know of) is weighted towards the bad.  But avoiding or trying to nullify the good actions of a bad person is...bad.  We should encourage, reward and make use of the good behavior in everyone, right?

I do have one proviso: you may not want to financially support Dr. Fallen, for instance if you suspect that financial support would somehow abet his reprehensible activities.  So you may well not want to buy his book if you haven't already.  If you feel that citing Dr. Fallen's text in a situation where you could also cite another (both are secondary sources) could induce others to financially support him, then maybe that's an ethical reason for choosing a different citation even if you personally think Dr. Fallen's text explains it better: this is a bit of an unlikely edge case, I think.


Postdoc job inteview presentation - slide "livery" / logos and references? I'm applying to my first postdoc position, and I've been asked to attend an interview that will start with a 5 minute presentation on how I meet the job criteria. The work that I'm going to talk about is all from my PhD at University A. The postdoc is at a different institution (University B). What is typical practice for the design of slides in this situation? A conference talk would usually:

1) Utilise University A's branding/identity through the use of logos etc.

2) Include a thank you slide that shows which other people were involved in the work.

At an interview, do I drop the branding to make it clear that I'm representing myself, not a different university? Or do I continue to "credit" them by displaying the branding?

And what about the "contributors" slide - do I use some of the 5 minutes to show that I had been working in a team? Or not mention other people to make it clear that it's (mostly) my work? I am also wary of wasting any of the short presentation time allotted.

Thanks for any help.

Typically, in the departments and universities I'm familiar with, as a student you're also an employee of your current institution, benefiting from their space at the very least and participating in the local research culture. As such, it's appropriate to keep the branding on your job talk slides since it's not just some obligation to the university to credit them, but it grounds you in a context of the research at that university.

Additionally, it's appropriate to keep your acknowledgement slides if there are people to acknowledge. Many PhDs are done as part of a team, and so you shouldn't drop this credit from your slides. That being said, in a job talk, even a short, introductory one, you should concentrate on the parts that you did. You probably shouldn't spend the time reading off all the names and roles of the people who contributed.

Now, given that this talk is short and intended to only be about how you fit the role, it's not even clear to me that you should be treating this as a traditional job talk about your research. I would focus down on the posted criteria and carefully and thoughtfully address how you satisfy them. Presumably you're being given the opportunity later in the interview day to give a traditional academic job talk (i.e. an hour-long seminar), and that's the place where you can dive into your research, credit your team members, funding agency, etc.


What should I do If I find out that there is a typo (repeated many times) in a recently published paper of mine at Elsevier? I've recently published a paper. It's available online, but not published on hard copies yet. What should I do If I find out that there is a typo (repeated many times) in a recently published paper of mine at Elsevier?

Contact the editor you worked with and let them know.  They will advise you of your options and hopefully work with you to update the online version and (if possible) either delay or fix the print version.


MS supervisor offered a low-paying PhD position; can I ask for a reference to work in a different lab instead? The circumstance :

I finished a master program (in engineering) in Germany a while ago with quite good grades (score of 1.**).
Immediately after the defense, the professor asked me the plan afterwards, and offered a Phd scholarship (1100 euro per month), not employee-contract.
I reacted positively.
However, I found several interesting PhD positions that give more support financially.
So, I want to ask the professor if he can write reference letters for me to apply to other labs.
But I am worried about getting rejected from the other labs, and also losing my chance for a position with my current supervisor.

So, if I ask for the reference letters to apply to other labs, is the opportunity (of 1100 euro/month) gone automatically? Would this be rude?

If you are looking for other PhD positions within Germany you may not need to ask for a reference: reference letters are not as common here as in some other countries. However, if you had an employment contract before, ask for your "Arbeitszeugnis" which pretty much takes the role of a reference letter. You are by law entitled to that, so asking for that should be a pretty standard request and you can say you'd like to have it for the sake of having your paperwork complete.
In case you were there just as Master student you don't get an Arbeitszeugnis, the certificates for final exam and Master thesis take that role.
I'm entirely with @cag51 in that your primary decision should be about the field/topics.
This is a perfectly fine reason to leave the group you are now in, and the professor should understand that.
Assuming the financial side is the only consideration that drives you away from the scholarship, I'd recommend being open with the professor about this. I'd assume an engineering professor to be able to calculate and the immediate difference in money is rather obvious (see below).  The professor may have further arguments in favor of the scholarship (see below), and there may be some space for negotiations.
If on the other hand, it turns out to be financially infeasible to do the PhD with the scholarship, the professor should again be willing to support you in looking for a job in the form of a reference.
(This assumes that the professor is neutral or benevolent towards you - wich is consistent with the offered scholarship)
OTOH, if you "secretly" apply for other positions but are not accepted and end up with the scholarship and the professor then finds out, this may create bad blood (not trustworthy, not open, etc.) - and a PhD is a rather intense and lengthy period of work where the professor may very well have thoughts into which students to "invest", say, money to attend conferences and which students are likely to run away as soon as there's the possibility. So I'd consider this approach somewhat risky here.
In other words, while it may be doable to apply for the other positions without a reference, I'd recommend to ask the professor for a reference letter.

Some thoughts about scholarship vs. PhD position via employment contract. It is not that easy to judge what amount of scholarship would be equivalent to what wage (though your offer seems to me to be rather on the low side):

1100 €/month scholarship will financially be comparable with an "employee" gross wage of 915 € or a net wage of 725 €/month. As you'll have to take care of your social insurance by your own (I'm assuming that even if you don't have to pay e.g. into pension scheme it would be sensible to put away at least as much as an employee in a similar financial situation is forced to put aside). If you decide against any social insurance that is not mandatory, i.e. only pay health and long term care insurance, you'll have ≈ 940 €/month.
As you say, it should be comparatively easy to find jobs that pay more: a 50 % TVL E13 in level I (first year) will be ≈1275 € net/month, so there should be other "features" of the scholarship to get it at par.
But scholarships often do come with additional features such as some money that you can spend at your discretion for your research (say, 200 € Büchergeld = money for books [which I could keep afterwards], I had a scholarship with additional money for travel to conferences and research stays and to purchase small things for the lab [they stayed with the university when I left]). You cannot take those things 1:1 like a higher scholarship, as e.g. university/your project rather than you personally should pay for conferences - but those sources are often very limited, so e.g. I did attend far more conferences than my fellow PhD students in the same group (typical was one national vs. several international + research stay for me).
Find out about this.
Scholarships may or may not allow you to work a side job. Check this carefully. If you can, you may be better off with getting a well-paying side job for a few hours per week.
In any case, check carefully how much you are supposed to work on other projects but your PhD project. This is unusual now, but my initial employment contracts as PhD student did not pay for any of my PhD thesis research work but were entirely about teaching lab/practica.
If you are anyways expected to be contributing to the institute's teaching load, you may be able to ask for an employment contract for that in addition to your scholarship, whereas a PhD student employment contract may include already a duty to help so many hours with teaching.
Scholarships are not employment contracts. Some of the consequences are: You are not subject to Arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz (employee invention law) nor to the employee paragraphs of copyright law: in consequence inventions and e.g. software you develop is completely owned by you, not by the university.
Also, the scholarship is not subject to income tax. OTOH, your PhD years will not count towards years contributed towards the governmental pension scheme unless you sign up for voluntary contributions (AFAIK, that is possible).
Scholarships often offer possibilities such as attending workshops and courses on particular subjects, and to network with people from other universities and other fields.
Depending a bit on the scholarship, it may be a good boost to your CV. Scholarships are not that common in Germany, so having had one means that you were selected, e.g. for being a very good student.
(side note: because of this, I find it unusual that the professor offers you a scholarship as opposed to offering that they'd help/try to get you a scholarship. Still, it is entirely possible.)


Editor decision OJS system After 3 days of sending my paper to the reviewers by the editor i have a new status saying that "New reviews have been submitted and are being considered by the editor". and 1/4 Assigned reviews completed. what does this mean? is this mean that the edior will make a decision based only on one review?

My reading of that message is simply that one of the four requested reviews has been completed, and that the editor will have a look at it. They might have to follow up with the reviewer (e.g. asking for clarification), or decide to invite an additional reviewer. In most cases the editor won't make a decision until they receive more reports, but it could happen in certain circumstances. So expect to wait a while longer.


How do deal with low self-confidence after a failed research rotation? In short, my third rotation research supervisor withdrew support on a Friday afternoon before my scheduled qualifying exam the following Wednesday. I had been rotating in the lab for about three months. He said that I did not have the cognitive ("critical thinking") or emotional abilities to be a PhD student. Apparently I was getting too much input from my postdoc mentor and the other graduate students, so he did not feel comfortable having me take the exam to possibly join the lab. (Even I were to pass, he would still "fail" me.) Because the lab is large, I was mainly supervised and received feedback from the postdoc. He maintained that I did good work throughout the rotation and was asking questions at an appropriate level for my experience. A staff scientist enjoyed working me as well and felt I was making appropriate progress.

When it came time to present the written report to the PI before the qualifying exam (which already had been approved by the postdoc) he was not pleased and could not believe that my postdoc mentor had approved it. He maintained that I would be absolutely picked apart by the committee for various errors. I needed to apologize and say how stupid it was to appease him. I asked other graduate students about his behavior, and they agreed he can be very condescending. I still felt uneasy though about the discrepancy in expectations between the PI and my postdoc mentor.

While the PI was not supervising my daily activities, he knew of my personal struggles during my rotation. My medication for anxiety had been changed at the beginning of the rotation, and I was experiencing enough symptoms that he caught me crying during a meeting. I explained my diagnosis, and he was very kind and supportive and told me to let him know how I was doing. I kept him updated throughout the rotation, and maybe shared more details than I should have, but I felt I was safe because his wife is a mental health professional. I never shared to get sympathy. I just wanted to make sure he knew that I was trying my best, and I could sense my work was not up to my usual standards. I felt it was the responsible thing to do. Because I was not up to par for a few weeks, he asked for my rotational time to extend beyond the qualifying exam to make sure that we could work together. The uncertainty was hard to deal with, but older students in the lab assured me that he had never let someone go who had rotated that long.

In the week before the qualifying exam, I moved and got diagnosed with an infection. The move provoked my anxiety, and the infection of course did not help, so I let him know what was going on because my draft edits were going to be late. That Friday afternoon, all of my problems that week, along with my mental health history in general, were used to substantiate that I was not emotionally ready for a PhD.

Because my first rotation mentor was a poor fit, and my second rotation mentor lacked funding, the department gave me a fourth rotation. The lab I am in now aligns well with my goals. However, I cannot escape the feeling that I am not catching on soon enough and I'm making mistakes on topics I "should" know. I am very worried that this PI will kick me out as well when he finds out what I actually know. The negative thought is always creeping in that I am not good enough, and maybe the third rotation PI was right. Realistically, my previous two mentors did not sense any problems, and my undergrad mentor maintains I will be a good grad student.

I'd appreciate any thoughts or advice. Thanks.

As suggested in a comment, ask your present PI to sketch out explicitly the goals for this rotation.  Take the initiative by writing a first draft, but ask the PI to help you refine your list.

Send the PI regular progress reports.

Try to find a support group.

It's fine to let a PI know of your diagnosis, but unless this person has personally demonstrated his or her trustworthiness, over a significant period of time, I suggest you draw some clear boundaries in your own mind, between what personal information you will share with a PI, vs. what personal information you will share with a support group or a therapist.

Read what I wrote about figuring out which educational accommodations would be helpful for you in this other answer.

Consider having a few sessions of EMDR about the specific trauma of the recent failed rotation.  Here is a link to get you started reading about EMDR: https://www.emdr.com/what-is-emdr/


Is it plagiarism to use an online tutorial as the basis for completing a programming assignment? Let's suppose that you were assigned a programming project, which is considered from your teacher/professor, not easy. However, you manage to find an online tutorial, that guides you step-by-step through the process needed (so the source code you have written doesn't have much difference from the one on that tutorial).

The final solution is based on this tutorial, but you have also added your own information, corrected some minor errors, etc. I don't know if this matters, but you know exactly what every single line of your code does, you are able to explain and answer complex questions, etc.

Is that considered plagiarism, and if yes, why? If not, how can somebody support that on a teacher/professor?

Using online material to learn is not plagiarism.

This is a great way to learn (e.g, worked examples and subgoal labeling) and is a common way for instructors to try to teach something. Am I plagiarizing every time I use a common design pattern? No.

However, copying and pasting code from online is. It gets a little fuzzy when working on simple assignments that can be found easily online because it could be weakly argued that you are recalling it from memory. I would definitely not be concerned about this, especially if you think you understand the code and were not trying to cheat.

If you're genuinely concerned, you could even discuss it with your instructor and they might realize that they are not spending enough time discussing a certain process or giving you enough practice material.

EDIT: Based on your clarification in the comments, if this is something more specific/arcane and not a tutorial on something general, then just cite it. I have done this in my programming courses before. I added a comment at the top of my code linking to the material I referenced and gave a very brief description of what it is and how I used it.


Should I ask professor for recommendation letter for graduate school if a month earlier he declined to give me recommendation for some internship? One year earlier I did a project under a Professor, I asked him for a recommendation letter for an internship program, but I couldn't get selected. Then this year I asked him for an internship program but he politely rejected me saying that it would affect if he give a lower rank to a student like me(He give rank to students and then send recommendations).
Now since I am going to apply for graduate school programs that also seem to ask for referees, should I ask the same professor for the recommendation?
He knows me well from classroom as well as project work.

Ask someone else
It sounds like the professor has already told you no.


What should I do if wrong version of manuscript was uploaded and submitted to journal? I think I may have uploaded a version of the manuscript which was loaded with markups and typos. I can’t see what was submitted now. I sent an email to the editorial staff telling them I was concerned that I uploaded the wrong version. What is the likelihood they will let me send the correct version if it explicitly says on website “no changes after submission”? (The reason I think it was wrong version, the name they gave my manuscript file on submission included a  date that matched earlier version manuscript, (If that makes sense)coincidence?)

The odds are very good they'll let you do it. They have nothing to gain by sending a badly-formatted manuscript for review. You could even submit the correct version as a separate submission now and the most that'll happen is some minor inconvenience for the journal staff (this is when the duplicate submission flag kicks in).

Worst case scenario, you can withdraw your submission and resubmit with the correct version.


Is a conference paper whose proceedings will be published in IEEE Xplore counted as a publication? I presented a paper at a conference last week. The organizer website has mentioned that selected papers will be published in IEEE Xplore. Following my initial paper submission, there was a selection process after which I got a mail intimating me that my paper was selected and the list of selected papers was also put up on the website and my paper was there. After this, I was asked to edit my paper according to the IEEE format. A deadline was set for the final camera-ready submission and I made it in time for that. After this, there was no intimation of anything related to publishing and I attended the conference and presented the paper. Since I read online that it takes a while for the papers to be put up online, I assumed there must be another review by the IEEE committee but I probably have been wrong. That last deadline asking for the papers in IEEE format was the final mention of publishing. I have a couple of question regarding my situation.

Can I include my paper in my CV under publications? Does this count as an electronic publication since it's going to be on IEEE Xplore? Or should I write it under conferences? This is my one and only paper. And when the proceedings are on IEEE Xplore, will they also be available in the book format or are they just digital publications?
Since the paper isn't out yet, I heard that forthcoming/in review/in press,etc must be used on the CV. Which term should I use here since my paper will probably not count as "in press" material? Also, what format must I use in my CV to mention this paper?
I read that depending on the area, a conference paper has much value or no value at all and in some fields like Computer Science, a conference paper has good value. Is this a fact?
What are "refereed" conference proceedings? Do IEEE proceedings fall into this category?

I am sure these questions have been answered before but I couldn't find the right answers and being new to the world of publishing in academia, things are quite confusing. If this question is a duplicate, please notify me so that I can delete it.

Edit: Added a few details to make my case clearer.

I would be a bit hesitant to include it as a "publication" rather than as "under review". I don't know what field or conference you are referring to, but in CS, my experience is that review happens before the conference (and before acceptance) rather than after. And since in CS, conferences are a main publication venue, it would seem appropriate to include under those circumstances. You seem to be describing something different, however.

But your words "will be published...after the papers have been reviewed" makes this seem a bit tentative.

I suggest you wait before you include it as a publication unless you qualify it in some way. You don't need to omit it entirely, just be honest and clear about the actual state of the world when you send it out.


Second Bachelors in Maths after Masters in Optics for Theretical Physics Phd I have completed my Masters(5 year Integrated) in Optics recently with average CGPA. I have couple of projects experiences in Theoretical Physics, but no publications. My masters course had rigorous higher mathematics papers yet I find that I have very little knowledge and experience in doing even the undergraduate math, though I am very much interested in it, may be because my course was designed to give more importance to experimental physics. Thus, I started improving math using online lectures and our mathematics stackexchange forum, and I can feel I am able to gain much more than what I could during the course. But many told me not to take a gap by spending time on maths after masters as it'd affect my chances of a Phd admission, as I am already 26.

So is it a good idea to do a second bachelors degree in Mathematics(distant education) before applying for a Phd in theoretical Physics in Europe/Australia ?

Or is there a better way to compensate the time I spend on improving maths myself ?

Note: The reason I was thinking of doing a bachelor's while improving my math is, that way at least I could show that I was doing something while I was away from academia.

So is it a good idea to do a second bachelors degree in Mathematics(distant education) before applying for a Phd in theoretical Physics in Europe/Australia ?

In general, getting another bachelors degree after getting a masters degree is not seen very favorably.  I understand your though process - show the admissions committee you'll do grade-A work in math.

In reality, it's much more likely to signal to the admissions committee you don't have a clear purpose, and make them wonder why you didn't just switch to a masters in math.  Furthermore, since you already have an advanced degree, they are less likely to be impressed you went back to undergrad and aced another bachelors degree.

The admissions committee is most likely to weight your academic performance doing your masters degree heavily.  If you are truly set on switching fields, I would recommend you get another masters degree in mathematics OR applying for a PhD in mathematics.


Tenure vs nontenure jobs I'm trying to understand an excerpt from a New Yorker article about the mathematician Yitang Zhang. The excerpt is included at the bottom. If possible, please help clarify Yang's point about tenure and nontenure positions; commentaries on the accuracy of his point would also be helpful.

In the excerpt, Yang seems to be asserting that nontenure positions are generally undesirable when he states,

  There are people who try to work nontenure jobs, of course, but usually they’re nuts and have very dysfunctional personalities and lives, and are unpleasant to deal with, because they feel disrespected.

However, in the preceding sentences he seemed to be describing benefits of nontenure jobs:

  If you become a good calculus teacher, a school can become very dependent on you. You’re cheap and reliable, and there’s no reason to fire you. After you’ve done that a couple of years, you can do it on autopilot; you have a lot of free time to think, so long as you’re willing to live modestly.

I feel like he's contradicting himself. Is his point that while there are benefits to being a nontenure Calculus teacher, most people in such a position are “nuts” with “very dysfunctional personalities and lives” who “feel disrespected”? I feel like I'm not quite understanding him. The full excerpt:

  Zhang’s preference for undertaking only ambitious problems is rare. The pursuit of tenure requires an academic to publish frequently, which often means refining one’s work within a field, a task that Zhang has no inclination for. He does not appear to be competitive with other mathematicians, or resentful about having been simply a teacher for years while everyone else was a professor. No one who knows him thinks that he is suited to a tenure-track position. “I think what he did was brilliant,” Deane Yang told me. “If you become a good calculus teacher, a school can become very dependent on you. You’re cheap and reliable, and there’s no reason to fire you. After you’ve done that a couple of years, you can do it on autopilot; you have a lot of free time to think, so long as you’re willing to live modestly. There are people who try to work nontenure jobs, of course, but usually they’re nuts and have very dysfunctional personalities and lives, and are unpleasant to deal with, because they feel disrespected. Clearly, Zhang never felt that.”

Justin, I think you raise good questions, and I'll try my best to clarify what I intended to say.

Regarding the first quote you cite, I did not meant to imply that in general non-tenured faculty are dysfunctional. The vast majority are incredibly dedicated and hardworking teachers. When I said "most", I really meant that most adjuncts who believe they have proved a major theorem (as Zhang did) are almost always wrong and usually "have very dysfunctional personalities and lives, and are unpleasant to deal with, because they feel disrespected".

As for the second quote, I was trying to be facetious. Those of us who are tenured professors know how many responsibilities and duties we have in addition to our research and teaching. So I like to say that Zhang had set up the perfect situation for doing research over a long period of time. He didn't have tenure (which as I said entails a lot of distractions) and just had to teach calculus (which, after a year or two, requires minimal preparation time outside of class). In addition, he had no children, and his wife lives on the other side of the country. This was perhaps not a good joke for a broader audience, but my colleagues all get it.

Finally, my point about Zhang is that he really was a good mathematician who had received very little respect from his peers and yet showed no signs of being bitter about his experience, even though he certainly would be justified in feeling that way.


What is a correct way for "marketing" non core PhD achievements on a CV? Reading this question and its answers got me thinking, once non-core PhD skills are learned and perhaps mastered, how can we make these achievements clear on a CV when applying for academic positions?

For example, my PhD majors in atmospheric physics and photobiology, but a significant part of it is in Android programming (the basis of the 3 published papers so far) and a few other skills not directly related to the major disciplines, but important nonetheless.

Related, would having peer reviewed published papers be considered as proficiency in the non core subjects without taking away the focus from the major disciplines?

I see no reason at all to leave any reasonable skill or ability off of your CV. Play a musical instrument? Won some medals in a sporting event? Program an android app? Have a black belt in a martial art? Add a section called "Other skills" or "Personal Information" and briefly list these skills. There are two reasons for this. First, it can help a potential employer think of you as a real person, perhaps someone they would like to know. Second, many skills can take years of dedicated practice to master; if you can master one such skill, then there is a good chance you can master whatever new skills may be required in the new job.

Here is an example from my life. Many years ago I programmed a video game (one of the old "text adventure" style games. I placed this on my CV, not thinking much about it. It turned out that one of the elder faculty conducting the interview had played that game and remembered it fondly. This alone certainly did not "get me the job," but anything that can smooth the way can be helpful.


How to write practice exams as a student as a way to study I'm an upper-division physics student. I have finals coming up next week and I want to take the advice of one of my professors from several years ago: write your own exams for practice and give them to peers. It'll help the test writer to review topics and your peers to have practice questions. However, my finals are all upper-division physics exams. Quantum mechanics, electricity and magnetism, and statistical thermodynamics. Homework and exams are generally pretty difficult, and I'm not sure how I can write an exam that will be on the same level that we can expect on the final.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to make up questions to create a practice exam for study purposes?

One way to do it is to make a kind of game out of it. Instead of trying to write a complete exam, just come up with one question. Give it to your peers and expect an answer in a few minutes. The first to give a correct answer asks the next question. Each person will need at least a couple of questions to get started, but not a complete exam. Questions asked will, hopefully, help people think of additional questions.

It would be good to do this face to face, but it could be done online if in real time - everyone simultaneously at their computer.

If no one answers in the allotted time, the asker gives the answer and another question is asked, either by the same person or another.

You might be able to use an online forum such as the physics section here to prime for questions. But searching for answers online sort of defeats the purpose of the exercise.


Is it of academic value to submit two papers describing two different but somewhat similar architectures? I'm going to submit two papers within the coming weeks. I'll be proposing two new architectures (one new architecture in every paper).

To sum up, the first paper surpasses the current state of the art.

The second paper improves some criteria above the first paper however the overall result of the second paper would degrade compared with the current state of the art by a little.

I was wondering whether it is ethical and of any academic value to submit both papers or I must just submit the first paper?

You can submit both papers to one or two different conferences, as long as you have two new contributions in them.

Side Note

It is advised not to cut the "meaty" part of a very nice contribution, into two or more different papers/journals. This sort of "slicing" put your future academic life at risk, because there are some academics that write many poor papers, by just slicing a contribution into different papers; and they are very well known for their "efforts". So, do not put your academic career at jeopardy, and think this through (i.e., contribution(s) you want to discuss in each paper).


Plotting a return course for academia: publications During the final stretch of my PhD in the social sciences (waiting for the oral defense date, publishing the dissertation as a book) I returned to my home country and pursued a career in journalism. Those two years were exciting, but I also realized that I wanted to teach (I was a guest lecturer for a journalism course for undergrads).

My question is, how can I plot a return course back to academia? I would like to apply for some lecture positions, but my greatest weakness is a lack of publications (aside from my dissertation) in the past few years.

If the application is due in two months, would it make sense at least to submit a few articles based on some parts of the dissertation to a few journals (thought I no longer have any academic affiliations)?

Is it conceivable for the hiring committee to consider my years outside of the PhD as a potential asset rather than a blank spot without publications?

Any insights and experiences on the matter would be appreciated. Thank you.

If the material in your dissertation can be adapted into articles that are suitable to submit for publication, then by all means do this.  Having articles submitted is certainly better than not having any, and if you have to try again in a year, hopefully some of them will be accepted by then.

Since the work was carried out at your PhD institution, you should list it as your academic affiliation, even though you are no longer a student there.  (But it wouldn't be a problem even if you didn't have any affiliation; that's not a requirement to publish, though people often seem to mistakenly think that it is.)

As for whether your time outside of academia can be considered a positive, it is up to you to make that case in your cover letter and application materials.  Explain how this experience has enriched your skills and how it will contribute to your effectiveness in the position you are applying for.


Is the Encyclopedia for Life Support Systems (EOLSS) a legitimate source? While looking for some biochemistry references, I stumbled across a PDF from a chapter in the Encyclopedia for Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Wikipedia claims that this literature is "crowdsourced", yet "relies on strict standards of peer review and can be referred to for academic purposes as well." However, the only citations on the Wikipedia page are to the EOLSS site itself.

The PDFs appear to be pretty high quality in terms the way the information is presented--I would say that look to be on par with textbook chapters. Yet the EOLSS website itself is sketchy as hell, and looks like it was pulled straight out of 1995 (complete with flash banners and a spectrum of colors/fonts for the bodies of text).

Does anybody have any experience with EOLSS? Or any reliable sources that give it legitimacy for academic citations?

It appears to be a completely earnest and legitimate effort, and I at least recognize a few names that appear to be involved. It also appears to be pretty old in Internet Time, dating from around 2002.  This makes me think that it's basically an idealistic but largely abandoned project, which would certainly account for its design.  It's also huge and almost certainly poorly curated, which means that there's no reason to think its quality will be uniform.

As such, I would recommend against using leaning on it strongly for any assertion, just because it's hard to tell what you've really got ahold of when you're reading it.  If you find something in it useful, look for the other review papers that the authors will likely have written or have cited, and work from there instead; cite it if you found it useful, but make sure that anything important has another source as well.


Is it common that advisor has no idea about what is going on and totally helpless? Before going to graduate school, I had been under the impression that professors were necessarily extremely intelligent.  I had also assumed that professors would tend to be smarter than assistant professors or postdocs.

Now after more than 1 year in my research group, I know that I was very wrong.
My supervisor has no clue to assess student work. They even need help to understand basic calculations, and they cannot help me with questions about papers.

My advisor often fails to understand basic content in my own reports after repeated explanations, becoming angry with me over it.

Questions:

Is this a common situation for PhD students to find themselves in?
What can I do to improve the situation?

No, it is not common.

However, everyone in academia probably will meet someone like your supervisor along the years. Incompetence and unprofessionalism can be found in every corner of society and academia is not an exception.

If you are able, change to another supervisor as soon as possible.


Dyslexia and the GRE I am applying to math graduate schools this year. Hence, I had to take the General GRE and Math Subject GRE. Only recently has it come to my attention that I could have applied for 1.5 or 2 times more time on these tests due to my Dyslexia. I had no idea that was the case so I did not do so. Therefore I missed out on a huge opportunity to increase my scores. Is there any way I can salvage this situation? Somehow alert admissions that I have trouble working under big time constraints and reading fast and that I did not utilize the accommodations?  It never occurred to me to apply for accommodation as time was never a problem in college.

In case it is relevant:

Math subject 72 procentile

Quant 165

Verbal 155

I was considering mentioning it in my personal statement, or something like that.

Any advice appreciated, I feel like that was a horrible blunder on my part that could have cost me getting into a great school.

Thank you

Your best option is to retake the GRE under fairer conditions. If you have already sent out the current scores, you can also update your application to mention the conditions under which you took the test the first time. Currently, however, if you have taken the test multiple times, as many do, you can decide which scores are to be sent.

But somewhere in your application materials I suspect that you also address your dyslexia and talk about why it isn't a hinderance to your success.

I'll note, as I have in answers to other questions, that admissions is almost never just a numbers game and individuals are examined for evidence that predicts success in future study. Some places that are overwhelmed with applications may need to reduce the number of applicants considered to a reasonable number, but normally, you need to present an application that shows both the background and the work ethic to succeed.

If you have any negative markers in your application then they need to be explained. Hopefully, the system is sensible enough that you can amend an application that requires it. But if you haven't yet applied, make sure that your materials honestly explain things that might be questioned.


Fate of publications under review after accepting a tenure-track offer "A", an independent researcher, has accepted a tenure-track offer* and will be starting in few months from now. "A" also has few manuscripts that are currently under review in high impact journals. Say that 1-2 manuscripts are accepted before "A" joins his/her new institution, will it be ethical/possible for "A" to contact the editors to ask them to delay publishing his/her accepted manuscript(s) to a later issue to when "A" joins his/her new institution? The rationale is that this new work won't be counted toward his/her tenure if it is to be published before he/she joins the new institution.

*This scenario is for an R1 school in the US.

Please note that "A" has discussed this issue with his/her new Dept. Chair as well as a senior mentor who serve at T&P committee (at a different school) and both advised to contact the editors for this manner.

I do not think it is either ethical or wise to try to delay the publications, anyone looking at the researcher will be equally impressed by a paper regardless of the address on it when it was published.


Can the book "Turning Learning Right Side Up: Putting Education Back on Track" be understood without any prior reading? I want to read the book Turning Learning Right Side Up: Putting Education Back on Track only if I would be able to understand it without first doing more than about a few books worth of other reading I have not yet done. My first question is

  Would almost everyone who got a high school diploma in Canada be able to understand that book even if they never took any more education after that or read any books they didn't have to read in school?

If the answer is no, then I have another question

  Would almost everyone who got a high school diploma in Canada be able to understand that book after reading only a few other books even if they never took any more education after that or read any books they didn't have to read in school?

If the answer to that is yes, then I have another question

  What books do they need to read in order to be able to understand that book?

After reading this answer, I think there's a real possibility that the answers to the first and second question are both no and in order to understand that book, I might first have to read so many research results that it takes years to read them. It's also possible that the answer to the first question is yes. It's possible that the author of the book did a really great job of summarizing the research results in a way that people can understand without first having read them.

If the answer to the first or the second question is yes, then I want to read that book because I might think of useful ideas for the world based on it. If that's not the case, I prefer to use my time to read other books that I can understand and have a chance of thinking of useful ideas based on.

Would almost everyone who got a high school diploma in Canada be able to understand that book.

We don't comment on specific books or specific individuals. But, there is an easy way to answer this yourself -- go to the Amazon page, click on "Look inside" and then "Surprise me!" Read a few random paragraphs and see if it makes sense.

  even if they never took any more education after that or read any books they didn't have to read in school?...I want to read that book because I might think of useful ideas for the world based on it

I don't mean to be condescending, but reading one book will not make you an authority who can develop "useful ideas for the world," even granted that you are smart and have some relevant life experience. There are education professors who have spent their lives thinking about how to improve the educational system, and even they rarely see their ideas accepted and implemented.


Why is Paper Publishing and getting a patent completely unrelated? I know that not all, but many papers (that are accepted and published) are based on ideas that can be patented as well. So, why is that there is no system in which a person can apply for a Publishing a Paper and also getting the Idea patented at the same time?

Is it possible that I publish a paper, do not get it patented (going to patent it at a later point of time - because of not having sufficient money to pay for the patent application or whatever) and during that time someone else patents my work in his name? Or Someone else picks up my theory, develops it further and gets a patent? How would the situation be then? What should I do under such a situation?

not all, but many papers (that are accepted and published) are based on ideas that can be patented as well

This is a misconception.  Even in engineering, only a small minority of papers contain ideas worth patenting.  The further you get from engineering, the smaller this fraction gets.

  So, why is that there is no system in which a person can apply for a publishing a paper and also getting the idea patented at the same time?

You can indeed do both things in parallel, but not via the same process.  Publishing a paper is an academic process, whereas filing a patent application is a legal process, and the two things just don't overlap very much.

It's kind of like asking why you can't write your dissertation and apply for jobs via the same process.  You can certainly work on both at the same time, and there is a relationship between them, but fundamentally they aren't the same thing.

  Is it possible that I publish a paper, do not get it patented and during that time someone else patents my work in his name?

No, it's not possible.  Well, technically someone could try, but they would be wasting their time, since your paper would serve as "prior art" that would invalidate the patent.

  Or someone else picks up my theory, develops it further and gets a patent?

That could happen, whether or not you file for a patent.  They would own the intellectual property rights to the extension of your work, but not to your work itself.


How long does it take to get a reply to your PhD application email in Germany? I am applying for PhD positions in Germany. Normally I need to send an email to the professors with a list of references, grades transcript, CV, master's thesis, etc. I want to know how long after sending my email should I assume that I am not getting the position?

Thanks

Usually, in Germany you get an answer even if it says that you don't get the position. I wouldn't worry if it takes a few weeks which (depending on the institute) can be absolutely normal. You also have to consider that there maybe is a deadline (in German often: Bewerbungsschluss). Normally you get notice a few weeks after that.

It is also absolutely acceptable to write a mail asking for the status of the application (after a few weeks). You also have to consider that currently there are semester breaks in Germany so the professor can be on vacation not reading any mails.


If a paper has co-first authors, is the next author after the first authors considered the second author? I've already read this question in this arena, but I couldn't find an answer.

The question is: if someone obtains first co-authorship, does the "third" author gain "second authorship"?

In this case, first authorship is being used for some sort of competitive ranking.  As such, if there are two first authors, then in the typical custom of competitive ranking there is no second author: the next author is the third author.

If this is being defined and used for a specific purpose by a specific institution, however, it is possible that institution has its own interpretation of rankings, which can only be determined by consulting the appropriate people or documentation at that institution.


What are some options to do over the summer that will help me in grad school? I'm currently finishing up my second year of undergraduate studies and overall I've gotten some pretty average to good grades. Over the summer, I would like to focus a little bit on myself and my health, but I'm worried not using my time to work on some academia would be detrimental when I want to apply to grad school.

What is something I could do that would still leave me with a lot of time to focus on myself?

If you want to do something that will help you get into and succeed in graduate school, I strongly recommend looking for a summer research project with a professor.  Many professors hire students over the summer to work on projects with them, and some institutions even provide internal "student research" support that makes it particularly easy for any professor to do so.

There are many advantages of doing such a project, including:

Getting a taste of research in general and also in a particular area, to see if you really like it
Summer projects let you focus on research in a way that term-time projects do not, yet can still be confined to 9-5 hours.
You will have an opportunity to learn a lot of research-specific skills.
You will get to exercise things you learned in your classes, which may significantly improve both your knowledge and your motivation to learn, since you will tangle with the realities of applying this knowledge, and may improve your future grades.
You will be able to talk about research experience and may be able to get a good recommendation letter from the professor you work with, both of which are extremely valuable for grad school applications.

Now, if you prefer to do other things, self-care, etc., there's no reason that you have to do such a project.  It can, however, be a lovely experience, and if you're choosing between working a research job and working a non-research job, I highly recommend making the research choice!


How do I orient myself to the literature concerning a research topic and not be overwhelmed? I'm in my first semester at a Master's level program in mental health counseling, and I have aspirations of perhaps eventually getting my PhD. I'm presently working on a project for a class about PTSD and after about a day of digging, I found a plethora of theoretical models; some of which are older, some of which are newer and have been built off of previous ones. Traumatology is a much larger and more developed field than I had initially thought, and there are numerous complicating issues, one example being the interaction and overlap with dissociative features/disorders and developmental pathways and models.
I'm starting to get overwhelmed by all the connections I'm seeing and all the articles and books I want/have to read in order to do a half way decent job, and it doesn't help that I'm on a time crunch.
I have had this experience in my undergrad a bit, but managed to scrape by with a research paper that didn't end up amounting to much. I was not satisfied with that outcome, and don't want to repeat that in any of my Master's level courses, but I find myself uncertain of what effective research even looks like or what to expect from myself.
I have 3 questions, the first two are iterations of the same question.

How could I orient myself in the literature of any given field without "getting lost" when pursuing a research project, an overview, or even just a rudimentary understanding as the basis for a question in a different field that has some interactions or influences with the one I am investigating?

For instance, perhaps I decide in my PhD to develop a project on topic x and want to include perspectives from fields y and z, which I have a good foundation for but am not intimately familiar with the literature or theoretical models of the fields themselves.

How do I know when I'm trying too hard to understand/give an account for a phenomenon that is not immediately and directly relevant to the topic of my paper?

For instance, if I'm really interested in doing a paper about the relationship between some particular feature of the interactions between pathology A and B,  but I get caught in the weeds in trying to understand/explain to the reader competing behavioral models for understanding A and contrasting the cognitive and behavioral models for B.

How do you deal with feeling overwhelmed when doing research?

Start with well-written review papers. These are designed to do exactly what you ask: to orient a reader to the state of knowledge in some field. If you are working on something multidisciplinary you may need a separate orientation for each discipline if there isn't a good review that already makes the connection for you.
Then, once you are oriented, you can start to dig. Try to discipline yourself towards pursuing a specific goal in your literature search. When you find offshoots, label them as future places to dig but don't start excavating them quite yet.
Other than that, try to stay organized. Organize your thoughts by writing down what you are learning, make concept maps if they help you, or start organizing references into nested bulleted lists. Be open to reorganizing as things develop.

I want to add an addendum concerning your specific field of research. Published science in biology and medicine, and even more so in areas related to mental health/psychiatry/counseling, may contain a lot of conflicting information. These fields deal with some of the most complex systems humans know of, and our core knowledgebase is extremely lacking. If you're used to reading textbook descriptions of "how things are", the actual academic literature is by comparison extraordinarily muddy (this is true of all fields, no doubt, but I think especially the ones I've mentioned). It may help to know to accept this, and to not treat any one paper as Truth. There are competing models and competing hypotheses and competing approaches to treatment because none have yet "won".
Adding  from a comment: if you are wondering how to find review papers...
There are some journals that only contain reviews. Some of these are good journals (and since reviews tend to get cited a lot, you can often discover them by their very high impact factors), some are not (these will tend not to be cited much). Some indexes, like PubMed, allow you to filter for only reviews (I don't know how accurate these filters are). Otherwise, adding "review" to a search string will help. You won't get all reviews, but many of the top results will be.


Does the NSF support researchers with no academic affiliation? It seems that NSF only supports researchers affiliated with academic institutions. For instance, if a researcher is in the industry, is there a chance to get funding from NSF for a pure academic research?

Let's say the researcher's employer is not a scientific/research establishment, maybe it's a manufacturing plant, and the researcher's interest has nothing to do with his/her daily job.

Another answer quotes the Grant Proposal Guide, which is of course the essential resource.

The NSF does solicit proposals (like other agencies) for the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program.

But I'd also say that whenever you have questions about NSF funding for a research idea, I'd figure out an appropriate program officer and send them an e-mail. For example, I'm in chemistry, so I go to the NSF chemistry website and guess an appropriate sub-program.

In general, I send an e-mail saying something like:

  Hi, I have a research idea that I think might fit in your program but I have some questions. Would there be a good time to talk this week? [etc.]

Sometimes I'll even get a call back promptly from the program officer, or a polite message that program X might be a better fit, etc.

In all cases, the NSF program officers want to fund the best research they can, so they are very helpful at suggesting appropriate approaches (e.g., if it's possible for them to fund your idea).


How do universities deal with loss in productivity post tenure? A tenure from a good university is generally considered to be the pinnacle of academic achievements. It is packed with so many benefits that it is easy to lose direction in one's research career post tenure.

In the event that such a thing happens, i.e., if a professor loses interest in research after obtaining a tenure (due to health, family or whatever), what steps do universities take?
Is there any procedure built into the functioning of universities that helps them minimise productivity loss post tenure?
Are there incentives which universities (could) offer struggling professors?

The cynical answer is "nothing". But in truth there are other ways to monitor progress and dole out rewards/lack of reward.

If your productivity drops off a cliff after tenure, you're unlikely to get promoted to full professor (US-specific), and get the associated salary increases etc. You may be comfortable with this (less service is a good thing!)
Some universities do 5-yearly post-tenure review. Doing poorly on such reviews can lead to loss of raises, reduced access to new space and facilities, increased service load (if you're not pulling in funding or teaching well for example), and so on.

but ultimately, the final incentive is your own desire to perform. It's very hard to fire faculty. But administrators can try to kill entire departments.


Hired as a research assistant and told to track working hours for payment, is this normal? I have been given a great opportunity to work as a research assistant. I will be working under this researcher (and her team) for about 5 months. I was only suppose to start in mid-January. But she said she would like to hire me as a research assistant for the next few weeks (full-time). She said she will be paying me (and the rate /hr is surprisingly high). Come mid-January (when I was suppose to start) I will not be allowed to be payed for my work (school rules).

Anyways, this work can be done anywhere (I do not need to be in a specific location to do it). Thus, she told me to track all of my hours and then send her a bill in January. I guess, sort of like what contractors do. I have never had a paid job before, let alone a research position. I am wondering, is this usual?

I could potentially earn 2 000 dollars over the next couple weeks. However, I feel like this is too much money. I feel as though I should understate the hours I worked. However, at the same time if I did that she would know I didn't work "full-time". This is all new to me so it would be great if someone with experience can make sense of this for me.

From my experience doing research assistant work at a state university in the US, and from speaking with peers in both "hard" and "human" sciences this is par for the course. A tiny bit of paperwork (a signature or two), and away you go. Though I'm assuming by "she will be paying me" it will be through the university rather than out of her own pocket.

Do the work (well), do not understate your hours, and enjoy the paycheck when it arrives. I can almost guarantee the researcher is concerned about getting things accomplished in a timely manner, and that the cost of your time is minimal compared to theirs and the other costs associated with the research.


Why are small fonts the norm in research papers? Is it just me or are the published articles a strain on the eyes in general? Has there been(/shouldn't there be) a study on optimal font sizes for reading?

This is a historical anachronism. The fonts are chosen for the print version of the journal.  For a print version, if you use a smaller font, you can squeeze more text onto the same page and print the same paper on fewer pages -- which saves money.  So, for print publications, the small font size arguably makes sense.  However, today print is less important and the digital format is more important, but journal requirements haven't caught up to this fact.

For instance, in computer science, the ACM is a notorious offender: they require papers to use 9pt fonts, which are very small.


How to not let paper rejection affect you? At times I am really frustrated with constant rejections when the papers just fail to make it to acceptance. And if this keeps happening for quite some time, especially when your peers are moving on, how do you deal with it? I am working, trying to address the reviews but somehow at some point, it is getting too much for me.

It is next to impossible not to be affected emotionally by a rejection of a paper. You put in a lot of time, effort and hard work, so it is a perfectly natural reaction to have a short term issue with motivation. There is no need to suppress this, and it will include quite a bit of frustration if rejections keep happening.
One of the more important things when it comes to publishing is that you are convinced of and positive about your own work and you may have to regain this after a rejection, so that the short term effects do not turn into long term problems. This might be hard to achieve when fighting all by yourself. Everybody needs some positive feedback from time to time. So talking to other people like your advisor or your peers and asking for their feedback will help because if you keep learning from the discussions, your work and your confidence in it will improve.
Of course there is also the possibility that you are working on a dead end with a particular paper. After having overcome the initial emotional response, you should be able to figure out if this is the case, maybe with the help of others. Then it is best to move on and concentratre on other projects with a better chance of succeeding. There is no happiness in working in a dead end. It is impossible from the distance to tell if this is true in your case.


Should I write a peer-review in third person? While it is generally accepted to write papers using the collective we, what is a common practice for writing peer-reviews: I, this reviewer, or something else?
For example,

This reviewer has a minor concern with how pink elephants are defined in this paper. It would have been helpful if authors defined an elephant first, and then added the color pink.

I have a minor concern with how pink elephants are described in this paper. My recommendation is to define an elephant first, and then add the color pink.

I recommend the first person.  Like most good linguistic constructions, the reader passes over it without explicitly noticing it, whereas your first construction with "this reviewer" holds up the entire mental process for a split second.
The idea of using the third person to "soften" the criticism: well, Paul Garrett knows how much I esteem him, and we usually see eye-to-eye on things.  But this time I simply disagree.  The reviewer is empowered -- nay, enjoined -- to supply an opinion on the work.  If you want to shade your opinion, explain very carefully and explicitly why you are doing that.  Switching to the third person should not convey that you are less sure of yourself, and it does not convey that to my ear.
[Imagine my answer began with "This academic".  Wouldn't that have been more distracting?]


Where I can publish my bachelor thesis? Currently, I'm doing my bachelor's in science. I wanted to write a bachelor thesis so I tried contacting many professors so that I can get some projects and can write my bachelor thesis but most of them were busy or better to say all of them were busy. So I decided to do a project by myself and to write a paper (a bachelor thesis). But What should I have to do with it?
Where I can publish it so that in the future I can have proof?

Edit:
I'm a physics honors student currently in my last year of the degree. I understood that research work and writing a bachelor's thesis are two different things. I have read this post. And  I don't have any research work as I have not come too far in the subject. But I have some things in my mind like writing a new solution to Brachistochrone problem or some geometrical proof for some theorems that I want to be in some official paper as my bachelor's work.
I contacted many professors from my department as well as some other universities but I got no response from them apart from saying that they don't have time or something of the sort. I haven't contacted Ph.D. scholars as I don't how to contact them (How I can access their information from the site?)  But I will try to contact them. Any of the students don't have a personal tutor or anything. And I haven't written the paper under their supervision so do they give really mention it?
I actually tried it posting on arXiv but they too need some endorsement approval or something of the sort. So I ask some professor showing my work and asking to approve it but He said,

Dear student
?It is better to publish it in a journal rather than sending it to arXiv.

I don't understand what's the difference and I don't know How to do what He said.

There are many assumptions bundled up in your question which I think need to be addressed.
Firstly, a bachelor's thesis and a research paper in physics are very different, in almost every aspect (content, length, aim, purpose, style etc). It is perfectly possible to write a bachelor's thesis on a topic and then rewrite part of it as a paper that you then submit to a journal for peer review and publication, and it is also possible to incorporate the findings of a published paper in a bachelor's thesis. However, I do not know of any journal (in physics at least) that would simply publish a bachelor's thesis as it is.
Secondly, it is extremely rare for a bachelor's thesis to contain actual novel research. In some countries, it's rare for a Master's thesis to contain novel research. The main purpose of a bachelor's thesis is to give the student a chance to develop their literature review and writing skills. Typically you would write about the history of a certain topic in physics, and perhaps discuss some recent findings or developments. In my bachelor's thesis, I wrote about Noether's theorem, describing its history, showing a couple of basic proofs and talking about how the theorem can be applied to orbital mechanics. Obviously I am not Emmy Noether; none of this was my own original research.
Thirdly, I expect you will find it extremely difficult to progress without supervision. You mentioned that you have contacted various professors. Are they all at your university? Have you tried contacting professors at other universities to see if they would supervise you remotely? And have you considered contacting PhD students or postdocs instead of professors? They may have more time to devote to you and could possibly provide more hands-on supervision.
If you do write a thesis but your university does not offer it as an official part of your degree (i.e. it will not appear on your transcript in any way), then the best "proof" that I can think of would be to show the finished thesis to whichever of your professors you are closest to (do you have a personal tutor or equivalent?) and ask them to mention it when they write reference letters for you. That way you have their word as well as your own that it is your work.
Alternatively you could consider posting it on your own website, or putting it on arXiv as a preprint. I would think carefully about the latter option, however, as you cannot delete things from arXiv and, as your personal standards improve and you move on to more in-depth research, you may not want your bachelor's thesis to remain public five, ten or twenty years down the line.
Edited to address the new details provided:
It sounds like you have some ideas for a research paper and you want to publish it when you have finished it. Your professor told you that it's better to publish your paper in a journal rather than on arXiv, which is true. ArXiv is a preprint server and does not provide peer review, unlike a journal.
Submitting your paper for publication is fairly easy. Firstly you need to identify an appropriate journal for your submission. I'd suggest asking your professor for advice on this, but it sounds like they are not the most helpful. A good way to decide on a journal is to look at the papers you cite in your paper and the journals those are published in.
Be aware that journals have different standards for submission and for some journals, it is common to receive a "desk rejection" i.e. your paper is rejected by the editor before going out for peer review, either because the editor thinks your paper does not fit within the topic of that journal, or because it is insufficiently novel or otherwise of low quality.
Once you have identified a suitable journal, navigate to the website of that journal. There will be an obvious link to click called "submit" or something similar. Click that link and follow the instructions given. Then, if you do not receive a desk rejection, you will have to wait (perhaps a month or two) to get the referee report. You may have to make corrections or alterations to your paper based on the referee report. If you do that satisfactorily, your paper will be accepted and published in the journal.
In physics, it is typical to upload a copy of your paper to arXiv. In my subfield, it's common to post to arXiv, wait a couple of days for the inevitable "you didn't cite me" emails, then submit to the journal. Once the paper has been published, you can then update the version on arXiv. You can check the arXiv help page for information on how to get endorsed: https://arxiv.org/help/endorsement.


Advisor professor asks for my dissertation research source code I am a PhD student and I wrote a computer program for my dissertation research. Recently my advisor professor got a grant and she wants to use my computer program in her grant and she asks me for the computer source-code. I will graduate next May and I am planning to use this program in my other studies. So I am not willing to share the code with her. She didn't mention future cooperation and I will also not cooperate with her because of huge differences in our research interests and perspectives.

So how can I refuse her properly?

Note: I was not a RA for her when I wrote the computer program, but this semester she got a grant and she set me as RA.

One of the reasons Science has been so successful is that scientists treat knowledge and tools as public goods. We don't hoard knowledge, but rather we write papers, share techniques, offer suggestions, etc. There are certainly cases in which sharing isn't beneficial, but these seem not to apply here. So of course you should share your computer program! You should share it with people you like, people you don't like, and people you don't even know.


Supervisor asking me to list a co-author who has literally done nothing I am in the final stages of writing a paper to submit at an IEEE conference. I am the primary author, in the sense that I did most of the work and most of the writing. I have three other co-authors who have contributed a significant amount of advice and proofreading (one of whom is my supervisor).

Last week, my supervisor told me I should add person X as a co-author (in addition to myself and my three existing co-authors). I have never met X and they have contributed absolutely nothing. It's not even clear if X has looked at the work we have done!

My response was as follows: "Fine, if X at least looks at section Y to make sure it has no errors, I'll put them as the last author." This has not yet happened, with less than a week to go before the deadline. My supervisor is still insisting that I add X as an author.

What should I do in this circumstance?

Based on what you have said, this seems to be a clear ethical violation.
I would send an email to your supervisor asking him/her if X has had a chance to look at section Y. This will force them to either state yes or no as to if X participated. Play dumb if you have to.

Hi [Supervisor]
Has X had a chance to look at section Y in the project? As I remember, we discussed adding X as an author as long as X verified the results of section Y. I just want to be sure that I get the right authorship on this paper.
Thanks, Mahkoe

Getting written directions from your supervisor on this will document any unethical behavior that he/she is suggesting you participate in. Your supervisor will have to either directly tell you to add X even though they have not contributed to the paper, or they will be leveraged into conceding that X does not deserve authorship and should not be added.
If your supervisor still insists that X be given credit in spite of doing nothing, you have a few options:

You can seek out the advice of your department chair or graduate coordinator.
You can refuse to put X in as an author and make your supervisor mad with you.
You can comply with your supervisor and chalk it up to yet another predatory, manipulative adviser taking advantage of students.

You decision here depends significantly on how receptive your department is to students and how much you are willing to risk losing if your supervisor tries to retaliate. I am understanding of the fact that you may or may not really have the leverage to directly turn your supervisor down on his/her demands. Such is the life of a student in academia. A small number of professors know you have no clout and routinely take advantage of students in these situations. And sometimes, it is better for your own sanity and career to let X and your supervisor commit ethical violations and publish your paper without further grief.


Am I allowed to use a figure drawn by co-author in another paper? I published paper 1 with a co-author A, who drew a very good illustrative figure in the introduction.

I want to submit paper 2 which addresses the same problem (but uses a completely different approach), so the introduction of the problem is pretty much the same. Do I need to ask A for permission to include the figure in paper 2?

I was at the "receiving end" of such a case once. One of my collaborators has used a figure I have drawn for another paper that I was not a co-author of without asking me first. I did not consider this intellectual dishonesty (the figure was neither particularly brilliant nor a lot of work), but I do admit that it stung a little bit to see my own work (however tiny this "work" was) being used without telling. If the collaborator had just dropped a brief email before, I would have certainly not minded.

Bottom line:

  Do I need to ask A for permission to include the figure in paper 2?

Strictly speaking probably not, but you really should tell A.