How should a job title be translated? When you introduce yourself to an international audience and come from an non-US system, there always is an awkward moment of translating your job title into a form recognizable by the people you introduce yourself to. Here are the options I see:

using the title in your native language: completely honest, but probably not understandable by anyone who does not know the system
replacing it by the closest US title: complete localization, completely understandable, but some nuance in the function might be lost
translating in a literal way: something in-between

I'll give a specific example here (from my own system, the French one). CNRS is a research-performing organization, in which permanent researchers hold the title of chargé de recherche (junior staff) or directeur de recherche (senior staff). I usually see these titles translated into “research scientist” and “research director”, but I those terms aren’t really self-explanatory. In particular, I don't think it's clear from “research scientist” that this is a permanent position, because that term could also be used in other places for post-docs.

There's no single right answer here. You should provide the information that you think is most salient in the given situation. In your case, you probably want to say something like "tenured research scientist" or "staff scientist," as those terms normally give the idea of permanence in a way that "research scientist" or "research associate" might not.

If you are writing a CV in English, on the other hand, you could write "Junior research staff (permanent position)," as that gets your title more accurately. In this circumstance, it's probably better to go with a literal translation (or as Federico Poloni suggests in a comment below, the job title in the original language) plus explanation, rather than try to find the "closest equivalent."


How to talk to an intimidating professor? I'm studying for a postgraduate degree and my courses with a certain professor will start in some time. I have been meaning to speak to him since a very long time but I'm scared to go over to his office. I want to develop off-class relations as well for multiple purposes - opportunity to have good relations with a well-established professor, have access to his way of thinking by speaking to him and last but not the least, I do want a recommendation letter from him as well in a few months. I have no idea how to approach him, introduce myself or begin talking about a topic for a conversation.

More importantly, I don't want to sound like I'm posturing or faking interest. So, how do I begin?

This is coming from someone who worked and still works with the most intimidating professor in our lab. This professor was my teacher when I was a bachelor student and he was also my supervisor project for my Master degree (And that's when I developed my fear). Now he is one of my co-supervisors for my PhD. I never approached him until this year (5 years to overcome my fear). So all this just to tell you that "I know :)".

The year I approached him, I discovered the following information (and the mistakes I made):

The professor was just professional: strict when it comes to deadlines and assignments, meetings were heavy and only work-oriented (a lot of information, a lot of tasks to do). This was stressful to a lot of students.
The professor is seriously passionate, so he takes everything to the next level. You really should arrive to class punctually, no small talks, stay focused. You break the rules, you leave.
I kept hearing past stories, or bad experiences, from other students and let those experiences affect our professor-student relationship.
And mostly, I missed many opportunities by not taking the first step in the past.
I made the mistake of mixing "How he does his job" with "Who he is".

So here is the only answer I have to your question: Just do it, I am sure that this intimidation is just in your head. I even noticed that I can easily start these off-class relations with other professors, but never with him. So here is something I would do:

I will schedule a meeting by sending an email (my professor was the Head Of our Lab, he is always busy). I will say that I need a recommendation letter for example.
During the meeting, introduce yourself and why you need the recommendation letter and try to start a conversation from there. Tell him your future plans, and ask for his opinion. He is your professor after all, his job is to guide you :).
During class, be active and always be interested. You can not earn his respect if he does not see how passionate you are.
Always take the first step. And if doesn't go your way, it's okay. As Buffy said, take it easy, you have a lot of time and "several opportunities to reinforce any interest"

Good luck.


Are MOOCs a good way to show grad schools that I've gained proficiency in a field which is not my major? I'm an undergraduate computer science major with a specialization in networks and communication looking at a masters in molecular genetics. In addition to a GRE biochemistry and molecular biology subject test score, I'm interested in MOOCs to enhance my resume.

There are several issues with MOOCs, all of which make them a poor substitute for actual classes for admissions.

Poor penetration. There is more widespread knowledge of them than a couple years ago, but they are still fairly unknown. Chances are high at at least someone reading your application won't know about or understand them.
No grades. Few MOOCs offer anything more than a certificate of completion, and many don't even offer that. Even if they offered grades, verification of identity is a problem.
Wildly varying quality. College classes are generally of a certain quality/difficulty, and knowledge of the quality/difficulty levels for certain field-specific classes across schools is something that application committees will use to judge candidates against each other. MOOCs are much more of an unknown.


Is it fine to change th order of authors in Arxiv? We have a paper on arxiv. For some reasons, we need to change the order of the authors. The first can be second. Is it fine ? or should we delete the paper on Arxiv and post it again with new names and authors.

Modifying an arXiv preprint is done with the "Replace" feature, and this allows you to make arbitrary changes to the Author metadata field.

There is no need to delete the paper, and trying to do so would likely cause more problems.  (You cannot actually delete an arXiv paper, you can only "withdraw" it, and trying to upload a preprint which is substantially identical to a withdrawn paper may be rejected due to excessive overlap.)

Just make sure that you also change the author order in the paper itself and upload new tex/pdf files, otherwise people will be confused.  And, of course, all of the authors must have consented to the new ordering.


Requesting a trained Neural Network model from an author? A bit of background: I am working in a R&D department of quite a big name in the IT industry, and we are trying, clashing and combining different ideas and cutting-edge inventions to tackle our engineering problem.

Now the problem itself: There is an excellent paper from CVPR 2017 that I want to try for my project. However, the authors did not publish nor their code, nor their trained FCNN (Fully-Convolutional Neural Network). Now, the project that I am working on is only on the infancy stage, meaning that we need to make some Proof-of-Concept product as soon as possible. Obviously, for this stage, training a deep CNN is a relatively very time-consuming and expensive process, so ideally I would want to ask the authors for the trained model of their FCNN. Of course, if the concept works, we will re-train and fine-tune the whole thing for our specific task, so the author's CNN will not end up in the final product.

Question: How to correctly ask the authors for it? Or is it correct to ask researchers for their results for a project at all?

Just write them a friendly e-mail and include the information you provided here. If they want to share their model, they will, if not, asking didn´t hurt.

Two additional points:

Be sure to acknowledge their work when you use it and let them know that you will.
Maybe you can offer a collaboration on the work. If their model is usefull to you I guess their knowlegde and know-how in general is. Collaborations with and (co-)funding from industry partners are very valuable for research groups.


What level would an assistant professor be hired at, if applying to associate professor position at another institution? If a tenure-track Assistant Professor who will be coming up for tenure shortly (5th year) applies for a tenure-track Associate Professor position at another institution, and the other institution is interested in making the hire, what is the relative likelihood of the following scenarios:

hired as tenure-track Assistant Professor with shortened tenure clock
hired as tenure-track Associate Professor without tenure, with tenure decision in a few years
hired as tenure-track Associate Professor with tenure

(assuming the candidate's record is tenure-worthy at either institution).

Based on what I've heard and seen, most schools fall into the second pattern, with the first and third happening much less frequently. However, I've known all three possibilities to occur. Ultimately, there is no "most likely" or "least likely" option, as it really depends on the rules for tenure promotions at the individual school at which the applicant is being hired.


Should I tell my professor that I may need surgery in the middle of the semester? I am an undergrad in the second year of a 2-year transfer program at a community college. I am retaking a class that I was forced to drop a couple of semesters ago due to family issues. The instructor is the senior guy in the department for my major, and I will be taking another course with him (both are 4 credits), requiring lab work.

The trouble is, I have known for a few months that I will need surgery. I'm on medications that are working, but the side effects in the strategic term are disastrous. The surgery will leave me bedridden for 3 days to 3 weeks.I am assuming at this point that I will have at least some flexibility in scheduling the surgery. I thought I could get it done over summer break, but that's next to impossible at this point.

So far as I can tell, these are my options;

Tell the instructor immediately (via email) or the first day of class.
Tell the instructor once I have any clarity regarding scheduling, in the hope that I can get it done over winter break.

Since this is a specialist in my major, who can help me with career guidance, references, and hands-on skills, I really want to make the best possible impression. His opinion of me is even more important as I expect to transfer next semester and would like to get As for both courses.

Unfortunately, in addition to making me unable to finish the semester with him, the aforementioned family issues resulted in an anxiety diagnosis which required special testing arrangements. He was not super happy with that. So, on the one hand, I need this surgery as soon as possible. On the other hand, I want to avoid the perception that I am unable to handle a heavy workload for any reason. How/when should I tell him about this, if at all?

Short answer: Tell him now.

Longer answer:
As pointed out in the comments, go find the office dealing with such questions and contact them. You don't need to resort to legal rights immediately, just tell them your story and get some advice on how to proceed. They might also know things you didn't consider yet, e.g. some regulations on how much of a class you are allowed to miss, what sort of medical certificate is needed, etc.

After you cleared all questions with them, tell your instructor that you have a pressing medical issue that will force you to miss up to three weeks of class. Do that in person if possible, not via email. Ask him how to handle this and show him that you are still interested in his class and willing to take it, e.g. ask him if it is possible to get the lecture notes for these weeks and hand in the homework via email. Of course this depends on how you define "bedridden", so if you will be on heavy meds and unable to do anything, or if you will be sitting in your bed, fully alert and able to work on a laptop, but not able to stand up. I don't know what condition you have and I understand that this is private, but you should think about a plan on how to make up for the missed classes and present this plan in the discussion with the professor. This will show him that you are motivated and willing to take the class and is far easier to accept than you being gone for a few weeks and some legal office forcing him to still let you pass.
Also try to point out that you have some flexibility on when to schedule the operation and ask him for his opinion. Make clear that you can't say an exact date, but ask him if he prefers this month or that month, for example. All in all, talk to him, be frank and show motivation to make up for the missed time and you should be ok.

The above advice might also help with him not being pleased with your anxiety. It is hard for a non-professional to distinguish between anxiety and stress/fear of exams. Furthermore, some students simply say "I have anxiety", even if they are just a little stressed at the moment. Show the professor that you are still motivated for his class, that you are not trying to use your anxiety as an excuse for anything, that you are doing your best even though you have several medical conditions and he will most likely not worry about it anymore.


Should I include a grad student who only duplicated my calculations as an author on an article? I recently received a request from another researcher in my area, who is guest editing a volume of a mid-level physics journal.  He wanted me to submit an article for the special issue dealing with our research area.  I agreed to submit something by the end of the summer.  I told him that I would produce an article about my current research, providing a careful conceptual discussion of some previously published work, as well as some recent (but not particularly exciting) advancements that have not previously been published.  The number of researchers in this area is not especially large, and acceptance of my article is a virtual certainty.

At about the same time as I got the invitation, I had a graduate student come to me, wanting to do research.  He started working with me on the same topic that I will cover in my (mostly review) article.  This student is, as another professor put it, "not as bright as he thinks he is."  He is qualified to get a Ph.D., but it is very unlikely that he will have a career in academia.  He has been doing calculations for me, but so far, he is only duplicating results that I have already completed myself.  (I hope that, by the fall, he will be able to start producing new results.)

My question is:  Does it make sense to include him as an author on the paper I am going to submit at the end of September?  He should have completed some calculations by then that have not previously been published.  However, all those calculations will be duplications of things that I have already done myself.  I could write the paper without his input at all, which suggests against making him an author.  On the other hand, he is exerting significant effort checking my own calculations, and if I had not done all the calculations before, he would be making a minor but meaningful contribution to the paper.  The student knows that he is, thus far, only duplicating my previous work, so I don't think he has any expectation of being included as an author on any publications including it.  However, I admit that I feel uneasy setting a student to re-do my own unpublished work, with the intention of publishing it without adding him as a co-author.

This specific publication is unlikely to make a real difference for either of us, professionally.  I have more than enough publications in top journals to be promoted to the next level, and, as I said, this student is extremely unlikely to have a long-term career in academia.  So, in the absence of any compelling outside pressure one way of the other, I am wondering whether I should include my student as a author on this upcoming publication.

There does not seem to be much arguments pro or against including him.

But when in doubt, it's probably better to include the student them not.

I've been in that situation myself and I've decided to include the student. The arguments I used to convince myself to include him were as follows:

I could not really find any argument against including him;
If I include him, he would be much more motivated in future works with me; whereas if I don't, he may get a little frustrated when he realizes that I published a paper exactly on the topic we were discussing without inviting him;
It looks good to whoever is looking at your interaction with students (graduate committee, department, etc) that you are publishing with them;
As the student should be learning to write his own papers, it's probably good that he starts doing this on a paper where he is not the main author.

So for me it was a win-win situation.

Of course, by include him I mean that you should invite him and have him help in writing the paper.


Proper resignation date based on relocation date for spouse I'm an assistant professor at a large public University, and I'm planning to make the move into industry for a variety of reasons.

My spouse is also an academic and has accepted a position in a different city 7 months before the position starts. Because I was planning to leave for industry anyway, I am making the move with my spouse and will begin a job search when I move to the new city.

My question is about a proper resignation date - it's February and I already know that I'm leaving but it seems very early to let the administration know. I am also supposed to be teaching a summer class that begins in May, so they'll need to find a replacement for me to teach that. I'm not sure what to do etiquette-wise; If I resign now I give them approximately 10 weeks to find a replacement for my summer course and all of my courses in the fall, but I'll need to deal with the inevitable peer negativity and rumor mill that'll spring up.

While it feels too early to give a resignation, I'm tired of fielding questions about the courses I'll be teaching in the future when I already know I won't be around. Any advice is appreciated!

I'll need to deal with the inevitable peer negativity and rumor mill that'll spring up.

You must work in a really bitchy department if you get peer negativity and rumors just for wanting to pursue an alternative career path.  In a well-functioning department, we wish departing staff all the best, and thank them for their service.  In any case,  whether or not you work in a department that is actually that bad, I can't imagine it will be any better if you leave more suddenly, with less notice of your departure.  The longer you leave it, the less time people will have to fill your duties, and the more inconvenience to them.  I'm sure your department head and close colleagues would appreciate as much notice as possible of your departure, and if you want this to remain confidential until you have some "official notice" of leaving, you can always ask them to delay telling the rest of your department.

Academics leave university departments all the time, and in this kind of circumstance, I would not expect any negativity to be directed towards the person leaving, particularly if they have given a substantial amount of notice.  If your notice of departure genuinely causes peer negativity and adverse rumours, that would reflect badly on the department, and it would just confirm what a good decision it is for you to leave.  If you are sure about leaving, my advice would be to give as much notice as possible --- i.e., let your department head know ASAP.


How to cite a phd thesis that was published as a book? What information is important to provide when citing from a PhD thesis that has appeared as book?

The publisher (even if it is a 'dubious' one that might vanish in the near future)
or the institution and that it is a phd thesis.

As for bibtex, I wonder whether I should use the @book or the @phdthesis entry type.

Provide the citation form that you think will be most useful to readers in the middle or long term, or provide both.

If it's self-published, then cite it as you would cite a thesis. On the other hand, if it was published in book form by a respectable publisher (i.e. it will be easy to find 10 years from now), then cite the book. This is commonly done in some fields of humanities.

Citing both is also an option, and it does not have a downside, except it's a bit longer.


Ethics of "recycling" assignments I can't think of a better title, feel free to edit.

I'm retaking a course at university, and the basic assessments are very similar; if I can assume that I'm studying effectively, could there be any issues with modifying my assignments to fit the new criteria, and effectively resubmitting them?

From my perspective, this cannot be collaboration or collusion, but it could be defined as plagiarism, at least by a computer. I don't see why I would have to reference my own work here if it is adapted from previous writings, is it therefore sensible to assume that there will be no complication from an ethical perspective?

I'm also interested in the general concept for academia - would I have to reference my previous writings, and if so, how?

Edit: Let me clarify that this particular case is not a significant assignment, but rather a small "checkpoint".

You need to ask your professor. Opinions about this may vary substantially from instructor to instructor. In additional a lot of can depend on the nature of the assignments (are you writing a paper on a topic of your choice, or proving a theorem that has been assigned to you, for example?).

When writing scholarly papers, you should always cite your own work if it is relevant enough that you would have cited it had it had a different author. Furthermore, if you re-use any figures or substantial amount of text from a previous paper, you need to be careful to indicate this very clearly lest someone complain that you are committing self-plagiarism. (No judgement implied here; my own views on the issue of self-plagiarism are complicated and probably go beyond the scope of the question.)


Another undergrad or a masters degree before PhD? I have a low GPA (2.97) and by the time I graduate this coming Summer I'll have roughly >3.01.

I'm debating whether I should add another major and not graduate in Summer or graduate in Summer and get a masters. The assumption is that I will get a 4.0 in either the added major or the masters.

What is the better choice/what looks more attractive or makes up for my GPA more? My only scar on my CV is my GPA as I excel everywhere else.

Background:

I study computer science and the masters or other undergrad major would be mathematics.
I do research in artificial intelligence and would be focusing on cog sci programs for my PhD.
I want to get into a top school for my PhD.

For clarity:

I'd be adding on a major and would eventually graduate with both CS and math.
My PI has said he'd pay for my remaining undergrad provided I stay in the lab (which is a good thing; he's a top AI researcher at my uni)

Update: I've decided that I'm adding a math major and going to attempt to get a 4.0 for the remaining time here while continuing research.

To switch from CS to math, you have to show you have enough math courses.  You didn't talk about that.

Poor grades in the first two years don't matter very much.

Your grades in your math classes and your more theoretical CS classes will carry more weight than, say, a class in operating systems or a very coding-intensive class.

You might need to pick out the key classes you think support your application the most strongly, and put them in a table, showing the course title, brief description if the title is not self-explanatory, and the grade.

Financial considerations could be important.  If you would have to go into debt to finance further studies, then you might want to get a master's in CS, with a TA-ship, but load yourself up with math and math-oriented courses as part of the master's.

It's not clear to me where you would do the master's.  Are you thinking about doing it in the same university where you're doing the Bachelor's?  If not, moving to a new school brings a lot of unknowns.  On the other hand, if your current university is not a great fit for you, for whatever reason, then it could be beneficial to go elsewhere for a master's.

One difference between taking extra classes as an undergrad and doing a master's is that if you take a 500 level class where both seniors and first-year grad students are enrolled, expectations will be higher for the grad students.  AND note that as a grad student you would be expected to earn an A or A- (or a B in the worst case).

Note that if you want to take more math classes at your current institution, there are two additional options that you have not mentioned:
- just wait to graduate, and take some more classes
- go ahead and graduate, and then take some more classes as a non-matriculated student

If I were going to evaluate your admission application (that is a big if -- I have never sat on an admissions committee), I would want to see that after three years of college studies, you started to take things more seriously, you started to do very well, and you started to take more responsibility and initiative.

Taking the initiative means finding math classes that help you mature as a mathematician.

So, bottom line: I think you should expend your energy choosing classes wisely.  I think that matters more than exactly what your status is when you take those classes.


How do you differentiate STAT/ML/DS in SOP? I'm going to apply to graduate programs in both Statistics and Data Science. To me, Statistics, Data Science, and Machine Learning essentially refers to the same subject, but some universities are offering different programs. Still, it's rare for a program in Statistics to not mention DS/ML at all, and vice versa.

My undergraduate major is in Statistics, but my research experiences is mostly concerned with Machine Learning. When writing my Statement of Purpose, I'm struggle to justify why I'm applying to STAT programs with a background in DS/ML. Yeah, they are closely related, but wouldn't it be weird to say "Through my research experience in DS/ML, I developed an interest in STAT, so I'm applying to your STAT program"? The reason I'm applying to a STAT program instead of that in DS when both are offered is that the former is generally more academic, theoretical, and in-depth. (AFAIK there are no Ph.D. programs in DS, but it's hard to find a STAT Ph.D. whose research interest is not related to DS/ML.) I cannot say for now whether I'm going to work in academic or in industry, but I believe a sound theoretical background would be helpful in either case.

I don't think claiming STAT, DS, and ML are the same in the SOP would be a good idea either, as the Committee probably won't agree with me. How do I address the issue of terminologies, then?

wouldn't it be weird to say "Through my research experience in DS/ML, I developed an interest in STAT, so I'm applying to your STAT program"?

I don't think so, especially if you modify it a bit:

  "My experience as a STAT major, combined with my research experiences in DS/ML, have inspired me to further study STAT."

I think you can, and should, blend the two together. As you noted, they are related, and the committees know this. Use that to your advantage.

If you are applying to a school with both and you feel like you must justify your choice of STAT over another program, then I think you've already got your justification: you are drawn to the theoretical and rigorous nature of the program. I think your major is more than enough to prevent you from seeming like an outsider.


When is it enough? Final year PhD student with an abusive advisor How do I know if I've had enough?

I am scared to take this further, since my supervisor is quite powerful (millions in funding) and goes back and forth with abusive behavior. Plus, I only have a couple months left to write up.

What would be considered an unrefutable evidence of abuse?
I am experiencing all sorts of difficulties at the moment, but I'm unsure of their significance in this generally challenging academic environment.

Thanks,
EE

Unless the abuse is legally actionable (sexual discrimination or abuse, racist comments, etc), it is likely that your best course is to put your head down and just write. You may be able to get some advice from a local office at your university, however, or, in some cases, from the head of department.

If it is legally actionable, then you need to talk to a lawyer, either inside the university system or on your own.

It is difficult to deal with powerful bad actors and difficult to avoid all negative consequences. But you probably need advice and support from someplace closer than this forum and with whom you can be more open.

But if you can just finish, somehow, you can leave the situation behind, though you may still need allies to deal with recommendations, etc.

However, if the abuse is continuing, you should try to document it, even if it is in a journal in which you date occurrences with a clear description. If there are witnesses, it would be good, if possible, to get statements from them as well.

I also wonder if the professor's colleagues recognize this as an issue and could serve as your surrogate in correcting the problem. He or she may have power over you, but not over the entire faculty. Allies.


I feel like I'm in a wrong place, should I quit my PhD? I started a PhD program recently. I never had any doubts about the fact that I want to do a PhD and I still don't doubt it for a moment. I love working in the area of my interest, but it seems like the department I'm in isn't what I expected. Things are going very poorly for me. I'm losing my confidence, my passion, my self-esteem, my "good reputation", and I think my CV could be destroyed soon. I'm thinking about quitting the program, but I don't know how, and I don't know what the consequences could be. I very much appreciate any help or advice.

First, about the department: It's a small department at a top institution, with excellent faculty, but their approach to research and even the topics in the courses is vastly different from what I imagined. This is in the US, so the program starts without an assigned advisor and with course requirements. The courses are on the topics that my undergrad background is the weakest in, and before starting them, I was kind of happy about it, because I always knew I eventually need to learn them for my research as they are very useful tools, even though not even remotely my area of interest. But now, I can see the approach is very different from what I expected. It also seems to me that this approach represents how the professors in the department approach research problems in general.

I'm also extremely overwhelmed by the expectations. Everyone else in our very small cohort (we're only a handful of PhD student), seems to have a very strong background on the topics. They find the courses to be boring reviews, while I struggle to catch up. I was a very strong undergrad at a top institution, but my plan was to complement my undergraduate education with my graduate education, not to do the same thing again. And given the courses we have now, my strengths don't show themselves at all before I start working on my thesis (where I think I'm going to rely heavily on my undergrad background). This has shattered my confidence into pieces. I'm by far the weakest student of the cohort in the courses, and I need to work so hard to barely catch up with what others find easy and boring.

On the other hand, soon we should choose advisors. The competition for working with the advisor I came here for seems to be unexpectedly tough this year. An unusually high number of us want to work with him, and I think I have the lowest chance for that.

All of these combined, makes me think I chose a wrong program for my PhD. I'm starting to think about a way out, but I'm afraid of talking to the professors here about that, because our financial contract is renewed every year for a year, so I'm afraid I might get into trouble or at least, they may become overly sensitive about my performance and review my exams and assess my academic performance more strictly if I tell them about my struggles, my issues, how their expectations about my background are false, and how my expectation about the program was false. I'm also worried about my alternatives after quitting the program. How can I explain to other schools that I just chose a wrong program?! I just misunderstood what the department expects and what they do! Everyone told me since a a very long time ago, that PhD is flexible, and that a lot of people switch fields even without a proper background for their PhD. Now I entered a program that has very little flexibility, and it seems like everyone has done exactly the same topics for their undergrad!! How can I justify that I just want to start over in a different environment?!

I am so sorry that graduate school is taking such a toll on your psyche. Please believe me when I say that you are not at all alone in feeling this way, and I agree with Buffy that this largely sounds like imposter syndrome -- something that even the top academics fall trap to.

In regards to your cohort, here is my advice, regardless of whether or not you change programs: remember that there will never be an even playing field. All of you have different backgrounds, strengths, areas that need growth, goals, and research interests. There is absolutely no way that any of your cohort members check every single box. With small cohorts like yours, it is difficult not to compare (especially if your program has set up a culture of competition). However, these comparisons can be detrimental to your psyche because you are only seeing part of the picture: what your cohort members publicly present. It could very well be that you are the strongest of your cohort in areas like grant writing, interacting with certain groups of people, or even a personality that others like to be around (a major factor that might sometimes get overlooked), but you are so early in your program that only time can reveal this. Wanting to succeed in academia is half the battle; if you have this, no matter how much or how little you are bringing with you into the program, you will find your fit. There is a reason you have been selected that might not be particularly clear to you, but it was clear to the graduate admissions committee, and it helps to shift your focus from what you think you lack, onto what your strengths are/what you offer that your cohort cannot.

In my own cohort, each of us offers something different. I highly respect the intellect of all of my colleagues, and when I publicly state this, some seem surprised and have even admitted that they had not recognized x as a strength of theirs until they heard it pointed out to them. Though I cannot guarantee you will get your a-ha moment, I can guarantee that early academia makes it very easy to forget the qualities you possess that have gotten you to where you are now. There have been occasions that your cohort members have lauded you or even felt jealousy, but since this knowledge is not explicitly expressed, you are understandably feeling as if you are not "enough."

Another thing to remember - your required classes are only one small part of your PhD. You will need to learn interpersonal, research, professional, administrative, and teaching skills, many of which can be learned but the extent to which you succeed cannot. These are skills you will need no matter the school that you choose, and it is often expected that you will accumulate them on your own (with some help from your program, however it is not necessarily your program's responsibility to walk you through them). It is so very likely that despite not coming in with the same knowledge or strengths as your colleagues, you will be stronger in certain aspects of the PhD track than others, and hopefully, you will be provided an adviser who can help you assess these strengths and weaknesses with you. For me, creating an Individual Development Plan (IDP) helped tremendously.

In regards to changing programs, are there programs that allow you to enter with an adviser? If you are not provided with this adviser, is it still possible for them to be on your committee? In my program (based in the U.S.), admission is heavily contingent on the adviser you choose and committee members are just as important. At your current institution, is it the norm to meet with professors you are interested in working with, to get a better sense of what they are about? Despite the program seeming to be restrictive on academics, perhaps there are faculty members that do not feel this way and can become allies to you. Find allies within the department, let them know the surmounting stress you feel, and gain their advice. Assess whether or not you feel comfortable talking with your graduate chair (if applicable). How accessible is the person you wanted to become your advisor, and how much time do they have for their students? How many students do they have? What are they even looking for in students - is it more based on research interests, or is it on grades? I believe that no matter the discipline, it is often the prior; since you are in a PhD program, you will be there a while, and your position in the department can change for better or worse at any moment and thus should not feel set in stone.

If all else fails, know that people do change programs to find a place with a better "fit." Finding an institution that fits your needs might take time and visiting many different institutions you had not previously considered when applying. It sounds like you have learned a lot about yourself in this process, and if you are adamant in choosing a new program, there are people in your institution that will support you and help you with this; hopefully, in your department, but at the very least, within the graduate school, academic advising, career advising, and graduate success initiatives.

Your questions regarding how to approach the situation when reaching out to schools is not easy, but it sounds like the problems you are having can be voiced in a manner that speaks about department "fit," which the right school will understand. I am unsure how you chose your current program, but speaking in person or on the phone with prospective schools and advisors is really what solidified both mine and my adviser's choice to work together. Perhaps explaining your problems with your particular program to other program's graduate coordinators might put things into perspective and allow you to see how other programs stack up on the idea of PhD flexibility.

On your qualms about speaking up affecting your funding - is your funding contingent upon your timely progress in the program? If so, keep focusing on that while sifting out your personal feelings about the program in the background. Focus on passing those exams. Take extra initiative to get to know your department, so they can get to know you personally and your POTENTIAL rather than your current knowledge. People in your department may talk, but the extent to which they have control over your ability to stay in the program funding-wise may be minimal, and letting them to get to know you outside of hearsay will be instrumental in making a good impression - a REAL impression of you.

Changing programs or not, you got this. I cannot emphasize enough that programs care more about your potential than how well you are doing in these classes, because academics can be taught but your willingness to learn cannot. It sounds as if you are more than willing to learn and more than capable of showing your value to your program (or to a different program that might fit your needs better). Best of luck!


I need to gauge my chances of landing a postdoc - should I send an e-mail to the contact on the job advertisement? I'm a recent PhD graduate looking to work in academia. I have applied for an assistant position (let's call it position A) that I think I have good chances of getting, that starts really soon. However, there is a postdoc position advertised (let's call it position B) in a different institution, which I think would be more beneficial to my career, and which starts a few months later. Trouble is, if I apply for position B now I won't hear back from them until after position A has already started. Also, position B seems to be far less certain.

So I need to gauge the relative risk involved in refusing position A if I get an offer. I was thinking of emailing the contact for position B beforehand, saying something like "I have such-and-such qualifications, do I stand a chance?" but then again I don't want to put them on the spot or make a bad impression. I mean, I know that they can't guarantee I'll get position B, and I don't expect that, but there's the danger that they may interpret my e-mail in this way. I'd like to explain to them that there is another position that I have very good chances of getting, so I need to calculate the risk (again, I know that I may end up not getting position B anyway, I just want to know if getting it is a serious possibility). Should I send such an e-mail, and if so, how should I word it so that it is received well?

I should also mention that I have personally met the contact in question and discussed my work with them in the past, and they will remember me in that respect. At the very least, I'd like to not ruin this relationship.

I really don't know what the right thing is, and I hope you'll understand my anxiety. Any advice will be appreciated... thanks!

You seem to answer the question yourself that there would be no problem of interpretation. It is just an inquiry. However, you are not likely to learn very much absent a formal application giving the new institution to compare your credentials with those of others. But I see no particular reason not to ask.

However, there are other avenues you might want to consider, depending on how flexible institution "A" is. You haven't been offered anything there, nor certainly accepted it, so you are free to apply to the other place. If you then hear encouraging words you can try to explore at least a delay with "A", informing them that you are undecided about another offer or opportunity. There is risk in that, of course, but if you don't apply for the second position you don't have any chance at all.


How and why do references in academic papers work? This question applies both to papers people write to attain a degree, as well as academic papers submitted to journals by researchers.

In theory, the way science works is by building your own original research on top of other people's work. The general idea is that if they did their work well, and you did your work well, then  new insights are revealed and human knowledge as a whole is advanced.

But not everyone is honest and not everyone cares for advancing their field. Bad science is a thing and takes many shapes. So people check each others work, and that includes the references to other people's work. After all, if you base your own work on flawed premises, then no matter how correct you make your own part, the conclusions are still going to be nonsense.

But how does this work in practice? When a reviewer gets a paper, how can they check if the references are reliable? There are so many potential obstacles in the way - many authors and papers will be unknown (so now you need to review those articles as well); articles can be taken from obscure, out-of-print books and journals that are nowhere to be found; paywalls that the reviewer would have to pay out of their own pocket; etc.

It seems to me so impractical as to be almost impossible. How is it done in practice?

But how does this work in practice? When a reviewer gets a paper, how can they check if the references are reliable? There are so many potential obstacles in the way - many authors and papers will be unknown (so now you need to review those articles as well); articles can be taken from obscure, out-of-print books and journals that are nowhere to be found; paywalls that the reviewer would have to pay out of their own pocket; etc.
It seems to me so impractical as to be almost impossible. How is it done in practice?

A properly chosen referee should be familiar with some of the cited references, but probably won't be familiar with all of them. If you're not familiar with any of the references, that's a red flag that you either should decline the referee request, or that the manuscript authors have little knowledge of the field. Leaving that case aside, most referees are probably more trusting of already published papers - at least ones published in reputable avenues. This is mostly reasonable, as they passed some kind of review already, hopefully from a knowledgeable and diligent referee. However, you shouldn't rely on that. Even when true, mistakes can be overlooked.
When you need to read another paper to understand a point/claim made in a manuscript you are reviewing there are some "smell tests" worth using (valuable for any paper you read, really):

Does the manuscript represent the cited paper fairly and without misunderstandings?
Do the results of the cited paper seem plausible?
Are they supported by good arguments?
How has the paper been cited (outside the paper you're reviewing)? After all, someone building on certain results is the person most likely to scrutinize them, so you may find additional support, counterevidence, or limitations in the literature. (Sometimes you can also find a better or more understandable exposition of the results.)

Depending on the specifics of the situation and the standards of the field, it may take more or less time to convince yourself that this paper is probably correct. However, fully "re-reviewing" the cited paper is (usually) not required or expected. If it is central for the manuscript you're reviewing then you might have to, but in that case the manuscript likely already retells the main argument, so it might be less additional work than you envision. What is much more common is to ask/suggest that the authors of the manuscript clarify, support, justify, qualify or hedge their statements as required. That is, you don't have to do the authors' work for them - they're supposed to convince you that their results are valid given the starting points. If they can't explain why the sources they build on are correct, well, they should at a minimum state their limits of their understanding clearly.
So ask if the approximations are justified under the current conditions, or if some external factors were accounted for in an experiment. Point out that technique X has some shortcomings that could affect the result, or if the validity of theory Y hasn't been established in the current regime. Doing so not only helps you figuring out if you trust the results, but also improves the paper for a less expert audience.
As for paywalls, you can ask the editor of the journal to provide you with a copy of papers you need for the review. If that doesn't work, or if the reference is an out-of-print book, inter-library loans can help you out. Ultimately, if the source is nowhere to be found (e.g. a unique original manuscript), or if the referee is unqualified to judge some aspect of the work, they should state so in the report.

The above is largely a description of how a referee could check if the references are reliable, and how they ideally should behave. In practice, however, corners will be cut in a number of places. Some people just aren't very meticulous, others don't want to spend too much time on working for free - especially if the manuscript is incremental, or maybe not all that interesting. Some people might see a famous name in the author list and conclude that the results are probably fine. Any reader should be aware that there are flaws in the reviewing process, and not trust papers blindly - especially when building on them.


When writing a literature review, more specifically writing a summary for a source, is the use of quotes frowned upon versus paraphrasing? Whereas I normally paraphrase information when I use a source for my literature review, I occasionally insert quotes (not to emphasize the information within the quote). All the reviews I've looked at so far tend to use quotations as little as possible. My question is whether it is discouraged or encouraged to present information through a variety of ways (ie. paraphrase, quotes, etc.)?

For instance:

In looking at the relationship between immigrants in the Netherlands and the Dutch economy, Rootenberg et al. (2003) drew upon findings comparable to that of previous research results found in Sweden: while the impact varied across different immigrant groups, the average impact was inconsequential. Among the groups that produced a net gain were immigrants who arrived at a young age and those coming from a western society; all other groups represented a burden to the public sector. Hansen et al. (2015) and Gerdes et al. obtain similar results for Denmark. Their findings are summarized as follows: “Immigrants from richer countries have a positive fiscal impact, while immigrants from poorer countries have a large negative one. The negative effect is caused by both a weak labour market performance and early retirement in combination with the universal Danish welfare schemes" (Hansen et al. 2005).

In general, paraphrasing authors is better than quoting unless they say something truly unique and their exact words are needed to convey their ideas. In a literature review, you may find yourself needing to quote more often because of this reason (for example, historian Gary Dickson coined the term "Mythhistory," which is not something I have heard other scholars use).

Many times in undergraduate writing, students will use several quotes in order to make their word count higher. In higher levels of academic writing (like journal articles or books), some publishers will not print your work if you include too many quotes. (A former professor of mine had to write a letter to his publisher to justify adding a total of two block quotes in his 80,000+ word book.)

I think the most important thing about using quotes is to explain them. To say that so-and-so said "important thing" isn't enough; your interpretation and justification of the quote is needed. I personally think your example in the question would be better paraphrased rather than quoted because the way the authors worded their finding is not too unique. If there is some specific wording from this that you would like to interpret, then I would say quoting is better.

I would suggest not arbitrarily quoting. If you can strongly justify using a quote then I would do so, otherwise paraphrasing is generally better.


What to do when other professors place unfair demands on my students? A recent question asked how students should deal with professors who "think their class is extra special". Putting aside the question of how good students are at judging what an appropriate workload is: how should other professors handle this?

For instance, I've had students whose previous class routinely ran late, causing them to be late for mine.  I once taught a class where several students had a professor immediately before me who decided, in clear violation of university policy, that their midterm exam would take place during a double length class period, which meant that would miss my entire class (which was in fact also my midterm).  (This is slightly less crazy than it sounds, because it was a summer course.)

Let's stick to the case where the other professor is actually violating university policy.  Students are usually very reluctant to try to enforce such policies on their professors, and I don't think I could in good faith encourage them to: even when there are written policies about these things, it's often unclear how a student would go about enforcing them, it's not clear that the relevant chair, dean, or provost actually would enforce them, and there's real potential for negative repercussions to the student.

I could be inflexible, but this seems unfair to the students, who are then stuck between two inflexible authority figures.  Even if I'm right and the other is wrong, students shouldn't bear the brunt of that.

Finally, I could seek to enforce the policy on the other professor, but as mentioned, it's not clear how one does that, especially if the other professor is in a different department.  (And since it's often relatively senior professors doing this sort of thing, at that point I worry about negative repercussions.)

Finally, I could seek to enforce the policy on the other professor, but as mentioned, it's not clear how one does that, especially if the other professor is in a different department. (And since it's often relatively senior professors doing this sort of thing, at that point I worry about negative repercussions.)

I see no alternative to "enforcing the policy on the other professor".  Seniority does not confer the right to violate university policy.  In my opinion you should not let hypothetical concerns about your career or your tenure case stop you from standing up for your students in a situation in which policy is clearly on your side: assistant professors are university faculty, not captives who hope to be rewarded in the future for their docile behavior.

The way to bring it up is to communicate with the other professor as soon as possible.  I would recommend speaking in person or over the phone, as email renders trivial a large variety of passive-aggressive behavior: e.g., they might not respond at all, leaving you to wonder how long to wait.  If you talk to someone face-to-face they have to either be reasonable or display their unreasonableness directly to you.  How do you look another faculty member in the face and say "I'm sorry that students will be missing your midterm, but it is critical that my midterm last double its scheduled length"?  You should come to the meeting knowing the relevant policy cold.  You should bring printed copies of the policy, but only take them out if things are not going your way.

You should continue talking to this person until you have conveyed that their proposal is against the policy, is specifically detrimental to your course, and that students are being caught in the middle.  If they agree to that or at least acknowledge receipt of the information and still are intransigent, then you should end the conversation, calmly, by saying that you will have to take the situation up with the administration.

I would then bring the matter to your department head and see what is suggested.  If the faculty member is in a different department then it may be in order for the two department heads to have a discussion.  If the department head does not take ownership of the issue you should ask whether he [I happen to know that the head of the OP's department is a "he"] wants you to take up the issue with the higher administration.  If not, then as an assistant professor this may be the place to drop it, but again you should communicate clearly that policy is being violated and students are suffering.  Or you could take it up with the higher administration: I might have done that as an assistant professor.  (As a tenured associate professor I would probably do it now, and would not worry about it jeopardizing my future promotion or dealings in the department.  On the other hand, the egregious behavior you described would probably not even be attempted at my large public university.)  Tenure and promotion is not a docility contest, and "He reported a rule violation" is not a point against someone's case.  I think honestly the issue is mostly one of your own peace of mind, so act accordingly.

You certainly have my sympathies: it sounds like the other professor is being both selfish and unreasonable.  It's hard to deal with unreasonable people -- you just can't reason with them! -- and if a situation arises in which it is primarily a battle of wills, then the unreasonable person tends to take the outside track.  The fact that you care about the students and the other guy apparently really does not could indeed make you blink first.  You may for instance end up having to give a makeup exam to some of the students.  If so you should clearly document every time you do that and have the individual students vouch for you as well.


When to write response document in context of complex major revisions and collaboration? The task of performing a revise and resubmit can vary greatly in complexity. In the simple case, the lead author can do the task mostly on their own. They might identify the points, work out an order to do them in, and then work through them one at a time, making changes in the document, and crafting the response document point by point.

However, more substantial revisions often involve a more fundamental restructuring of the paper. Thus, the first attempt at incorporating a response to a particular point might be further drafted and redrafted. Collaborators may review the manuscript and make further edits. Sometimes, you make a change to address point 1, and then as you are making changes to point 7, you realise that this going to slightly alter how you address point 1.

In these cases where you have complex major revisions and or collaborators who are providing substantive edits, it is tricky to know when to write the response document. This is particularly true if you are trying to make the response document relatively self-contained (e.g., quoting changes, deletions, inclusions, etc.)

Thus, my questions:

When preparing a response to a complex set of revisions, when should you write the response document: (a) while you are writing the response to each point, or (b) at the end, once all the points are made, or (c) rough draft initially that is reviewed at the end?
Relatedly, how important is it to have a clear strategy about how all the revisions will be handled before starting to make any revisions?
More generally, are there workflow tricks for dealing with the issue of ensuring that the response document stays consistent with the manuscript changes?

I have had to this on a number of occasions (as I am sure many have), and have, with the help of my collaborators. At the moment, my colleagues and I are doing exactly this for a paper.

In answer to your questions:

  When preparing a response to a complex set of revisions, when should you write the response document: (a) while you are writing the response to each point, or (b) at the end, once all the points are made, or (c) rough draft initially that is reviewed at the end?

I tend to do (a) and (c). Details in answer to the 3rd question. But, I find that it is always good practice to take the time and critically review everything I do in academia.

Alongside the manuscript, the response to review is an important document in terms of the publication of your paper. As such, it needs to be completed methodically and reviewed before submission.

  Relatedly, how important is it to have a clear strategy about how all the revisions will be handled before starting to make any revisions?

I believe that it is always crucial to have clear strategies.  Making (and refining) a 'plan of action' is a good way to increasing the efficiency and the effectiveness of how the revisions are handled.

An important part of this is to decide who will address the reviewer comments first, and who would review the corrections and responses (we have the first author do this, as an example).

  More generally, are there workflow tricks for dealing with the issue of ensuring that the response document stays consistent with the manuscript changes?

What I have done for complex revisions on collaborative papers (and found to work rather well):

First make a printed 'working desk copy' of the reviewers' comments and have the manuscript on the screen.

for convenience, we put the comments in a table, with a column for our notes in response to the reviewers' comments. Additionally, we put another, thinner column for where the change occurs in the paper (page/line number etc).  But, this is up to personal preference - the point is to have a printed copy that you can write over.
As I have often found that reviewer comments are in the order that they appear in the paper, we use the same order when we go through the comments. if the comments are not in order, it is helpful to put them in order.
One suggestion I have seen for this stage is to put all the comments in the order that they appear in the paper. But, we prefer to have a separate page for each reviewer's comments, and have the desk copies side by side (as a response to a suggestion from one reviewer may affect an earlier suggestion from another reviewer).
Take the time to consider each suggestion individually, writing in the revisions as you make them to the manuscript (highlighting any changes if you wish, for this stage).
Once you have completed the review desk copy, type the responses into the response to review digital version - as you do, double check that everything is included accurately.
Send the revised document and the response to the collaborators to check and review that all comments are addressed and that the responses are accurate.

Then of course, the final step is to prepare both documents for submission (re-submission) to the journal in accordance to their guidelines.


Is it Customary Under Certain Circumstances to Provide Personal Information on one's Academic Website? This question is inspired by the question My class teacher was not happy with my mistake of using a wrong title, in particular by the statement

  But the contact information on the school's web does not tell whether she is married or unmarried

I have seen lots of academic websites, and I noticed only a few times that academic people would divulge what to me seems like very personal/private information via their website. More concretely, the only times I saw any hint of that were statements in the style of (hypothetical example) X is an assistant professor, passionate programmer, husband, father, hobbyist painter, and loyal fan of The Black Adder to express how multi-faceted a person the academic in question is. Of course, not everyone writes that on their website, as that would make the statement seem trite/overused. (Granted, it may already be on the verge of becoming so.)

In other words: Expressing whether one is married or not does not seem to be a standard thing that is done on academic websites, unlike, for example, the university and year of getting awarded one's PhD degree.

Or is it? Maybe my own impression is biased in that I have seen disproportionally many academic websites from people who work in a German-speaking area, and incidentally, any distinction in addressing married and unmarried people has fallen out of fashion in that language, so knowledge about the marital status would not be of any use.

Therefore, my question is:

Is there any explicit or implicit part of self-presentation etiquette that suggests to somehow provide information about one's marital status on one's academic website in language environments where that information may have to be considered by other people?
or, in other words: Is the expectation to find any information on an academic's marital status on their academic website with any desirable degree of likelihood reasonable within any context?

I see this somewhat differently from a possible analogous question in Workplace SE, as academic websites tend to be quite a bit more "individual". If it's unclear how to address a particular person in the industry, one can still write to the department as a whole (slight repercussions for not spending enough effort to actually find a way to directly address the intended recipient notwithstanding) and be reasonably sure that it will be processed. In academia, on the other hand, addressing something to a department as a whole rather than to a single person will often lead to the message being placed on the "Not sure what this is or who should even try to find out what it is." batch (that only ever gets touched again when all personalized batches have run empty) for an indefinite amount of time.

In US academia, I have never felt there is any expectation that an academic website should contain any personal or family information, such as marital status.

Some people choose to post personal information; this is their choice and (within reason) considered to be fine. Some people choose not to; that is their choice and considered to be fine.

You won't find my marital status on my professional web page, as I happen to feel that it's irrelevant to anyone looking for professional information about me. Nobody has ever even suggested to me that I should change that.


Does publishing on Arxiv diminish chances of publishing in a journal/conference? If I publish a paper on Arxiv, does it diminish my chances of getting published at a reputable peer reviewed journal? Does it diminish my chances of presenting my paper at a reputable conference?

In mathematics it is extremely common for people to post their papers to the arXiv before submitting them to a journal. The idea is that this allows them to get feedback on their paper before making the submission. For instance, several of my collaborators have posted all of their papers to the arXiv. Moreover, I have never heard of a journal not accepting a paper due to its having previously been posted to the arXiv. This doesn't mean that there aren't any journals with policies prohibiting arXiv posted submissions, but I cannot imagine any mainstream journal having such a policy as use of the arXiv is so widespread that there would be a big pushback. There are even well-respected arXiv-overlay journals like Discrete Analysis which do not host papers at all but merely link to the relevant arXiv posting.

The bottom line is that when it comes to well-respected math journals, having already posted your paper to the arXiv should have no affect whatsoever on the likelihood of its being accepted to be published by a journal.

Added: One potential exception to what I wrote above are journals with double-blind reviewing systems. Such journals are extremely rare in mathematics, but they do exist (e.g., The American Mathematical Monthly). Posting an article to the arXiv and then submitting it to a journal with a double-blind reviewing system runs the risk of ruining the anonymity of the author.


What is "technology in the classroom" that so many job applications ask for? I am applying for academic mathematics positions, and I noticed that a few job applications ask for experience using technology in the classroom.

What use of "technology" in the classroom are these hiring committees looking for in an applicant?

The only things I can think of for mathematics is the use of computing programs, or videos and demonstrations shown on a projector.

It's hard to guess exactly what the authors of the advertisement meant.  However, there are lots of technologies that the advertisement could be referring to, including

Graphing calculators.
Numerical and symbolic computation software (MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, etc.)
"Clicker" audience response systems.
Lecture capture recordings.
Prepared video clips for students to view outside of class.
Learning Management Systems like Blackboard, Canvas, etc.
Systems for online discussion of the course such as Piazza.
Computer based homework systems like WebWork, Maple TA, etc.

In evaluating candidates, I want to know what experience they've had with these technologies and how they've decided to incorporate them into their teaching.

Most experienced instructors will have used at least some of these and have opinions about how best to use them.  A candidate who can't talk intelligently about these technologies is probably lacking teaching experience.  Someone who claims experience with these technologies and has the "wrong" opinions about how to use them will likely be seen as a poor fit for the position.

Before you go for an on-campus interview (or even for a telephone or skype screening interview), it would be a good idea to see what technologies have been adopted at the campus you're visiting so you can be prepared to discuss this during your interview.


Postgraduate with a third Context: Graduate has a third in their undergraduate degree from a world leading university on a notoriously difficult course (Cambridge mathematics BA) and wants to apply for postgraduate study elsewhere on a slightly tangential course (taught theoretical physics MSc). Assume that the student has the capacity to cope with postgraduate study and is able to fund themselves (i.e. had some non-academic circumstances that led to the third).

Are there any such MSc courses out there in the UK that would consider an applicant with a third? Would such an application be competitive? Does the fact that it's Cambridge maths help, or worsen the issue? What could be done to improve the chances of finding a place?

And feel free to add anything else that may be relevant but isn't covered by the questions above.

Thanks in advance!

The candidate can get in somewhere (a friend of mine with a third from a less prestigious UK university got into a PhD programme in Melbourne) but the candidate should decide carefully whether it is constructive in his future plans to obtain a position "anywhere".

I don't think the application will be competitive. "Cambridge" on the CV is a big help on any application to any UK place (business or academic) but the candidate will have to be ranked objectively against those obtaining Upper Second Class and First Class honours at many other good institutions.

That said, all the CV and the qualifications can achieve is an interview. If the candidate can impress the interview team with his mathematical or scientific skills then the formalities of a third may be disregarded.

Since the candidate is self-funded the usual rule "2:1 or better" may be relaxed; because actually it is a rule from the funding bodies for the candidate to be eligible for funding. ["2:1" is a British expression referring to a degree awarded with "Upper Second Class honours", which is the "typical" degree a good student will receive.]

I would also strongly advise that the candidate speak to his former tutor at his college in Cambridge. If the tutor is not receptive then he should talk to the head tutor or even (in a small college) the Master of the college. Basically, it might be that some strings could be pulled (academia is a small place) or a particularly favourable reference be produced for the candidate, explaining some of the deficiency in his degree classification.


Are open-book exams generally a superior way to test understanding on practical courses? I understand why it would be a bad idea to allow math students access to paper materials as it  is necessary for students to know the basic math formulas by heart.

But what about advanced practical courses where it is important to "understand" rather than "know"? For example, knowing statistical formulas won't help if you haven't understood how to apply them. Knowing STL commands by heart is also useless for programming, unless you're actually good at programming. Intel's x86 developer manual won't help a complete newbie in Assembly programming.

Therefore the question is whether it is reasonable to believe that good courses should be focused on "understanding" the subject rather than "memorizing" it, meaning that the instructor should have no problems with his students using paper materials on the exam?

You might find this article on a computer science class valuable (1). The tl;dr is that sections allowed student-prep notes showed no overall improvement, but mostly because many students didn't bother to create good student-prep notes. Good notes = good grades.

A quick browse of a review/ meta-analysis article on the topic (2), indicates that open-note exams can decrease student anxiety, and that student-prepared notes tend to produce larger improvements than open-book exams.

As an instructor, I've found students often spend energy only where they feel it is needed. I would recommend providing sample exam questions (as a group activity in class?) that gives students a good idea of what will be required and what sorts of notes would be helpful. This will help them expend the energy in preparation instead of frantic in-exam page-flipping.

Thanks for wanting to trigger deep learning in students!

Duncan, D.G. (2007). Student performance shows slight improvement when open notes are used during information system exams. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 361–370.
Larwin, Karen H., Jennifer Gorman, and David A. Larwin. "Assessing the Impact of Testing Aids on Post-Secondary Student Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation." Educational Psychology Review 25.3 (2013): 429-443.


Leaving a Master's Degree Early for a Doctorate Degree? I am currently enrolled in my fourth semester of my master's degree program in psychology and this should be my final semester.  Due to issues stemming from myself and my relationship with my mentor, my thesis has been lagging behind the rest of my school work and I am just now preparing to defend my prospectus.  While I am currently awaiting to hear back from Ph.D. programs, I am starting to consider an alternative plan to completing my graduate education and was wondering if anyone could help shed some light on this matter?

On the off chance that I get accepted into a doctorate program I am wondering if it is possible to leave my current graduate program without completing my thesis and proceed to enroll in said doctorate program? Are Ph.D. programs going to frown upon this decision?  Will they still allow me to join the program? My present thesis is really not related to anything remotely close to what I want to study and I have had a very strained and borderline emotionally abusive mentorship experience at my present program and would prefer not to continue working with my current mentor if possible.  I am assuming I will have to complete a new master's thesis on top of a dissertation while completing this possible Ph.D. but I just wanted to know if the option to leave one program and enroll in another is available?  I would much rather spend more time completing a new thesis with research I care about and a mentor who will (hopefully) not be as abusive rather than finishing up a thesis late at my present program.

Thanks!

If you're in your last semester, the best path forward is to finish your MA thesis. Your dissertation does not need to follow directly from it, particularly if you're studying in the social sciences.

Finish the thesis for a few reasons. First, finish it for the MA degree. You've (presumably) paid for 3 semesters of coursework. Failing to finish would mean that, essentially, you've wasted the past three semesters. Second, finish the thesis for yourself. In 20 years, you won't care a whit about your strained relationship with your mentor, but you will care that you saw the program through, even when the going got tough. Third, finish the thesis so that you don't have to explain it in the future. People will wonder why you failed to finish your thesis, and it might cast doubt on your ability to stick through tough/challenging projects. Academia is a small place, and you don't want to be known as the guy who didn't finish his master's degree.


Postdoc application: having your own funding vs. depending on your mentor's funding I wonder, in the general field of electrical engineering and computer science and in the USA, how often does a postdoc applicant secure her own fundings before applying to a certain open position? Or is it the norm that the applicant will be on her mentor's funding during the postdoc study?

Thanks a lot for helping!

Citizenship may matter less than you think. Many post-docs expect to get something back from you for the funding you get. If you can do the required work, it doesn't matter much where you are from.

There may be some, of course, that favor citizens and some (national defense work) that require it. And getting appropriate visas has become a problem for many.

But, don't assume that you are ineligible without at least asking or doing a bit of research into positions that are offered. I'd expect that getting your own funding is actually harder, unless you have support from your own government.

I think that self funded post docs are pretty rare and, perhaps granted sometimes as a courtesy to someone who needs an academic home for a while and can, perhaps, assist some regular faculty in their research. But, again, funding strictly out of the candidates personal funds would be more rare still, but with some people bringing funding with them from another institution (or government). It could be the only option for some who don't qualify for a "visiting professor" position for some reason. And few institutions are likely to have a regular process to cover such a case.


Can I use my own paper for own thesis? I published a paper on a statistical topic after my bachelors.

Currently I am doing my masters thesis and I would like to cite/use my own paper in it.

However, I did not inform my supervisor before that I already had a publication in a similar field of my thesis when I started, because I did not expect it to be directly relevant then. However, now I would like to use this paper.

Is it OK to cite my own paper in my thesis? Will the supervisor be OK with it, despite I did not inform him about my previous work when starting the thesis with him?

Thanks.

Practiced in moderation, self-citation is natural, healthy, and ethical.
There are typical two reasons why excessive self-citation can become problematic:

It often indicates a person who is unaware of the related work being done by the rest of the community.
Self-citation can be abused to falsely inflate one's perceived importance and citation metrics.

A healthy line of research, however, will often produce a non-trivial fraction of self-citation in each paper because your old work is related to your new work.  In fact, it would be unethical to not self-cite when citation is appropriate.

A simple guiding principle for approaching the question is this: if somebody else besides you had written the paper, would you want to cite it?  If the answer is yes, then you should cite the paper.  There isn't even any particular reason you need to mention it to your supervisor, though it would probably be fun and enjoyable for you to mention in passing, "Hey, and it turns out this other paper I wrote was actually useful enough to cite!"

Now as to whether you can include your other paper as part of your thesis, this is a very different question.  The first question is: why would you want to do so, if a citation will suffice?  If you've done a Masters' Thesis worth of work excluding this other paper, there is no reason to need to include it.  If you haven't, then that is when you need to have a discussion with your supervisor, because the answer will depend on the policies and practices of your particular department.


If I don't ask for a recommendation letter from a postdoc I did research with, will it look bad? I am applying for math graduate school. I have two people that I did research with: A professor and a postdoc. I have a strong connection with the professor, but the postdoc I do not. He was very passive aggressive with me and our relationship does not seem to be a good one. I do not want to ask him for a letter. However, I am wondering if this will look suspicious or hurt me in any sort of way. If I say in my application that I did do research with a postdoc but I did not receive a letter from that postdoc, will that affect me or the admission committee's decision? Will the admissions committee likely email this postdoc to hear about me from him?

Thank you very much.

Admissions committees expect letters to be signed by professors.  It is perfectly normal to get a letter from the professor who supervised the postdoc.  The only case where I would expect the postdoc to even be mentioned in your application would be if you published a paper with the postdoc which did not include a contribution from a professor.

Keep in mind that professors often ask postdocs to help them write letters of recommendation.


My supervisors take long time to respond to me I am a PhD student. I need to finish my study in 6 months.

My story and problem:

I always send my work to my supervisors on time. For each work (objective), they take about one to two months to respond to me. Therefore, I need to send them a reminder after one month. After my reminder, they ask me to resend it again as they forget it and do not want to search for it. Then, they take about 2 weeks to respond.

After that, they asked me to do some more work, which I do and resend my work to them again. They agree that this version is good and ask me to do my next objective based on my study plan.

After finishing all my tasks and sending them my thesis, they asked me to go back through all my objectives and do further work. These objectives have been already proven many times in many different areas and are not related directly to my topic. I explained to them that I will be in trouble if I do not finish my study at the time that is specified by my sponsor. The university has put me under review as I did not finish on time already. Also, I have had to request two extensions from my sponsors.

In addition to their delay in responding, they sometimes travel overseas for about 6 months without regular contact. This happens every year.

What do I have to do now? Any help, please?

There isn't a lot you can do on your own. The supervisors have their habits. The best advice I can give is to try to find someone to speak to them on your behalf to get them to help you meet the deadlines. You want an advocate that will be respected by the supervisors. Deans are good for this sort of thing, actually.

But if you can meet face to face with people, either the supervisors or an advocate to help impress on them the urgency it would be better than trying to do things by email, which is asynchronous by design.


Should I apply for a research Internship if I'm not in touch with the subject matter? So, I'm doing my undergrad in physics in India. I want to apply for research internships, but when I read professors' CV's and stuff they are doing reasearch on currently, I don't understand anything, it's way too complicated, I see things like " X-ray Binaries, Neutron Stars, X-ray Polarimetry , quantification of non-linear quantum correlations at very low light intensities. etc. ".
It seems way beyond what I can comprehend !

So, if I have no idea about what they are working on then should I apply for the reasearch internship ?

It's normal to feel overwhelmed with the complexity of such advanced topics at your level, the goal is to learn about it progressively. However if you don't even feel interested in discovering the topic, then there's probably no point applying.

In order to start evaluating your own interest about a particular topic before applying, it would be a good idea to read a bit about it. you won't understand everything of course, but this way you can get a sense of whether you like the topic or not. This will help you choose, and it will also help you get accepted in case you decide to apply, since an advisor is more likely to choose somebody who knows at least a little about their topic.


Conflict of interest/collusion in academic scenario I know somebody, let’s call him Joe, who had been a good student. Being a good student, other students asked help from him to understand the class materials. In the meantime, our university started recruiting a lot of international students. These new students, especially those who had a lot of money started hiring Joe to teach them for a fee.

Then, I came to know that Joe charged these students a set fee for the semester with the understanding that they would get the expected grade. This means that he would do online quizzes, do any specific homework problems that students had difficulty, and teach them before a major exam.

Then, Joe became a teaching assistant and now he has access to more materials that normal students may not have. Since he is now a graduate/teaching assistant, he could potentially have access to quiz/exam questions before the exam and have answer keys for those tests. He continued to assist other international students for a fee.

Now, Joe is at part-time professor. He finished his graduate degree and the university hired him for part time teaching. He is continuing to help with quizzed, do homework and possibly leaking exam questions for other students.

In future, he may be hired as a full-time professor at the university.

Personally, I know this, and I do not feel this is right. I see a case of collusion and conflict of interest with this setup.

Should I inform the university about things that is going on? I am not sure if university knows about all the things that are going behind the scene.

If this is a real, rather than a hypothetical, then yes, Joe has been unethical and probably criminal, though it might be hard to make the case.

In theory you should bring it to the attention of the authorities, but you will be creating a painful situation for yourself, conceivably being charged with slander. An anonymous letter to authorities would be safe, but easy to ignore.

A group of accusers would be more likely to be heard than an individual. A complaint transmitted by a trusted authority such as a lawyer would be relatively safe and the lawyer could advise you on your potential liability.

But the charge is a serious one.


What are the differences between these levels of study? I'm Brazilian and am currently trying to apply to this scholarship in New Zealand. However, when asked which "level of study" I will apply for, I see the following list:

PhD
Masters course
Masters thesis
Post-Graduate Diploma
Post-Graduate Certificate

I only understand what a PhD is. To me, both masters sound like the same thing (in Brazil we have a masters course that you conclude when you present the thesis), and I haven't the faintest idea of what is the difference between a post-graduate diploma and a certificate.

So what's the difference between these four categories and are they known as such throughout every English speaking country or are they specific terms used only in NZ?

(also I'm not sure which tags to use here, so correct me if necessary)

A Phd is a three or four year degree awarded following research and a thesis.
A Masters course is a taught postgraduate degree usually of one or two years duration.
A Masters thesis is a research degree of one or two years duration awarded following research and a thesis.
A Post-Graduate Diploma is usually two-thirds of a taught masters and is awarded to someone who did the examination component but did not complete a dissertation.
A Post-graduate Certificate is usually one-third of a taught masters and is awarded to someone who left after completing half of the course credits.

These terms would be used in areas based on the British University system, but all have analogues in the Bologna Process.


How to cite oneself as co-author without all names, for resume or presentation? My questions regards the format of citation.
For the context: I am a student, presenting my work (with slides) and referring to the publications in which I am co-author (never in the first three authors).

It would be nice for my name to explicitely appear, as I also refer to other publications in which I did not take part.However I do not want to list all the authors (more than 10 for some papers).

Should I use (recommendeed by my advisor):

  A.Smith, M.Myself et al. "Marvelous publication"

Or

  A.Smith et al. (including M.Myself), "Marvelous publication"

My concern is not to appear as being the second author, which would feel like a lie, while keeping a compact formatting.

Is there a common way of doing this ?

Thank you.

For a presentation I would use @Jan Kukacka's answer. Say in the presentation "This work was published in our 2015 paper".

For a resume you've four options as I see it:

List all the authors (put yourself in bold).
List the first x authors (where 10 is a common value of x) then put et al (several journals/funding bodies use this format). Choose x so your name always appears
List all the authors up to and including your name, and then put et al.
List just the first author. As the papers will probably appear in a publications section on your resume, its fairly clear that you are going to be an author.

Which ever you choose, it might be worth including a very short sentence that described your role in the work.


Is it okay for professors to completely copy another professors' notes, assignments, and exam questions word for word from another university? I have a professor who used the same lecture notes, same assignments, and same exam questions word for word from from another professor at a different university (who posts his notes, assignments, and exams online). She mentions she "makes her own exams", however the questions are identical to the online past exam and assignment questions.

It's a masters level class and the exam questions are quite specific. We are given an abstract to read and then asked to perform calculations/analyze the abstract.

Is this common or "allowed"?

If 1st professor published his/her notes and question with a license which allows that, it's almost ok.  If 1st professor published questions without anything which looks like a license, the 2nd professor should ask permission.

The main pros of using notes and questions made by somebody  - optimization of work. Why should anybody invent a bicycle if we can get already invented bicycle and use it?


Professor sleeps in class and makes cheating easy I’m a senior in my final year of a B.S. degree in Engineering in the United States. One of my professors is in a geriatric state (he is not tenured). His class is largely themed around student presentations which form the core curriculum and all material tested on exams.

Unfortunately, the professor often falls asleep during these presentations which he should be grading as they are delivered. He does very little to facilitate discussion in class. When he generates the exam, he often just reviews the slides and picks out extraneous details for questions. To make matters worse, there is a small group of students who have taken advantage of the said professor’s poor proctoring skills and have used their phones to view the slides hence giving them a magnificent advantage over even the best students in the class.

I have already notified our department head, who is peripherally aware of the situation, and his superior, the college division head. However, they seemed concerned but have  not taken means to solve or even observe any of the issue for themselves.

What else can I do to address such an issue?

The first thing I want to say is that you should be careful with the information you provide on the internet.  In ten minutes of routine searching I was able to determine the identity of your instructor and other information about him: e.g. he is 84 years old, that his highest degree is a master's degree, and that he is (as mentioned) not tenure-track at your institution.  Thus you have publicly enough claimed that someone is senile.  That opinion is yours to express...but it is not very nice.  If you have not already had at least one conversation about the instructor himself about what you find unsatisfactory about his teaching, then complaining about him to everyone is not an honorable thing to do.  I think it would be better to remove identifying details from your profile.

Now moving on to your question: I think you have at least two issues here.  The first is that you claim that rampant cheating will put you at a disadvantage in your classes with this instructor.  The second is that you think the instructor is unfit to teach at your institution.  These are pretty different: one of them is localized to a particular situation and is primarily about you.  The other is a general problem and is primarily the concern of the institution.  I would recommend decoupling these concerns at least in your own mind and thinking about how to pursue them separately.

As for the first concern: is the cheating you're describing taking place in a class you are now taking? Your question suggests that but doesn't quite say it, and in my internet research I couldn't find any courses that the instructor in question is teaching this semester.  If yes, this is a pressing issue, and of course you should bring it up first with the instructor himself.  Does he know that students are cheating by looking at their phones in class?  What is his response to that?  If he hasn't been informed of the cheating, it is not very reasonable of you to blame him for it.  If his response is "I don't hold truck with those devilish pocket phones" then that's inadequate and merits escalation.  It sounds however that you're trying to bring forth action on a more generalized "everyone knows this is happening" cheating situation that may not even be taking place this semester.  That's going to be hard to do.  You lament that many students complain about this but are unwilling to do anything formal about it.  You're right to lament, because that probably will kill the matter right there.  I am a university professor and I've had the experience of students who complained to me about cheating but were unwilling to take it any further.  That was very unpleasant for me, because there was nothing I could do about it....other than make sure that the circumstances that allowed the cheating did not present themselves in the future.

In terms of your second concern: whether this man is fit to be an instructor at your regional campus of a state institution is primarily the concern of that institution.  I am not trying to say that this is none of your business.  What I'm saying is that it's more their problem than yours, and you should take the attitude that you are helping them out by informing them about it.  Do you see what I'm saying?  If you come to an administrator saying that a certain instructor is not fit to teach...and you are not asking for any personal reparations for that in your own coursework, then it puts a different spin on things that may make the administrator take it more seriously.  (That's why I would consider separating out discussion of this with the cheating issue: if you discuss them at the same time, then it can look like you have a conflict of interest, because something good could happen to your course grade if the instructor's incompetence is recognized.)

In terms of informing administrators that the instructor is unfit to teach: you have to realize that this is a long game.  It is extremely unlikely that someone is going to get pulled from teaching in the middle of a semester for reasons of "senility".  Firing a faculty member -- even a temporary or untenured one, and especially someone who has been working there for many years -- is not something to be done lightly.  You can't really know that the administration is not looking into this or will not look into this in the future.  Maybe they are.  However, in the absence of any positive evidence, yes, maybe they're not.  In that regard Dan Romik's advice is on point: bring this up repeatedly.  If other students feel the same way, get them involved.  (If really no one other than you wants to get involved...what's up with that?  It's worth thinking about.)

Another thing that students don't necessarily appreciate is that universities have limited resources, and the in current economic climate many academic programs are being held together with string and chewing gum.  Every once in a while I get an evaluation from a calculus student saying something like "Dr. Clark knows his math, but I'm not sure if he's ready to teach UGA students." Which makes me smile a little bit: I was a tenure-track (now tenured) faculty member.  Do the students think that teaching freshman calculus is a privilege only earned by the very best, and that some time in the penalty box would make me rethink the error of my ways?  That's just not the way things work.  At my university faculty members get tenured for excellent research and unproblematic teaching.  Freshman calculus students are going to be stuck with my teaching -- which, according to student feedback, is below the departmental average -- for the foreseeable future.

At your institution I noticed that there are a lot of non-tenure track faculty, often without PhDs, teaching courses for majors.  Your administration would certainly prefer if such courses were taught by people with PhDs: it would add considerably to its academic prestige.  The fact that they have courses taught by non-PhD faculty probably means that they have limited resources and/or haven't had the chance to do enough hiring to correct the problem.  To put it more starkly: if your octogenarian instructor gets released, who will replace him?  If they don't have such a person, then they are probably working towards getting one and thinking that in the meantime he is a lot better than nothing.

I will end by saying: you are right to be concerned about this, and if what you say is true than in my opinion you are helping out your university by doing so.  Good on you, and I hope you follow through with it.  Definitely do not do anything like publicly shaming your university by uploading incriminating videos: that is not a step towards a solution of the problem.

Added: Based on information provided by the OP, I have changed my mind about who the faculty member is.  I now believe he is 79 years old.  Anyway, the point is that when you reveal your institution and department any complaint about faculty members is certainly not anonymous.  Any slightly interested party can make a guess.  Maybe they will guess wrong...which is not so great either.