How to deal with different stylistic advice from two professors/institutions I'll start by sketching my situation. I first studied a couple of years at institution A where we were taught a couple of things concerning academic writing. (E.g. don't use passives, distance yourself from your work.) After that I did another bachelor's at another institution B (same field, same country, other city). Even though we didn't have a course dedicated to academic writing there, the promoter of my bachelor paper taught me not to distance myself from my work:

  You did the research, and not some leprechauns, right? People should
  know that you did all this -- it didn't happen magically.

However, after my bachelor's I returned to institution A where I am currently going for my master's. The thing is: even though my grades for the first semester were good, I received feedback from different tutors and professors that my work is too personal and that I should use more passives to distance myself. This is completely the opposite advise my promoter at institution B gave me. Normally I would just go with the advise of the current institution, as that's where I am studying now and I don't want to challenge their style. The problem is that the promoter of my master thesis is the same professor as the one who promoted my bachelor paper. He changed institutions the same year that I went from institution B to A and of course he wants me to write from a personal viewpoint - whereas his (new) colleagues advised against that.

Tl;dr: promoter tells me to follow one specific (personal) style of writing, but his colleagues and other of my professor seem to like a non-personal approach better.

Note that this question isn't restricted to the distinction between personal vs. distanced/distant academic writing. I am interested more in the situation itself: what should one do when his or her promoter advises for A when the institution's approach is the contrary?

A promoter here in Belgium is a professor who is your supervisor when writing your bachelor paper or master's thesis. He or she is typically very knowledgeable about the topic you are writing in. In the process of writing your bachelor paper or master's thesis you can ask him or her questions related to your topic. Not only that, I have found that you can basically ask him or her anything related to academics - as long as it's morally and socially acceptable. He will also be the one will grade your thesis at the end of the year - possible together with a jury. The problem thus occurs that in my case this person gives me advice for something, whereas other authorities in the same institution seem to give advice against that. Since he is the one who will have to grade my work at the end of the year, I'm not sure whose advice I should follow.

The first thing you need to do is determine if there is an underlying issue with your writing that A and B are trying to get at. If there is, fix that problem and the style issues may be ignored. If it truly is a style thing, you need to talk to them and explain the issue. If one supervisor demands that you never use the passive voice and instead write in the 1st/3rd person and the other supervisor demands that you never use 1st/3rd person and prefers everything in the passive voice, then somebody is going to have to give.

Once you determine it is purely stylistic, you need to decide which style you want to write in. This should probably be influenced by the recommended style of whatever journal/publisher you are targeting and/or any archaic rules your department has about theses. Then approach whoever you are agreeing with, get them on your side and finally explain to the other person the approach you are going to take. They might have a good counter argument or they might give up.


What to do if there is no book about a certain topic? I am currently researching the foundations of graph theory (math). I have noticed two kind of things in introduction books.

There are results seemingly so obvious nobody writes about it.
There are variants of the topic mentioned in almost any book, but covered in detail in none.

At the time of writing this question, the stack exchange community was unable to help me with my observations in my specific case. Since I think very highly of this network, I'm starting to believe that currently there are no suitable books about these topics.

But I feel like there ought to be books about it. The question is, what do I do in this situation? How can I "help" that such a book gets written? The most obvious answer would be "Write the book.". Although I like the approach, this is not possible. For simplicity's sake let's just say I lack the time. So what to do? Like, can I just mail a publisher "Why don't you already have this kind of book?", although I don't know anyone working at any publisher? Do I ask a professor at my university if (s)he would like to write one? Btw I'm  a graduate student, but I don't think it is relevant for the question.

Please note this question is not about how I can research a certain topic. It is really about how books of some topic do not exist. Please assume for answering that they don't. If you happen to know about books about the exemplary example topic I provided here, please answer in my linked question, not here.

In reading the following, keep in mind that anything you can do personally will have at best a minuscule effect on whether such a book gets written, and you shouldn't expect it to happen anytime soon.  For all practical purposes, you should plan on having to proceed with your research without the aid of this hypothetical book.

My impression is that these books usually get written on the author's own initiative, perhaps prompted by having them see a need for such a book.  So
I think the best thing you can do is to identify someone who you think could write such a book: someone who is a recognized expert on the topic and who writes particularly well and clearly.  Contact them and say something like: "I've really appreciated reading your papers on topic X, but it strikes me that there are no books that could give a comprehensive introduction.  Have you ever considered writing one?"

Unfortunately, your message alone probably won't do much, particularly because you are a grad student - these suggestions would have more weight coming from someone who would be recognized as a fellow expert.  Someone who is more deeply acquainted with the existing literature and its gaps.  But if the potential author starts getting a number of such suggestions, it might plant the seed that such a project could be worthwhile.

Of course, writing a book is a huge task (thousands of hours, I'd say) which is poorly compensated.  Academic structures are such that researchers tend to have stronger incentives to write papers than books.  If the book is to be published commercially, there is the additional question of whether it will be profitable - even if the book is fantastic, if the topic is too "niche", there may not be enough potential buyers to interest a publisher.

I don't think that contacting a publisher will have any effect.  Again, the incentives are such that a publisher can't do much to encourage anyone to write a book, unless they already really want to do so.


What are the working hours for full time PhD students in Germany? What are the working hours per week for full time PhD students in Germany? Also, how many holidays are granted in a year? How is the work-life balance for full time PhD students? Thanks!

You are typically paid for 50 or 65% to do work on some project, but that just means that the university graciously allows you to write your dissertation unpaid in the remaining 50 or 35%.

How much you really spent is hugely dependent on the discipline, the department, the advisor, and yourself. The best case scenario would be when there is a huge overlap between the project and your dissertation, both the department and the advisor are very supportive, and you are very disciplined and get a lot of work done in a short period of time. This does happen, but not everybody is that lucky.


How do Professors feel about writing recommendation letter? Just curious about how professors feel about having to write recommendation letters? Is it a chore for them? Or do they actually enjoy writing them? Or is it more of neutral.

I am in a situation of applying to various graduate schools. Last year I only applied to one school and was rejected. This year I am thinking of applying to more schools so as to increase the chance of being accepted. I feel a bit "guilty" about having to ask my supervisor to write 5 separate letter of recommendations. Would it take up too much of their time?

That said, I don't really have any other choice since the recommendation letters are pretty much compulsory.

Although I'm not a professor, my position has a lot of similarity and I have often been asked to write recommendation letters.  My reaction has been a mixture, depending on who is asking for me to write the letter:

Students who I like and respect: "Sure, I'll be happy to.  What are the aspects of your work that you'd most like to have emphasized?"
Students who I haven't got a strong opinion on: "I'm not sure that I know your work well enough to write a strong letter.  If you really need me to, I can, but I think you'd be better served by getting somebody who knows you better."
Students who I have been disappointed in: "I'm sorry, but I don't think that I would be a good person to write the type of letter that you need."

You only want letters from the first type, who will happily sing your praises.  And for a student like that, it's no burden at all: I'm going to want to push your career forward, because I'm hoping I'll get to see somebody who I like prosper, and maybe even return to work with me as a colleague in the future.

As for the multiple letters question: don't worry about it unless you're applying to like 20 schools.  If the programs you're applying to are similar, they're probably just going to be writing just one template letter about their experiences and filling in a couple of blanks to customize for the institution.  Now certain institutions have terrible forms that will make it a pain to send that letter, but that's hardly your fault, and your recommender will be used to it...


Is it frowned upon to obtain a recommendation letter from a recent Ph.D. graduate? Like many other students in a lab where interaction with the lead Professor is very limited, most of my time is spent with the graduate student who is working on their dissertation/publication project.

This student is a Ph.D. candidate (Ph.C.) and will have their degree by the time I apply to graduate school. Whether they will secure a faculty position or post-doc somewhere is unknown, but my question is whether it is okay to ask them for a recommendation letter since they will have earned their doctorate degree by then, despite having worked under them when they, themselves, were still students.

Will this be frowned upon by the admissions committee?

*This is for Social Sciences

I wrote one or two recommendation letters as a graduate student, though only after encouraging the students to find someone else if at all possible.

My experience is in math, which may be different, but it's been that a letter from a PhD student counts for somewhat less. Prestige of the letter writer matters a bit, as does experience, and a PhD student generally doesn't have either.

It would be common in your situation, I think, to have the lead faculty member write the letter, but consult with the PhD student about what to say. (Or even to have the PhD student write portions of the letter and have the lead faculty member complete and sign the letter.)

When students have done a research project but the supervising faculty member doesn't write a letter, that can be a red flag. A letter from a PhD student helps, especially if it explains that they did most of the supervising, but it still raises questions.


How to dress for visit to math phd program for accepted students? How should I dress for my visits to math programs as an accepted student?  As if I were showing up to a job interview?  Shirt and tie?  Suit?

The visit seems nicely planned by the program - jam-packed with meetings and events with faculty and students.

(I'd guess that this visit would also be a great time to talk to faculty to see who could be a great match for me as an advisor.)

Math professors tend to be pretty casual dressers compared to those in other disciplines. Wearing khaki pants and a collared shirt (polo or button down) would put one towards the dressier end of the spectrum at most places, and jeans and a t-shirt / hoody are usually unlikely to cause one to stand out.

I think that if you were to wear a suit and tie to these events you’d stand out. Not in a negative way mind you, it’s just that all of the faculty members you’ll be interacting with will be dressed much more casually. If you wear jeans or khakis with a collared shirt and sweater then you’ll look like you put in some effort and are taking this seriously, but aren’t dressed up so formally that you stand out.


How should an academic negotiate his/her salary? This is a follow-up question to this question of mine, where I wanted to know if academic salaries can be negotiated.

How does an academic negotiate a pay package that has been offered? What special points in one's profile must be emphasised in order to get a favourable bargain? Are there any standard cards (tricks) that must be played?

PS: The negotiator is assumed to be fresh out of his doctorate.

It's important to remember that you're negotiating a package, not a salary. In other words, there is a set of things you're negotiating for, and you can play games in that space to get most of what you need. Limiting yourself to salary negotiation is tricky because salaries are often the most constrained part of the package (especially in public universities in the US), and the one the chair/dean has the least power to change.

So remember that your success at the job depends on your ability to recruit students, procure resources and bootstrap your research program. Which means you need startup money to pay students, lab space and equipment money as needed, teaching relief if that helps you focus on research, and so on. Throw these all into the mix when you negotiate, so that if you give up something along one dimension, you can try to parlay that into a gain along a different dimension.

Also understand who you're really negotiating with, and what powers they really have to offer you things. This can be found out by talking with your supporters at the department (you must have some, otherwise you wouldn't have an offer) and also folks at other institutions.


Discovered that my research was not so original after it was complete. Is there a policy I should follow here? I'm a student researcher in high school.  Over the summer, I did some research on a rather obscure math topic, so there was not much research done on it.  I found some decent results on the topic, and through all my searching for articles or other sources, I did not find similar results, so I decided to write a paper on it so I could eventually submit it to some research competition.

About an hour ago, after googling my topic under some unthinkable term, I discovered that someone, in a forum post, found all my results years ago, and the work done never received much attention.  Our derivations/methods differ slightly, but overall, they are really similar.

This is really frustrating.  I thought I finally came up with something new, and yet on some obscure part of the internet, someone did it already.  I was convinced I was exhaustive in my literature review, since that forum post just never seemed to come up.  I don't think there's any time left to extend my research.

Should I submit my paper anyway?  Is it ok to submit original work that isn't original?

This happens even to people who know how to search the literature and have some experience. Often it happens because when one starts thinking about something new, one understands little, and only once one has understood some things is it possible to realize that others have also already studied and understood them. Talking to other researchers, attending conferences, reading widely, etc. are all activities that help avoid rediscovery, but obviously they are all hard for a high school student.

Generally, one should not publish results that are already available in the literature, particularly if one's methods are in the fundamental aspects the same as those used previously (moreover, it will usually be quite difficult to publish results that are already known). There are exceptions, as sometimes one has a new take on an old result, or a better way of obtaining it, or sometimes one can adapt one's work into an expository account of the already known results that could be published (this will work only if those results have generated a fair amount of interest). If one succeeds in publishing already known results, it could generate in others' minds doubts about one's honesty, although it certainly happens that people innocently rediscover and publish known results (I know several examples). Often this occurs when they rediscover them in a context different from that of the original discovery (e.g. a graph theorist discovers some algebraic fact, and publishes it in a graph theory journal, although some experts in the relevant algebra would recognize it as a special case of something they already know).

However, there is a positive side to such rediscovery, and this is the most important aspect for a high school student.

The positive aspect of rediscovery is the following. First, that one has rediscovered published results should confirm one's sense (that one ought to have already) that one is doing something interesting (this is important for one's confidence). Second, any interesting results admits extensions, variations, further developments, etc. so such rediscovery provides a base for further work. Third, as a practical matter, that someone else has already worked on something means the audience for extensions of those results is at least one (besides oneself) and it is always positive to reach others with one's work. So the productive/constructive response to discovering that one has rediscovered something is to push it farther. This really works in practice. My most recently accepted paper started this way - I worked out something, it seemed so natural that I thought this surely is in the literature already, and, sure enough, there it was, published 5 or 10 years earlier. It was a disappointment, but I kept thinking along the same lines, and it was possible to build on it to obtain something new. Also it brought me into contact with the authors of the previous work, which for me was also positive.

Finally, I would recommend that you get in touch with the mathematics department at the nearest research university. Usually someone is happy to help out an enthusiastic and talented student.


Does it look bad if I apply to two very different fields for grad school? I'm going to be applying to grad school (a combination of direct PhD and research thesis masters programs) this fall, and I cannot make up my mind between two different fields - machine learning (essentially artificial intelligence) and computer architecture (essentially processor design). They would fall under either the Computer Science or Electrical/Computer Engineering departments.

I obviously need reference letters to apply and I'm going to be asking professors I've done research with in the past. However, I'm worried that asking for reference letters for two very different fields reflects poorly on me; it makes it look like I'm not entirely dedicated towards either.

I'm afraid that the letters I get from the professors will be a lot weaker than if I only applied to one field, because in that case it would look like I'm extremely passionate about it, compared to now where it looks like I'm not entirely sure what I want to do.

I'm wondering if this is a valid concern, and if so, how I should best address it. I could obviously pick one field now, but I'd prefer to put it off till after I get offers, so I have more time to make up my mind.

Just for context, out of the three professors I'm going to ask, one of the professors worked with me on a machine learning project, one on a computer architecture project and the last one on a signal processing project (not directly related to machine learning or computer architecture).

Based on the title of your question, I thought you were going to apply for two really different fields like French Poetry and Algebraic Topology!  So, while I appreciate the difference between software design and hardware design, I certainly would not characterise machine learning and computer architecture as "very different fields".  Both involve understanding and using computers, and I'm sure there are many people with an interest in both fields.  If anything, your interest in both fields reflects a holistic interest in the field of computer science and would probably be interpreted as a positive.

Regardless of how similar or different these fields are perceived to be, I cannot imagine that it would reflect badly on you to have an interest in both, and to be willing to pursue either field at graduate level.  While academia tends to push professors to become hyper-specialised, it is not expected that we will have worn you down to this point before even entering grad school!


Can I perform psychological experiments at home and be taken seriously? I've just finished my under-graduation in psychology in my country and I'm very motivated to start publishing and making my own experiments.
Following this answer: Does one need to be affiliated with a university to publish papers?, I've discovered that I can publish papers without institutional affiliation. Is it the same with experiments?
How can I prove that my experiments were rigorously conducted and that I'm not faking documents or participants?  how can I show that I didn't induce some answers to the participants to prove a given hypothesis?
If I can publish without an institutional affiliation, would my results be taken seriously in academia?

Publishing papers about psychology experiments does present an additional issue, human subject research ethics. A reputable journal is likely to require assurance that the rights and welfare of the research subjects were protected during the research.

If you were working or studying at a research university in many countries the university would have some provision for reviewing the ethics of planned research, and monitoring it in progress. US research universities each have an Institutional review board. A journal could rely on IRB approval to know that the research subjects were protected.

You need to find out how that is handled in your country, and make sure you are following procedures and getting reviews that will make your research acceptable for the journals in which you wish to publish. There are enough pitfalls in doing human, or even animal, experiments that one should really not attempt them without guidance.

Usually, a psychology researcher starts their research career as a graduate student with an academic advisor supervising them. They will learn how their supervisor, and other researchers, prepare and organize experiments. Their supervisor will guide them in selecting ethical experiments, getting informed consent, preparing paperwork for independent review, etc.


Can a method of research used in one context be reused in a different research context? Is it permissible to reuse a methodology in another context. e.g.  One did a research on land surface temperature(LST) based on a model, say for it. Now is it legit to follow all the procedures of this research for forest loss modelling? Care that just majority are same (in methodology part) but one uses for LST and another for forest loss.

Yes, it is possible - it happens a lot. Epidemiological methods that originated in health have been applied to other fields, for example.

Doing it is easy.

Doing it rigorously, in keeping with the standards expected in academia, is really hard. It's hard because the source field's methodology usually has a lot of tacit assumptions built in. Identifying those, and testing they're applicable to the application field, is difficult. Lazy researchers don't bother doing that testing, and produce shoddy work as a result.


TOEFL Score and Teaching Assistantship How does my TOEFL score affect my odds of being granted a TA in US Universities? I'm an international student BTW.

Note that TA is normally only granted to a (usually) doctoral student. You need to be accepted into a program before you can be considered to be a TA and that will be determinative.

The evaluation will be different at every university as we have no national system here. Also, TAs do different sorts of things in different fields and in different universities/departments. Some actually teach undergraduate courses and some simply grade papers. In between are those common cases where a TA will work a few times a week with a small group from a large lecture section. For most of these situations fairly good English skills are needed, but each department will do its own evaluation. But it is probably understanding and speaking ability, more than writing, that is the most important thing as a TA.

Treat TOEFL as important but there may be other considerations that are treated as more important in a given situation.


Does it matter if I present in a PhD interview a topic which is partially unrelated to the PhD one? I have a PhD interview coming up on organic chemistry in a few days. As part of the interview process I have to give a short presentation regarding a research which I am currently undertaking. However the current research is more related towards bio-organic (more biology). Does this matter if I still present a topic which isn't exactly in the organic field?

I should however stress that I am a chemist and done a lot of organic research for my undergraduate but for my masters I took a different turn but now wish to return to the organic side.

I was offered a job in a sub-discipline that I was not a specialist in.  Everyone knew this; I was quite truthful about the situation.  If this should happen, think carefully because much extra work will be expected on your part.  I take it as obvious that you should be and have been honest throughout all this.  However, you still must evaluate very carefully what to do if the job-offer is too far removed from your field-of-study.  From:  One who has been there.


My research paper has been stolen on pretext of a book publication deal? What can I do? I submitted my paper to a supposed editor for publication in a book.
He never responded to the emails post my submission of the paper and upon contacting others from the mailing list I found out that they haven't received any response from him either.

A senior scholar suggested that I should partially publish the paper I sent so that I can save it from him stealing it. I did that and thought to forget it, but I just found out the supposed editor has a paper with my research idea in his list of publications.
This person is now doing his postdoctoral research at a European university.

As a young scholar, I am feeling quite helpless.  What can I do in this regard? Please help me.

EDIT: So upon reading the paper I can see that he lifted my idea and sources and tweaked it, my research paper was a literary analysis and he has copied my methodology and core text along with my sources.

This is an unfortunate situation. I would try to contact that person's current supervisor (if you can find out who) and explain all this, and maybe s/he can reprimand this person. Additionally, I would also contact the editor of the journal and explain the same to him/her. It might result in the paper retraction on grounds of plagiarism/academic dishonesty. However, I am not sure how would you be credited for the stolen work. Maybe an addendum saying it was your idea or maybe publishing it separately altogether.

Edit1: As @CaptainEmacs pointed out, "Add email date evidence. It is not perfect, but at least corroborates the dates."

Edit2: As @ASimpleAlgorithm pointed out, "Presumably there would be vastly more evidence possible in terms of prior revisions and incremental experimental or theoretical work. It only takes a very short conversation before it becomes obvious which person is the plagiarizer and which is the author."


Is it worth writing and publishing a survey paper while a PhD student There are opportunity costs associated with spending time on writing a critical analysis of the literature and submitting that review article to a journal as opposed to conducting research (although the two aren't mutually exclusive). As a PhD student, is it worth spending the time to write and publish a review article as opposed to just pursuing research, without impacting the graduation timeline? And if the review article is published, would it be reasonable to incorporate it in one's dissertation?
This question is of particular interest to me since I also work a full-time job and only have enough time to allocate to one, maybe two, major projects for school at a given time.
This question has been significantly revised. The old version of the question is below.

My PhD program (United States, Computer Science) recently changed the comprehensive exam requirements so that we now have to write a research survey critically analyzing an area of our choice and orally defend it. The expectation is that the survey, either as is or with some additional work, would be of publishable quality, although there is no requirement for it to be submitted or published. My advisor is encouraging me to strive for actually submitting the survey once completed.
For those familiar with the either formal or informal requirement to publish a certain number of papers in order to graduate, how would publishing a survey impact that paper count? Should or would surveys be considered to count towards the paper count requirement? Additionally, there are opportunity costs associated with writing and trying to publish a survey, such as not being able to dedicate as much time to research; however, writing the survey will certainly help with research.
I understand there are many factors in play with respect to the type of program, quality of the survey, committee members, advisor, etc., but high level considerations would be appreciated.

A survey almost certainly would count towards your paper count requirement.
A proof based on common sense is that surveys can generally be hard to distinguish from research papers: there exist review papers that have notable amount of novel work added but are still called reviews. Thus it is very unlikely for your department to put such a distinction.
Publishing your (already finished) survey is worth it.
Your original question states that you have to produce a survey of defendable quality. Then, the effort required is just polishing the survey further to publishable quality and handling the communication with a journal. The reward will be getting a publication, with all its formal (increasing your paper count, see previous paragraph) and informal (getting recognised) positive consequences. Surely worth it!
The proof is again based on common sense: if the pros did not outweigh the effort in your local environment, no work would have made its way further than internal discussions within your department.


Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions As a peer reviewer, I sometimes feel there are issues in the manuscript but I'm not sure how they should be corrected/addressed, partly due to my inadequate expertise in those exact issues.

I also sometimes find some words/terms are incorrectly used, but as a non-native speaker I can't easily suggest alternatives.

Should I just point to such issues anyway, or ignore them since I couldn't suggest solutions?

Does "peer review" mean you have to re-write the material, or just point out where the flaws may be and the author is meant to sort them?

I suggest it is the latter, so point them out and expect the author to edit / correct or justify what they meant.


Should I apply with a non-subject LoR to a university? I am applying for a master’s program in computer science. I am using two letters of recommendation from the computer science field and one LoR from the language department where I learned a foreign language. Although the foreign language was part of my undergraduate education, does using a non-department LoR create a problem for graduate admissions?

Your recommenders should be able to vouch for your previous performance in undergrad and explain why you would be successful in a graduate program. A foreign language instructor might be able to provide the first part, but they might have more trouble with the second.
If you believe that your foreign language instructor could write you a strong letter highlighting characteristics that would make you successful in your program, then they might be a good person to ask. It will not necessarily harm your application to have a letter from such a person, but a letter from someone in your area might be stronger.


Editor rejected manuscript claiming it is similar to a not-yet-published manuscript (that I haven't seen). How to proceed? A few months ago, I submitted a manuscript. After the reviews were completed I received a rejection decision from the Associate Editor (AE). The rejection was based on the basis of a single rejection recommendation by one of the four reviewers. The journal has very high standards so this is not uncommon. However, the reason for the rejection appears really awkward to me. The reviewer wrote in his/her report that another paper with a similar idea was submitted (not published) in another journal. He/she wrote that the submission date of the other paper was earlier than mine so the originality of my idea is questionable. The AE agreed with this report and adopted this argument in the rejection letter.

I want to emphasize that my results were independently developed and I have no knowledge whatsoever of the other manuscript which according to the reports that were attached has not been published yet. The whole situation seems rather awkward and I am not sure how to react. Of course the reviewer's identity is not known to me, but I find it hard to believe that he/she is not an author or somehow related to the author of the other paper.

Furthermore, I feel really offended by these comments  as it appears to me that I am implicitly being accused of plagiarism. I am considering writing a letter to the Editor in Chief. I do not want to change the decision, but I would like to make clear that my results were independently obtained. Also, what are your thoughts on how should I proceed with my manuscript?

I don't think there is any point in writing to the EiC, if you don't want to actually appeal the decision.  I would simply send a note to the AE who handled the paper:

  Thank you for handling my paper.  I accept your decision.  I would simply like to state that the results in my paper were obtained independently, and I had no previous knowledge of the unpublished manuscript mentioned by Reviewer #4.  I will look forward to reading and citing this paper when it becomes publicly available.

Then submit your paper somewhere else, quickly (though after making any revisions suggested by these reviewers).  I would be inclined to include a comment to the new journal's editor, saying that you have heard there is a paper under review somewhere with similar results, but you have been unable to obtain a copy of the paper or any further information about it.  You could also emphasize that you have obtained your results independently of any other reseacher / group.


Should I turn down PhD offer if I think I may not pass qualifying exam (risking immigration issues if I fail)? I am done with my MS in EECS from the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, and I currently working full time in a good company on OPT.

I will be defending my MS Thesis in coming December. Moreover, when I contacted one of the well-renowned Professors in my department he expressed his interest in taking me as PhD student depending if his funding is approved in next few months.

Here is the issue:

My overall GPA is 3.43 and my core GP is 3.5. I had already mentioned this to the Professor, and I straight away told that after working hard I am just a solid B+ student that too when I study with friends. I sent my transcript to him thinking he would turn me down based on my GPA, but he did not.

My question is: I don't have issues with quitting the well-paying job for the PhD program. But what scares me is the oral qualifying exam. If I don't make through the exam, and they decide to kick me out, I have no options. I will no longer be enrolled in the PhD program, and cannot go back to the industry as I have used up my OPT.

My future goal is to join academia, but if I don't pass the qualifying exam, I will put my family and me in immigration issues. So, least I can do is to work in industry and give up on joining Ph.D. At least I will not put my family at HUGE risk of getting kicked out of the US after spending so much on MS program.

Please advise. The reason I ask this question is that one must aware his limitations. When I compare myself with fellow PhD classmates, they way better than me in course work. I have never met any classmate in my graduate school who are less smarter than me.

Professors and admissions committees have a lot of experience in accepting students- they wouldn't offer you a position unless they were confident that you were capable of handling the program. It's just as bad a situation for your professor if you fail at the oral exam stage: they will be stuck in year 2 of a 5 year grant without an experienced student and no immediate replacement to carry on that work.

Two specific thoughts:

Find out who the Graduate Program Chair or the Graduate Admissions Committee Chair is for your department and ask them the same question you asked your professor. These are people with a lot of experience handling and admitting graduate students, and they can give you an impartial opinion.
See if this program has an alternative to the oral examination. My program allowed thesis-option MS students to waive the oral exam under some conditions.  In some labs it was very common for students (typically international students with weaker presentation skills) to fulfill the MS requirements and write a thesis rather than doing an oral presentation.


What typesetters do with the submitted paper? I am informed that submitted paper supposed to be sent to the typesetters today. I am advised to check the mails. Until now there is no acknowledgement except the first mail. I am curious about the typesetters job in this process. Do they make considerable updates? Do I have much work to do, after typesetter is done with the paper? Since, I am on holiday, I wonder if the workload will ruin my holiday?

Typically, once a manuscript has been typeset, the editor asks the author(s) to check for errors that might have been introduced by the typesetting process. The checking process does not take too long, but I suggest you to check carefully the equations (if there are any), for their meaning is unknown to the typesetter and he or she might involuntarily introduce errors in case of reformatting.


How can I let google scholar find conference name of an arXiv paper? I uploaded a paper to arXiv, and google scholar made its index.
The paper is then accepted for a conference, but the website of the conference does not have any link to the pdf of the paper.
The search result of google scholar shows that the paper is on arXiv, but it does not show the conference name.
As arXiv suggests, I put the conference name in the "comments" field when I submitted to arXiv. However, it seems like google scholar cannot recognize it.

How can I tell google scholar the conference name of the arXiv paper?

Google scholar crawls the web automatically and indexes all the papers that it finds. Your paper will not be listed with the conference name before it is actually published. And since the conference has not taken place in your case, it will not be listed as such (and how should google know that the ArXiV paper and the official versions are exactly the same - which they probably aren't?).

So you have to wait until the official version of the paper appeared (e.g., on the publisher's web page). You can then tell Google Scholar to merge the two papers into one in your account.


What to do when the potential supervisor does not respond after initial positive response? I contacted to the potential supervisor and got his reply after 3 days, saying that he is available to be my supervisor. Then, I contacted him again whether he would like to have meeting with me (which is part of admission process) or proceed the formal application. Now after 1 week, I didn't receive any of his reply. Should I send follow up mail or call him?

After waiting for on week, it seems reasonable to write another friendly reminder email to him. Calling might be an option but you may not succeed if he is currently out of office. Therefore I would rather write an email.


Steps to take from a paper to a patent? My question relates to the following thread I posted some weeks ago:

How to publish a paper that does not seem to be within the scope of any journal?

I have written the paper mentioned in that thread, which I HAVE NOT PUBLISHED YET (see the history there; I was entertaining the idea of uploading it in Arxiv, but right now it seems more reasonable to me to keep calm and do not risk anything in any dumb move which might cost me dearly; there is always time to upload it or publish it later on).

The thing is: as of late I have received very positive feedback from some mathematicians and / or computer scientists which read the paper I sent them privately. The paper provides some very fruitful clues for further practical implementation which engineers or computer scientists might undertake. I myself could give them the indications to do it, at least at the beginning. It is not far-reaching to think that some application (algorithm, software  and the like) might derive from that. I would like to be legally as assured as it gets, so, the question is twofold, I guess:

Could I patent the basic findings from the paper, without waiting for the specific applications?

Should I necessarily be part of the application in order to economically profit from it, or does any other form suffice (say, the people taking up the task signing their intellectual dependence on the paper or the like?).

I would like to know how to proceed so that the transition is smooth and no one gets busted in the process (neither me nor the others).

What you can and cannot claim in a patent is a highly debated area. You should really consult a legal expert.

If you're affiliated with a college or university, they probably have an office that handles these sorts of things. They'll guide you through the patent process and help cover some/all of the fees. You might not have any choice of working with them. Depending upon your contract, the school might own part of your work and have the legal option to attempt to monetize it first.

If you're not with an organization or you know that you're free from any legal obligations, you should get in touch with a patent lawyer. They can help you draft the patent, help look for prior work, and advise you on the intricacies of international IP.

You can try to patent it on your own, but I really advise against it. A lawyer will help you understand what parts of your work you can patent. They will also help to draft the patent in as broad a way as possible to allow you to claim as much as you can.


Should I ask my research advisor for extra hourly work as a gap-year research assistant (not a student)? I'm currently working as a post-bac researcher with my undergraduate advisor in the US, but lost my funding last summer. So, I have been doing the research as voluntary work and work odd jobs that are not contributing to my career just to pay the bills. I'm in a tight financial situation where earning some extra money would be good.

Since I am not a graduate student, would it be reasonable to ask my advisor if I can be paid for some side research and TA-related work (e.g. grading papers for a class)? Does this seem like atypical request to a professor?

There's nothing wrong with asking.  However, I suspect it's unlikely you'll get it.  Such work is often restricted to enrolled students only.


Applying to PhD programs while pursuing a PhD Imagine the following situation. Somebody is doing their PhD in field A in the US.
 Suppose they became interested in a different field, field B, and consider doing PhD in field B instead. Suppose further that the university they are doing PhD at is not suitable for doing PhD in field B for some reason. Is it acceptable to apply for PhD positions in field B in other universities without notifying their current university until after they have been admitted to a program of their interest? The reason for doing this is to ensure that if they don't get accepted anywhere, then they could just continue pursuing their PhD in field A (which is also an acceptable option for them).

In most fields in the US this would be acceptable. An exception might be if you have accepted a grant that has some sort of termination clause that prevents it or makes it difficult. If you wind up leaving your current position you might have some ethical obligation to finish up some tasks if they affect others, but that is a separate question.

In general, though, you can seek a better position for yourself.

But you will also need to be able to explain to the new institution why you are leaving and why you are a good prospect for their program. Self awareness and learning are usually a good reason that (most) people will accept.


Accepted behaviour while working in international collaborations How is getting-job-done outlook perceived in different parts of the academic world? In some parts of physics, I know a person who goes forward and suggests times and dates for meeting up for the workgroup and some improvements will be very welcome do to so since it is viewed as a responsible and active act. However, I noticed that in some research areas (which even might be the nature of the subject or the people involved) this might be seen as an imposing behaviour where they believe in suggesting a meeting and not stating any times/dates to give space to the other people involved.
My question is there any international standard or accepted etiquette in this regard?

There is no international standard of etiquette. Cultures differ so much between countries (and within countries) that I think it would be impossible to agree on the details of such a thing. What you are discovering is part of the fun of collaborating with other people from different countries: you get to indirectly learn about the cultures and working practices of those countries.
In situations like this, my advice is to take it on a case-by-case basis. Ask your collaborators early on whether they prefer you to take the lead on suggesting meeting times and related goals, or whether they would prefer to communicate with you as and when they make progress. That way you can ensure that everyone is happy as the collaboration goes on, and you can always check in with them later on to see that the arrangement is still working for everyone.


Do professors get paid for supervising students? Do professors get paid for supervising PhD students / honours student's projects?

If so, typically how much?

In the US, supervising graduate students is generally considered part of the normal workload of a faculty member and there's no extra pay for doing this.

The number of students supervised is typically a factor in tenure, promotion, and pay raise evaluations.  Not supervising enough graduate students can hurt your evaluations and might possibly result in your not getting tenure or promotion or a pay raise.


Does everyone who is doing a PhD has to dabble in philosophy to a certain extent? Does everyone who is doing a PhD has to dabble in philosophy to a certain extent?

The question is irrespective of the field of research.

No. This is a misinterpretation of what “Ph.D.” means. The full title of the degree is Philosophiae doctor, technically a doctor “of philosophy.” However, this does not mean "philosophy" in the modern sense, but rather someone who pursues knowledge (“lover of wisdom”—the source of "philosophy"), not necessarily someone who studies philosophy.


APA location/address of publisher vs location of conference I need some clarification of the parameter location specified in the APA manual regarding papers published in the proceedings of conferences. Virtually all online data banks for papers that I came across give the location where the conference took place but not the location of the publisher. Some times I have a hard time finding out what the latter is sometimes I can't find it at all.

The manual gives this example:

  39. Proceedings published in book form

  Katz, I., Gabayan, K., & Aghajan, H. (2007). A multi-touch surface
  using multiple cameras. In J. Blanc-Talon, W. Philips, D. Popescu, & P.
  Scheunders (Eds.), Lecture Notes in ComputerScience: Vol. 4678.
  Advanced Concepts for intelligent Vision Systems (pp. 97—108). Berlin,
  Germany: Springer-Verlag. doi:
  10.1 007/978-3-5407460729

Does location really mean the formal/legal location of the publisher? What if I can't find out what it is because the publisher does not mention it on their website?

I think "location" means the venue of the conference, where it was formally organized. This location is needed to conflict when there are two different conferences with the same name organized in two different locations.

The location that shows in your example "Germany" is most probably the place where the proceeding is published. This location is not very required.


US Academia and sick days In a comment to their answer to the question Faculty member brought sick (feverish) child to class - is this unethical?, the user Anonymous Physicist writes:

"
@quarague It's okay to cancel class for a sick child in US academia, but some US workplaces do not grant sick days for sick children. US academics don't have sick days at all.
"

I come from a European country where the concept of "Sick Days" is different than in the US (indeed, I understand the word "sick day" only because of Workplace SE and I am still not sure I understand it correctly) -- as I understand, a sick day is day you can take when you are sick and still get paid.
My question: Is the comment true, i.e. do US academics not get sick days? Is it really true universally in the US (i.e there is some "law" or regulations that universities are not allowed to give sick days to their employees)?
Is there some other system in place or do US professors really just not get paid when they are sick? (If not, why hasn't there been some strikes/demands/movements? Surely tenured profs don't need to worry to get fired when they make demands?)

Please note that while those questions may sound silly for a US person, US and European employment laws differ a lot and the whole concept of "sick days" is really complicated to me.

For full-time faculty, the question doesn't really apply well because faculty aren't paid hourly or daily.  In the departments I've been involved with, the policy is that faculty handle their own classes and minor illnesses.  That is, if I need to cancel class one day then what that means for the class is up to me.  Maybe I have a TA teach it, or I offer a recorded lecture to fill in time, or even just cancel the class and adjust material accordingly.

What it comes down to is whether I can meet the obligations for the class while handling my illness.  For major illnesses where that isn't true, the department would schedule someone else to teach and I would look at my short-term disability benefits, which are commonly available in large US universities.  The unfortunate exception is an adjunct faculty member, who simply teaches contract-to-contract, and may not even have benefits through the university.


How to avoid European bias in science history teaching? I'm a new lecturer. Part of my course (one lecture) teaches the origins of our scientific understanding of the solar system.  I talk about the ancient Greeks, the preservation of their work by eastern scholars, the Renaissance, Copernicus, Kepler, De Brahe, Galileo, Newton, etc. Much like how I was taught, and also following the course text (that I inherited).
In some student feedback I have been accused of giving the impression that everything was discovered or worked out by white European men. It's made me feel very lazy. I want to improve and avoid giving this impression.  But firstly, how should I respond?

[I want to] avoid giving the impression [...] that everything was discovered or worked out by white european men.

I'm not a science historian, so I can't really say if the impression is actually right or wrong. It seems counter-intuitive, however, that a small local fraction of the earth's population should have "worked out" science alone. That's puzzling enough to examine this assumption.

  I want to improve.

This is a great example for how questions from students can trigger a researcher to advance their own research and understanding. I'm sure there's a huge literature on non-western science history. Knock yourself out.

  But firstly, how should I respond

By admitting that you know little about non-western science history, and that, naturally, your previous knowledge and specialization have shaped the syllabus of your course. After asking colleagues and/or doing your own literature search (it doesn't have to go into any depth), you may feel confident enough to give some pointers to your students who want to read up on non-western origins of science. The main point here is to acknowledge your perspective (and you already did that) rather than to claim a "neutral" viewpoint based on unexamined assumptions.


Is it okay for a supervisor to require students to seek permission before publishing? If I were a PhD student, should I be concerned if my supervisor always requires their permission before I can publish a paper?

Under what conditions should I find it acceptable or unacceptable?

If you are including your supervisors name, or anyone else's name, you should notify them first and allow them to review the paper before sending it to the publisher.

If you are just wanting to publish under your name alone, it depends. Are you publishing findings from data that belongs to your advisor (or anyone else's data)? Typically any data collected by you that was paid for by your funding agency belongs to the principal investigator, which is usually your advisor. You should ask for their permission before you publish findings from his or her data.

This applies to abstract submissions as well.


Why don't Universities pay PhD students more? I've worked in higher education on the administrative side. I've been able to get a very thorough look at University budgets. From my perspective it's really a travesty that research Universities, with their multi-billion dollar operating budgets seem more inclined to hire largely purposeless administrators than to increase PhD stipends/wages such that a PhD wouldn't be so financially painful for students.

From my own perspective working in administration, it seems to me that the blame can be placed squarely at the feet of the near universal tendency for bureaucracies to naturally increase in size over time if left to their own devices. The discussion of why this is the case is beside the point, but this near universal law seems to be at work here. This limits graduate student stipend size because when faced with the choice of expanding the bureaucracy or paying graduate students more, the administrator - as a bureaucrat - will almost invariably decide to expand the bureaucracy.

That said, there are other dynamics at play in Universities that make me wonder why bureaucracies have been so successful at vacuuming up funds. Elite Universities often compete for top PhD candidates, so why haven't the competitive forces that drive up wages in the face of labor demand also driven up the stipends offered to accepted candidates? Are Universities coordinating to keep stipends artificially low? Or is the bureaucratic tendency to expand overpowering the market dynamics that would otherwise compel Universities to offer higher stipend packages? Or are existing stipend packages already at what we would expect the market level to be?

For students funded via the NIH and similar mechanisms (CDC and AHRQ come to mind), there are standard rates for what graduate students are paid. This is a fairly extensive treatment on the subject for one university: https://controller.ucsf.edu/file/4361

There are some ways to supplement this, but "This is what my grant pays for" is a very strong pressure on budgets, and departments often set grad student pay by policy in light of this, to prevent there being clear gradients of funding between students in their department.

Note that going over this by a lot via something like unionization can have extremely unintended consequences, like PIs suddenly becoming much more interested in postdocs.


How to apply for professorship in another field? I am an associate professor of chemistry and all my education was in chemistry programs too. But my works were always in computational science. I developed various programs for analyzing chemical data. All I work with are programming language and algorithms.

I prefer to work in a computer department where I can use my skills for other applications (than chemistry) and work with colleagues who have knowledge about programming.

Can I apply for an assistant professorship in a department of computer science? How can I convince them that my experiences are comparable with computer education?

My worry is that because any academic position includes teaching at undergraduate level, department does not allow me to teach course as I have not studied that curriculum.

With due attention to the fact that within that CS department, there might be many affiliated faculty members, are who proficient in programming and capable of teaching, your tendency might not, reasonably, lead to the desired outcome.

As the programming skills, nowadays, are essential for different scientific disciplines, I suggest you try to convince the department, in a proposal-based manner, to define a programming-driven course for students corresponding to your home department, you say, containing the fundamentals of the simulating chemical processes (If it has not been already existed, of course)...

Such scenario would sound more functional for you to follow your interest.


Why do some conferences have a variable amount of reviewers for each submitted paper? Why do some conferences have a variable number of reviewers for each submitted paper?

For example, I read on https://redd.it/9nomv1 that the AAAI 2019 conference has between 3 and 5 reviewers for each paper submission. Why isn't the number of reviewers the same for all submitted papers? Is that to make up for non-experienced or outside-the-area reviewers, or for reviewers who do not turn in reviews?

Editors usually invite more than the minimum amount of reviewers when they assign a paper for peer review, because not all invited reviewers will agree to do the review. A suggestion that I have seen in a guideline for editors (and which indeed mostly works well in my experience for this specific publication venue) is to invite 5 or 6 reviewers initially when aiming to get 2 reviews.

Occasionally an editor will be lucky and (almost) all invited reviewers will submit the review, leading to a higher than required number of reviews for this manuscript.

In other cases there will be less than the minimum number of reviews even though more reviewers have been invited, and the editor will have to invite even more reviewers.


Applying for graduate programs in different subfields? Suppose you have done work in two subfields of a main field, and have a keen interest in both of them. Some examples might be,

Main field: Physics, Subfields: Experimental Quantum Optics and Condensed Matter Theory
Main field: English, Subfields: American Literature and Medieval Studies/Literature
Main field: Mathematics, Subfields: Topology and Numerical Analysis

Is it a bad idea to apply to some programs in one subfield and some programs in the other subfield? I'm faced with this dilemma, and my hope is to choose which subfield to go into based on my acceptance offers.

Or is it better to just buckle down and only apply for programs in one subfield? Certainly that would make you more focused, and thus more desirable as a candidate (and also more focused as a researcher).

The main problem you'll face is the increased workload you'll face in preparing your application materials. Depending on the programs, you'll often be expected to identify faculty you'd be interested in working with, and you'll be expected to succinctly show why your research interests fit with that person. The statement will also be viewed as a whole, so you will inevitably need to either focus a single application around certain aspects or be clear that you are open to a range of sub-fields within a given discipline.

Some people like very focused statements, while others are still welcoming of more broadly stated interests, so one is not necessarily good or bad. That's part of your unique situation and interests, but the advice I've been given is if you really do have broad interests, express that because it will attract advisers and programs that value that. But if you really only want to study certain things, say that because that too attracts you to the right people you're more likely to be happy with in the long run.

Most people (all I've talked with, anyway) find preparing multiple drafts of all the materials stressful as it is, so having to prepare multiple versions with very different tones and a different focus likely will take you some more time and effort to do well. So if you are applying to only one sub-field per application you can still focus your statement on that field and just the right people to work with in that field - but you are going to have to create at least 2 sets of very different personal statements, each of which will be customized per program.

As long as you are OK with the extra workload, I am not aware of any other downsides beyond application fees if you are applying to more programs in total. Applying to programs with different sub-fields is fine if you really interested in both, and will not generally make you a less attractive candidate because no one but you (and maybe your letter writers) has any idea you're applying to a variety of programs.


Is it easier to obtain H1B / green card as academics in the US? I am a social science PhD student (with a quantitative bent) at a U.S. research university. If paperwork is not a concern, I would be equivalently interested in working as an academic and in private industries. However, one of my goal is to be able to stay in the U.S., thus to craft my plan I hope to know whether it is indeed easier to obtain H1B / green card as an academic than as a PhD-holding employee? My industry-relevant skill-set is statistical training and programming.

While this question has far-reaching relevance for any typical international PhD students, I would also be willing to give more details regarding my training, my school reputation, etc. if it helps answering the question.

P/S: This is throwaway account for anonymity. I have been an avid user of StackExchange and would love your input.

First of all, IANAL.

The H1B process requires a declaration from the employer that the skill set provided by the candidate cannot be found within the US. This is typically not too hard to satisfy, and is required regardless of whether you're in academia or in private industry.

The Green card process can change dramatically depending on which process you use. Academics will typically go through what is execrably called the 'Outstanding Researcher' process, which awards a green card based on scholarly excellence. But Ph.Ds in private industry also go through this process (I did!). It really depends on the willingness of the employer (because of the legal processing involved).

The alternative is to go through the "regular" advanced degree process, which has different qualification requirements and has a different queue/wait time. Arguably, this could take longer, and I don't think academics ever go through this.

So the bottom line is: it depends on the employer, but there's a technical sense in which being an academic can help slightly.


Paper accepted by a journal without comments Did you ever get a paper accepted by a journal without any comment at all? It has happened to me twice; both times with a very high-standing journal in my field.

I was initially confused, did not know whether to be pleased, or horrified. I then settled for the latter. In my opinion, this is a terrible consequence of the current publishing model where editors are not necessarily qualified to review papers, and referees do not have either financial or prestige incentives to do a good job.

Is this common? What did you think of this phenomenon?

EDIT: after all your nice answers and comments, and talking to people working in the editorial side of peer-review process, I came to the conclusion that the lack of replies was due to the fact that both papers were - somewhat - interdisciplinary. I understand it is way harder for editors to understand interdisciplinary papers (they are expert in a subject, not necessarily in multiple subjects) and thus judge for themselves and to find appropriate reviewers. If this was true, it would be particularly scary as the most groundbreaking papers are typically multidisciplinary and thus most likely be accepted with little criticism (if the author is already renowned) or dismissed without further ado (if the author is relatively unknown, at least in that area).

This has happened to me twice. The first occurrence was for a paper that was accepted in a decent computational fluid mechanics journal with a single reviewer. The comments were purely aesthetics ( Color change to some figures, etc.). The second time was in a chemical engineering journal (also a pretty good one), and there were absolutely zero comments from the single reviewer that reviewed the paper.

Initially, I found these occurrence quite alarming because the papers had been accepted after significant delay (2-3 months at least), but had been reviewed by a single reviewer. With time, I think this is just a proof that the review process is by itself flawed, but there is little we can do as researcher except carry our own reviews with as much care as possible.

However, from a career point of view, no one knows how many reviewers actually reviewed your paper once it is published (except for some very specific journals). What I did, and maybe I can suggest you do the same, is to take extra care when you do the proof reading of the paper and the corrections. I would even ask some colleagues or at least your co-authors to help you as much during the proof reading.


Is a professor required to provide homework solutions? For graduate school classes, if a professor writes his own homework questions and creates his own problem sets, is he required to provide solutions to the homework problems, after the homeworks have been turned in and graded by his teaching assistant(s)?

No. The professor gets to decide if it would be more beneficial for students' learning to provide full solutions, partial solutions, or no solutions to homework problems.


Student leaving before completing PhD - how to write about his motivations for switching in recommendation letter? I have a beginning PhD student who wants to enroll in a more prestigious PhD program elsewhere. He has done good research work here, both with my group and with a group at the university he wants to join. He is currently supported from my grant. He also wants to switch fields to something he always wanted to do.

In his recommendation letter, I want to write the things above and motivate why he wants to switch fields.

Will switching fields be seen as a negative by a graduate admission committee? He's done it already twice, mostly because funding and availability of diploma and master's advisers.
Will the graduate committee feel it is better to give the PhD position to a candidate who is not currently financially supported?
Will leaving a PhD program before completion be seen as a negative? We simply do not have specialists in the field of his choice at my institution.

I might be overthinking this, but given the quality of his work, so far, I think it would be a shame for him to miss out on a much better opportunity to (re)start a career. I also think he will perform well in that PhD program.

I think you probably are overthinking this somewhat.  I have written a number of letters for students in similar situations--wanting to leave my department's doctoral program (sometimes after earning a masters, sometimes not) for a better one (sometimes in a different area)--and they have generally been successful in getting into excellent programs.  (These students, naturally, tend to be among the best who are enrolled in our program.  On the one hand, I hate to lose them, but for the students themselves, moving is probably the best choice for their careers.)  In my letters, I try to give a modest amount of context for why the students are leaving, but mostly I just try to write them a conventional very strong letter.

I don't have any firsthand knowledge of what the admissions committee at a top institution would think of a student who has switched areas multiple times, but if you explain that the student wants to switch fields and that the new field has always been his real passion (and explain why he has been unable to pursue that area previously), I imagine that would go a long way.  The people reading the application might still look a bit askance of somebody who has changed subject areas repeatedly, but I don't think there's much more you can do to address that point specifically.  Just make the overall letter strong.

I seriously doubt that the admissions committee is going to refuse admission to somebody who already has a funded position elsewhere.  They want to get the best people for their program, and if the student has a valid reason to want to move, I think that ought to be enough.  Even my own (middle-ranked) department gets some applications from people who are already funded in graduate programs at other institutions, and this has never been an issue in our decision making process.

In the long term, I don't think anybody is going to look back over a student's record and be concerned that he jumped around a few times before completing a strong Ph.D. at a good institution.  People transfer between programs fairly frequently.  (Most people don't move, obviously, but movers are not rare either.)  And again, moving should not hurt his admission chances right now, provided he (and you) give a good explanation of why he wants to move.

So I think the most important thing you can do is to write a strong letter.  Emphasize that the student already had demonstrated skill in research working with you and that you believe he has excellent potential in the new area he wants to work in.  Explain why the student wants to move and that you support the decision, but don't let that be the main focus of your letter.  That's just there to assure the admissions committee that the student doesn't have some problem.  The core should be your strong evaluation of the student, just like in any strong recommendation letter.


How to decide whether I should use “we” in an essay? The answers to this question promote a view that the personal pronoun we is acceptable in an academic paper. But I did not see an answer there, or more generally on this site, that discourages the use of we. This question is different to the one mentioned above because it queries whether the word we should be used at all, not just to ask whether I or we is more appropriate.

The economics department at my university (UCT) discourages the use of personal pronouns in an essay – I was marked down in my essay for my use of the word we. At the end of my essay, I wrote

  In conclusion, we note that the European sovereign debt crisis created uncertainty in the global financial market, and South Africa was one of many countries that dealt with this.

I decided to use we in my essay because I had grown accustomed to seeing it in mathematics textbooks, so I assumed that it was formal enough. But the economics department says that it is not formal enough.

Even though it seems acceptable to use we in some circles, it seems that it is a point of debate. What guidelines should I be using in order to make my decision about whether to use we or not?* Should I continue to use we as I see fit, except for economics essays? Or, should I apply this rule to all my academic essays (I also study public policy & administration)?

It would ostensibly be silly to have different writing styles emanating from the same person. The problem has not been brought up before, and I have used the word in a number of sociology essays in first year, and one public policy & administration essay in second year. In those essays, I used the word in the following ways.

  In this section, we discuss motivations for why provincial government should be restructured.

and

  Applying this model to provincial government, we can graph a U-shaped function of long-run average cost.

and

  Approaching the question from the side of the teacher, we find that inequality can be caused via culturally insensitive teaching methods.

As a final clarification, I do prefer to use the word.

* Edit: Although it was not initially made clear, I have not been provided with style guides. However, I doubt that I would ask this question if I were provided with style guides. Saying that I should "follow the style guide" makes perfect sense, but doesn't really help me in my situation. I asked this question on academia.SE so that I could ask others to brainstorm ideas about how I could make the decision without a style guide (e.g. how were those rules formed in the first place?).

You're doing a postgraduate degree, so you should have been taught / be about to be taught the basics of academic writing.

Here is one of the basic rules.

Follow the style guide.

You've been told what the style guide for your coursework says about personal pronouns: it says don't use them. Follow it. Don't use personal pronouns in your coursework.

When you write for something with a different style guide, follow that style guide instead.

Different style guides have different rules. That's what makes them different.

No, it is not ostensibly silly to have different writing styles from the same person, assuming that person can comprehend and follow Rule 1, above.


If I took electives from another program during my BSc and MSc, how should I list it on my CV? While I was doing my BSc in Applied Mathematics I took 5 electives that were part of the Data Science MSc program. Right now I am pursing a MSc in Computer Science at the same school and I'm taking two courses that are also part of the Data Science MSc. When I finish my master's program in a year, I will have also taken another two courses that are part of the Data Science program.

So, in total I will have taken 9 courses part of the Data Science program. Since the Data Science program has 11 courses in total, I was thinking on saying that during my BSc and MSc I took 9 out of 11 courses part of the Data Science master's program and list it something like the following (it wasn't actually at Harvard, it's just an example):

2014: Applied Mathemaics BSc
Harvard College, Cambridge, MA.
2017: Computer Science MSc
Harvard College, Cambridge, MA.
Additional coursework: Data Science MSc
Harvard College, Cambridge, MA.
Took 9 out of 11 courses from the program (not officially enrolled).

Do you think it's okay to do it this way?

You shouldn't. This is what your transcripts are for.
If you truly need to point out your data science experience, note briefly when you refer to your education, in the cover/application letter, that this information can be found there.
If you don't think your transcript reflects well enough to refer to, then mentioning the courses without a willingness to back that claim up, will come across as suspicious.


How to ask a teacher for an extension? I failed an exam last year and now I am retaking it but in a different format.
Everytime I sit in front of my laptop to write the assignment I have anxiety. My anxiety is mainly caused by the fear I have to fail the exam or the fear to make the things wrong. The anxiety probably depends also on other reasons(I have a chronic disease plus other families related problems). I did not say anything to my teacher about the anxiety because I don't want he thinks I am using the anxiety as an excuse.

The problem is that I already asked for a small extension but now, I realized I need few more days. What should I do?I am spending all my days crying because I am stuck with this assignment and I cannot procede. I have the fear of the deadlines, I always wait the last days to finish an assignment because of my menthal status and the medical treatment the doctor gave is not helping me as I am feeling sleepy the whole day.

I don't know what exactly to ask to the teacher...If I can say the truth(stress/anxiety related problems) or if I can tell him that I need few days because I would like to achieve better result without talking about my mental status(which is something I need to fix as soon as possible).

Update 09/03/2020: I didn't receive any answer from the teacher :( I am feeling really really bad

Most universities have an office dedicated to helping students deal with disabilities of various kinds. Perhaps you should visit them. They can probably help with stress reduction. In extreme cases a doctor's help might be needed.

But, you might also consider asking your professor for an alternate way to take the exam than online. Perhaps taking it on paper would be helpful. Perhaps having someone else in the room with you would be helpful. But think about more options than just additional time. There is something going on in your life that suggests that time, alone, isn't the issue.

Even an oral exam is better for some people, though not everyone. But it requires a certain amount of empathy from the professor that not all will exhibit.

But if you need to ask, do so in person if at all possible. It is more likely to be successful and the professor might be able to suggest alternatives that won't come up in an email exchange.


Can I take the biochemistry GRE test if I am a biology graduate? I currently hold a bachelor of science in botany but plan to do a master's in genetics. I was wondering if I can take the GRE subject test for biochemistry, molecular biology, and genetics, or am I eligible for biology graduate record test  only?

There are no requirements on who can take a GRE subject test. So long as you pay the test fee, they're happy to take your money, even if you've never taken a course in the subject in your life. You're a French major who wants to take the mathematics GRE? Bien sur !


3 - 4 years since I graduated, how should I time asking for recommendations? Since I graduated as an undergrad three years ago, I've been planning to go back into graduate school, so I saved all my assignments and heavily kept up on studying and research. My transcript looks good and I've had a lot of time to focus on GREs.

The most uncertain and anxious part is getting letter of recommendations from my former professors. Due to my nature, I haven't maintained contact with the three professors I have in mind, especially given the job I have. I'm confident that they'll remember me if I send them a quick e-mail, but I'm hesitant about the timing. It seems a bit awkward to re-establish contact out of nowhere without letting them know my intention, but at the same time, I feel it's a bit too early to let them know I would like to start looking into graduate school.

I was thinking of sending them e-mails stating my intention to apply to graduate schools, be able to provide documents/statements so they have something to remember and write about me, and ask if they were interested on writing the recommendation. If so, I would follow up and provide them the application details several months ahead.

Is this better than asking them out of the blue when graduate application crunch time starts?

Also, for professors and those who wrote letter of recommendations, what are your experiences of writing recommendations for former students reaching back 3 - 4 years later?

Edit: Update on this below

My recommendation is similar to those posted in comments. I worked for several years before applying to graduate school and did not stay in touch with my professors during that time. Approximately 4 months before I applied to graduate school, I sent each professor a brief (1 paragraph) email explaining my graduate education plans and career interests, and asking if they would be willing to write letters of recommendation, which would be due in November. I also indicated that if they were willing, I would send them my CV and a summary sheet of my college activities for their reference. I contacted them via email, as I lived in a different state than the college, and face-to-face meetings were impractical.

When they agreed to write the letters I sent them:

A summary sheet listing each program I was applying to. For each program I listed the address and contact person (so the letter could be properly addressed), 1 line about why the program interested me, the names of faculty I was interested in, the application deadline, and specific application letter forms or links to online applications, if relevant.
My CV
A summary sheet highlighting specific grades in major-related courses; research projects and activities I engaged in during college; a 1 paragraph narrative explaining what I had done since graduating and why I was interested in pursuing another degree; and a list of courses I took with that particular professor/letter writer, along with the grade for the course and any special projects completed in those courses. Try to keep this to 1 page.

Although this sounds like a lot of information, work to keep it as brief as possible, while ensuring the professor has the information they need to write a strong letter.

You may choose to time this differently, but the four month window ensured that I had committed to applying and gave me time to identify alternative writers if they had declined. I'm not sure it would be useful to ask your professors a year in advance, as 1) your plans may change, and 2) they may not recall a commitment they make that far in advance. That said, I would make initial contact in the summer before you apply; if you wait until the school year kicks into full gear, your email might get lost in the shuffle. When I was applying I was advised by multiple people to provide all materials to my letter-writers a minimum of 2 months prior to the deadline. Many schools require letters to be written on specific forms, have surveys your letter writers are asked to complete, or even ask the letters be submitted online; it's unlikely the most recent application will be available more than a few months prior to the application deadline.

A few final notes:

Be sure to ask if they feel they can write you a strong letter, not just a letter of recommendation. Most faculty will be honest about this.
Send your letter writers an email two weeks prior to the application deadline to thank them and remind them of the approaching deadline. Many online applications will indicate when your letters of recommendation have been uploaded.
Be sure to thank them, both when they agree to write the letter and when the letter is submitted. Consider writing and mailing a formal thank you note, once the application is submitted. Also, contact them once you're accepted and have decided on a school; they like to know how it's worked out!


Quitting a job after spending ahead on a grant Let's say that I take a position at a university, and the university gives me a grant of $X for 2 years. I use the grant to buy a bunch of equipment and make some international trips, which costs me three quarters of $X. After one year, I decide to quit to take another job elsewhere, and I cannot take the grant with me as it was from the university.

What typically happens in this situation? Is it possible for the grant to get prorated ($X/2 per year), in which case I would have overspent my budget by a quarter of $X? If not, are there any other repercussions?

Most grants are not given in a lump sum, but in a sequence of increments---typically 12-months increments, but sometimes shorter or longer.

It is true that when you get a chunk of money for a increment, there is typically quite a bit of flexibility in how you spend it within a phase (though some funder require notification if you go significantly "off plan").  You cannot spend more than you've been allocated, however, and asking for an increment in advance is typically either impossible or else requires negotiation and approvals from the funder.

In your hypothetical situation, then, if the funder (university or external) gave all of the money up front, and the spend plan was within contractual bounds, they really have no place to object if you happened to spend it faster than anticipated (assuming no other regulations were violated).

However... the money was never actually yours. It belongs to your institution in some way (probably via your department via appropriate contracting and accounting personnel), and you probably never even had the right to sign for the money.  You were just given authority over allocating its expenditure.  As such, when you leave, the remaining money (and any tangible assets, like equipment) stay in place.  The money will likely go away, since the terms of the grant specified key personnel (you) who are no longer available, but if the parting is friendly enough it may be possible for somebody else to take responsibility and the project to continue with you as a subcontract or consultant.

Reputational consequences based on the particulars of how you quit, of course, are another matter entirely.


Usage of Videos or Images from Youtube/ Google-images as data source I'm working on a deep neural network research application Does usage of youtube videos or google images as data source cause a sharing-data, ethical, copyright or commercial problem? The aim of the usage of these data is only academic research. Maybe we can neglect google-images because of there are many free image data set. But we need youtube videos because of time and cost. Instead of sharing data in the article, is sufficient to write: "this study uses top 10(or more) search results for keyword search on youtube/google". There are lots of machine learning examples that learn from google like https://www.pyimagesearch.com/2017/12/04/how-to-create-a-deep-learning-dataset-using-google-images/

I think this depends on more than what you state here. In particular, it depends on what you intend to do with the data you analyze and how you intend to present it. If you copy/replicate/publish the material, then you need to deal with copyright as anyone would. But if you are only extracting naturally anonymous information from it you should have no problem. Your suggestion that you "reference" your dataset not by providing a copy of it, but by giving (with the date of access) the search terms that generate it, you should be fine.

As an example, if you are researching how many people pass by a certain street corner on a given Tuesday, you can gather the counts without getting "informed consent" from everyone that passes. No issues there. But if you intend to publish, somehow, the names (or images, or other information) of those people then it is a completely different story. You will need to judge where on that spectrum your study lies. I think you can even categorize things in the aggregate as long as you don't label individual items with your categories. To say that "60% of the videos we examine have blue backgrounds" is benign. Even saying "40% of the videos in our sample present conservative positions" is fine, as long as you don't "name names" and point fingers. (I am not a lawyer, of course.)

If you were in the US, then your IRB would give you guidance on this. In your country there may be institutional rules to guide you. You should seek those out. But generally, the "academic use" exceptions to copyright that were in place in the past have been fading out as copyright holders try, usually successfully, to extend their control over the culture. Not a good thing, but the law can be used against you.


Interesting vs tractable PhD topics When one starts a PhD, should it be based upon interest or tractability of the project? If a project fails is switching advisors a reasonable option within the same department?
I have a couple options for PhD, one is an area I am more interested in but it's a more open ended problem with potentially less straightforward solutions. It also gives a background in more areas I am interested in learning and more industry applicable(focused on making novel system which works).
The other I don't think I want to work on for 4 years but probably will be more straightforward, it's also less useful to industry(I think) and more theoretical in nature. It is a continuation(mostly) of what I already know.
I'm not sure what to do, I have no interest in staying in academics so a PhD which is more focused on an applied topic which could be used to spin up a company is a lot more interesting to me but I obviously don't want it to fail.

You give a false dichotomy, because you should be doing a project that you are interested in and one that can be completed. There's no point in choosing a topic you hate working on for 5 years but is solvable just as there's no point in choosing a topic you're passionate about but not even those who have studied it for decades could solve (possible, but highly unlikely). Therefor, the answer to your question is to choose a solvable problem that you are interested in.
However, if you're interested in living in a binary world, then choose a project that is tractable and you hate. If you are concerned about getting a PhD, then it's better to complete a project and receive the degree than to work hard on a problem and receive no degree.


Statistical precedent? Suppose that an author [or team] writes a paper making heavy yet very questionable use of some particular statistics, without a convincing argument, demonstration, or test that the statistics are appropriate for how (and on what data) they are being used.

The argument in support of their use relies primarily on citations to previously published work in the same venue (generally regarded as a high-quality venue) where the new work is being submitted.  While statistics are often important in that field, the reviewers are not necessarily statistics experts and may not have given those previous papers any detailed statistical review.

What impact, if any, should these prior publications have on the review of the new work?

I have been in that situation as a statistician moonlighting in psychology. I have seen my fair share of voodoo statistics here. (Sadly enough, the original manuscript title did not make it into the final article.)

My opinion is that prior errors do not justify later errors. I call out statistical errors and insist they be fixed, no matter how many authors have made the same error before.

Yes, I see the point that then new results cannot be compared to previous ones. But then, how reliable or useful were those previous results, anyway? Standing on the shoulders of giants is not overly useful if those giants are walking in the wrong direction.

It is always useful to refer to published work on specific errors if this exists - especially published work in venues that cater to the specific field. Psychologists will trust a statistical exposition more if it comes from a psychological journal, rather than JASA. I have lost count of how often I have referred to Miller & Chapman's "Misunderstanding Analysis of Covariance" (2001). Statistics in Medicine also often has articles that explain particular misconceptions. If there is nothing in article form, I sometimes include links to CrossValidated.


Leaving academia - what to do with the personal website? I have a question about "post-academia" personal websites. The question is open-ended and fuzzy because I am not 100% certain with what I would like to do, so I am also looking for suggestions.

Some background first.
I will soon finish my PhD and I will probably leave academia permanently for an industry job (and most likely it will not include any research). Despite leaving academia I am not abandoning my work and my academic credentials. In future (at least in the next 5-10 years) I would like to

brand myself as a professional in the field with an emphasis on my academic contributions (I think that if someone googles my name and as the first result is listed my academic page that can only be positive for my image)
remain open to a potential collaboration with academia (e.g. projects that my company finds interesting; reviewing papers for conferences)
remain open to sporadically co-author papers that are related to my previous research (e.g. someone reads my paper, finds my work interesting enough to ask me to contribute to his future paper, but realises that I am not anymore in academia so gets a wrong impression that I am closed to such offers -> I would like to avoid that).

Now goes the question.

As many academics, I have a personal website with my research interests, projects, publications, and so on. I would like to retain that website, but I have no idea how to design it in the way it is sustainable and not dead for many years to come. I have seen that former researchers leave personal websites on the server of their former departments, but they look quite dead with an obsolete email as contact, old photograph, last update 10 years ago, etc.

But on the other hand, probably I will also not have any new content to fill since I will not be writing papers anymore, and my field is not like architecture where architects have websites with their portfolio even when they work for a large company.

How to design a "post-academic" website in the way it is sustainable? What content to put? Do you have any examples of successful webpages of former researchers?

Edit: I forgot to note that I have a Linkedin profile, but I don't find it as a good replacement for a personal website.

Edit 2: I'd like to make a website that is sustainable irregardless of the job and company I will work for (I expect this to change multiple times in the next 10 years).

Put your website on some other hosting than your university.
Write up-to-date status and contact, perhaps with a few words of explanation (e.g. to make it clear that is not only for archival purposes).
When it comes to rest of stuff, they can be the same. (Minding academic data and contact; when it comes to branding - it is a question for Workplace SE and answers will depend on your profession.)


Should I mention that I am a tutor on Chegg on my CV? I have recently been selected as a tutor on Chegg for the subject of advanced physics and have recently also been applying to various internship opportunities as I am in my final year of undergrad. I have the experience of being an educator at an Indian organisation, and was wondering whether I can add this new part time tutoring job to my CV. The problem is that I have the opinion that professors don't look at Chegg as something good, so is there any way it could look bad on my resume?

I would probably interpret "tutor on Chegg" to mean "paid to help students cheat". Maybe this isn't a fair assessment of your job there, but it's certainly the impression I get out of Chegg.
I am only willing to answer student questions on StackExchange and on other sites here like Biology.SE because of strict moderation policies that prevent students from using the site as a homework cheating tool rather than an educational aid. Other sites without these controls, especially those that seem to have a business model based on helping students cheat, leave a bad taste in my mouth.