What are the possible pitfalls of a university employee and a student being roommates? Is it best to avoid this situation? I have two closely-related questions:

First:

  What are the possible pitfalls of a university employee (faculty or staff) and a student at the same university being roommates?

And, in the event that I need to take on a roommate as a faculty or staff member at a university:

  Is it best to avoid living with a student and ask, for example, another university employee to share my living space?

Yes, it's basically allowed everywhere I know of, but there are plenty of situations where it might get weird. On the non-weird end of the spectrum, I was a researcher and manager at my university when my live-in fiancee decided to go to grad school there in a different department. We even got married the summer between the two years of her master's program. There were no problems and no rules that prevented this. We didn't even need to tell anyone about it.

Now, if she had worked for me or enrolled in a class that I taught, there would have been some people we would have needed to tell to make sure that there was no favoritism for her and that everything was fair for other students or employees. She probably would have had to have a different manager appointed for work if I would have otherwise been her boss, etc. Our living situation wasn't the determining factor, but rather our romantic involvement.

If the staff member isn't romantically involved with the student who is also their roommate, then there's generally no issue. However, if the nature of the relationship changes from roommates to partners, then depending on local rules and the proximity of the staff member's job to the student, someone probably has to be notified at the very least and a management plan created in some cases to deal with it. If the student and the staff member aren't in the same department, then there's usually no need for notification at my university.

E.g. if a psychology student wants to room with an admin in the Geology department, it's fine. If a student wants to rent a room from his English professor, then maybe some departments want to know that. If a Physics student wants to date/marry a Sociology prof they will never take a class from, it's very likely that the university needs to know, and they may try to forbid it. And if a student wants to become involved with their PhD supervisor, the university will definitely get to have a say.

As best I can tell, the rules tend to be about who is romantically involved with whom, not where students choose to find their accommodations.


Prizes and awards: what about travel grants? I am applying for various postdoc grants at the moment. They all have some section concerning Prizes and Awards. While I understand that this obviously includes things like 'best poster presentation' or 'best dissertation', I wonder whether competitive travel grants fall under this category? Often they involve the writing of a research proposal, have a low success rate and can entail large sums of money so I am sure this is relevant for applications.
If not under this section, where should I mention these things? I have never seen a field specifically dedicated to travel grants and I do not think they can be mentioned under something like research grants.

Yes, travel grants belong there, in particular if there is no other field like "personal scholarships/stipendia" or similar.
Also, you are probably overthinking this, as even if you find another more or less appropriate section and put your travel grant in both of them, it won't hurt you application chances in any way.


Podcasts like Manager Tools/Career Tools, but for academics: Do they exist? The Manager Tools and Career Tools series of podcasts are industry-oriented, but I find great value in them as I retool for an academic career. I was never a manager in my industry career, but the communication skills and practical understanding of organizations imparted are gold.

For example, my adviser does regular 1:1s with his students and places a big emphasis on giving and receiving feedback, both MT fundamentals. Some other concepts apply less directly--for example, delegation of tasks as project leader where no one is my actual "direct report". Academic politics differ from industry politics, but fundamental principles (relationship power!) carry over.

It makes me wonder if there's some podcast series or (only slightly less desirable) Web site to help academics improve communications and ability to navigate organizational politics. I'll see what I find with obvious Google searches but I wonder if anyone out there has some favorites to recommend.

I spent a little while searching around various podcast directories for something like this, and came up blank. I suspect the main cause is that running a lab is really not that much different from running any other group of people, and the difference between PIs/advisors and managers really isn't that big. Because of that, anyone looking for podcasts on running a lab can look to any of a number of management podcasts and follow the advice there. If you're a bad advisor, you don't care anyways, so you're not looking for advice.

That said, I was surprised that I wasn't able to find any podcasts focusing on being an academic, rather than about the topic of academia itself. (I did find this one episode of this university-level teaching podcast, but that seems to have been a one-off episode.) Interestingly enough, someone recently posted a very similar question on reddit, with no good answers other than "Check out chronicle.com." I'm starting to suspect that the answer to your original question is "no".


How to properly describe experience in exchange program in Statement of Purpose in Master Application? I went to the international exchange program in a top CS university in Hong Kong, during 2020 spring, when the world was suffering from the pandemic. The Covid-19 affected the exchange program and made it much less exciting - most of the time the courses were taught online and I didn't have any research experience with the professor. But I indeed learned a lot from the coursework and the touch with foreign friends I met in campus.
I am currently drafting the SoP of CS Master program, where I would like to mention the exchange experience in Hong Kong. How should I describe it in an appropriately? Although Covid-19 is something unavoidable in description of the experience, how can I adjust my narration so that the exchange program appears to be still valuable and rewarding?

Actually, the SoP my be the wrong place for this information. The Statement of Purpose should be looking forward to your academic and career plans, not the past. The CV and other introductory material form a retrospective on your past.
Don't waste word in the Sop on things that aren't about future plans. The exchange program would only be appropriate there if it causes some change in your plans looking forward.
But a line or two in the CV would be a better place to mention it, with some simple phrasing (or not).
If you wind up in an interview, you can bring it up then. But give the SoP the impact it requires.


Invited to interview for several postdoc positions - how to proceed? I'm currently in the process of applying for postdoc positions. So far I've applied for four, and to my surprise I've been invited to interview for three of them (1 phone, 1 Skype, 1 face to face) so far (the fourth hasn't got back to me yet).

This is obviously a good position to be in, but it raises some questions for me about my next steps. Until now I've gone with a fairly scattershot approach, on the presumption that the majority would outright turn me down. Now I'm wondering if I should start being more selective in which positions I apply for?

To be clear, I would definitely be happy to take any of the jobs I've applied to so far. But what if 'the perfect job' comes up later, and I'm potentially already committed to making a decision on another job offer? (Note, I would not accept an offer then renege on it).

Is it still worth applying for many positions, for the interview experience, and potential to get a preferred option?

Also, would it be reasonable for me to be offered a position and then turn it down, or should I try to avoid that situation?

No matter what you do, or how carefully you apply, a better job can always come up later.

The decision you have to make is not "is this my perfect job?", because unless there's a specific single position that you have your eye on, there's no such thing; it's "is this position good enough that I'd take it if offered?". If it is, then do the interview, and if it goes well (in both directions), choose between the offers that you have available to you at that time.


What's wrong with my e-mail to potential PhD supervisors? I recently sent some e-mails to potential supervisors asking information for a PhD with them, I obtained no answers. I share my doubts and then copy the standard mail I sent.

I sent it to 5 different professors in different universities, is the sample too small to expect some answers? I know professors are flooded with e-mails so it could be normal not receiving answers.
Can you point out something I did wrong in my email such as: too long, too short, harsh, too many details, not many details, grammar mistakes (I'm not a native speaker), anything, to help me improve for future e-mails?
How do I have to take these silences? Should I solicit an answer or simply accept that they are not interested in answering?
I sent them on a sunday night, is this a bad moment to send such e-mails? if it is what are the best days and time to send them?
Feel free to give me any kind of advice you think could be helpful.

Here's a copy of my e-mail

  Dear professor XXX,
  I'm a student of XXX at the university of XXX thinking about applying for PhD in FIELD X, therefore your group at the university of YYY attracted my attention.
  I'd like to ask two questions about the possibility of being admitted at your university:

  1) Is there a good chance your group is going to look for PhD students in 2019/2020?

  2) Is the topic of the master's degree thesis fundamental for a strong application? For example, what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a group like yours?

  This is a very important question for me as it will have a great impact in my application strategy and maybe in the selection of the advisor for the thesis.

  Thank you in advance for your time and help if you decide to answer me.

  Best regards,

  ZZZZ

Addendum 1: as suggested by iayork I  have to be more precise and state that I'm European writing to professor in Europe and that I wasn't trying to bypass the application system by writing to them but instead following. As suggested I share the example of a  professor I didn't write to:
https://www.ics.uzh.ch/~jyoo/home.htm
In the section jobs he says he has to be contacted for information by possible PhD students. Another example from a university I didn't write to: http://www.en.physik.lmu.de/promotion/berechtigung/index.html
The point 1 is to find an advisor getting in touch with him/her

Addendum 2: Since it's creating a bit of confusion I have to precise that Topic Y in the letter is far from the research interests of the group contacted, I should have been more explicit in the mail and here explaining that the point of that question was to know if I had a chance even with such a thesis, and in case of negative answer I would change my master thesis advisor and topic to produce a thesis that allows me to have a chance to be taken in consideration by the group.

Thank you in advance for any help.

The statements

  what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a group like yours?

and

  it will have a great impact in (sic) my application strategy and maybe in the selection of the advisor for the thesis

tell me you are not specifically interested in applying here.

Are you interested in working with this prof or just shopping around? Giving general application advice to strangers isn't high on the list of the average professor's priorities.

(My direct experience is with German and Austrian universities. Programms with centralized admissions are becoming more frequent in continental Europe as well, but in general professors have more leeway here over whom to hire or take on as PhD students than in the US.)


Adding ResearchGate profile to Resume? It is common that people add their LinkedIn profile in their resumes. On the other hand, they add profiles (like ResearcherID) counting publications, citations, and showing factors such as h-index.

ResearchGate is something in-between, but I have not seen if anyone add his/her ResearchGate profile link in resume. Is it because ResearchGate is young and not popular, or it is not technically convenient?

I think the reason ResearcherID is sometimes used on CV's is because it's a quick way to link to (and host centrally) your publication list as well as bibliometric information (h-index, number of citations, etc.). I also see people use Google Scholar as an alternative service for that, although the quality of citation data is not as good.

For LinkedIn, it may be field-dependent. I see a large number of people around me (chemical engineering, both academic and industrial) semi-actively using it, i.e. maintaining a network of peers and getting the occasional introduction/reference through it. I do not often see it used in CV's, however. It is clearly used for networking.

ResearchGate, as you stated, is neither here nor there. It's not very widely used yet, and rather aims to be a "Facebook for researchers": it is centered around papers, comments and discussion. While it can be used to host a publication list, the metrics it offers access to are not commonly used and, one must say, rather opaque. I think that's why it has little value to add to a CV.


How do you evaluate the potential for getting funding of post doc applicants? This answer of mine, in which I advocate listing internal funding of your PhD studies on your CV, is not well liked. When evaluating potential post docs for my lab, I am interested in if the applicant is going to be competitive for external funding. I take self funding a PhD as being an indication that the applicant was unable to obtain external funding. I give applicants who were funded internally by a department or someone else's grant a big pass since the need for external funding was absent. Is the no funding/internal funding distinction important for a potential post doc supervisor to know? If not why?

Do you mean fellowships and other PhD-student only external awards, or are you OK with listing "I helped write this larger project grant that covered lots of people but I was not listed by name in the application"?

I think that in the last couple of years of a PhD, students should be helping to write the project proposals, but there are lots of reasons besides failure and lack of trying that might explain why they did not. Well-funded supervisors may, in my opinion misguidedly, shield their students from grant writing so that they can focus on the research. I think that this is a failure on the part of the supervisor to properly prepare a student for future research work, but it happens all the time. Some people don't get this training until the are a postdoc. You shouldn't hold the actions of the supervisor against the candidate.

Also, some applicants may believe that if they were "only" part of the writing team but not a co-PI or Senior Personnel (in NSF-speak) on an application, that they should not list it on their CV.

Finally, even for external grants which only cover a single student (fellowships and the like), having not applied for one doesn't mean much. There are many, many more PhD students than there are fellowship opportunities.

If you are trashing CVs for any of these reasons, you may be missing out on good postdocs.

Edited to answer the question (sort of): I don't hire a lot of postdocs, but I have directly or indirectly hired 20-30 PhD-level research staff. Some of them are expected to participate in proposal writing. We gauge their ability to write proposals by looking for it on CVs, asking them about their experience when it's not on their CVs, and talking about it during interviews. Then, we throw them in the deep end and see what happens. In my organization, we have large-scale projects that fund people's time, but if they want to work on their personal research projects, they need to write proposals. Those who do, get to work on things besides the center-wide projects. Those who don't, don't.


Do I need to inform my PI about every single project I am working on? I feel like my PI doesn't care much about my thesis (as if I already had one), and keeps assigning me several unrelated tasks to support the publications of his postdocs. Even worse, I don't feel like he is my "academic" advisor: every weekly meeting revolves around grant writing and research expense rather than the experiment itself. And the worst? We differ in our approach to science: his is data-driven, mine is hypothesis-driven.

At the same time, I greatly enjoy the mentoring I have been receiving from three  members of my thesis committee. We did have many exciting sessions of exchanging ideas and fruitful follow-ups. I feel like with their help, I am becoming the kind of scientist I always try to be. Last but not least, although they are experts in different fields, they respect each other and are happy to collaborate through my thesis.

Here is my problem: I have several ideas with each of my three committee members, and want to turn them into publications. However, these are deemed not the interests of my PI's lab. Do I need to inform my PI that I am working on these projects? Do I need to describe these projects in detail (he will yawn his way through the meeting anyways)? And if I can get some publications, should I put my PI's name there?

In your comments you mentioned that you are funded by your PI, which changes the dynamics and expectations somewhat between you and your PI; and I think he needs to know how you are spending your time.

My suggestion would be to seek approval from him to work on these. This is to show him that you are respectful and value his opinions on if these are worth working on. It can be in the form of I have some ideas I would like to develop with Prof xxx and Prof yyy, can I go ahead and discuss with them?

Your PI would probably also need assurances that working with them does not compromise too much in your abilitty to support his lab. And lastly remember this. It is in your best interests that relationships between your advisor and you remain cordial.


Why is it recommended to do a post-doc outside of the group you did your PhD in? If it's possible to do a post-doc in the group you did your PhD in, which I assume should not be too hard if you have a good relationship with your advisor, why do researchers often choose to do postdocs at other departments?

If one does a post-doc at another lab, one has to face the cost of adjusting to a new environments and labmates and take the risk of working with an advisor he/she doesn't have good chemistry with. These costs are further augmented in light of how short a post-doc normally is.

why do researchers often choose to do postdocs at other departments?

A few reasons:

It's fundamental, especially at the beginning of one's career, to widen one's horizon and see how other groups around the world are used to work, how they are organized, and which kind of activities and ideas they have. I know a few researchers who have never tried to have experiences outside their "home" group, and I think that they have a limited view of the academic world, and have limited research ideas.
It helps to build connections that might become useful for one's future career.
It strengthens your curriculum.
It helps to keep boredom away: many people is positively affected by a temporary, or less temporary, change of environment.

  one has to face the cost of adjusting to a new environments and labmates and take the risk of working with an advisor he/she doesn't have good chemistry with.

You might be faced, instead, with meeting amazing people, expand your experiences and knowledge, and visit other cities and countries. All this while being paid.


Do editors of other journals get asked to review papers? If editor of Journal A finds that the speciality of the editor of journal B is very close to the subject of a paper submitted to Journal A. Would the editor of journal A ask the editor of journal B to review the paper?

Probably not in their capacity as editor of journal B, but certainly probable in their capacity as known expert in the field (and if the fields are near, they'll probably have professional connections anyway).


Toxic, harassing lab environment I have just started a research position (around 2.5 months ago) at a top-10 university. I am having my own funding and was initially quite excited about the opportunity, and did and do love my project.

I have some trouble with the mentorship, however, and the following things have happened so far:

I was sitting across my mentor during one of the first meetings I had with him. I was not aware that because of my clothing (I had a rather loose-sitting shirt on) and the way I was sitting, one could see my décolleté. Although I understand that looking at other people is quite normal, not only did my mentor stare at my chest, he then also leaned back and laughed in an arrogant kind of tone. Although he has not done that anymore, he still looks at my body in quite discomforting ways (I see him staring at my backside, my waist etc.). At this point, I am spending my time thinking about what to wear when I meet with him to avoid such situations. Then I end up being bothered that this has become a concern of mine.
I am the only woman in the group, and sexist jokes during weekly meetings are a thing. It seems that specifically, one of the students tries to cement his status by making jokes I would not like and that this student knows that the mentor will laugh along at these jokes (which he does loudest) which will also impact the relationship of me and the mentor in a negative way - which it does, though I see it as the mentor's responsibility to act differently. I have never been at a lab before where jokes about women's bodies were considered normal during meetings.
When we discuss work from a female scientist, the tone is quite different than when work from a male scientist is discussed. Again, I am well aware that we all have biases. But the discussion of a female scientist's work became aggressive quite quickly, with the mentor saying things like "This work makes me so angry that I can't control my anger anymore". I haven't experienced such bursts of aggression towards male scientists, and his behavior shapes the overall environment of the lab, and aggressive behavior I experience from the students are in my opinion at least partly a consequence of his behavior.

The student is the kind of person who knows where people's sensitivities are and uses that knowledge in his favor - but my concern is really much more the PI than the student, since, at least to a great extent, his behavior sets a blueprint for acceptable behavior and the rules of the lab.

While I have not experienced this before, there still is the possibility of leaving and ending up in a similar situation - maybe I was just lucky so far with my supervisors? It is a fear I have, it does not have to be logical. But I simply am afraid of leaving a careerwise unique opportunity without knowing what will happen next

What should I do?

Brief update I changed my lab and I am now at another "top 10" university and extremely happy. Supportive lab environment, supportive and respectful PI, great scientific work. I am glad I left and don't have any doubts anymore that this was the right decision.
Advice for others experiencing something similar: I got (anonymously) help from people who experienced similar things, but kept everything very lowkey. I tried to part as peacefully as I could from the old lab, and pointed out positive aspects of the new labs during the job interviews. I care very much about my principles, but also understood quickly that the universities would use all of their force against me if I would speak up, and decided at this point to protect myself (and my mental health).

Also, I want to thank everyone here for their support!

First of all, not all research labs are like that. You can find better work environment elsewhere, perhaps even have luck in the same University.

The academic world, however, is extremely small, and people will talk behind your back. You can't fight that. One way to minimize this is to minimize amount of time you spend in the current group.

Hence, one of few options is update your resume and start looking for another job. Your current situation will not become better. One of the reasons is that you have no political capital (friends) to change it, and filing complaint will definitely make your life worse in the group forever.

While searching for new job, try to connect with local chapter of Women in Science or similar unofficial group. Major universities have those these days. Ask them for help and advice. Another contact is something like Office of Equity and Diversity. These people have seen your situation before and will give guidance.

When you get a new job offer, you might want to consider filing complaint with HR specifically naming your current group leader. Hopefully, university will pay attention and investigate.


What is the typical cost of Summer Course education in the US? I would like to pursue summer college courses - particularly a creative writing class and a computer science class - to help broaden my knowledge and improve upon myself as a person.

However, looking at some college courses in the local city, tuition alone for a single undergrad course is upward of $800 for a three-credit Summer class.

This seems a little excessive.  Is this a typical cost for college summer courses in most areas?  And is there a cheaper alternative if I'm seeking to expand my knowledge pool, and not necessarily seeking academic credit hours?

The cost of summer courses in the United States is likely to be as staggeringly variable as the the cost of courses during the semester.  To the best of my knowledge, most universities generally do not change their tuition fees significantly during the summer.

As such, it will range across at least two orders of magnitude depending on the school you are dealing with, and can easily change by nearly an order of magnitude depending on the type of student that you are.  Consider, for example, this table of tuition rates published by the University of Iowa: you will find that summer course charges are almost identical to semester charges, and differ wildly for Iowa residents and students coming from out of state.


What to do if an advisor does not give enough time of his to you I am a student of  Pure Mathematics and wanted to work in Linear Algebra,Abstract Algebra etc.. I entered a PhD program in 2015 in a University.

My adivisor wanted a scholar to work in the field of Graph Theory.

My advisor works in the field of Cryptography and said previously that though he could not publish anything in Graph Theory but he is very keen to work here.
He said that he has connections in this field to whom he can send me if I have doubts in Graph Theory which he can't answer.Also he said he will start reading with me and told me that we two will have a great time.

Believing him I took up research in Spectral Graph Theory.I read some books in this field and  started having doubts.I asked him about that but he simply said that he is too busy  to look into my problems because of his conferences and asked me leave them.

Also he told me that he is developing ties with other advisors in this field but he has not yet succeeded and it will take time.

In one year,he has not ever sat with me and discussed any problem nor has he advised me which books to read as he says that it is the work of the scholar to find out new problems and decide what to read and what not.He says his guide also treated him the same way.

Though he has 6-8 scholars where some have completed and 2-3 have submitted there PhD and working as part-time lecturers. I am his first scholar in the recent 3-4 years and he assured me all sorts of co-operation if I join him.
He told me that he wants to broaden his field of research and that's why he wanted me to work here.

Can I leave him?But if I join somewhere else they will ask me what I was doing in these two years,what should I say them?

What should I do?Is this what happens in  a PhD?

Isn't there any role of a guide in ones PhD?

Please help me with some of your advice.Thank you very much

In addition to dan's answer, I would add one practical piece of advice. Ask your mentor to schedule a 30-60 minute weekly meeting so that you can touch base regularly. I suggest asking in a way that puts the impetus on you (and not your mentor's lack of mentoring). For example, tell your mentor that you are having trouble developing your ideas efficiently and you're concerned about your progress through the program... and meeting weekly would help you stay on track.

I don't get the sense that your mentor will be into this idea, but it's worth trying! This is what I did after my first year (I had a similar experience as you did). My mentor was receptive to the idea, and we've been meeting ever since. Good luck!


How to write a letter to nominate an awesome Professor for an award? How to write a letter to nominate an awesome past Professor for an award for work he has done in our university?  This professor established a cyber security scholarship program at our engineering university for students to pursue this field, especially when it was emerging 15 years ago.

What pointers do I mention in the letter?
How long can the letter be?
What tone should I use (serious, humor, etc)

Please advise.

The award is given by the university based on these criteria:

  A record of outstanding teaching effectiveness both within and outside
  the classroom

  The ability to inspire, promote, and sustain the intellectual
  development of students

  A pedagogical approach that is innovative (new approaches using
  current or new models of teaching), intellectually rigorous, creative,
  and engaging

  Demonstrated scholarly/professional contributions and their
  integration into the classroom that foster critical thinking and
  challenge students to independent inquiry

  Advising/mentoring of undergraduate or graduate students or doctoral
  and clinical supervision-interactions outside of the classroom and the
  quality of such interactions

  Contribution to developing or enhancing curricula in the field

  Length of service

  Internal school awards/honors received

First, thank you for wanting to do this! Once the awardees have been announced, no matter the result do let your professor know you did this, and pass on the award packet you created (let any letter-of-support writers know you plan to do this, as a courtesy; they probably won't be fussed about it). Your respect will mean more to your professor than the award!

Now, to your actual questions.

Pointers to mention. Think of this like a cover letter for a job application. You want to address as many of the listed criteria as possible as specifically as possible. (Award-ceremony emcees often quote from nomination letters, so try for good soundbites!) You don't have to hit every single one (especially as that list is rather long), but try to touch on half to three-quarters of them.

Length. Often the award criteria will specify this. If not... honestly, I'd call or email somebody in the office sponsoring the award and ask what's typical. I've seen one page up through almost ten, and it's not good to err in either the too-short or the too-long direction.

Tone. Err on the serious side. If you have an anecdote displaying your prof's sense of humor, use it if it speaks to one of the award criteria ("quality interactions outside the classroom" or "classroom effectiveness" might fit), but be absolutely sure the humor is one hundred percent harmless first -- you don't want to land your prof in hot water, you want them to win the award!

Good luck to you and your prof!


Wrote a paper, supervisor couldn't respond I wrote a paper based on research done with my supervisor, and sent it to them.
They haven't yet confirmed they saw it. It's been some time, and I sent a followup.
What happens if they never reply? I am an undergrad; this would be my first paper.
I am aware I cannot submit it on my own, and I don't know where to submit anyway. But may I post it on arxiv?

No, publishing it in any form without all authors (and their consent) is misconduct. But you don't yet know that you are being blocked, and I doubt that you are, since it is pretty rare.
You don't say how much time has passed but if it is less than, say, a month, there may not be any problem. People have other things to do. Email gets lost or misfiled. Lots of things might cause this "issue" for you.
But you might be able to discover, by contacting the department whether the professor is available or if there is something causing the delay. You might not learn what it is, but you might be assured that it is just a delay. Illness happens, for example as do family issues, travel, and all the rest.
But some third party might be able to give you some assurance if not the actual reason. And it might just be patience that is needed.


Is it possible to write and defend a dissertation on work for a private company? I am in an oddball situation where I have amassed a number credits beyond a masters at University in the US. I am currently working in a research setting, but I am aware that without the PhD by career ceiling is somewhat low. I do not want to leave and go back full time because I like my job and I want to stay in industry anyway.

Hypothetically, assuming no IP issues, is it possible to write a thesis on a private work related topic? I would be returning to the same school that gave me the masters degree and I would self fund, but I am curious to know if I would face a lot of friction if I asked. The research topic is not a core strength for the department but I just need to affiliation etc... I work with all PhDs from respected institution, who would be pseudo advisers. Getting a PhD on my day to day work would be advantageous since I already have a sound background and I know my degree would be marketable.

There are certainly ways to get a PhD while working on a project supported by a private company.

It will almost certainly require enrolling in a PhD program, doing the required coursework (if any), passing the necessary exams, assembling a committee, proposing the dissertation, then writing and submitting it. There are few credible institutions that will look at a body of work done outside the institution, go "Well, that's it then." and award you a doctorate.

You would be well served in talking to potential advisors and chairs within the department about their feelings on the matter, as well as your current supervisors - they may not view a PhD earned while working for them as the same as an external PhD ("If we hire you, we get new expertise") so it might not actually resolve your career ceiling problem to your satisfaction.

But in principle, there's nothing prohibited (barring a university's guidelines) in working on research driven by private industry. Though additional complexities may arise - what if the company doesn't want you to publish one of your dissertation papers, for example? Get everything settled, preferably in writing, beforehand. And recognize that working full time and getting a PhD is a tough road.


If I'm personally invited to give a talk but have to pay and submit an abstract does that count as a invited talk? Suppose I receive a personal, written invite to a conference. I would like to attend, and the procedure still requires me to submit an abstract and pay for the conference, would that count as an invited talk?

On one hand, it's not different procedurally from someone submitting an abstract that gets accepted. But on the other hand, I have technically been given what seems to be an invite.

Yes. It does count. For example, many meetings have special topic sessions (e.g., SETAC). When people organized these sessions, they are often required to have a number of committed speakers.

That being said, here are some caveats:

Beware of predator conferences.
The value of being invited to a special session is different than being invited as a plenary speaker. Be careful to not overplay this on your CV. For the life sciences, invited talks are nice, but not as import as fields where conference proceedings are highly valued.
The custom related to being an invited talks vary across academic disciplines.  Also, some meetings wave registration for all speakers (e.g., ODSC). Most, however, do not.


Can I apply for MS in software engineering in USA from a non CSE background? Can I apply for MS in software engineering in USA from a non CSE background? If so, then which universities generally accept with such condition? And how can I make my chances better?

First, let me say that from my point of view, I see masters' programs as broadly divided into two categories:

The first one contains courses that combine students from two different backgrounds, e.g. biology and IT (bioinformatics), law and IT, finance and IT, etc. In these courses, more introductory modules will be offered, e.g. data structures, programming etc. that are elementary for people with a background in IT but challenging for the others.

The second one contains "advanced" courses, that is people wanting to further specialize on the degree they have obtained. E.g. an "advanced computer science" master will not cover elementary issues (such as databases or computer architecture) but will have more cutting-edge, more advanced topics, closer to concurrent research.

I believe your best bet would be to apply for a master in the first category. I would look for something like "IT for architects", and not for courses with "advanced" in the title.


Should a professor require students to attend classes well past their listed times? I'm currently in an undergraduate class that is focused on doing group presentations. This class has a total of around 80 students, in groups of 4. Every two to three weeks we are required to present a 10-15 minute slide show on a specific topic to the class. The issue is our professor does not want people going on different days, because he feels it gives an unfair advantage. On the course schedule the class runs from 1810-1930, however on presentation days he expects all students to sign in at the start of class and sign again at the end of presentations (which seem to run until around 2200).

We've tried to talk with the professor about how late classes are running during presentation days and his solution was to move them to Saturdays from 0800-1200 (but keep the normal class times during the week). He is refusing to break presentations up over multiple days and falls back on the fact he let everyone know this would happen during the first week of class and we had ample time to drop the course.

Is this expected behavior for a large class focused on multiple group presentations? It's too late to drop the course (this wasn't really an option from the start since it's one of the few upper level classes offered this semester), so is this a case of just suck it up and deal or should I bring this up to my department?

The usual advice is to first try to work things out with the professor. In more extreme cases, if you can't work it out with the professor, you should move to their immediate supervisor, which is often the department head / department chair.

Different universities have different cultures about professors extending class. At some, it would be viewed as normal, while at others it is unheard of. So you should make sure to take into account the culture of your school in that regard.

With that being said, I think you indicated the professor is adding an extra 150-240 minutes per week (if I read the question correctly). That seems unreasonable, in my opinion, and I do think it is reasonable for you to ask for a better way of handling the presentations.  Even if the professor mentioned this in the first week, it is such a large amount to time that it could seem like an unfair imposition.

One option would be to simply email the department chair. Be very brief in your statement: one or two sentences on what is happening, and one or two more explaining how you have tried to discuss the situation with the professor. Phrasing the email to the chair as a request for advice is one polite way to raise a concern: "Here is what the professor is doing, do you have any advice for handling the situation?" That gives the chair a lot of flexibility in responding.


Dissertation reader issues I am having some serious issues with my dissertation.  I am currently on my third and perhaps last draft of my final dissertation.  I sent my draft to committee to revise after mentor said to do so.  The first reader took one week to respond.  The second reader has not responded for two months despite me sending reminders!  It is the university's policy for readers to provide revisions after three weeks.

I kept my mentor abreast of what's going on.  This particular reader has given other students issues with their dissertation.  My mentor then informed the department chair who is currently handling the situation and said that doing so carries risks and that it will take a while.  Since this sounds quite alarming I asked my mentor to speak over the phone for more details a couple of days ago and has not responded.  What could be the potential risks and time frame?

I should have graduated this week but given the above that is obviously not happening.  In speaking with others who have defended they have all endured some sort of academic "hazing" from their mentors and readers.

Of note, this particular reader is in charge of signing off to ensure that students have met all graduation requirements after defending so I would have to sit down with this reader after defending.

Anyone here has had a similar experience?  I don't want to pay for another semester because of the reader's evasion.  Would the university waive tuition/fees until I defend?  Lastly, what should I say when I am applying to postdocs regarding this?  Thanks!

Background:
My similar situation
I did have a problem with my committee. I started a tenure-track job before I defended, and to my horror, one committee member resigned prematurely. I was a two-day drive from my alma mater, and had to find someone very quickly who was both qualified and willing. I proposed a tenured professor in a field closely related to mine, with similar research interests approached by the methods of his field. He had a good CV and was therefore acceptable to my advisor and the rest of the committee. He had a mild crush on me at the time, though not a serious one, mainly because I was the new kid on the block. That might be why he agreed to the thankless task, but I couldn't concern myself with his reasons. He came through, which was all that mattered, although there was a brief crisis after I had made it clear that I wasn't going to participate in any improper flirting with someone on my committee and found my unmarked dissertation shoved under my office door.

A cautionary tale
The committee member who quit had been extremely problematic while I was still in the department, to the degree that I went to the ombudsman for graduate students to discuss the matter and get advice. I was assured that the meeting was entirely confidential, but soon learned that it was reported to my department's chair and made its way to the reader. Therefore, I advise caution in going outside the department.

Answer:
The money issue
You have two questions. One concerns the possible financial cost of a delay caused by the recalcitrant reader. That can be taken up with the university's administration, starting at the lowest conceivably helpful level which would be somewhere above the cashiers. In asking about it outside your department, you should relate very little about the reason for the delay. It should be sufficient to say that it has to do with with the schedule of one of your readers. After a face-to-c=face conference with the appropriate authority, ask for leave to submit your case in writing. Lay it out in calm, practical and professsional language. If you're refused a waiver, write again and politely requested references to the written policy that governs. If there is none, you have some leeway to appeal the decision and assert the need for an accommodation in cases like yours. You might end up pretty high on the chain of command, so tread carefully. The higher you go, the more likely it will get back to the problematic reader, so each time you have to go over someone's head to have their decision overturned, you  should weigh the pros and cons of opening a can of worms. (I don't know what the tuition cost is; your decisions about pursuing a waiver will obviously be affected by the affordability of staying in school longer than you planned to.)

"Self-help"
If you want to go to the reader yourself and ask when they'll complete their review, it's essential that you have your advisor's permission to do so. To do otherwise might create the appearance of "going rogue." The risks your advisor mentioned, associated with involving the department chair, probably exist because your advisor sought help from an authority, which is about as popular as going rogue.

Are we there yet?
I interpret "it will take a while" to mean more than two weeks, with anything up to two months possible.

A practical proposal
If there's any chance to replace the problematic reader with someone as well qualified but not as slow and uncommunicative, that might be ideal. It would be polite, with your advisor's knowledge and permission, to ask the problematic reader if he or she minds being replaced.

Philosophizing
Fact is, a student shouldn't have to handle this alone. Your advisor should be capable of resolving it for you.

The other fact is, your advisor can't control a tenured professor, if that's what the problematic reader is. Neither can the department chair. Maybe a dean could, but this isn't a matter for a dean.

Giving up all hope and the rewards that can follow
If you end up having to pay for another term, make the best of it by keeping a toe in the research you're interested in. If you can help out in your advisor's lab, do so. You can also analyze and write up any worthwhile unpublished data you collected as a student, or work on a scholarly review of research in your narrowly defined area, addressing questions and problems that remain unresolved, if there hasn't been one recently.


Is re-using an idea from a research proposal considered as self-plagiarism? It is known that re-using oneself idea in his/her published work without citing is considered self-plagiarism. In school, submitting an assignment which uses certain amount of works from a previously submitted assignment without mentioning it properly can be considered self-plagiarism. If one submits a research proposal which contains original research idea, and later proposed another proposal (let's say, for applying graduate school)containing significant parts of ideas from the previous one without mentioning it, can this be considered as self-plagiarism?

Is re-using an idea from a research proposal considered as self-plagiarism?

No: You can re-use ideas from research proposals which you haven't executed upon, i.e., ideas that you haven't advanced (e.g., because the research proposal was rejected or that part of the proposal was never addressed or ...), they're still fresh ideas.


Participants had to be rejected - where and how do I explain that in my paper? I recruited N participants for an eye tracking study and had to reject the data of 3 participants because of bad recording quality or technical issues.

Where should I report that the data for 3 of the participants was rejected? Up front in the "Participants" section? Or later, such as in the Results section?
In the paper abstract, do I report the larger N, or the smaller N - 3 as the number of participants?

A useful piece of information is that I am still using questionnaire data for the 3 participants that had bad recordings. Still, most of the results are about eye tracking data. All the participants consented to having different types of data used in the study.

It is very simple: you just need to (1) be honest and (2) explain clearly what you did, just like in the question you are asking here.

The explanation why there are two different values of N belongs in the "Methods" or "Participants" section. But it will most likely be necessary to add (N=...) in a few other places in the paper (eg. in figures), to make sure that there is no confusion over which of the two was used.

To mention N in the abstract, if you have to choose between the two, the lower value would be preferred (in general, people like modesty and statisticians like to "err on the side of caution").


Is it socially acceptable to directly contact renowned academics as a student? Can anyone chime in whether if it is socially acceptable for a (graduate) student to directly contact renowned academics outside your immediate research department with comments on their work or your work?
This is under the assumption that you are not a crank or a stalker or someone who is trying to become an "academic celebrity".
By renowned academic, I refer to people who have published well-known textbooks, ultra-high impact publications, or are important figures (i.e., "Godfather/mother of..."), or have made public appearances, shook hand with the President, etc.
It is not unheard of in the old days. I remember seeing letters from Einstein or Freud answering questions from "concerned citizens" (including kids). But I wonder if it is socially acceptable to do this nowadays. Regardless of the answer, I wonder what are the chances of receiving a serious reply.
Update:
Encouraged by the response I have received, I contacted the person with his work and I posed to question for him asking for advice. The person gave me a very warm reply!

Yes, it's perfectly fine to do so. To maximise the chances of a response, make sure your email is clear, concise and polite.


How to contact a potential supervisor when I don't know if I am a good enough candidate? I have been following certain mailing lists for PhD opportunities. About a week ago, I found a really interesting position. Unfortunately (?), it is in a top school, so I don't know if my qualifications are enough.

I will finish my master's early next year with decent grades (average is near 4.5 of 5.0). However, my grades in the bachelor's degree are not that good (around 3.0 of 5.0). Anyway, I have several publications, teaching and research experience, and a notable research award. I do not meet desired level of proficiency in one of the sub-components of their preferred english language test (though my average score is higher than what they want).

How would I go about asking more information about the position? I would like to send a brief email but mentioning all of the relevant "positive data" is rather difficult. Should I just ask some specifics, and give a URL to my CV?

What to do here?

(I am aware of the other question asking about how to get bad grades past admission committees. My question here is not the same one. Instead, I would like to know how to make the first contact)

I'm currently looking for a PI to take me as a student ina PhD program. So, I've contacted the student's affair office and they told me to introduce myself to the PI like this:

Hi Professor ABC,
My name is X and I am currently doing BLA BLA BLA at the Z Institute. I am interested in applying for a PhD at BLANK in the area of BLANK and was wondering if you were interested in taking on more students/have room in your lab for me.

Simple as that, he will probably ask you for a more detailed profile of yours with your cv.

Good luck!


Can you submit the same session proposal to two different conferences? Each conference is on a different continent but is in the same discipline
(A & H). If my proposal is accepted, I will be chairing both sessions but will obviously have different speakers.

I am concerned that the governing associations may not be pleased due to a fear of redundancy.

Is this an academic faux-pas?

An 'emerging scholar'.

Normally, two different conferences with the same session topics will result in two groups of work that are different, but compliment each other.

For example, assume I run a session called "Computer Forensics" at two different conferences. We will either invite different speakers, or use peer review for submissions to the session. In either case the result will likely be two sessions with the same general topic, but very different specific topics.

If the governing associations do not want the same topics, then make the topic title more general, but still related.


How do I balance interests within a specialized PhD? Do I simply read a lot outside my field? I'm going to get a Master's in Artificial Intelligence, likely a PhD in Molecular Biology afterwards. I'm thinking I can do computer vision as a hobby while putting most of my energy toward understanding the big picture of cellular processes, because computer vision is something I can performance check. That's why I'm leaning towards Molecular Biology over AI even though I'll have years of research experience in AI.

The problem is that I want to know too much. I want to study Cell Signaling/regulation, Genomics, Molecular Biology/Biochemistry/Structural Biology, and disease during my PhD to do some interdisciplinary research in all of it. I want to develop computational data mining models that can take entire cellular systems into account.

Is it unheard of to fully specialize in two subfields during a PhD and associate my research topic to cancer later on in my PhD over 5-7 years? Or must I, for example, study a single new enzyme in an important pathway across various environments only in biochemistry?

Can you have a more general PhD that is still a successful contribution to the field? Say an analysis that studies an entire biochemical pathway from genetics through molecular biology to cancer if I have two committee members (one in each subfield)?

You say, "The problem is that I want to know too much." You don't want to know too
much, but maybe you want to know too much all at once.

If you are going to pursue a PhD in molecular biology, you owe it to
yourself, your department, your research adviser, and whomever is
providing financial support to focus you energy on learning that
material and writing a fine thesis roughly within the usual time
expected by your department. Most serious PhD students don't have
much time for 'hobbies' outside of their coursework and research,
but if you do, you could consider AI as your hobby for now.

There seem to be unexploited connections between molecular biology and AI,
so it is worthwhile to look forward to exploring those connections
at an appropriate time.

If you can't bear to let a major connection to AI wait until you
finish a PhD in molecular biology, then maybe you should re-think the
order of your concentrations. Both fields are developing rapidly.
Will it be easier to catch up on recent developments in AI after
your PhD in molecular biology? Or would it be easier to learn about
recent developments in molecular biology after getting a PhD in AI?

I have some idea how much biology an AI a person would have to know in order to
make worthwhile applications to molecular biology. But personally, I
have no idea how much you would have to know about AI
to exploit opportunities in molecular biology. So I have no advice about the best
order of concentration.

As a starting place for you to make the best decision on your own, do you see how study "of a single new enzyme ..." would make successful exploitation of AI techniques more likely? Or maybe you can find a molecular biology department
that is already deeply committed to using AI.

I have done a lot of work in applications of statistics and probability modeling
to biology with only self-taught biology (not even a high school biology class).
My impression is that it is easier for me to catch the essence of the necessary
biology ad hoc than it is for biologists to catch the the essence of the
required statistics or probability. (Some of my collaborators may disagree
on that.)


Is it a faux pas to offer a favor to a professor who has written you a letter of recommendation / served as a reference? I have a long and very good relationship with a previous professor of mine. I took two of his/her courses in college, got A+'s in both, and spent hours chatting with him/her on various academic topics even outside the scope of those classes. In addition, he/she has written me two letters of recommendation, both of which have served me very well in my career, and functioned as a reference for several jobs I've applied for (and for all of which I was given an offer).

This professor recently again agreed to function as a reference for a job application, and in our email exchanged asked me if I could recommend any resources for him/her to use when making a new website. I provided said resources, and also offered to make the site for him/her if they wished (I have several years of experience as a full stack web developer and would be able to make them a high quality site in a relatively short amount of time).

My question is this: did I put this professor in an awkward situation by offering to make the website for him/her? I understand that writing letters of recommendation and serving as a reference is an expected part of a professor's job, and I am worried that by offering my services free of charge, I may be putting the professor in a potentially questionable ethical position (i.e. making it look like writing me a letter of rec was a quid pro quo). Of course, the reality is that I'm just happy to help someone whom I greatly respect and consider a friend, but I'm worried that it may not be perceived as such.

This may vary greatly from person to person, but I, at least, would feel it was inappropriate to accept such a favor from somebody who I had written a recommendation for (unless it would already have been appropriate between us otherwise).

Personally, I feel that writing letters of recommendation for good people is not a favor, but a responsibility, a duty, and a privilege.  It is a responsibility and a duty because it is one of those little pieces of service that is vital to supporting the scientific endeavor and maintaining its quality.  It is a privilege because my opinions get to help shape the future of the field, and by supporting people who I believe in, I get to help make it the environment that I wish it to be.

In short: gratitude from a recommendee is appropriate.  Quid pro quo is not.  I would not hold it against somebody who offered a favor in return, but I would politely decline.

As I said, however, opinions on where the boundaries lie vary.  For example, I would not have requested information about web resources in the same email, as the professor did for you.  I personally think that is a faux pas (but, as noted, I'm pretty hard-line in my opinions here).  Thus, in responding, I don't think that you committed an error, though I would find the whole interchange a bit dubious myself.


Colaborative book writing Recently I got a master's degree in Computer Science and now I'm writing my doctorate proposal. Meanwhile, I'm looking to colaborate on book writing within HPC, virtualization, cloud computing area.

I know most of books are written inside a common group... but, my question is: is there a place where you can seek for people to colaborate on a book writing with you? I mean, perhaps a group of person want to write about operating systems, but there is no people specialized on scheduler for instance... is there a "craig list" of this type of thing?

I dont know if I made myself clear.

To sum up the comments: There is no such thing.

I also think that there is some reason behind this. Writing a book is quite some work and in fact, it is quite some more work than writing lecture notes. I guess one can put it this way: If the manuscript is written (in form as it would be written as lecture notes), then at least 80% of the work is left. Things that are left to do include:

Check if the material is organized in the best possible order, given the possible readers and lecturers a path how to access the material but also to offer additional routes than just going through the book cover to cover.
Cross check all notation for consistency and clarity.
Build and, far more important, cross check the index.
Build, if necessary, a list of notation and/or a glossary.
Recheck your list of references for completeness, but also if it still is up to date. Many textbooks also have a "commented list of reference" to give hint for further reading.
Edit, edit, edit, and edit again.

Besides all this things: There are many different writing styles, for textbooks even more than for scientific papers. If you have a bunch of authors and you did not fully agree on the style (by agreement or by chance), you will probably end up either with a never ending editing going in different directions or with a books that changes the narrative style several times and hence, is not a smooth read.

On the other hand, I, personally, think, that it is a good idea to write a book in a small team of two or three people. However, you probably need some joint writing experience to make this a success.


Could conducting collaborative research with more than one professor BEFORE applying for a PhD lower an applicant's chances of acceptance? I have been doing teaching work in my field (i.e., language/linguistics) for several years while at the same time conducting and publishing research (I am from a developing country). All of these projects have been collaborative, with two being conducted alongside two different professors. Now, I feel I am ready to apply for a PhD but one of the professors, who is also abroad, is keen on doing a couple of more projects with me. I am concerned and ambivalent about this for two reasons:

The first project we did together was relevant to my research interests/expertise and my role/contribution was clear there. But, the new projects are at best tangentially relevant to my interests and future research area. I am worried that conducting research on such topics could mean (to a potential PhD supervisor or graduate admissions committee) that I am somehow intellectually disorganized or still undecided about my main interests.

Relatedly, I am concerned that reporting even more collaborations on my CV at this stage may put off potential PhD supervisors who may become suspicious of my commitment to their program or think my attention will be divided.

Is there any validity to these concerns? Or, am I just passing up on a good opportunity to expand my research profile?

I don't see any problem with adding additional collaborative projects, but make sure you can finish something and aren't stretching yourself so thin that you make no progress.
There's nothing wrong with exploring research interests, if anything, it's a benefit. But you also want to show you have some follow-through. It's completely different to have started 10 different things and finished none of them than if you've completed some projects and also tested the waters on others.


How do we end the culture of “endless hours at work”? In many of the research groups I’ve worked at or visited, there is a culture that endless hours in the lab equal successful researcher. (I am in a theoretical field, so requirement of long-running experiments are outside of the picture. Let's ignore them in this discussion.) In chemistry, a widely-known example of this culture is the following letter:

I would like to provide for you in written form what is expected from you as a member of the research group. In addition to the usual work-day schedule, I expect all of the members of the group to work evenings and weekends. You will find that this is the norm here at Caltech. On occasion, I understand that personal matters will make demands on your time which will require you to be away from your responsibilities to the laboratory. However, it is not acceptable to me when it becomes a habit.
I have noticed that you have failed to come in to lab on several weekends, and more recently have failed to show up in the evenings. Moreover, in addition to such time off, you recently requested some vacation. I have no problem with vacation time that is well earned, but I do have a problem with continuous vacation and time off that interferes with the project. I find this very annoying and disruptive to your science.
I expect you to correct your work-ethic immediately.
I receive at least one post-doctoral application each day from the US and around the world. If you are unable to meet the expected work-schedule, I am sure that I can find someone else as an appropriate replacement for this important project.

I have fallen prey to this during my PhD, doing very long hours. Now that I manage a research team, what is good advice to help fight this culture in my team? (Obviously, I don't want students and post-docs to get the message that little work is required either.)
Things I already do to that end:

When a new group member comes in and they get the out-of-hours building pass (for Sundays and late nights), mention that they are not expected to use it on a regular basis.
Avoid planning meetings at unusual hours (bank holidays, week-ends, etc.)

In the different groups I worked in, their respective cultures were always the result of the behaviour of the leader. So lead by example. In particular, some useful hints from my experience would be:

E-Mails: don't send e-mails in non-office hours, especially not requests for help with something. No e-mails on weekends and late night are a signal which everybody "gets" after a short while.

Social activities: support group's social life. A group hike to nearby mountains (in office hours on a working day!), or a joint trip to a museum sends a signal that taking time off is an important part of one's life. We used to do it on occasion of having a guest researcher (for a study stay, or just a seminar talk). It's good for group's cohesion and again tells people that rest time is also very useful.

Personal relationship: care for private lives of your group members. Build relationship with their families. Speak to them about their personal activities, about their vacations, kids, etc. and do not forget to give back and speak about yours. These kinds of discussions send a powerful signal that you perceive time off in a positive way and even encourage it, since you take it as well.

Plan well ahead: clear plans and roadmaps in projects allow people to plan their time off as well. Nothing more annoying than a spurt interfering with one's private life to deliver some report, because the boss didn't care to tell the group ahead.

Time in the office: being in computer science, where I do not need to spend time in a lab and can easily work anywhere, I was always lucky to have bosses who cared for deliverables, rather than for my time in the office. After all, most of my good ideas are born in weird places, such as under shower, while on a bike, walking in woods, and by reading stuff outdoors. Making it clear with the group members that you care first and foremost for deliverables and are flexible regarding the actual time in the office (within reasonable bounds and respecting the local laws and regulations) works well. My experience is also that people tend to deliver better if they are given the power to plan their time and process, rather being forced to mantinels set by their supervisor.

Generally, I found it always very comfortable in groups where having kids was something nice and for what the group leader and members cared. Nothing is worse than a group where work interacts negatively with one's family life and where going home before 6pm to care for kids at home is perceived as something bad.


What's the point of publishing your peer review report along with your new paper? One journal that I think of, for example, is Nature Communications.
Why does the author choose to publish the peer review report of their new paper?
Is it to educate others who are submitting papers to the journal?
The peer review reports are pretty interesting to read: some are short and to the point (mostly flattery, with some short recommendations for revision), and some are very long, detailed, and maybe a bit harsh or rude.
A related question, reviewers, e.g. for Nature Communications, have the option of being named in the peer review report, for recognition of their review efforts.  Are their names known in advance, during review, before the paper is accepted or rejected?  I'm pretty sure the answer is no, but just wondering.

Are their names known in advance, during review, before the paper is accepted or rejected?

Depends on the journal. At Nature family journals, I believe the identity of reviewers that choose to sign their reviews is only revealed at publication time.

Why does the author choose to publish the peer review report of their new paper?

I imagine it is because they are primarily supporters of the concept of openess in peer review. I pass no judgement on the merits either way here, but you can't be a supporter of the theory of open review (and therefore gain its benefits - like more reluctance of the part of the reviewers to be unfair), and then not opt to publish the reviews of your papers.
It will also help readers to have confidence that the paper has been properly reviewed.


Listing awarded grants not affiliated with a university research position on a CV I've had a look around but couldn't find an answer to my question. I'm in the process of updating my CV and am wondering about how to list grants awarded, specifically grants awarded to a group of people at a not-for-profit institution in which I am/was involved with. This involvement is outside of my current role as a teaching/research academic and is entirely voluntary.

E.G. 1: For one not-for-profit, I completed the research component that enabled the organisation to seek funding to support their project. Would this count towards a grant awarding or no?

E.G. 2: I'm currently involved with a not-for-profit organisation that received government funding for a particular project that I currently manage/was involved in the initial set up in. We've just been informed that the funding will be renewed (which is very exciting). As an organisation (and not a single person) we sought the funding together (it's a very small org, there's about 6 people in total involved). Would I list this as perhaps a group project?

Any tips, feedback or suggestions would be helpful!

(this answer was close but not exactly what I was looking for...Conventions regarding listing grant applications/funded grants on a scientific CV)

Your CV is a list of all of your scientific credentials, not just all of the credentials that you happen to have gathered while in a university research position.  Whether you obtain your grant at a university, a non-profit, or a for-profit company, in all cases it shows evidence of your ability to engage with funders and obtain external support for research, education, outreach, technology transition, or other such activities that are important in academia.  Certainly, for my own part as a scientist working at a for-profit company, I quite comfortably and proudly list the funding that I have obtained for my work on my CV.


How many years after MSc graduation, am I able with possibilities to be accepted from a PhD program? I graduated one year ago and still haven't found a PhD after many applications. In two of these I was ranked at 3rd and 2nd positions accordingly, but I regard that even though has been passed one year from my graduation, I should keep going.
What do you think?
Sincerely

In many places you have a chance until you die, so don't lose heart.
But you might want to evaluate why you haven't been accepted. For many people it is just too few applications. For others it is only applying for positions in a very narrow range of institutions, such as "top 20 in the field". And there might be ways you can improve your application materials as well, including letters of recommendation and your statement of purpose.
But a year is really nothing.
Don't lose contact with those that can support your candidacy. After ten years, it will be much harder if no one in academia remembers you.


My MA thesis has flaws. How do I present it during PhD application? I completed my MA in 2014 (humanities, third world country) but due to very bad (almost non-existent) supervision and other reasons my thesis is subpar in some areas (e.g., research design, data analysis). However, during the past 7 years I have not only been working in my field, but I have also managed to make up for this by publishing a couple of world class peer-reviewed articles, have a couple of articles under review in flagship journals, and a book chapter with a quality publisher to be released soon. Now, I am applying for a PhD and they want my MA thesis among other documents. It does not reflect my "current" research abilities at all so I think it is not a fair way to assess me now after all this time, effort, and achievement.
In any case, how can I confront this situation? I was thinking about adding a cover letter to my thesis which indicates upfront that this thesis is not my best work and may have flaws and then proceeding to more precisely refer to these flaws and how they can be rectified.
Is this a good strategy? Do you have any other suggestions?

Do not mention anything related to the master thesis being flawed or of poor quality. It is supposed to be a degree rather than a big contribution.
The situation would vary depending on the selection procedures. Perhaps nobody will even have a glance at it, especially if you have already two papers. Those would be probably scrutinised in more details, or at least taken into greater consideration.


Should I do a post doc? Good thesis but no papers (yet) I am finishing writing my thesis in physics, where I present a new kind of microscope. I think it's a good work but I have no papers out yet, also because of a perfectionist supervisor. I have been told two papers should be ready within a few months, but I don't really believe this and I don't know I will have the energy to work hard for them... I feel a bit worn out, and I know I need a break.

On the postdoc side, I got a few rejections, submitted a good application for a fellowship and I guess I could do a postdoc with a professor at my department, but I would prefer to move somewhere else. To put things in contest, I'm 30 and European.

With these premises (good work and no publications, while the other students I know have 3 papers out at least), do you think it would be a good idea to do a postdoc?

First of all, I know you are tired (been there, done that), but those papers must be published. This might be different on your specific field, but usually the thesis itself doesn't have much use, apart from being a requisite for the defence. If you don't publish your results, properly, it would be almost like you never did it at all. Like I usually say to my students, "if you did the research/wrote the paper all alone in the forest and nobody saw it, did you actually do it?"...

Second, postdocs are pretty much mandatory. Again, this might be different for your field, but, in general, you are expected to do a few years as a postdoc, specially if you want to be a professor in a reasonable research university... It similar to the internship part of engineering degrees/accreditation, IMHO. This is even more true in Europe, with shorter phd durations (3-4 years X 5-6 years in the US)..


Should you cite somebody's Transfer Report? (Confirmation Report) Context: At UK universities at least, before progressing from the first year of your PhD  (or transferring from an MPhil to a PhD), it is required to write a fairly substantial report detailing the research done so far and the outline the research direction over the remainder of the PhD. It's usually known as the Transfer/Confirmation/Upgrade Report.

Is it appropriate to reference these kinds of reports when writing: a) Your own Transfer Report, and b) Published research articles? I have never come across one referenced in a paper before, whereas I have seen references to PhD theses, Masters, and undergraduate dissertations.

If it is published somewhere, then you should feel free to cite it. However, if it's not, then you have a challenge. You might cite it as, more or less, "Author. Title. Transfer Report, University, Year. (unpublished personal communication)" Which indicates that you friend or colleague gave you a copy in which you first found the information you are referencing.

I think such an approach gives your colleague credit and gives readers at least some hope of being able to track down a copy if they want to verify your claims about what it says.


What affiliation to put on an academic paper for alumni authors? I finished my B.Sc in CS about 6 month ago and now I am writing a paper for a conference. before when I was a student I put my university and department name below my name as an author. but now I am not a student. I saw somebody put their IEEE membership on the paper something like "member of IEEE Computer society" or something similar, but I am not a member in any society yet!

What I used before:

Sajjad Gerami
Department of Math and Computer Science,
Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran
Email: my.email@gmail.com

What I may use now:

Sajjad Gerami
Email: my.email@gmail.com

Can I do that? Can I publish a paper just by my name and email (which is a Gmail one) without any institutional affiliation?

Update: For information about email address check these questions:

What should a proper email signature look like for graduate students?

E-mail address to use in publications

The standard practice is to list the affiliations under which the work was performed. If you performed the work as an undergraduate at your undergraduate institution, then you should continue to list it in work related to that effort. However, you can "update" your address by listing a "current address" along with the old affiliations.


Collaborating (online) with researchers from other institutes/countries I am a first year graduate student in a completely theoretical field. How does one go about collaborating online or otherwise with researchers from other institutes/universities? In particular, if I am interested in a problem or an area which is not very well represented at my current institution, how do I approach researchers from other institutes to start a collaboration assuming I have the basic background to start research? Should I have a very particular problem/idea in mind while contacting a potential collaborator, or is it unusual if I approach a researcher just because I am interested in his work and would like to learn more and work on it with no particular problem in mind?

I have found that it is very difficult to start collaborating with people who are totally new to you. Some good ways to find people to collaborate with are:

Tapping into your PhD/PostDoc advisor's existing contact network
Using your advisor's status/fame to get new collaborators (i.e., the advisor handles the initial contact)
Giving talks in conferences and getting people excited about your work.
Talking to people in conferences and finding some common interests for new projects.

I write this as a PhD student with experience in collaborating within physics/chemistry communities.


Where should a glossary be placed in a book? I am writing a book for a technical industry. I'm planning on including a glossary, I wanted to know, should I place this at the beginning of the book or at the end of the book?

There is no "correct" answer here. It really depends on what your goal is: if it's to inform the audience of terms before they start reading the main text, then it might make sense to place it in the "front matter." On the other hand, if you expect readers to consult it as needed when they're reading, then typically you'd place it at the end of the book with the appendices.


How to send end-of-the-year wishes in academic environment? Currently I am working in a research group where there is much emphasis on the interpersonal relations.

I want to write an email and send it to my direct supervisor, with whom I have closer relations compared to the others. But, I also want to send my wishes to the whole group included the head of the group, but I want to do it in a fashion which will sound mildly formal but with a sense of respect and hierarchy in it, and not friendly and too informal.

Any suggestions, or nice emails that you have received?

There are many options which can be made by themselves or in some combination.

You can design a "card" to attach to the mail which could be informative or aesthetically pleasing (but do not make it a huge file).
You can, as I and my former adviser do, make a "Christmas letter" that summarizes the year both academically and private. You need to adapt to your audience here since the private section should not be too detailed if your are not really close friends, but comments on travels with a nice shot is never a bad idea.
You can divide the send list up into different categories but the backside of this is that if you group people and group them wrong (from their perspective, it can become embarrassing).
The previous point is also true for listing people in some order; so alphabetical, even in the way you list the e-mail addresses, is probably wise.

Do not emphasize Christmas and New Year per se since not everyone may be celebrating these primarily Western holidays. Use something more neutral formulation such as "Best Holiday Greetings" or "Best Wishes for the Holiday Season". Again, know your audience and adjust.

You can send a general more formal greeting to a larger group and then follow up with a more personal greeting to specific people you wish to share more personal greetings.

So, think about the options and combine to taste.


Do teaching load agreements always refer to the academic year? I was lucky enough to get hired as a tenure-track assistant professor in computer science. During the negotiation of the offer (per email), the department head assured me that, during my first year, the usual teaching load of 2 courses per year will be reduced to 1 course.

After having accepted the offer and agreeing on a starting date in Spring (2017), I was told that I will be teaching 1 course in Spring (2017) and also another course in Fall (2017) as "I am not teaching any course this Fall (2016)" and hence I have a reduced teaching load as promised. The reasoning makes little sense to me as I will only be joining in Spring 2017. (For the record, I am going to be TA for a course at my current institution this Fall).

How do I approach the situation?
Is it common that new hires joining in Spring miss out on reduced responsibilities during the first year?

Note that the department/university is considered to be well-established (i.e. reasonably highly ranked and has been around for several decades.)

Edit:   I will also be teaching a course in Spring 2018.

I've seen this sort of thing happen from time to time; these situations are sufficiently open to interpretation that if you don't have clarity in the letter itself, the chair may try to get you to do a bit of extra teaching. It's entirely reasonable to push back a bit.

First, though, I'd want to know what you're doing in Spring 2018. If you're getting a semester of teaching release then, that may be just as good as getting in Fall 2017 and thus there would be little reason to argue.

If you're expected to teach in Spring 2018 as well, then you've got a legitimate beef. Just bring it up politely, ask for some remedy, and remember that it's in your department's interest as well as in yours that you have the time you need to get established in your new department and get your research off to a splendid start.


do's and don'ts of networking for a PhD student in a conference? My field is Telecommunications (Engineering). I am going to a very huge conference in our field where I am presenting my work as well. I want to take this opportunity to hone my skills of networking, make some good connections, leave some good impression of my university and myself.

I want especially to meet professors who are elite in our field (I know few that are coming) and I am not sure if they will be kind enough to give their time to me?

How should I approach these professors?

PS.  Note that I don't expect (and don't want) to get a post-doc opportunity out of this conference, but I sure do want to make great contacts and learn skills of meeting

One could easily make a long list of obvious don'ts relating to basic conduct at the conference.  However, given your stated goals, here are some things I would recommend:

  Do present your own work in a clear and simple way that allows the audience to understand your topic and get interested in your problem.  Be prepared to discuss your problem (and other research interests) afterwards and form collaborations if you find them useful.

  Don't try to impress people by making your talk sound complicated - make it as simple and clear as you possibly can.  Impress people by your clarity rather than trying to bamboozle them with complexity and obfuscation.

  Don't restrict your goals to meeting only the "elite" researchers.  Try to network broadly and talk to anyone else who has shared interests.  Focus on talking to people who have shared interests with you, who can have a clear and fruitful conversation with that imparts value.  You might find that your most fruitful interactions are with people closer to your own research level rather than the most elite researchers.


Must graduate applicants who will need funding submit financial statement for I-20? I am applying this time for graduate admission in physics at Utah.  In the online application they require a financial statement.  Does graduate admission require it too, even though I must need a TA/RA?

A financial statement is required by the US for visa eligibility for all international students applying for standard student visas. It is not needed for admissions decisions, as stated in the form you've uploaded.

The purpose of the statement is to show that you will be able to support yourself (and any dependents) while you are in the US. If the university offers funding, you will use that as a source of support on your I-20. If the university funding does not fully meet all your financial requirements, then you will need to show that you can handle the rest of your expenses through other sources.

You don't need to worry about the I-20 until after you've been admitted. The university will give you more information then, including how to submit the necessary documents and what the official program expenses are for visa purposes.


Should I look for research internships or stay at my university for the summer? I am in my last semester of Physics and Mathematics and, at the same time, my first semester in a MS in Applied Math (which I will finish in two more semesters) in one of the top universities for physics grad programs. I plan on pursuing a PhD in Physics by Fall 2020 and was wondering what was the best option to do this summer to increase my chances of being accepted in a program at a top university. I plan on applying somewhere else.

One option is looking for a research internship at another university or a national lab. On the other hand, I have been working in several projects at my home university and I am in a collaboration with another university. I have a publication done with a small group and a renowned professor in mathematics, and if I stay this summer I might be able to finish one or two more since I have been working in said projects for a year or more. The important thing is that I want to publish them before I send in my applications for PhD programs this fall. I think there is a considerably smaller chance of publishing if I go to an internship, and I might be able to apply to short programs like two week summer schools while I work here at my university. Furthermore, I already have participated in two summer internships at a Fermilab and Princeton, so I don't know if it makes any difference participating in a third internship, or if it would be better to potentially publish 1 or 2 publications more before I apply to a PhD program.

Summarizing, what do you think is more important: another internship or another (one or two) publication(s)?

Thank you for your opinions!

Stay where you are.

Normally, I would say, sure, do the summer trip.  But you've got a lot of balls in the air, considering the masters.

Plus, you've already checked the summer trip box twice.  Checking it a third time won't change the application.


Thesis proposal near thesis defence I'm a PhD student in computer science. In my university, the PhD process is divided in the following steps:

Qualification exam
Research proposal exam: presentation of chosen topics and methodology and plan (near 1-1.5 year after PhD program begining)
Thesis proposal exam: presentation of done and remaining work (near 1-1.5 year after research proposal)
Thesis defence

I'm at the end of my PhD and basically at the end of the dissertation writing. I still have to write the last chapter about the validation results.

I still haven't done the «Thesis proposal exam» and will take it in mid august; then I expect to submit the dissertation draft at the end of august, for a defence expected in late september or in october.

I'm embarrassed, as I basically almost ended the dissertation, by the fact that the «Thesis proposal exam» presentation and the «Thesis defence» presentation will foregone be the same content. It look like the first one will be a sort of rehearsal of the second one.

How can I proceed to present a meaningful «Thesis proposal exam» and still having something new to say during my defence presentation?

Thanks.

As MadJack says in the comments, this is really something that you and your advisor need to sort out with the department.  Part of an advisor's responsibility to their students is to make sure that they don't end up in easily avoidable bureaucratic screw-ups like this.  So yes, you've failed, but your advisor has failed as well.

First thing to do, then, is to sit down with your advisor and figure out how serious a problem this is.  If it's something like JeffE suggests, and due to recent regulation changes, or if it's a requirement that is more pro-forma than serious, then there are likely good ways to deal with it.  For example, you might end up following the letter of the law and in fact having the proposal exam be essentially a dress rehearsal for the defense (and that might be considered to be OK).  Or the proposal exam might end up finding some problems that really do need to be addressed before you defend, and you will be grateful---you might be delayed, though, and that might or might not be a problem (you don't say where you are: in the US, delay is generally not a problem if your advisor can fund you; in some other countries it can be a major issue).

If the department is not flexible, however, and wants to make an issue of your failure to comply with the letter of the law, then the resolution will be very particular to the department, and that is something that you and your advisor will need to navigate together.


Benefits to serving on an IEEE Standards Association? What are the benefits of being a member of IEEE Standards working group?

From my limited knowledge:

you get another badge on your cv
you get to have a say in outlining a specific IEEE Standard
you are contributing to the scientific community

Are there other benefits? For example, would an employer look at a candidate favourably if the candidate was on a IEEE Standards working group etc? What kind of employers or job-positions would specifically look for candidates with such experience?

Jon Custer's comment is spot-on. You will meet (hopefully) smart people across many disciplines and have forced exposure to different areas of expertise. You will also get hands-on experience in negotiation and compromise, which is always handy.

Your question didn't ask about downsides, though, which probably should be mentioned.

Writing standards is a very tedious and often frustratingly political endeavor.
This can take valuable time from the doing actual research.
There is no guarantee that the standards you create will actually be followed in The Real World, which can be kind of depressing.


At loss about CS specialization/sub-field Unfortunately, I did not know where to post this sort of question as it is very ambiguous. So I figured the Academia forum was the best place to ask, but feel free to point me to another direction. That said, this question is more about getting inspiration, rather than getting answers.

Here's my story: I'm currently studying computer science at college, and finally being top of my class in a particular course has given me the confidence to strive for greater things than I originally thought possible for myself. I want to pursue a job in research, because I would rather help mankind with technological/innovative progress than financial/social progress... So my dream is to acquire myself a well-earned Ph.D.

But here's the thing: I've studied computer security most of my life (leisure-study), and always imagined that this would be my main field of research because I'm very good at this specific area of expertise.

However, recently i've started to rethink this career path. My realization was that this field, albeit obviously not wasteful, was not going to prove beneficial for mankind in general/long-term. Unless we could use these defensive information technologies against a synthetic alien invasion, who's plan A was to destroy our Internet, hindering communications. But somehow I still think they would succeed.

So I have started to look into other areas of computer science. I kinda always had a dream of working with quantum computers (probably more a physics/engineering field at the moment), but i'm not really one of those extremely hardcore nerd types (God bless you guys.), so I suppose that's out of reach for me.

I'm leaning towards artificial intelligence, because I imagine that the two most prominent areas of research that will cause significiant improvements on our way of life will be either quantum computers, for their theoretical astonomical computational powers, and self-aware "strong AIs" that can help our race with all our physical, philosophical and economical problems (to name a few).

But I would still like to know if you guys think I should try to pursue something different. I'm not all that great at mathematics, but i'm extremely committed to my work once I begin, so I wouldn't mind becoming one of those "hardcore nerd types". I looked abit on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_science , and skimmed the theoretical computer science section, but nothing really sticks.

P.S. Please do not provide an answer such as "just learn what you love to learn", but it's not that simple in this case. I love just about everything that has to do with computers, both theory and applied, and computer science isn't a small genre to pick from.

Thank you most sincerely.

Honestly, you sound like someone who is looking for a Magic Bullet to Save The World, not someone who is really informed about or interested in computer science.  You sound like someone in love with the idea of computer science research, but with no real idea what computer science research is.  Computer security against aliens?  Quantum computing?  Artificial intelligence?  These are all dangerously close to science fiction.  There's tons of good research in all those areas, but nothing — in any of those areas — is close to "saving the world", and everything interesting — in all of those areas — requires a fair bit of mathematical maturity.  Sorry, but if you don't like math, you won't like real AI research, or real security research, or real quantum computing research.

If you want to do research, and really do it well, you have to love your tools.  You have to love the math; you have to love the code; you have to love the nights in the lab; you have to love the balky experimental equipment.  You have to love feeling stupid, because researchers spend 99% of their time feeling stupid; they're at the bleeding edge of what mankind understands about Reality, so of course they don't really know what they're doing.  You have to love to work in the face of almost certain failure.  You have to take the world's ignorance, especially your own personal ignorance, as motivation, not frustration.  You have to get over the idea that you are going to Save to World, because you aren't, but you do the work anyway, because you can't not do the work; it's in your blood; it's who you are.

If that's not you, don't bother.  There are much better ways to make money.  There are much better ways to help people.  There are much better ways to be happy than to do something you don't really love because you think it's Cool and Important.

But if you really can't live without doing it, then you really have no choice—do it, and do it well.  And who knows; you may save the world after all!  (But probably not.)