What credit does inclusion in "Who is Who" book add to the researchers and academicians? This question has two intents. Firstly sharing an email I received, as an academician, with other academicians and also clarification on the contents of this email and the way it works.

I have received the following email.

  Dear XYZ,

  I am the editor-in-chief of Who's Who in the World® and I have received your name through a private nomination process. I'm writing to ask if you would provide us with information about your personal and professional accomplishments for possible inclusion in the forthcoming 33rd Edition.
  Inclusion in Who's Who in the World is a sign of true success. The book is a global reference source relied upon by universities, libraries, corporations, and governments around the world.

  Like LinkedIn, Wikipedia, and Facebook, it costs you nothing to be included in Who's Who in the World. But unlike those resources, our books only contain biographies that meet our rigorous selection criteria (see below). Also, our books are available both online and in print and are used by the world's most respected institutions. So among other things, Who's Who in the World provides all the benefits of high quality networking. Many people put this recognition on their résumés or CVs.

  Please click this link to the Who's Who in the World Biography Submission Form and you will be taken to our password-protected site. The submission process takes only a few minutes, and the benefits of being included are significant.

  Deadline: February 23, 2015 Congratulations on being nominated!

  Sincerely,

  Fred Marks
  Editor-in-Chief, Who's Who in the World®

I googled this message and found some other people are getting it. I further drilled down and found that my email is allegedly given to them by Thomson Reuters (from the Thomson connect website that is the sender of the above email). So, I assume I am not the only one and will not be the last. I assume many of you academician and researchers will receive the same email so I thought it is good to raise the concern here since I found no other discussion elsewhere.

The email is being sent from

Who's Who Selection Committee
and the reply-to field shows    Who's Who Selection Committee

The email is Signed By "thomsonreuters-authorconnect.com" (suggests that my email is being given to them by Thomson Reuters).

The company behind this email is called

￼￼￼￼￼￼￼￼Marquis Who is Who, Publisher of Who’s Who in America® since 1899

Here are my concern:

How much is this website credible? Does anyone (including academic employers) give credit to those listed there (email says, inclusion in Who's Who in the World is a sign of true success. The book is a global reference source relied upon by universities, libraries, corporations, and governments around the world).
Registering into the system needs to fill a form that contains almost every single piece of information about me, including my parents, education, work, wife, certification, political/social activities and many more which is quite scary to me. How can individuals rely on this particular website and share their information. Does inclusion in this particular website gives so much credit that people lose privacy?

They are trying to sell their books and associated vanity products. They know that their primary market for it, is people included in it.

Personally, I'd take an academic's inclusion in it to be a possible indication of gullibility.

If you've got the time, the Forbes article on the Marquis Who's Who series, "Hall of Lame", is worth a read.


Is it possible to get a job in a philosophy department with a non-philosophy PhD? As an undergraduate, I studied philosophy and the field in which I'm pursuing a PhD right now. Though I had passion for both fields, I chose this field because I did better in this field than I did in philosophy, and the job market situation seemed slightly better here.

But I figured I still want to be in touch with philosophy, so I've been taking graduate philosophy courses for credit. The problem is, I've found these courses more interesting than the field I'm currently in. It's not that I'm entirely disinterested in my own field, but I prefer the method or approach taken in the philosophy department to those in my own field. Good news is that there's a philosophy professor who's interested in my project and I'm planning to work with her (she's officially affiliated with my dept). I'm also trying to have another philosophy professor join my committee so that a half of my committee will be from the philosophy department. And, of course, my dissertation will encompass both fields.

That said, in the future, I want to apply for jobs in both departments. But I don't know how realistic this hope is. I'm not talking about how hard it is to get a TT job, as I've heard nightmare stories numerous times since when I was an undergraduate student. Rather, I wonder if not having a degree from the phil dept will become a massive hurdle even if I work closely with the philosophy department. If I have to choose either, I honestly would prefer a philosophy department, but I guess I realized it too late.

Thanks in advance!

K

The key would be to offer the department something attractive. Let me give you a well known example.

Previously in philosophy there have been many workers who have studied the questions around "what is the mind?" They have asked a huge variety of questions such as:
- How do we recognize a mind in another?
- How does the mind connect to the body?
- What does it mean to be conscious?
- What happens to the mind when we sleep? Get knocked out?

And many many MANY other questions. Whole aisles in the library of books published on such questions.

Then along comes artificial intelligence. And a new philosophical "industry" is born. You can go look at nearly any of those books and check what happens if, instead of a biological mind, you use a computer made of silicon and transistors and so on. And instead of memory and sensations it runs on software and electronics.  This can be a hugely productive research program that can, in principle, interest both the philosophy department and the computer science department.  And possibly the neuro-science types in the medicine research areas.

There is another example. Consider the idea of evolutionary biology. This area studies how characteristics relate to genetics and evolutionary selection pressures. Then along comes Prof. Gad Saad who studies the evolution of psychology, with emphasis on why people value certain things over competing interests. Such as why people select their mates, why they prefer certain clothes, etc. And he is a prof of Marketing.

Now you enter with your degree in some other science. Is there the possibility you can relate this to some important philosophical question? In principle, you could found an entire new channel of philosophical investigation.

Crossovers of two seemingly disparate lines of research can be massively productive. There can, of course, be some difficult times at the start. But if you can establish it, you could wind up being the wellspring of a huge amount of highly interesting research.


Postdoc dilemma: Top department vs. top researcher I'm a mathematics PhD student looking for a postdoc position in the US, and I currently have two job offers:

Offer A is from a top department, but while they have some good researchers working in my field, they're certainly not the top researchers in that field.
Offer B is from a good but lesser ranked department, BUT they have one of the top researchers in my field (I would rank him among the top 3).

I tend to believe that I'll be equally productive in both places. Given this information, I have the following questions:

Which is going to be more helpful when I'll start looking for a tenure-track position: Having that top department being mentioned on my CV or having a good reference letter from that top researcher in the lesser ranked department?
Are there any other factors that I should consider when I choose between the offers?

Would you be publishing with that top researcher? If yes, you will probably produce more cited publications in better journals with better impact. Nobody cares about departments when it comes to publications, if there is a person whose name they recognize. Otherwise it is all about department, because as an average researcher you do not deserve a personal slot in anyone's mind. You will be assumed to be the mean of that department.

The effect is actually really small because academia is meritocracy. After you have merits you will be evaluated based on those. If I feel busy or lazy, I may skip a paper that does not look good after a quick eyeing if I do not see any seals of quality, such as a researcher I recognize or a department that has the good stuff on average. Also the top journals matter. So the point is that when you are under a rigorous evaluation for your future positions in Tenure Track, they will read you papers and make the decisions based on those. But you will have a slightly better metrics on those papers if you publish with a top researcher or you are from a top department, you might have a small advantage because people are slightly more likely to read your paper. But if you make it to the top journals or produce high quality publications it does not really matter.


Using papers published before admission to partially fulfill PhD requirements Some papers I wrote recently as an independent researcher, several years after receiving my Bachelor's degree have been accepted at good CS conferences (rank B in the CORE conference ranking).

I'm considering getting a PhD. Is it realistic to expect that these papers can be used to partially fulfill my PhD requirements?

Is it realistic to expect that these papers can be used to partially fulfill PhD requirements?

Probably not, if you're in the U.S.  There's a concept of a "Ph.D. by research", which is awarded on the basis of past research accomplishments.  This only barely exists in the U.S., although it's more common in some other countries.

Instead, the way most U.S. Ph.D. programs work is that the dissertation must be based on research conducted as part of the program.  One reason I've heard is that overseeing research in person makes it easier to judge how well or honestly you are carrying it out or how much assistance you might be getting.  In any case, being unable to use your previous papers in your dissertation is generally not a real obstacle to graduating quickly, if that's your goal.  Much of the time in a Ph.D. program is spent developing the ability to do high-level research, and if you already possess that ability upon entering you could finish substantially more quickly than usual.  (I'm not convinced that finishing quickly would be a good career move: it's almost always much better to focus on depth rather than speed.  However, you shouldn't worry that putting your prior work off-limits for your dissertation will be a burden.)


Transitive copying - plagiarism? I am writing a paper with a co-author. I need to explain some terms in the preliminaries section. I am copying the definitions from my co-authors previous paper. Afterwards, I want to include the paper into my thesis. If I use the same definitions word for word in my thesis, would that be considered plagiarism?

Your question sounds like you're asking about a math paper.  Definitions in mathematics are a bit of a strange corner case for plagiarism issues because they're not supposed to be "in your own words."  My understanding of normal behavior is that you would never put a definition in quotes (unless you're writing about history), that you can nonetheless reuse definitions verbatim, but that you need to either cite the original source or say that they are standard definitions.  A typical way to do this would be by saying "We recall some key definitions from X."


Choose a referee who knows me better or one who is better known? I'm currently choosing my second referee for a masters application. I did an academic internship and I worked closely with two people while there. One of the people was the Director of the institute and is more experienced than the other. However, I know the other person better and believe she would write a better reference. Should I go for the person who may be better known in the world of academia, or the person who will write a better letter?

On any sort of application, for school or a job you want to build a portfolio that highlights your suitability for the desired position. Neither of your referrers will be there with you if you get the position. All they can do is speak to your suitability as they see it.

So, choose the one who can best speak to your abilities and general characteristics that suggest success. This would seem to suggest the "other" person.

However, you know something about each of them and are a better judge. But it isn't the capabilities of those giving references that will be judged. It is what they say about yours.

Later in your career it might be different, if you have a powerful sponsor who will continue a collaborative association with you going forward.


Can a graduate program rescind my offer if I don't complete a previously declared Minor? I am a physics major and had declared a 'Minor in Computer Science (Expected)' on my US graduate school (PhD) applications. I have been accepted by a couple of programs but I am currently still one course short of completing the number of required courses for the minor. I am currently enrolled in this last course (a theoretical Computer Science course) in my current (last) semester. The course is not very relevant to the programs I have applied to (Physics and Data Science) -- more 'relevant'/applied courses that I have an interest in were unavailable. The course is quite time consuming and is affecting my performance in other courses I am enrolled in (physics graduate electives and statistics). I would very much like to withdraw the course, however, if I do so, I would only have completed 4 of the 5 required CSE courses counting toward a minor and will not get a minor.

I am concerned about how the graduate program I decide to attend will view this. My ultimate worry, of course, is whether my acceptance could actually be rescinded for not having completed the minor. (I have still completed 16 of the 20 required credits, so I still have courses in Computer Science, I would just not receive this tag of a 'Minor in CSE'.)

I...declared a 'Minor in Computer Science (Expected)' on my US graduate school (PhD) applications. I have been accepted by a couple of programs...[C]ould [acceptance] be rescinded for not [achieving that qualification].

It depends on the offer. If an offer is conditional on the basis of you achieving a minor, then, yes, that offer can be rescinded. Otherwise (the offer is unconditional), it cannot. (Conditionality of an offer may be buried in the fine print.) Albeit, we're in legal territory and INAL.

For practical purposes, I suggest that you contact the universities that have made offers and discuss your situation with them.


Asking if the position is tenure-track. I recently obtained my Ph.D., and I am looking in various states for an assistant professor or instructor position. Since I will be moving to another state, I would ideally like to find a tenure-track position. However, some of the jobs postings  I found do not mention whether or not the position is tenure-track. They usually list the position as full-time 9/10 month, with no mention of a contract or fixed term.

Is it considered impolite to email the university's HR and ask if the position is tenure-track? If not, what would be the best way to ask?

In many cases, they might think it is clear from the job title.  In the US, job titles with the words "Lecturer", "Instructor", "Adjunct", "Visiting", "Clinical" are almost always non-tenure-track.

The job title "Assistant Professor" is usually tenure-track, though with some exceptions: "named" assistant professorships like "John Doe Assistant Professor" may be effectively postdocs.  But it does not hurt to ask for clarification.

As David says, talk to someone in the department instead of HR.  The HR office is usually not closely involved in a faculty search and isn't likely to be the best source of information.


How should I give a talk about my paper if I know it has a significant weakness? One of my papers was accepted to a conference.  There is this one thing that everyone asks about, including more than one of the reviewers, and other people I've talked to about my work.  The answer to the question is sort of disappointing, and substantially deflates the balloon of my work.  What is the best way to approach the question when people inevitably ask about it at the conference?

I don't think my advisor wants to talk about the thing, and he doesn't want to incorporate the reviewer comments that were about the thing, either.

Edit: To clarify, the question that people ask is something that most people ask out of curiosity, and it doesn't seem like a weakness until they know the answer to the question.  I think if they knew the answer to the question, the paper might have gotten rejected.

How should you talk about the weakness? Honestly.

This doesn't mean you need to dwell on it or undermine all the rest of this talk around your point.  But if you know about a serious weakness, you shouldn't be afraid to acknowledge it when necessary.

Yes, your work will appear less awesome as a result.  But which of these two scenarios would you rather have?

You show the work you did, acknowledge the weakness, and discuss how you think it would be best to improve the work in the future in order to achieve the overall goals.  You haven't solved the problem, but you've taken a useful step.
You claim your work has no weaknesses, and when people inevitably notice, they think that you are either too foolish to notice the weakness or too insecure and self-important to acknowledge it.

Your paper was accepted, despite the reviewers pointing out the weakness, and that means people must find something of value in it.  Focus on the value that is still there despite the weakness, and let that be the point on which you build.


Alternatives to Word/LaTeX I wrote my undergrad thesis using Word. Overall I managed to get the job done, but as with all WYSIWYG editors, by the end I feel like I had created a bit of a mess. It didn't show, but I know it's there.
Soon I'm going to start writing my postgrad thesis, and I'd like to use a tool that gives me more control over the single elements. The obvious choice seems to be LaTeX, but as I'm going to be writing a thesis about humanistic matters, I wouldn't be using all its advanced features. Also, it's something I don't know, and it would take me a while to learn how to use it properly.

But here's what I was thinking. I know HTML. I know CSS. (I used to be a web developer, as a matter of fact.) Is it possible to use them for typesetting in an effective way? I think about XML and how it may be used with a specific schema to declare semantic tags, but of course that would need either a converter or a very complex XSLT.

I'm not asking about a specific software, but rather the approach. I'm not sure if my end is worth learning a new tool, or even creating a new one.

HTML and CSS for typesetting?

No, just no. HTML and CSS were designed for looking good on screen, not paper. Although there are CSS styles for page printing, using a medium for a purpose other than its original design will at best be an overkill (if it works) and in most cases a utter source of frustration.

  The obvious choice seems to be LaTeX... I wouldn't be using all its
  advanced features.

This is the basic misconception. You will use all advanced features even in a humanities thesis. You will have inline references, bibliography entries (bibtex), links to bibliographic entries, figures, title pages, perhaps even tables etc. As you see, you are going to use much of the advanced features of LaTeX, regardless of your discipline. LaTeX has an increased initial learning curve, but in the long run it is worth this time investment.

Conclusion: Stick to LaTeX.


Do European PhD programs have a qualifying exam, and if so, what form do they take? Now, I understand that European PhDs are far from monolithic in format, and that most quals in my field (physics) can fall into two general formats, as far as North American PhD programs are concerned:

A set of tests covering the fundamental areas of undergraduate-level education in your discipline (I know MIT and Princeton can be quite nasty in this regard for physics, but UChicago phased quals out due in part to student health concerns
A review of the literature in your research topic and the relevant fundamental notions underlying it, which must be explained in front of a jury that will ask questions as well

My question is: are quals present in European PhD programs and, if yes, what are formats commonly in use for that purpose?

Most central European universities don't traditionally have QEs. However, it seems to me as if it is getting more popular to have something after the first one or two years of your programme. Two data points:

In my current university, PhD students need to defend their thesis proposal after (maximum) two years. This includes writing their proposal, receiving written comments by two other (i.e., not their advisor) professors of the faculty, and presenting and defending their proposal in front of the entire faculty (our faculty is pretty small). Questions are asked in this defense, but not typically about material that is not directly linked to the proposal. In theory students can fail at this step, but is is very uncommon. The goal is rather to force students (and advisors) to have a clear goal of where the thesis is going early on, something that was historically a bit of a problem.
When I did my PhD, we did not really have any sort of entry exam or defense in my alma mater. However, since then, they have switched to a model not unlike what I explained above. The main difference is that proposals are only presented (there is no written document), and that only a small committee is responsible for giving feedback on the proposal (not the entire faculty). This defense has to be taken one year after start of the PhD. Failing this defense is again very uncommon.

Summary: the places I am well aware of don't have stressful QEs. Instead, we traditionally had pretty much nothing. Nowadays, many places have a proposal defense instead of a QE, but this is not a step that students typically have to be stressed out about.


Getting research jobs in Canada for immigrants I have a PhD in engineering from an African university which is obviously not well known and now I work at the same university as an assistant professor.

I think about immigrating to Canada (EE system), is there any actual chance that I can get a research position in Canada? Not necessarily at universities. How can I improve my chances? what are the criteria? should I forget about getting such jobs? Hit me with reality!

I would say that it is unlikely that you will. The reason is that even for graduates/PhD's of well known institutes like the University of Toronto, it is very hard to get an academic position in Canada. Therefore, if you come from a not well known institute, and you have not published in the top places in your field, and you have no strong connections to the relevant international academic community, then it is hard to get an academic position.

Possibly, there are some academic teaching positions available. I do not know, but they are not research, and I would assume that even for them it will be very hard.

The criteria for improving your chances are listed in the first paragraph.


How often do professors regret accepting particular graduate students (i.e., "bad hires")? Completely out of curiosity, I was wondering how often PIs have to deal with "bad hires" in their lab/group? I sometimes hear the PI/trainee relationship be compared to marriages, where half ends in a divorce. Is there actual truth to this? There are also posts like these that reinforce this:

Tales of postdocs past: what did I learn?

As profs, have you ever accepted grad students only to regret it later? Does this happen often and how do you deal with it? Are problems typically that they cannot do the work, or that their personality is just not a good fit? I think for the most part PIs I've met handle these professionally, but I do wonder how they actually feel about the situation.

I've discussed this with a few line managers, I've hired a few people, and I've checked with headhunters. We all come to very similar numbers**.

Once you're doing the recruiting well, you can expect that for every five people you hire, on average one will be an extremely good hire, and three will do the job well enough. And the fifth will be regrettable, through some combination of lack of will, lack of ability, an absence of a shared understanding of what the role requires, & personality clashes. You can try moving them to different roles, get them more training, work with them to find out what they need. Sometimes one of those things will work. Sometimes, none will.

** My primary dataset is academia. I got similar answers from the wider market for professionals (not manual workers)


In conference review process, what do "author response" and "author notification" mean? I just visited a conference website where organizers, for the submitted paper review process, listed a date for paper submission, a date for "author response", and another date for "author notification".

It's the first time I see this double wording.
I suppose that "author notification" is when they communicate to authors if their papers have been accepted or not, but what does "author response" stand for?

Thanks

It has to be a conference with a rebuttal phase, where the authors can answer the main points raised by the reviewers, who in turn will be able to draw more conclusive remarks on the paper itself

see also here: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mckinley/notes/blind.html


Engineering Major applying to Pure Math Grad school I'm an engineering student from Korea, but I'm going to apply to graduate school in pure mathematics (to US, UK, and other European schools). I took several classes in math and I'd like to know what other courses I should take for my application to be considered "good enough". I took and got A from the following courses:

Undergraduate: Calculus, Linear Algebra, Differential Equations, Number Theory, Algebraic Curves
Graduate: Algebra I, Commutative Algebra, Differentiable Manifolds, Riemannian Geometry, Algebraic Topology

What other math courses should I take for my application to be considered seriously?
Can I take graduate courses instead to demonstrate proficiency in the courses in Question 1?
For example, if I am advised to take undergraduate Topology class, does taking graduate Algebraic Topology class count as taking the undergraduate Topology class?
Is it bad if I took all the courses in Question 1, but didn't meet the requirements for obtaining B.Sc in Mathematics in my school?
For example, my school requires that I take Statistics as part of the B.Sc requirement, but other schools may not.

Thanks a lot in advance..!

Edit: I added where I'm studying at and where I'll be applying to.

You don't say where in the world you are or where in the world you want to be.  Giving this information would allow for a more targeted response, as the mathematical background of students entering a graduate program varies quite significantly by location: in particular, most European undergraduates take exclusively courses in mathematics and closely associated fields, whereas for most American undergraduates mathematics occupies less than half of all the undergraduate courses they take.  I will answer with respect to an American PhD program in mathematics, since that is what I am more familiar with.

With that in mind: your overall math background seems quite strong to me.  It is more than enough so that admissions committees will overlook the fact that your undergraduate major was not mathematics.  That you took and excelled in five graduate courses is better preparation than the average incoming math PhD student at most American PhD programs and is similar to the average background of beginning students at, say, programs ranked 11-25 or so.  [Give or take: I have been affiliated with programs ranked both above and below 11-25 so can make an educated guess, but my direct experience is more limited.]

  What other math courses should I take for my application to be considered seriously?

The one noticeable omission is in analysis.  Both differentiable manifolds and Riemannian geometry use some analysis topics, but far from all.  Your application will be taken seriously already, but your chances would be better if you had courses like: real analysis (undergrad or graduate level), metric spaces / general topology and complex analysis.  In the US system, undergraduate real analysis -- taught out of Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis or a more recent equivalent -- is taken by most "serious" undergraduate math majors and is perhaps the number one course that admissions committees want to see an applicant take and excel in.

  Can I take graduate courses instead to demonstrate proficiency in the courses in Question 1? For example, if I am advised to take undergraduate Topology class, does taking graduate Algebraic Topology class count as taking the undergraduate Topology class?

The answer is that it depends on a lot of factors.  In the example that you give, undergraduate topology is desirable but not required.  Taking graduate topology looks great...but it doesn't entirely cover undergraduate topology, depending upon what that means.  In the US, unless otherwise specified, undergraduate topology is primarily general topology, which you are not going to learn much about in an graduate algebraic topology course.

Another consideration is that -- at least at the American institutions I'm familiar with -- grading in graduate courses is often different and more lax than in undergraduate courses.  For instance, in more than half of the graduate courses I've ever taught, every student has received an A grade.  For almost every undergraduate course I've ever taught, 25% or less of the class received an A.  (It is a strange coincidence that the notable exception was...general topology, in which almost half of the small number of students taking the course got an A.)  On the other hand, this is not always true.  If you have recommendation letters from the faculty who taught these courses explaining convincingly why you were one of the best students in the course, you'll probably get "full credit" for your grades.

  Is it bad if I took all the courses in Question 1, but didn't meet the requirements for obtaining B.Sc in Mathematics in my school? For example, my school requires that I take Statistics as part of the B.Sc requirement, but other schools may not.

Not really.  Most math admissions committees care about what you know and they find that out in large part by looking at your coursework.  We tend not to care so much about meeting other requirements.

On the other hand, now that I look over your story I admit to being a bit curious / confused about why your major is in engineering rather than mathematics.  According to your SE profiles, you have been studying and also taking graduate level mathematics courses for the last three years.  In a recent comment, you say will receive an undergraduate engineering degree in 1-2 years.  It doesn't quite add up to me -- with the math courses you've taken, how could you possibly be any further than 1-2 years away from a math degree?  You might want to address this point in your personal statement.

Added: I am currently the Graduate Coordinator of the mathematics department at the University of Georgia (and thus the chair of the committee that does graduate admissions).


Can I submit just two great letters of recommendation if the application calls for three? I'm getting ready to apply for a graduate program in biophysics at a few different universities. I'd just like to ask a question regarding the quantity and quality of letters of recommendations.

I'll first give some background about my current application. I have a 3.0 cumulative GPA (there is a valid reason for a few low grades early on in my career which I won't get into here, but my GPA has increased dramatically since then), my physics GRE score is a little low and my general is above the 55th percentile in all three fields.

I have two strong letters of recommendation. One from the director of my lab, and one from the head of experimental physics at my university. My question is regarding a third letter. Most applications state that 3 letters are required. I have two options for the third letter at this point; the first being from my advisor, who I've never taken a class with but knows me well, and the other is from a professor who said he'd write me one but it wouldn't be very strong as he can only discuss my character and, to quote him, "general interest in science".

I'm afraid that a third letter would hurt my application, regardless if two of the letters are strong. How damaging would two letters be in applying to a physics graduate program?

Thank you.

If the application calls for three letters of recommendation and you only submit two, your application may be considered incomplete and may not be considered at all.

So if you don't have a third letter, you're going to have a problem. But if the third letter is weak, it will hurt your application, too, which means you're stuck between a rock and a hard place.


Are there any downsides to receiving BSc, MSc, and PhD all from the same university? Like the title says, are there any downsides to receiving BSc, MSc, and PhD all from the same university?

My university is not very well known outside my home country. I did not enter the PhD program yet. If I would stay here, I would already have many good contacts (~10 professors/academics). Also, because I perform quite well, I assume I could get to do exactly what I want. On the other hand... I think I could get into Europe's top-ten universities.

There is an obvious downside of staying at the same university—you will only work with one set of advisors and contacts throughout your career. That will mean that you may not benefit from the experience and diversity of viewpoints and philosophies that comes from working with different groups of people across the length of your career.

However, if there is a compelling reason to remain at your school, that's a different situation. This could be financial, personal, or educational. For instance, a family member may have a job that makes it difficult to relocate, or a new project may be starting up that provides a unique educational opportunity.

Beyond that, though, I would lean towards going somewhere else for your PhD program!


End-of-semester course activites I am nearing the conclusion of my first course as an adjunct instructor and I'm searching for some useful and engaging activities for reviewing the semester's content as a group. This is a required undergraduate survey business systems course that covers a fairly wide range of concepts and terms, with students representing a variety of majors. I hope to both prepare them for the comprehensive final exam and to reinforce the key ideas that we've covered (between which, ideally, there is significant overlap). Although most of the students are performing quite well, there have been several complaints about the difficulty of preparing for an exam covering such a diverse set of topics.

There are an endless amount of resources for this question available on the internet here is just a handful of ideas

Developing a study-guide yourself is a default option for most lecturers. You include all of the concepts that will appear on the exam plus additional ones that you believe the students should know but that you will not assess. The additional information prevents the students from focusing only on test content.
Jigsaw involves dividing the work for the review by groups. Each group reviews their part. After each group reviews their part you remix the groups so that each group includes all of the pieces of the review. Everyone in each group shares their part to form the complete picture.
Some professors have students make potential sample questions. Developing and answering questions is a useful technique in content mastery. Students are able to articulate what they know through such an approach.

There are also an endless supply of games that can be modified to help with reviewing, for example

Jeopardy
Wheel of Fortune
Monopoly
Bingo

This provides some basic ideas.


I am conflicted between getting a second master's and moving on to a PhD? I have always loved psychology, and so I went and got a first degree in that field. However, I also loved technology (especially computers) while growing up. Unfortunately, I wasn't well-informed about university programs, and so I didn't know I could do both psychology and computer science in my undergraduate, until I was admitted and wasn't allowed by my institution to pick on new programs. So after undergraduate I decided to go on to pursue a health technology (ehealth & telemedicine) master's program, but my lack of knowledge in computer science makes me not proficient in the tech aspect of my field and limits my PhD options in that field. My ideal career move involves combining technology in my psychology professional practice. But now, I am confused as to whether I should just go on and pursue a PhD Health technology or go in for a second master's in psychology to allow me further into PhD psychology afterwards? I can't apply for PhD in psychology without a master's in that field either, but I also feel I am not growing younger anymore and so time matters, if I want to enjoy a long career before retirement then I should get a PhD soon enough. But that will mean sticking to health technology and forgoing my psychology dreams. I am really confused now. Also, is there anyway I can get into psychology and still take a course in computer science? What are my options, what should I do?

If it is possible to start your dream PhD without further prerequisites: do it. Also take notice that it'll be hard, but doable. In my opinion a second Master's has no benefit, taking the possible admission to the PhD program aside.

I know someone, who got a PhD in physics after a Master's in biology. I went to a PhD in CS after a Master's in mathematics.

(This is also a bit dependent on the field and on the social component, so please tag with a country for further answers. My experience references German system, but it should be generic enough for US too.)


will a lab feel deterred from hiring me if my undergrad thesis is in a different subfield? i've interned at the same lab for two summers, and they highly encouraged me to apply for a research assistant position in the spring. however, i am concerned that they will not hire me based on my undergrad thesis topic.
the lab focuses on developmental neuroscience. i conducted research in the neuroanatomical etiology of autism spectrum disorder in children during the school year. but, my senior neuroscience honors thesis is on neuropolitics, technology, and radicalization. i love developmental neuro, but i'm fascinated by neuropolitics as well, and i was wondering if these dual interests are a deterrent at this point in my career.
any feedback is welcome and of help.

Since you have some history there, it seems very unlikely that such a thing would be a detriment. In fact, it might be viewed as positive that you aren't "too narrow" in your education and outlook.
But, it is up to them and you only learn by applying.
And picking a topic for such a narrow reason as obtaining a short term internship would be, I think, a mistake.


How far do you commute to graduate school? I decided that I want to go to graduate school. I started looking into some local schools, but none of them have any programs that are very appealing. I found a program that is two and a half hours away and classes are held on Saturdays. Is this ridiculous? How long is too long of a commute? As much as I would love to just move there for a few years, I have a husband and a toddler. I can't uproot them as well. My only other option is to take the program online. Do people even take online programs seriously in the job market?

Indeed, it matters if it is just a course-work based program or if it requires research, lab work, etc.

You'll need to check with your program to be sure what's expected of participants, and if you reach out and contact an enrolled student (or if their admissions office has a student they could direct you to for such questions) you can ask them for their experience of "what it really takes", and what options you have.

For one example, all around the USA there are "weekend {MBA/etc}" and sometimes "executive" programs. These are designed precisely for people like you, people who are working full time during the week, who live far out of town, etc.

The first step is determining what is really needed - is that one day all you really have to be there for, in person? Are there demonstrations, oral reports, projects, group meetings, etc, that must be done on any other day of the week?

To continue with this answer, we must assume the answer is "yes, the program really only requires you to be here Saturday, and everything else can be done at your home, email, web, etc".

As a matter of my experience, I have not done this myself, but I've worked with about 4 people who were doing exactly this. They would finish their work on Friday, commenting about how they had a long drive ahead of them. If they had a morning class some would go down on friday night, stay in a hotel (or couch surf, or stay with a friend/family), and then go to their classes. When they were done they'd drive home and be there in time for dinner.

Some others drive down early on Saturday, did class, and drove back all in one day. This is doable - they were doing 3 hours each trip, so 6 hours of driving in one day. But I must warn you - according to psychological/cognitive research, people do not habituate to commutes of this length. If you find a way to enjoy the drive as an experience, like your chance to listen to audio books, loud music, be by yourself to meditate and think, etc, then that's fine. Most people just always hate it - it's one of the few things we, as human beings, suck at just getting use to.

In the experience of my coworkers, none of them liked the drive. But in the case of all of them, they decided that the unpleasantness was worth it because their degree was important to them, and all it cost them was a chunk of their weekend. They didn't like it, they always looked a bit down to have to make the drive the next day, but they did it anyway. Another coworker stayed with family/friends and stayed the whole weekend, driving back Sunday night.

My father was actually going to do this for his PhD in English Literature, but found 1.5 hours back and forth while working 50-60 hours entirely too unpleasant, and stopped before even really starting it. Your value and personal situation - and how you handle long stretches of time in the car - will heavily influence your experience.

In short, "Your Mileage May Very". There is no "too long" or "too short" to commute. Commutes suck. As humans, we universally tend to hate them, especially while driving. As a personal note, I've found that anything over 20 minutes per day (if every day) starts to wear on me, and anything over 45 minutes is very displeasing (unless I'm on public transportation, which I find relaxing and can easily do double the time). Meanwhile, some people drive an hour and a half and just "deal with it" temporarily. I find road trips for 3 hours ok, but the ride back is rough even if I did very little that day, and I spend most of the next day tired. You'll kind of have to find this out yourself - might I suggest some trial runs to scope out the campus?

Finally, you could also try to find creative solutions, which will depend on your personal situation. Some couples, if they are both off during the weekend, will travel together and one will go to school while the other has a Family Fun Day. Since this is almost always done on trips to a larger city than one lives in, there are often museums, parks, movies, etc. This can be anywhere from relatively cheap (pack a cooler and picnic, choose low/no cost fun things to do) to prohibitively expensive.

As to online classes, that really is a separate question you might want to search for, with lots of good answers all over. To give you an executive summary: it depends on who you ask - but some people say they worked for them just fine, and there are some people who give them no value. What percentage of hiring decisions will consider them a negative? No one seems to offer good data, and I'm aware of no quality comprehensive studies for any area of degree. Education is strictly "let the buyer beware" in the USA, with little exceptions. (They are starting to crack down on some aspects that involve federal student aid, but only on the worst offenders.)


Is a good GRE score evidence of merit? If a student acquires a good score in GRE, does it guarantees that he has a good merit to earn a good grade in a taught graduate program?

Short answer: No, not at all.

Long answer:

  What I understood from the official GRE manual:

GRE, just like any other multiple choice exam, requires fairly specific preparation. You need to understand how to go about analyzing their standardized types of problems, methods of elimination of the answer choices, and even sometimes think like the person who's writing the question. Getting a good score means that you've acquired these skills and can use them rather efficiently in the 3 hours you took the exam. This is what I understood by reading their official manual.

  My personal opinion:

Doing well on GRE does probably also mean that you can, in fact, learn how to do other things, given that they are presented to you in "standard packaging". But so does an undergraduate degree where you get to take classes and prove by taking exams that you can efficiently use what you learned in those classes.

However, none of these (and no other single thing) actually "guarantees" that you will do well in graduate school, regardless of what program you go into. It's just a metric that you should be able to do well, if you are passionate enough to do well in graduate school.


Why do people organize summer schools? I have been in the computer science academic community for at least five years, and I noticed that there are several so called summer schools organized every year everywhere.
I have been knowing just few people attend them.

These summer schools are addressed mainy to MS and PhD students, last around 3-7 days, and may include a final exam. They often include important international speakers coming from overseas.
I have been thinking about them, and there are two issues that concerns them, in my opinion.

The first problem I notice is that is very very hard to make students learn something important in just 3-7 days. They should have more time to re-process all the things that they learned, do some practice, and think about. They include a hipe of subjects that is sometimes very large.

The second issue is that, since the students are studying their own courses, why should they spend their time and money to go to a summer school instead of attending a course at their own university? It's not clear to me.

So, in the end, why do some people organize summer school?
Is it just teaching passion?
Or is it a way to advertise the organizers and their university?
Or is an occasion for networking?

Or, is it something that I am missing?

A summer school is usually a way to have a focused series of lectures on a specific topic. The best analogy I can think of is that of a master class for musicians. The audience are students who are usually sufficiently adept that they can handle the intensity and focus of a short program taught at a high level. For example, if you're just starting out in grad school in computer science, a summer school in specialized aspects of (say) deep learning might not be very useful. This at least partially answers your first question.

Summer schools are useful because they can bring a set of experts on a topic together in one location, at a venue where this expertise might not otherwise exist. In computer science, this might also be part of the explanation of why there are so many summer schools in Europe: since many topics in the field are dominated by the US, it makes sense to have summer schools in Europe for the reason above.

The speakers of course get the opportunity to travel and teach a focused group. It's a prestigious thing to be invited to such an event. The organizers make their mark (and benefit their institution) by organizing such an event. The students learn about a topic that they might not otherwise get exposure to, from the experts in the field. And that is an answer to your second question.


Is it legal and is it appropriate to display religious items in faculty offices in the United States? This question is specifically in the context of an American public institution and a generic faculty member, specifically not someone working in religious studies or a similar department. I have noticed over the years that many faculty members have religious items on display in their office or on their office doors, and I was wondering on the one hand whether they are legally allowed, and on the other hand how wise it is to display them while being sensitive to a diverse student population. Here are a few examples from my own experience (all in mathematics).

Several years ago I had a colleague post the ten commandments outside his office  door.
I have another colleague who has Bible study books prominently
displayed on his bookshelf.
I myself have a poster of the Buddha and a Buddha statue in my
office, both given to me by a student.
Somewhat less on topic: a now-retired faculty member used to put ads
for a Bible study that he held in his home in graduate student mailboxes. (I know many foreign graduate students found this off-putting.)

There's a big difference between inconspicuously displaying religiously-themed materials in one's office and effectively proselytizing, as the retired faculty in your example apparently did. The former is I think entirely reasonable, as it's a personal display that does not put any burden on a visitor or guest to the office. Putting religious materials in their inboxes is unwanted, and is inappropriate for a faculty member to do (particularly given the power imbalance involved).

I don't think I've ever received (or heard of) a legal notice that one is not allowed to display religious imagery in a personal office. Is it a good idea? Again, I think it's a question of degree. There's nothing wrong with displaying a small cross or Star of David or moon and crescent in one's office. Having a large and ostentatious display, though, would probably put students ill at ease. Similarly, having those materials where you actually meet with students (say, at a conference table in the office) is more "aggressive" than just having it on a bookshelf.


Research topic already covered, change direction or what? The previous days i begun with a research project on economic impact of physical disasters, and in the mean time , I found a paper with the same topic published 10 years ago (Sample period 1980-2003). My question is whether i should continue my research ( Which has similar methology) or change direction. Are there copyright issues even if I mention the previous work in the abstract? My sample period, on the other hand will be a 2005-2017.

You can cite the previous paper. You should consider whether your work contributes to the literature in addition to the previous paper. If you proceed, you can explicitly explain how your paper provides a novel contribution during your introduction.

Some possible places you could extend the previous work might be:

Making changes to the methodology
Updating the paper for more recent results
Extending the previous results
Further validating the previous results
Examining the question historically

You may also want to consider contacting the author of the previous paper; he may be willing to work with you.

In short, you might want to revise your research question and paper slightly, but you can continue with your research if you give credit to previous paper and can convince journals that your paper is important.


When should a supervisor be an author? I understand that in a lot of big-lab fields it is common for the principal investigator to append their name to a paper even if they did not write the paper, design the experiment, or collect data since they spend energy securing funding, and managing the whole lab. What about for small labs?

What are the requirements for a supervisor to be included as an author on a paper, as opposed to just appearing in the acknowledgements? If you are working on your own projects independently of your supervisor, but using funding provided by your supervisor (how does this change when the funding provides resources versus just your salary), are you suppose to add them as authors or just acknowledge the source of funding?

Allow me to strongly disagree with eykanal's answer.  There is no universal standard.  You must ask your advisor in advance what her coauthorship policy is.

In theoretical computer science (and mathematics), it is generally considered unethical to list someone as a co-author who has not made a novel and significant intellectual contribution to the paper.  In particular, merely funding the research is not considered an intellectual contribution.  Adding a supervisor's name to a paper to which they have not directly, intellectually contributed is lying.

In practice, writing a good grant proposal requires at least as much intellectual novelty as writing a good paper.  Most of the good ideas that PIs pour into their proposals also appear in papers; as long as those ideas constitute novel intellectual contributions, the PI merits co-authorship.  But that only works once per idea; once an idea has been published, it's no longer novel, by definition.

To be specific and personal:

I am not a coauthor on all of my PhD students' papers.  (Of course, I still report my students' independent work back to NSF as outcomes on whatever grants supported them.  So I still get credit from NSF for having the foresight to fund the student.)  The same is true of all the other theoretical computer science faculty in my department.
My PhD advisor is a co-author on only one of the papers I published as a PhD student.
My PhD advisor doesn't have a single co-authored paper with his advisor.


Is it fine to make a poster on a topic in which I have an article under review? Next week I am going on a summer school meeting where the organizers encourage us to bring a poster. I would like to make a poster on a topic that I have covered in an article that is currently under review. Is that fine?

The rules of the conference to which the article is submitted state that I cannot submit any paper that covers the same material to any journal, conference or workshop. Does a poster count as a paper in this context?

Typically this would be okay, because the poster is not published.

If in doubt, contact the PC chair of the conference to make sure.


Do German universities take mid-career international students for PhDs? Do German universities (specifically, Technical Universities) take mid-career professionals from other countries (i.e., the USA) for PhD studies?

I am trying to grasp how that process would work - or if it would work - for someone with family & in their mid-30s.

N.b., I am aware that the system is different, i.e., Funded PhD position chances for international students in Austria.

My field is computer science, if that matters.

Yes, that is definitely possible (if you have a Masters degree as JayFromA mentioned).

Normally professors have their own funding and 100% control about who gets accepted into the PhD program. This means you directly apply to the chair and not to the university but if the professor is willing to pay you your other background does not matter.

The computer science community in Germany is very international (especially the TUs are very proud of this) and it should be no problem if your German is not that good.

If you do not have stipend your salary is fixed though and there is no room for negotiations (and its not really competitive to industry work). There will also be no relocation funds or anything. Teaching is normally included in your duties so you can not upgrade your pay with that.

The good thing for people with family is that most programs offer "Individualpromotion" which means you do not do course work but research independently (with the help of your supervisor). This is normally more time flexible and useful if you have small children.


How to search private annotations in Mendeley? I have dozens of papers in Mendeley. Most are filled with post-it notes, what Mendeley calls "private annotations". Unfortunately, these are not searchable.

Mendeley users have been asking this feature for years. It still hasn't been implemented.

There is a workaround: exporting the article as PDF. The private annotations are added in pages appended to the PDF. But it is tedious: it requires to manually export each and every paper one by one...

I know Zotero's annotations are searchable. So I exported my Mendeley Library to Zotero. But the private annotations don't follow. Furthermore, Zotero only has a 300 Mb capacity, whereas Mendeley offers 2 Gb. So back to square one.

Would anyone have found a way (maybe a programmatic way) to search Mendeley's private annotations?

You CAN search your notes from the library/folders page (searches all notes for all documents) by selecting "Notes" on the drop-down menu in the search box. I don't know why you can't search notes from within a specific file.


How to do a good job of undergraduate advisement? Among my other duties as a tenure-track assistant professor (in math), I serve as an advisor to undergraduates: they are required to meet with me and get my approval on their choice of courses before they can register.

I dread this job every semester, because I suspect that I do a poor job of it. Some of the reasons:

I have little sense of what career opportunities are available to students of moderate ability and motivation. I can probably help the very top students, because I enjoy reading and listening to first-hand accounts told by extremely successful people, but I have little sense of what is available in the "middle of the market".

It does not help that this city is relatively economically depressed, and that I have learned the hard way not to ask people here "What do you do?" This seems to run counter to local etiquette, and when I do ask, people often describe work which sounds dull to me, and about which they don't seem very excited either.
There are a plethora of campus-wide programs, and periodically I get e-mails asking me to push various of these to my advisees. However, I don't really know anything about these beyond what I read in the e-mails, and in particular I don't have (and can't readily acquire) any first-hand knowledge of which are actually valuable and which are just empty organizationalism and/or some administrator trying to make him- or herself look good.
Students rely on me for information on what their graduation requirements are, but this is subject to rapid change and to misinformation which I can still find on the internet (despite me pointing it out to those responsible). I am constantly terrified of giving students bad advice which will delay their graduation.
In general, I am somewhat spooked by discussions with my colleagues who have invested a lot of time and energy in learning how the university outside my department works. I get the sense that there are a bunch of administrators pushing their pet projects, and colleagues who are involved with these seem a bit shell-shocked to me.

Despite all of this, I have the opportunity to help students, and I want to do a good job of it. What are some principles to keep in mind?

I've had some experience in running a training program for faculty advisors and working with new advsiors at my institution in the US (you haven't said so, but I'm guessing that you're at a US institution.) I've been asked a lot of very similar questions in recent years.  Your questions show that you care about doing a good job!

Your questions also seem to show that your university isn't providing enough support to faculty advisors.  I'd argue that having incorrect information on the web site and pushing new programs for undergraduates without providing relevant information to the advisors are signs of disfunction in the advising system at the university level.  You may be able to work around these issues, but a better long term solution is to encourage the administration to fix the system.

At a very low level, you can address systematic problems like this by being persistent but polite in reporting issues to the responsible authorities.  For example, emailing the registrar's office to tell them that information on one of their web pages is contradicted by the current catalog should probably result in the incorrect web page being updated.  Don't complain about these things in a very public way though.  Some administrators welcome this kind of assistance while others dislike "interference" and might ignore you.  If you run into that attitude, then your best approach may be to escalate to that person's boss.

At a higher level, issues like these can be addressed through faculty committees.  If you have a faculty committee that deals with advising issues (or more generally with academic procedures) then you can bring these issues to the attention of the committee.  Don't be surprised if you're recruited to work on the committee!

Here are some suggestions of things that you can do on your own to be a better advisor:

Learn as much as you can about the academic rules and keep up with changes.  In working with students, either be absolutely certain of the answer to a question or know who to ask to get an authoritative answer to that question.  The worst mistake that you can make is giving incorrect information to a student.  In comparison, "I'm not sure of the answer to this question" is much better.
Make sure that you have correct information about any student that you're advising.  Know how to use your Student Information System to look up a student's transcript, run a degree audit, etc. Many advising mistakes are the result of advisors not having complete and correct information about their advisees.
If a student is in danger of "flunking out" due to bad grades, it is important to intervene as early as possible.  If the problems are academic rather than personal than you should work with the student to come up with a realistic plan to address the student's bad grades.  Make sure that you know all of the rules about academic probation/suspension and that you're aware of the options that a student might have for withdrawing from classes.  Monitor your advisees' performance by checking their midterm and final grades each semester.  If your campus has an early alert system then respond to flags raised on your advisees.
Crisis management is important.  When a student who has been doing well suddenly starts doing poorly, this can very rapidly result in loss of financial aid, academic suspension, etc.  Often times these situations are the result of personal problems (health problems, psychiatric illness, drug abuse, death in the family, breakup with a boyfriend/girlfriend, etc.)  These kinds of personal problems are not things that you should address, but you should refer the student to offices that can help (a campus health center, counseling office, etc.)  In these situations it is often best for the student to cut back on their academic commitments by dropping courses or even withdrawing from an entire semester.
Academic decisions can affect financial aid, and the rules are so complicated that faculty advisors generally aren't in a good position to answer questions about them.  Check with your financial aid office on the consequences of any action that a student takes that changes their number of registered credit hours.
Advising students should ideally be more than just course selection.  The traditional "prescriptive advising" approach of simply telling students what courses to take should be replaced by a "developmental advising" approach in which the advisor's job is to help the student understand the choices available to them, clarify their goals, and then take responsibility for their educational path.  This kind of advising can be more rewarding for both students and advisors but it takes a lot of work.  Developmental advising can be particularly helpful for those students "of moderate ability and motivation" by helping them to figure out what they want to do in life and having that serve as motivation to do the hard work necessary to be more successful students.
The reality is that a BS/BA in mathematics is not by itself a qualification that is likely to lead to an exciting career in mathematics.  Most students are going to need to combine this with either a second major or a more advanced degree.  For example, there are lots of opportunities for students with MS degrees in applied math, statistics, OR, etc.  Some web sites that do provide useful information on careers for students majoring in mathematics include:

http://weusemath.org/

http://www.siam.org/careers/

http://www.amstat.org/careers/

http://www.ams.org/profession/career-info/career-index

http://www.beanactuary.org/

https://www.informs.org/Build-Your-Career/INFORMS-Student-Union/Career-Links-for-Students/Career-FAQs
You should get to know the "career services" office on your campus.  I encourage my undergraduate advisees to attend job fairs and look for internship opporunities starting very early in their undergraduate career.  Finding out that many employers have GPA cutoffs at 3.0 (or even 3.5) can have a powerful impact on a student who has been getting lower grades...


Does economy of scale apply to universities? On the one hand, it seems like "no" - hence some universities like Caltech choose to remain small, while others like Boston University & MIT don't merge into a single super-university in spite of having campuses that are side-by-side.
On the other hand, I don't see why it wouldn't apply. There should be an advantage to pooling resources, e.g. with library subscriptions, campus transport, and so on. At the academic level, more students/faculty would also allow the university to teach more specialized subjects.
Does economy of scale apply to universities? If yes, why are Caltech, Boston University/MIT etc (and Imperial/UCL for that matter) making the decisions they do? If not, why not?

Yes, economy of scale does apply to universities.  Having more students reduces the operating cost per student.
The universities you have listed are research universities.  They prioritise spending on research, and not students.  They do not care about revenue as they have plenty of money and do not exist for the purpose of gaining more money.
For institutions that have little money and get most of their money from students, I've sometimes heard it said that 300 students is "enough" to achieve economy of scale.
Some universities achieve economy of scale using purchasing consortia.  In these constoria, several universities work together to negotiate a favorable contract from a vendor.  This is quite common for public universities.


Is recommendation a must for getting PhD admission in Australia I am new to this community. The discussions here are interesting so I thought may be I can solve one of my queries regarding PhD admissions.

I am in India and I have completed my post-graduation last year from IIT (one of the top engineering institute in India) in research. I have submitted 2 journal papers and 3 conference papers (as co-author) in my post-grad course. Now I am looking for PhD admission in Australia. There is some personal reason for choosing Australia and I don't want to go to other country as of now. meanwhile I am working as a software engineer in an IT organisation.

I have emailed my resume and thesis to professors in Australian universities regarding the PhD vacancies under them. I have not received any reply (positive or negative). I have started wondering whether I am doing something wrong! Is there some other way to get this information and applying for it? Or am I suppose to send more information than resume and thesis, something that I am missing out.

PS: I have not added any sort of recommendation letter yet. I personally feel that my achievements should speak for me.

Thanks for any help in advance.

The short answer is yes. You're not going to get PhD admission virtually anywhere in the world without letters of recommendation.

But there's something more important: your approach is wrong. You should not start by contacting professors directly. First, find out if the university has a centralized PhD program (these centralized programs are very common in the US, for example). As far as I'm aware, Australian unviersities do not, but if they do then contacting professors individually is just inappropriate and a waste of time; you should apply to join those.

If they don't then you should find out if they're recruiting PhD students. They might have a webpage with a list of possible projects for example. If they do then you want to check those projects out and make sure you're interested before contacting them.

Here's an example of how to get a PhD position in astronomy at the Australian National University. After Googling for this, you should land at this webpage for the RSAA. You can see what topics are being studied there. You can also find a link to a list of potential projects, sortable by the level of study. Restricting the search to only PhD-level projects, the first result as of time of writing is this one on 3D modelling of nearby galaxies by Dr. Brent Groves, with a short description of what is involved. If you like the project, then you can email Dr. Brent Groves with your CV, motivation statements, thoughtful questions about the project (if any), and ask him if he's willing to supervise you. If you've read Dr. Brent Grove's work and have a suggestion for a potential project, you could write that too. If you just send your CV and "thesis" (what's this?) without any apparent knowledge on what Dr. Brent Groves is doing, he's likely to just ignore you.


Is it ethical to submit a paper with the name of a co-author who cannot be contacted? The paper in question is based on research my collaborator X and I did together some months ago. Our respective contributions to the research were around 2/3 for X and 1/3 for me. In terms of the actual text of the paper, X wrote about 1/3 and I wrote about 2/3.

During the writing of the actual paper, X decided to leave academia. I can no longer contact X: emails to the old address go undelivered and there is no forwarding address for physical mail. Attempts to find X through web searches and contact X through mutual acquaintances have been unsuccessful. X has thus not seen a complete draft of the paper, only the sections that were actually written by X.

In these circumstances, is it ethical for me to submit a paper with X's name on it, without a complete version having been checked by X and without X's approval?

If I do submit it, should it contain a note of the fact that X was unable to check the completed paper? I am considering the hypothetical possibility that I could have inadvertently introduced an error while writing the complete paper (and such an error might survive through peer-review and into publication); responsibility for such an error should be mine alone.

There is no possibility of separating out my contribution into a separate paper. Either the work has to be published as a whole or not at all.

I am in a field where alphabetical listing of authors is standard, so there is no question of the order of authors.

This is actually the subject of a blog post over at Adventures in Ethics and Science. In general, it seems that several possible actions are defensible. However, whatever action you take, you should make sure to

Document your efforts to reach your co-author
Let the journal editor know at submission time what's going on

RetractionWatch is full of stories papers that were retracted for having been submitted without a co-author's knowledge. These steps can help you avoid that fate.

Given you've done 1 and 2, your choices are then:

Include the co-author, despite the radio silence, or
Acknowledge the co-author

The problem with the first choice is that authorship signals endorsement of the paper's contents. If the missing co-author has not read and endorsed the final contents, having his name as an author is misleading. However, you can resolve this to some degree by including an explicit statement (e.g., in a footnote) that Author X could not be reached to review the final version of the paper.

The applicability of this choice also depends very much on the journal’s official policy and what responsibilities each of the persons listed as authors have met. I'm sure we can all agree that it would be out of bounds to forge the missing co-author's signature on a form that needs to be submitted with the manuscript! However, even if you have to sign a form stating that all the authors have reviewed the manuscript, you shouldn't do that either - tell the editor you can't, and explain why.

The problem with the second choice (acknowledgement instead of authorship) is that the missing co-author has presumably done enough to warrant authorship of the paper. However, you could argue that an essential part of authorship is to see the paper through to publication - and that if the missing co-author has not done that, he does not deserve authorship. Again, if you do this, you must clearly document the author's contribution in the acknowledgements and alert the editor.

Which action you choose will probably depend on authorship standards in your field and the outcome of your conversation with the editor. Whatever the result, make sure you clearly and honestly communicate the contributions (and lack thereof) of the missing co-author to both your readers and the editor.


Factors determining a feasible research field It was discussed in prospect of PhD research proposal previously, but this question is for all ages of researchers.

What factors should one take into consideration before selecting a research field?

Are you passionate about it?
Are you good at it?
Will people pay you to do it?

Everything else is noise.


Should I pursue a good advisor-match or institutional prestige / pedigree? I'm in a conundrum! Which one should I choose for my PhD in life sciences in the US: a great-fit advisor in a mediocre institution VS an OK (or potentially ill-fit) advisor in a prestigious institution?

I know it sounds obvious ---go with the good match (I also want this at heart)! BUT I also know that pedigree matters A LOT when applying for grants / conferences / publishing during and after PhD (unless you're back into a stellar institution for your post-doc* I guess?).

(*) I assume I can find a good-match advisor in my post-doc in a stellar institution, despite the mediocre PhD institution label on my CV, if I publish a couple high-impact papers with this good-match PhD advisor.

Background: I already have a master's from a super high-prestige institution in the US and I have a very specific research interest and goal** (so, I might be less malleable than a lot of fresh out-of-undergrads who are also applying for these PhD positions). My goal is to become a professor (I think it's an awesome job, you get paid for following your passion!).

(**) the well-match advisor is also on board and excited about this goal in particular, my vision in general. We chat multiple times on this topic; we really click well with her! Also people in her lab seem very happy and she is VERY passionate in her research, which is good because I am too!

Thanks for your help and insights in advance!

There are some undefined terms here, so it is hard to give a definite answer: mediocre, for example. But there is some general guidance.

What do you want to shoot for as a career? Do you want to do research in an R1 at the expense of all else? And a top-name R1 at that? Nice goal, but few achieve it. But studying at a top institution gives you some background for that. Or do you want to teach and otherwise do some good?

There is very little worse in a doctoral program than having a bad advisor. But bad means someone who isn't very interested in your work or is hostile to you or your ideas in some ways. Browsing around this site gives many examples of the horrors.

Having a high prestige advisor, from a high prestige institute (or not) will be a help for you in getting your first job, but it will decline after that quite rapidly and you will stand on your own. On the other hand, if the advisor, from wherever is connected to many others in the field, you can enter into many fruitful collaborative arrangements through the advisor and these will serve you throughout your career.

But the high prestige advisor may be too busy to give you the help you need, or, since you have your own ideas already, too disinterested to help you when you really need it.

But, it would be good to think long term about what you want, and the best choice will depend fundamentally on that, not the other factors you mention.


Is it normal/ethical for student grades to be assigned according to quotas? In my undergraduate Physics courses, I have heard from my Professor last semester that he got in trouble from the physics department for passing too many students.

This semester, the TA in the lab portion of my class (who grades our lab reports) came flapping around a memo he got, also from the Physics department, stating that the average grade needed to be 75% and he will now be grading accordingly, after a few weeks of normal grading.

I typically spend up to 4-5 hours on these reports, typing up formulas and doing analysis, calculations, etc. I have gotten a 100 on every lab report in my first semester and up to that point in the second. Now, after the ultimatum, I'm losing points for things I didn't before, and being asked for additional analysis that has never been required. I already spend as much time as I can, and this harsh grading feels out of nowhere and undeserved.

Questions:

Is this normal that teachers have quotas?
Should it affect students who actually put in the work?
Does this seem like an ethical issue of arbitrary grading that I should bring up to the department or my professor?

Unfortunately, the universities and colleges are run by managers and not only by academics. In ideal world, all students' work should be marked according to its merit; for example, if all mathematical problems are solved correctly, then the paper deserves 100%. Academics usually understand and share this view (apart of a few strongly believing that "no work ever deserves 100%").

Unfortunately, people who manage universities, are not always guided by common sense or mathematical reasoning. They seem to invent some obscure metrics and force them on the rest of academic staff. Academics do not think it is correct, but they have to play by the rules which are set by non-academics.

Unfortunately, students become a collateral damage in a clash of two cultures: academic and management. If you want to query this, best ask not your professor, but a Dean (anonymously or as a part of larger group). The misguided policies arrive from the very top; your professor has not much power against it.


Am I being ignored after an interview? I have had multiple situations (ok, well only two) where after what I thought to be a positive Skype postdoc interview (in one case, two interviews), my follow-up questions/requests have been completely ignored. I've sent 2-3 follow-up emails spaced over weeks with nothing in reply. In one case it's been over a month. The weird thing is that the email exchanges prior to the interview(s) to set a date/time happened very quickly and were enthusiastic. I thought the interviews went well and they said certain phrases like "you seem to have very relevant skills and interests." I made sure to thank them in follow-up emails and I asked a few more logistical questions about their group that time did not permit in the interview. But nothing in reply.

Maybe they decided they didn't want to hire me. That's fine, I get it. But I'm very frustrated with this because its seems to be so unprofessional. If they don't want to hire me, why not give me the courtesy of saying no so that I can move on? The field is not that big, so it is very discouraging that I would now have two groups that I need to avoid.

My question is if this is typical for a group leader to just ignore emails like this if they don't intend on hiring an applicant? Or is it possible that they suddenly became very busy and aren't able to answer emails?

Well, I had quite a few postdoc interviews and I can tell you that it is NORMAL for a PI not answer you back. Of course it is a shitty situation, even more when you thought the interview was good, but that's how life is when you are searching for postdoc positions.
1 email as a follow up or an update is ok. But don't insist on it. The truth is: you know as soon as you finish the interview if you would hire the applicant or not, so if you don't hear from them after a week consider it a no.


Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after accepting it subject to minor revisions? Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after previously accepting it?

When a paper of mine was first reviewed, one of the reviewers was okay with the paper and the other one requested minor revisions. The journal clearly said that the paper was accepted, subject to minor amendments and even went on to mention tentative publication dates. I then quickly made the required revisions.

Both the initial reviewers accepted it, but the editors solicited a third reviewer. These reviewer’s comments were not that specific but just referred to things like some of the citations are too old and he had problems with the methodology and contribution and then in other places he goes completely off topic saying that the paper implies certain things that I certainly do not say and are very far from what I am discussing in this paper. Now the journal has rejected the paper.

Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after previously accepting it?

It’s certainly not common, but it’s also not entirely unheard of or something that should never happen per se. Coincidentally something along that lines happened to me yesterday.

See this from the journal’s point of view: When they consult somebody as a reviewer, they assume them reliable and thus it would be odd to fully ignore their judgement. If this reviewer raised severe objections, it would be unwise of the journal to leave them unaddressed.

On the other hand, if two reviewers gave a positive evaluation of your paper, it seems equally unwise to reject your paper without even giving you the opportunity to react to the third reviewer’s criticisms. I thus strongly suggest that you check the wording of the journal’s decision letter and your paper’s status carefully as to whether your paper was actually rejected or they just want you to address the third reviewer’s comments and decide upon that. If your paper was actually rejected, you might want to consider a rebuttal due to the above reasons.

What seems a little odd is that a third reviewer was considered at this stage. Could it be that this reviewer was asked in the first round of revision and turned their review in only recently for some reason?

Finally, a sidenote: If the reviewer actually argued against your paper because it “implies certain things”, this gives you a strong argument for rebuttal. Even if a paper’s result imply that the first law of thermodynamics does not hold, it should not be rejected on that basis.


Changed jobs. Email from last job is now dead and that is log in for my google scholar I have changed jobs.  My email from my last job is now dead and that is log in for my google scholar account.  How do I get round this?

The email is most likely not dead, you simply don't have access anymore. Ask your former employer to help you change the mail (by forwarding you the confirmation mail, for example).


How to improve the language of my master thesis by myself? I have written my thesis on my own (with my limited English skills) and I gave it to my supervisor to check it. He said the work is fine but the writing is a bit bad and I need to proofread it by myself. I know that my English level is just below the normal and needs time to improve. However, I have limited time (a couple of weeks), so my question is how to improve my English writing efficiently during this period that will lead to an improvement of my thesis?

I have heard that there are some phrases and academic vocabulary list that are given by Cambridge University or other universities for use and are not regarded as plagiarism, does anyone know them?

My best tip for proof reading your own work is to have your computer read it back to you. We often notice how things sound weird when they are spoken compared to when they are written.

Microsoft word includes text-to-speech as part of the Word. I use it all the time. Stand alone text-to-speech software is available if you use something else for your writing.


Quality and quantity of contribution to a scientific field from an industry position In general, is a position in academia the best way to contribute to a field of study?

In general, are contributions to a particular scientific field made from an industry position as impactful as contributions (to the same field) made from an academic position?

For example, say, you worked in one of the best teams/labs in industry for a given field (e.g. IBM or Google for a technology-related field). Can you produce work that rivals the work produced by some of the best academic groups/labs in that field (e.g. from MIT or Caltech for a technology-related field)?

Or is it that, although the people at these industry positions work with the latest ideas in the field, they don't (actively) contribute back to the field? I.e. they don't produce new ideas w.r.t. the field, but rather work on implementing the newest ideas in the field in commercial products?

Is it correct to assume that, in general, in a given field, a top researcher from industry has less understanding of the field (as a whole) compared to a top researcher from academia?

I realise that the question is perhaps a bit subjective, but as academics, if you were in an industry position, working on the same (or very similar) things you are working on now, do you think you could and would contribute as much to your respective field as you are contributing now?

The question is not about being active in academia from an industry position. I know that is possible. My question is, rather, about the quality, and to a lesser extent the quantity, of work.

Speaking as a researcher in industry, there is absolutely no reason to think industrial research need be inferior to university research.  Top industry labs and top university labs regularly both compete and collaborate.

Industrial labs and university labs do tend to have somewhat different strengths and weaknesses, however.  The key difference is the fact that universities tend to be based around students, while industry tends to be based around employees, which has the following implications:

Students (and especially undergraduates) are much cheaper than industry employees, and so it is much easier for universities to take risks.
Employees are much more predictable and reliable in their work, so industry research can take on bigger and more complex tasks.
It is OK for papers-per-person-per-year to be much less in industry, so industrial research can do projects that require more infrastructure and less "sexy" work---even though they may be just as important a piece of research.

Now, it's true that most of the industrial world is not doing good research, or even any research at all.  That is, however, also true of the world of education.  For the top groups, however, I would suggest that the right way to think about it is not even "industry vs. university," but about complementarity and partnerships between the two, as both sides tend to be acutely aware of their advantages and disadvantages and therefore frequently collaborate in order to get the best of both worlds on their projects together.


How do I find references and how do I know that they are valid? I took a pause from school during personal problems and started it again half-year ago. Now that I've finished almost all of it, the last thing I have left is to finish my thesis-work.

My professor stated that for my work I need to look up references that validates and proves for what I've stated in my report (Which is logical), but my problem is what the title is given out.

How do I know that the reference is valid?
Where is the best place to find references? (For my case it's about software-development)

In general, these questions indicate a quite fundamental gap of knowledge in how science works. It is a pity that your coursework has not prepared you better for your thesis.

  How do I know that the reference is valid?

There is no magic wand that tells you that. You will need to carefully read the papers, consider their limitations and threats to validity, and decide for yourself whether the paper is useful as a source to support your argument. That being said, as a first approximation you can look at the venue that the paper has been published in (is the journal or the conference very good?), and how often the paper has been cited by others (you can see that in Google Scholar). However, again, keep in mind that all of this is just supporting data - ultimately you need to decide yourself whether a given piece of research is valid and useful.

  Where is the best place to find references? (For my case it's about software-development)

There are three common strategies for finding literature:

Searching a digital library (in your case e.g., IEEEXplorer or the ACM DL), searching through DBLP, or using Google Scholar. In all of these cases, you can investigate a lot of different journals and conference proceedings at the same time, but you need to be aware of the right keywords to search for.
Browsing journal back issues or conference proceedings. That is, after you have identified important journals and conferences in your field (for you ICSE might be a starting point), go over previous iterations and look over all paper titles and abstracts. The most convenient way in computer science to do this is via the aforementioned DBLP.
Once you have a few good papers as starting point, start following the chain of references. Look at both, the papers that your papers are citing, but also which papers cite the papers you already found (Google Scholar has a feature for this).

You can find a summary of this also in a presentation I recently did as part of my own seminar.


Citation feed for scholarly works Is there a site that can provide me a feed of scholarly works that cite another scholarly work as they are published?

Yes, this can be done in a number of ways:

In Google Scholar, you can set up an "alert" for citations of any paper that you're interested in.  Scholar is very broad in its collection of data, so this will include citations not just in peer reviewed journal articles but also citations in ArXiv preprints, theses, conference proceedings papers, and all sorts of "grey literature."  Google Scholar alerts are free.
In Thomson Reuter's "Web of Science", you can have saved searches that generate alerts that are emailed to you.  In comparison with Google Scholar, Web of Science indexes a much smaller set of publications, so the coverage is not as broad.  Furthermore, you (or your institution) need a subscription to the service.
Elsevier's Scopus database also offers alerts.


Article waiting for AE assignment for too long? I have submitted two articles to a journal. One of them got accepted within 10 days, but the status for the other one has been "Awaiting AE assignment" for 15 days now. The journal says on average they take 30 days to make a decision on a paper. Should I contact the journal about the status and why it's not changing? Is it possible that they forgot my article? And would sending a reminder have a negative impact on the decision of the journal?
Thanks.

You can send a request for an update at any time. You may or may not learn anything. There could be many reasons for a delay, including not sending too many papers to one editor and needing to find another who is suitable.
But an average of 30 days tells you little about the distribution of actual times. There is no real reason to panic unless you have other options for the paper that seem equally good.


What is the likelihood of getting tenure? What fraction of new assistant professors end up receiving tenure at the institution that they started at? This of course varies by field and rank, so please include the area and range of ranks you are thinking of when you answer. (i.e. "Computer Science, top 25 but not top 10", etc.)

It seems hard to find hard statistics on this question. When you get official statistics for how many people come up for tenure and are denied, you get an overly rosy picture, because people who are not going to get tenure often leave before they come up for it.

This question was the topic of a recent article in Science. Briefly, around 50% of tenure-track faculty will actually remain to become a full professor. This varies with gender, discipline, and year (e.g., its harder to obtain tenure now than it was 20 years ago). I strongly recommend reading this Ars Technica article, which explores the aforementioned Science paper in depth.


What are the ways I can demonstrate to the PhD admission committee that I am a highly motivated applicant? I have a STEM background. After failing in the CS MSc program, I got enrolled in a graduate program in Education. I was originally heavily motivated to do a Ph.D. in CS. But, after failing in CS, now I want to go for a Ph.D. in Education.
What are the ways I can demonstrate to the Ph.D. admission committee that I am a highly motivated applicant?

(I'm a computer science professor; I regularly evaluate applications for my department's graduate programs.)
You are asking the wrong question.  You don't want to show your motivation; you want to show your research potential.
It really really really Does Not Matter how much you want to do a PhD in computer science.  Sure, all else being equal, we prefer to admit students who are excited about joining the program, but at a fundamental level, we assume that if you aren't motivated, you wouldn't have applied.
What we do want to see is concrete evidence of your future potential for computer science research.  Make no mistake: Your "statement of purpose" or "statement of motivation" is actually a research statement.  What are your research interests?  What is your research experience?  What are your research goals?  What specific expertise can you apply to your research?  What open problems do you think are cool?  How do you want to attack them?  We are looking for both personal and technical detail, written in the idiomatic language of researchers.  (Even if you're not a researcher yet, even if you don't know what your specific research interests are yet, that's the voice you should strive for.)
We do not want to read about how inspired you were by your first smart phone, or who many programming languages you know, or how you've been programming since you were in the womb.  Yeah, yeah, we've all been programming since we were in the womb.  What have you actually done?  And what do you want to do that nobody else has ever done?
Part of that concrete evidence is your scholastic record: In short, grades.  Normally these only matter if they're low, but yours are low.  So in addition to the discussion of your research, your application also needs to address the elephant in the room: You need to give at least a brief explanation of what went wrong in your MSc program, and you need to provide evidence that the same issues won't arise again.
All of this evidence needs to be visible not only in your statement, but in your letters of recommendation as well.
I strongly recommend reading Mor Harchol-Balter's advice on applying the graduate school in computer science, which is based on her experience at Berkeley, MIT, and CMU.  Her advice is also consistent with my experience at Illinois.


"Telecommuting" in academia In business (e.g. IT industry) remote work (aka "telecommuting") can be relatively common (see e.g. a recent StackOverflow blog post). It is exceedingly rare (or even nonexistent) in academia, even though most part of academic work consists basically of thinking and writing, which can be done in any environment. Are you aware of any successful implementations of "remote work" in academia?

Of course, there are many factors making it less feasible - an academic employee usually has other duties (e.g. teaching) which can't be done remotely, there is also the social aspect of research, meetings etc. (although this is not that much different from similar aspects in a programming job, unless we argue that doing science is "more creative" than mere programming and thus requires more physical presence). Also, currently available tools still make e.g. making a web seminar or math meeting difficult (no blackboard), although this too is changing (see e.g. G+ Hangout seminars: TCS+). However, given the scarcity of jobs, "N-body problems" etc., it seems to me that the potential for remote work (even part-time) is, as of now, underutilized in academia.

Doing it part-time is rather common at least in places i have worked. At moment me and most of my colleagues work from home two days of the week (usually Mondays and Fridays for most and Thursdays and Fridays for some) on the days that no teaching is involved. If there is an important meeting we will show up otherwise we skype. I think i generally work on average 6.5 days in a 22 day work month from home.