What are effective ways to deal with burn-out while working full-time during a PhD program? I'm a second-year Ph.D. student in Computer Science and I feel extremely burned-out because:

I work fulltime as a software engineer

I work for financial reasons because TAship pay is negligible or basically equal to one-third of my rent.
I asked to be part-time and I have been continuously denied because my managers think me working part-time would not be enough to get things done

I have to be a TA as part of my Ph.D. program so I teach one section algorithm & data-structure
work on my thesis
taking a graduate-level class which is extremely time-consuming

The semester is almost done and I'm exhausted I hate losing and dropping out is basically losing but I also enjoy school and learning.

What are effective ways to deal with burn-out while working full-time during a PhD program?

Doing PhD studies isn't a trivial activity - there's a reason why most PhD students are full-time students. Unfortunately, that means you cannot easily both do a PhD and hold a separate full-time job. That would be equivalent to doing two jobs at the same time. No wonder you're burned out.

Options:

Switch to a part-time PhD. You'll take longer to graduate, and you'll still be working 1.5 full-time jobs, but if you're willing to work hard this could still work out.
Put your PhD on official hold (or perhaps even quit it if you can't put it on hold), get on a more secure footing financially, and then go back to finish the PhD. You'll take even longer to graduate, but you'll only be working one job at a time.

Personally, I'd prefer #2, because I've found that working >1 job at a time is really hard and imposes a heavy cost. It's bearable if the period is only a few weeks, but if it'll take years (a part-time PhD could easily take 8+ years to finish), I'll likely burn out anyway.


Are there still teaching professor positions in Western Europe in Biology/Env Sciences? It seems that I can't find any evidence of just teaching positions in universities across Europe, aside from the temporary position for a semester or two. I am mainly interested in Italy, France, Switzterland but let's make this a bit more broad so it applies to more people.

Every job ad I have seen requests publications and then asks to have a strong research agenda, raise funding, etc.

Do those positions still exists in Biology/Environmental Sciences and related fields? Or perhaps positions with minimal research pressure?

In France at least, the answer is yes, these positions exist. The positions you need to look for are either called "PRAG" (for PRofesseur AGrégé dans l'enseignement supérieur) or "PRCE" (for PRofesseur CErtifié affecté dans l'enseignement supérieur). There exists a list of such positions (warning: big xls spreadsheet) and I count a few that mention "biologie" for example. These are teaching-only positions in universities, or sometimes "grandes écoles" (which are pretty much the same as universities except that they have fewer students, students had to take a competitive exam to get in, education starts at the 3rd year level, and the focus is often more on engineering).

However, landing these positions is not easy.

They are very competitive: there are few of them, and they are in high demand.
To become a "PRAG" you need to be professeur agrégé, as the name indicates. This is done by passing the agrégation, which is a national competitive exam. Similarly to become "PRCE" you need to be a professeur certifié, which requires passing another national competitive exam (easier than the agrégation).
Both of these are civil servant (fonctionnaire) jobs. Professeurs agrégés usually teach in high school (sometimes in middle school), and professeurs certifiés teach in middle and high school. If you win the national competition, you have to take up a post (and you're unlikely to obtain a PRAG or PRCE position your first year unless you're brilliant and lucky). If you don't, then you will lose your position unless you have a compelling reason, which certainly won't help you build the seniority/experience necessary to obtain a PRAG/PRCE position.

As professeur agrégé you would also have the possibility of teaching in a prépa, including biology. This is a special post-secondary studies pathway consisting of two intensive years of training (for the students) before the students take up the national competitive exams to enter a grande école. This covers the first two years after high school (and usually the content of the courses is larger than the content of the first two years of university). Once again, obtaining a position in a prépa is rather difficult and is a combination of brilliance and luck (and networking...).

Upside: there is zero research pressure in these positions as you will not have any duty (or time) to do research.

Other than that, I don't think there exist any teaching-only positions in France. All other academic positions (maître de conférences, chargé de recherche...) are either teaching+research or even research-only. It is not surprising that all the job ads you found emphasized a strong research record in France: by law, research is mandatory, and university departments are only evaluated (and hence receive funding) through research.


How are some academics able to publish so many papers per year (e.g., 50+ papers per year)? Background: I understand that academics have different styles of working, but in the same field, I would have thought that the outputs of senior academics should be comparable (and according to their extra responsibilities).

For example, the Editor-in-Chief of Nano Energy (impact factor 12.343) is the director of a research center. Until now in 2017, he has published 69 papers in high-impact journals (all with impact factors higher than 10). Many distinguished professors in the same field publish about 20 papers per year (in a wider range of journals) without executive or editorial responsibilities.

Note that my question is not about this specific person as there are many examples of academics who are publishing far more than is typical for the field.

Questions

How is an academic able to publish so many papers in a given year (e.g., 50+)?
Does this imply the academic is a genius? Or are there other factors at play?

If you look at big names in science, you'll see their name at the end of a ton of papers (in many disciplines like chemistry and biology, standards can be different elsewhere) and this is why: providing the money and the lab space gives "senior authorship". Usually they review the drafts coming out of their labs/collaborations, along with guiding students/postdocs at the idea stages (which is considered worthy of authorship by NIH/NSF and journal standards). People with big labs get to put their name on the end of every paper generated from not only their lab, but from their lab's collaborations and whatever their grants funded.

Of course, some people are just crazy productive, but it's more likely that someone with tons of papers is getting a lot of them through their large labs.


whether to make a tenure track faculty job talk interactive Is it appropriate to give a tenure track faculty job talk in an interactive way, like posing some questions, asking for audience opinions?

In the right circumstances you can. For example, if you are studying color vision and have worked on the dress it might make sense to poll what color people see as a way to highlight the ambiguity. I job talk I saw on the psychology of magic, involved magic tricks and breaking them down. It was useful. If you are going to interact, it really needs to be critical to the talk.


European style PhD in the US I'm wondering are there any PhD programs (specifically in machine learning) in the US that are structured more like the European ones, i.e. where you immediately start doing research and don't spend your first two years or so on something very similar to Masters' program (lots of coursework, less research).
I have already a Master's degree and research experience and would like to start working on my thesis from the start.
Also I'm wondering are there any non-university research institutions in the US that grant PhDs? (For example, something like German Max Planck research institutes)

Thank you!

It should be noted that the reason for the difference between the US and European style programs is primarily philosophical, and has to do with the way master's degrees are considered.

In Europe (or at least those countries part of the Bologna treaty), master's degrees "follow on" from the bachelor's degree program, and usually programs are designed so that students who complete the bachelor's degree will continue on to the master's at the same institution before beginning a doctoral program.

By contrast, in the United States, the master's degree is very weakly coupled to the bachelor's program. Instead, in many places, it's viewed either as a separate degree in its own right, or as a stepping stone to doing a doctoral degree. Moreover, because the bachelor's degree program is only four years, while the European bachelor's-master's system includes five years of coursework, there is a bit of a discrepancy between the coursework a bachelor's degree holder in the US would have, versus that of a master's holder in Europe. Consequently, most schools tend to require roughly a year of coursework for students entering a doctoral program, as it acts as completing the master's program at a European university.

Also, because graduate admissions are almost always organized at the departmental level in the US, rather than the research group level, there is usually a "qualification" procedure which must be completed at American universities that aren't found in European universities. The coursework phase of the doctoral degree often figures into the material tested in the qualifying exam, and therefore schools often are reluctant to waive these coursework requirements.

However, reluctance is not necessarily the same as refusal. If you have questions about how things work, and whether a particular department would be willing to waive some of the requirements for you, you should contact them. If you can demonstrate that you have most of the work already in place, they may be able to let you skip some of the classes, or at least replace them with other electives (which may be of benefit—you shouldn't assume you're done with classes and learning just because you have a master's or even a doctoral degree!).


Why can't universities work around the proposed reclassification of tuition remission as taxable income, by not charging tuition? There has been a lot of press about how the new tax proposals currently being considered by Congress could hurt grad students because one of the plans would treat remitted tuition as taxable income.

I understand why this would be bad -- grad students who receive tuition remission would have to pay a lot more in tax.

But if this became the new law, couldn't universities simply change the way they handle tuition for funded graduate students?  In most top Ph.D. programs no grad students pay tuition because it is always remitted.  Instead of remitting it, couldn't the universities just not charge tuition at all, or pay it through a grant rather than through remission?

I'm asking because I'm wondering why grad students are so worried about the new tax plan.  I understand why it would be bad if universities didn't change the way they handle tuition and students had to pay tax on all that extra "income." But as it is, tuition for many Ph.D. students is just a shell game because it is always remitted. If the goal is to allow students not to have to pay tuition, it would seem that there are other ways to do that that would get around changes in the tax code.  And I can't think of any reasons why giving students remitted tuition is more beneficial to the university than just not charging them tuition in the first place.

Am I misunderstanding something about the way tuition remission works, or the new tax proposal?

This is a great question! I decided to write an answer to test my own understanding of the (rather convoluted) forces and interests at play. Assuming my answer makes sense, I hope it will help further the debate on this new proposed taxation rule.

  Why can't universities work around the proposed reclassification of tuition remission as taxable income, by not charging tuition?

We don't know that they can't -- I guess we will find out if this proposed new rule becomes law. But with that said, I think working around the rule would require a lot more than just relabeling "tuition" as something else or some similar cosmetic change. The reason is that there is something pretty honest and logical about the current arrangement, which makes me think that changing it would lead to an illogical, dishonest situation, which would be problematic from multiple points of view and create all kinds of undesirable distortions.

My understanding of the current system is as follows. There are four parties involved in the exchange of funds and services when a student goes to graduate school:

The university.
The student.
A funding entity (e.g. a public or private funding agency or an internal university grant).
The government, acting on behalf of the interests of the rest of society (yeah yeah, I know how naive that sounds).

Each of those parties has its own interests and has something to gain from the transaction, and provides some benefits to the other parties in return:

The university provides the student with an education and professional training, a costly good to provide (requiring physical infrastructure and lots of human capital). In return, it gets the tuition money (from the funding entity, or in some cases from the student him/herself) and the benefit of the research and other intellectual output of the student.
The student gets an education and valuable professional training that is likely to translate to a happier, more fulfilled life with improved employment opportunities. In return, he/she does research and other intellectually taxing work that benefits the university and the rest of society.
The funding entity provides funding to the university to offset (part or all of) its costs of educating the student. In return, it gets nothing, except the knowledge that it has fulfilled its mission of facilitating this process. (After all, funding agencies are set up precisely to be the entities in charge of giving away money to fund research.) This knowledge is used by it to justify its continued existence to the higher-level entities that are the source of its funds.
The government and society get the benefit of the student's research and other intellectual output, and the multiple benefits associated with a more educated populace. In return it gives a tax exemption to the student from paying taxes on the tuition money, which is after all a material benefit provided to the student by the funding entity (except for those rare students paying their own tuitions). This tax exemption is in effect a subsidy or incentive for people attending graduate schools. Of course, as readers of this site are well aware, going to grad school in the US is quite an expensive proposition (in both real costs and opportunity costs) already, to an extent that even deters some people -- probably a lot of people -- from pursuing a graduate degree. Going to grad school still makes economic sense for lots of people, but certainly not for everyone, and requires a lot of sacrifice and patience even from people who do end up benefiting.

Now imagine what happens if the tax exemption in item 4 is eliminated through a unilateral decision by the government, which is only one of the four parties. This will result in a net flow of huge sums of money back to the government. The whole set of incentives of the other parties will be drastically impacted. It is very hard to predict the exact consequences, but likely there will be an equally huge drop in the number of people wanting to go to grad school. Universities will have to go begging for more money from the funding agencies to offset that and restore equilibrium to the system, but the funding agencies don't have more money to give, or they would be giving it already. So: a big, big problem for everybody.

Now, you are proposing that universities simply eliminate tuition to forestall this flow of money back to the government. But then how will they offset the high cost of the education and training they are giving to the students? Charge money from the funding agencies, you say, but just don't call it tuition. Well, the funding agencies have to agree to this. How would the money be charged? By what logical name would you call this transfer of funds (it is after all a subsidy by an external entity of the student's education, which is a benefit to the student and therefore taxable as income under the new rules, at least if it is called "tuition"); and how will you prevent the government's taxation agencies from coming and saying -- quite logically in my opinion -- that this is effectively a form of tuition subsidy whether you call it that or something else, and that the applicable tuition taxes are therefore due? These are all tricky questions. As I said, I don't know if the universities will be able to find a work-around, but it is far from obvious to me that another equally viable arrangement can be found under the proposed new taxation regime.

Finally, I should add that the current arrangement works well not just because each of the four parties gets something in return for what they give, but because each of them gets back much more than what they give. There is a very large net gain of utility to society from the existence of higher education (and graduate schools in particular). That is why it is a resource that is subsidized, in one form or another, in all advanced countries.


What information to share and what to hide? Science and research is open knowledge. We should always share our knowledge with each other. However in current competitive world, scooping research is very common (specially in bioinformatics, methodology and medicinal sciences where research has immediate applications). This has further downstream effects like less chance of getting published in good journal, loss of novelty etc. I was wondering what kind of information generally people share openly versus hide. I know this will depend on kind of research you and your rivals are doing but still is there any commonality ?

To be more specific, I am looking for research in computational biology. Let's say I want to present a poster in a conference where my rival group (working on similar topic) is also presenting. Now how much information about my current research I should present?

I think that you have to consider and balance, at the very least, the following aspects:

Your overall career goals. I would argue that career-wise every researcher wants (and has to) establish themselves as an expert, if not in a discipline, in a particular area(s) of research. With that in mind, it seems pretty obvious to me that sharing your research is much more beneficial then hoarding it. The one potential exception to this approach is noted in my next point.
Your current research (that is, particular study's) goals and priorities. If your current research has a potential to be commercialized and you have desire to deal with that and you have financial means (or your institution's support) to do so (as you know, patenting is not cheap, and, as I imagine, patenting in such a complex field, as computational biology, is doubly so), then you might consider taking this route (should be decided on a case by case basis).
Impact on potential collaboration. Modern research in many, if not most, fields is highly collaborative. Thus, your decision to significantly limit sharing research results and other related information will most likely make you an unattractive candidate for participating in upcoming collaborative research studies and, therefore, will most likely have a serious negative impact on your future research portfolio and, consequently, research career.


I want to be a researcher but I don't think I'd be any good at teaching. What do I do? I would like to study for a PhD and hopefully become a researcher. There is nothing I can think of that I would like to do with my life more. However, my social and communication abilities are bad. They are bad beyond the point where it could be dismissed as me being a 'quirky professor'. People assume that if you want to go into academia, you want to teach. However, I don't think I could do it. I have Asperger syndrome, so there's a limit to how much I can improve my social skills. No matter how much I try to be 'normal', it doesn't work and it's massively draining, to the extent that I find myself struggling to do basic tasks because I get burnt out. There are staff at my university who seem to like me, so it's not as though it's impossible for me to form positive relationships with people in academia, but that's very different to being able to teach classes. Is there any point in me trying to pursue an academic career? Can I focus on research and do minimal or no teaching? I know that there are autistic people in academia, and that I'm pretty 'high-functioning' for an autistic person (i.e. I have it easier than a lot of autistic people, even though I do struggle a lot), but I don't want to set myself up to fail.

Staying at the university, i.e., eventually becoming a professor, will be hard / impossible without teaching. There are, however, research facilities that are usually financed half by industrial projects and half by funding from the state. If you get a job in one of these, you will have to aquire money by getting research projects accepted, and are then free to do research without any teaching obligations. Note that your contract there will probably never be any longer than 2-3 years at once. I will then hopefully be refreshed, but you will not have a lot of stability.

The main question may be whether you think you can do your PhD. That involves giving several presentations (at conferences and during your defense), a rather high level of stress tolerance, and probably occasional preassure from your advisor, especially during the last year.

I had a colleague who might have a slight form of Asperger, and he quit about one year before finishing his PhD, because it got to overwhelming. But there were several factors involved there, including him not being happy with the direction his research was going. So that might have nothing to say!


What, if any, roads are open to graduate schools for athletes with borderline grades? My understanding is that colleges with sports programs will admit students with "low end" but not "off the charts low" grades if the respective sports teams want them. By this, I mean grades just above the "cut-off" for admissions, without having to make a special case or allowance for the athlete.

Suppose a certified athlete tried to get into a graduate program with similarly minimum grades. To take an example, suppose the Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter retired, went to college, and got something like a 3.3 GPA which is the cut-off for certain graduate school programs.

What constituencies (if any) might such a graduate applicant have (e.g. celebrity value)? Or are "athlete" slots open only to undergraduates?

I'll answer based on the U.S. (which is where these issues are most relevant, I believe).

There is no special consideration for athletes in graduate admissions.  Undergraduate admissions are handled by admissions officers who often use all sorts of non-academic criteria, and recruiting athletes to play for the university is a specific goal at many universities.  However, graduate admissions is done by departmental committees made up of faculty, and the non-academic criteria that play an important role for undergraduates (well roundedness, extracurricular activities, athletics, etc.) are irrelevant.  If anything, a continued desire to participate extensively in high-level athletics could be considered a disadvantage, since it would take time away from academics.

If Derek Jeter wanted to go to graduate school, I'm sure some faculty would be impressed by his fame, but they would also be careful and skeptical in evaluating his qualifications.  In any case, there certainly wouldn't be a special admissions slot designated for an athlete.


Is conpher.com / conpher legit? Does anybody know if conpher is a trustworthy organization?
I have recently received a couple of emails from jm@conpher.com. The email body says:

Congratulations on your new article! We are a group of researchers
gathering feedback on your journal publishing experience in order to
share with colleagues around the world. I know you are really busy,
but it takes less than 90 seconds to share your advice and it could
help save a colleague months of stress with future submissions.

followed by a URL to their website with the DOI and my email as arguments. I am very suspicious since I do not see any relationship between conpher and PLOS where the specific article they linked is coming from. In fact, I believe their business model is similar to yelp, except for shopping for journals & publishers.
From their privacy policy, stated in https://conpher.com/privacy-policy/, they seem to want me to evaluate journals and articles.

When you make a review of a journal, we collect the information you state in the review, including which journal you review, which article(s) the review concerns, and how you evaluate the journal.

I work for Conpher.
Conpher was started by 35 postdoc researchers who want to share journal article publication experiences in order to share advice on where best to publish your research. Conpher is a is free platform available for all to search.
We are independent of all journals and publishers.
We launched in June 2020. Colleagues in over 30 countries have already shared their experiences. Sharing one's experience should take less than 90 seconds.
We display publication times, acceptance times, quality of peer review, quality and timelines of editorial/publisher communications and recommendations from past authors.
All reviews are validated in order to provide you with genuine advice which can help you determine the best journal for you to publish your research in.
We also add journal data such as CiteScore, Acceptance Rates, OA Licences and recent samples of articles published.


Prerequisites for RTDb (tenure-track assistant professor) position in Italy I have read that a prerequisite to apply for a RTDb (tenure-track assistant professor) position in Italy is to have held a 3-year RTDa position in an Italian university or an equivalent 3-year postdoc position in another country or to already have received a national associate professor habilitation. Is this information accurate? If yes,

Must the three years have passed at the time of the application or at the time of the appointment to the position?
Does the habilitation have any requirements about the years of postdoctoral experience?

Also, what are the characteristics of a RTDa position in Italy and how do they differ from a postdoctoral contract in other European countries?

Yes, that is accurate up to my knowledge.

This should be specified in the individual calls, but usually requirements are checked when the applications close: so if you must submit your application until January 31 (for instance), then you also must have 3 years of experience on January 31.

No, there isn't an explicit number of years of postdoctoral experience required for habilitation. However, the committee also evaluates your "scientific maturity" to take on an associate professor position, so they can decide that your experience is not sufficient. I suggest you to take a look at how candidates were evaluated in your sector at the previous deadlines, to get an idea.

RTD-A positions have a fixed duration (3-year positions, renewable once for 2 further years), and they involve some teaching (ca. 60 classroom hours/year, plus a good amount of exams). They are probably better described as a "non-tenure-track junior assistant professor position" rather than as a postdoc.

If you are thinking about applying now, note that you missed the last deadline at https://abilitazione.miur.it/public/agenda.php?sersel=61&&#idx-1 . I guess that new dates will be published soon with minimal changes to the overall system, but now we are waiting from news from the ministry.


How can you best answer when a Scholarship proposal asks for your objectives? I come from a developing country and I got admitted to a UK university in MSC, Computer Science. As I am not financially strong, I am also applying for a fully funded scholarship. There is an online form I need to submit for the consideration of this scholarship.

There are some questions that I can't answer them in the way the needs to be answered and convenes the scholarship organization. One of them is:

  What will be your objectives during the award?

If I answer this question it would be simple like the following:

  My main objective during the period is to get more and more knowledge and to learn new technologies that will give boost to my career.

I'm guessing this answer isn't viewed positively from by a scholarship committee.

What content do scholarship committees expect to see in the "Objectives" section of an application?

"During the award" sounds a bit strange to me; I guess it means during the period covered by the scholarship. First, I'd be sure to answer the question with specifics, not generalities. Something like "During the award period, my objectives are: 1) to complete the first year with an A average grade, 2) to master programming skills in Java (or whatever) such that I can independently program a controller for quad-power drone aircraft, and 3) ... etc.


Can I cite an old book in my research proposal without having read it? Here's a small dilemma. I have a few ideas that I am putting into the form of a research proposal. It borrows heavily from the insights of David Ricardo's Theory of Comparative Advantage. Now, the notion of comparative advantage is pretty much common knowledge in economics. However, my proposal is for research in Complex Networks.

Should I cite David Ricardo's original book from 1817 in which he published the idea, without having read it? (I doubt I'll be able to follow the argument easily in Enlightenment-period English) Or should I cite a secondary paper by someone more modern that talks about and analyzes comparative advantage? I would prefer the latter route as I would actually be able to read the material that I'm citing, but then I will not be going to the source of the original idea.

You need to read the material you cite.  That does not mean you need to read an entire book if the relevant portion is in one or a few chapters, but just plopping in a citation without ever cracking the cover is reference padding and is academic misconduct.

You've been given good advice by J. Fabian Meier about also citing newer material, but you can't cite something you haven't read.


Thoughts on Business Ownership Experience in the Academic CV So, I'm on the job market, preferably a liberal arts university (I'm an economist). As part of that, I had three discussions with members of my committee about my job market packet.  There is quite a bit of disagreement of the importance of one item of my CV, my business.

I started a software company where I developed an SaaS CRM and project management tool (not to mention all of the marketing, documentation, videos, etc.).  This company has existed for over 10 years, it put me through my undergraduate degree, and meant that I wasn't living on "my stipend" during my PhD.  And probably more to the point, I consider my own identity intimately tied to the company: after all I decided everything it did and did all of the work and I'm passionate about the products I made and how they are different than the competition (why they "deserve to exist").

When it came time to put my CV together, I said to myself, screw the normal order.  Everyone has a PhD applying for a given job, why should that be first?  So my order was:

Business
Research
Teaching
Presentations
Education
Everything Else

I went and talked to a committee member who is more of a friend than anything else, he thought it was strange, but probably good.  My chair thought it was fantastic idea.  Then I spoke to another committee member, she thought it was just wrong -- and she has been on many search committees.

Not only just wrong, but deserving of no more than a bullet point under "industry experience", she compared it to working for a company (like working for a company and running a company are the same thing).

Now, I have a huge amount of respect for all three of these people (I'm unusual in that I actually like my committee).  However, what I think happened is that the first two people understand what my company does.  They get that product development is really hard and is very similar to research (and in fact harder than research in some cases).  And a huge reason that I've been a productive researcher is because of the skills that I gained from the business (not to mention the "real world" perspective).  However, when I explained that to the third person, she didn't buy any of that.  And I think it is quite possible her reaction is more representative of someone who doesn't know me.

I get that the most important thing is research (and I have more research than most of my cohort, so I'm not suggesting this is a substitute).  But people list absurd things on their CV.  They list their community service (which I have as well, I just don't list it).  Or not real awards (like travel grants).  In fact, in this same conversation she suggested I list some extremely minor volunteer work for a grant she applied for.  Certainly, the thousands of hours of work involved in my business has to be worth a lot more than that!

So this is my current thoughts.  I list the "standard" order, but I still have a good half page on my business, albeit on page 5 of the CV.  Thoughts?  Does this really not matter at all?

I like your compromise proposal.

It is important, when writing a CV, to demonstrate knowledge and respect for the process by which you're evaluated. In my mind, that strongly suggest putting the "standard" stuff first.

But I also heartily endorse your decision to highlight your work experience. It sounds quite impressive, actually. Just do it after you have assured your prospective employers that you have the credentials and skills they're looking for.


When applying for a phd, does a hiring committee cares about winning in various programming/data-mining contests? When applying to a computer science PhD position in US, does it make sense to mention various significant achievements (finishing in top 5% percent) in programming/data-mining contests (topcoder, kaggle, hackerrank).

These competitions have their weight for tech giants, but does a PhD hiring committee takes them into consideration? If so, it would be nice to know how much weight do they have and what is the best way to present them?

Yes, they matter to PhD hiring committees, because they show potential.

I believe you should include such achievements in a "Distinctions" or "Awards" section in your CV.


What can a student do to respond to faculty/administration decisions based on current political events? We are from Kuwait. Our university often has many foreign professors visiting for extended periods.

In my particular department, the head has now begun rejecting professors from the US, and starting to send those back who are here already, the reason being that this is in response to the immigration ban imposed on Muslims from certain countries (however not Kuwait) by the US.

How should one deal with this as a student in this department? My first reaction was that this is obviously wrong and unfair, but I know from my advisor that the department head also feels that it is unfair to the rest of the world's professors that Americans can ban others from entering their country, but in turn can themselves go almost anywhere they want. So it is according to him a fair policy.

As a student, unfortunately there is probably nothing you can do about the situation -- except to remind yourself that one day you might be in a position of power and influence yourself, and able to do things differently.

Things might be different if there were was a particular American professor you wanted to invite to campus for academic reasons. In that case I would express to your chair that you understand his concerns, but talk about what you hoped to gain academically from such a visit.

The immigration ban is strongly opposed by many American academics. If there iss someone particular you would like to invite, you might ask if he/she has done anything to fight the ban (e.g. calling one's senators, participating in protests, donating to the ACLU). In such a situation, your chair might be willing to reconsider.

That said, I would not recommend pushing the issue hard if at all. You are still a student, and as such you don't have a lot of political clout.


Recommendation Letters with Research Professors I've been working on a research project this past few months under a professor's lab, but I've been mostly working with the professor's PhD students and other research assistants. I don't really meet the professor and have only talked to him basically once (at the start of the entire project). Is it a good idea to ask for a letter of recommendation from that professor? He's familiar with the overall output of our work, but he doesn't really know me on a personal level.

You can and should ask, but you could first ask them if they know you and your work well enough to write you a good letter. If not, ask them for advice.

I assume that the prof will probably ask the RAs who know you best for advice on the letter, so make sure you have a solid reputation with them, as well.

It isn't especially important that they know you on a personal level, but they need to be able to speak positively about your work and your likelihood of success.


Scholarship/funding based on publications/research work I am an undergraduate senior Mechatronics engineering student looking for a scholarship to pursue a Masters degree next year in Europe (Germany specifically) or US. My current accumulative GPA equates to a C+, however i worked on many research projects, 3 of which were accepted by high impact journals and still working on more to come.

I was wondering if universities would accept my work so far when evaluating my scholarship application? If not, is there a relative number of publications i should achieve in order to apply for a scholarship?

In general, while universities will look for publications, they won't entirely compensate for poor transcripts. Also, there is no "ideal" number of publications here: the more, the better.

With a C+ average, though, you are unlikely to get a scholarship in the US. I should also point out that in central Europe, master's studies don't normally have tuition, and so scholarships aren't normally awarded: you instead need to get funds to support your living expenses.


How important is the language of the bachelor thesis? My university requires me to write my Bachelor thesis in my mother language. How detrimental and devastating is it to have your Bachelor thesis in non-English when it comes to applying for PhD positions and language requirements in other countries?

My thesis is on p-adics and my wish is to pursue a career in mathematical physics, so I'd be particularly interested in how mathematics faculty rank their candidates in this regard.

It should have no effect, whatever on your future. You can fulfill all of the requirements of your university, but also, when you have the time, provide a translation of your thesis for others to peruse. You can, in theory, produce an English language publication based on the thesis in another language.

You need to demonstrate some English proficiency for study in some countries, but it needn't be through your official thesis. There are many other ways. In fact, a translation, done by yourself, might be an especially good way.

Yes, my doctorate is in mathematics, though I worked mostly in CS. Your mathematics will be much more important than whether the thesis is in one language or another.


Is my contribution enough to ask for co-authorship? I am an undergraduate research assistant in a physics lab.

At the start of my research term, my supervisor suggested a project to me. The project is to design, test and implement a piece of apparatus in our experimental setup. With the new component I have built, we will be able to take very precise measurements that were not possible with the old setup. The component I am building will effectively open up some new areas of research for the group.

Note that the apparatus I am building isn't new in our field; others have implemented it previously so I can't publish a paper on what I designed and built. I will have to leave the group soon because I attend another institution, my research term is up and I must physically move back to my home institution after that. I will not be able to collect any data or help write any paper in the future.

However, since taking this data would not be possible without my component, do I have any claim in co-authorship for (at least one) future paper? Or is an acknowledgement more appropriate for this scenario? I have no idea as to what level of contribution merits co-authorship on a paper. I think this is a good learning experience.

If I do have some claim, should I approach my supervisor about this?

In my opinion, it does not deserve authorship credit. Some university have specific requirements about authorship. For example, one university where I was previously studying had this requirement: an author should at least have done two of the following three things : (1) participate in finding the main idea of the paper, (2) participate in designing and carrying the experiments, and (3) participate in writting the paper.  According to what you said, you would only qualify for (2), and it would be indirectly, since you just implemented something that was already published. Thus, in my opinion, they could put your name in the "acknowledgements" section instead of as a co-author but if they don't it may also be ok depending on the context. Moreover, if you got paid to do what you did, then perhaps that they don't even need to put your name at all.


I found that a method I was hoping to publish is already known. What would be a proper way to retract emails sent to professors asking for help? Continuation of this post.
Basically, I emailed a publisher and two profs, asking for help on a paper I had written but not submitted. Turns out the method was not as novel as I thought, as an MSE post containing pretty much the same derivation was posted in 2016. Now, I'm trying to figure out how to break the news to them.
Off the top of my head, I considered saying "actually found it's been done before", but not sure how good that sounds. Probably this is as bad as I think it sounds, but any advice making it sound the best?

Don't worry, we do that all the time (figuring out something has been done/shown before). It actually shows that you do your work.
Maybe give a link to the other solution/work as well in case they are interested (though this is coming from a very different field).


Thanking professor with dinner delivery There is a professor who has made several reference letters for me, and I would like to thank him. However, I have some doubts as to whether it would at all be appropriate to thank him with dinner delivery to his office, say. I feel that simple verbal thanking is not sufficient at this point, but then, the atmosphere of formality is still there at the level of university relationships. What are one's ideas on this? If sending him a fine dinner would not be appropriate, especially without first discussing this with him, what is another way of thanking a professor, which would be considered "formally appropriate"?

I would avoid giving food-- especially a full meal-- to a professor, unless you know them very well. This is because you may not know their tastes or dietary requirements; for instance, unwittingly giving them a dish with nuts in if they have a severe allergy is definitely not a good idea.

It's also a bit strange to deliver such a meal to their office. They probably want to go home and eat their dinner there, rather than sit in the office and eat your gift.

While you are understandably grateful for the reference letters, the professor probably just considers this part of their job. If you really want, a nice handwritten card saying thank you would certainly suffice.


How to deal with an unprepared professor? For one of my classes (upper-level), the professor seems to be quite unprepared for the class. More specifically,

As they openly disclose, they haven't looked at the course material in many years (prior to the preparation of the course), and are formally teaching that specific class for the first time ever. Although the professor offers nice explanations and new insight in some course topics, it's clear that they lack the necessary knowledge to fully teach the course. Many of the students, including myself, ask questions on covered & related material to gain a deeper understanding, but we're far too often met with "Oh I can't help you with that. Sorry." Then we read the standard literature (textbooks) on the subject, and see that the answers to our questions are standard knowledge (i.e. should be known by an instructor).
The professor has been packed with other obligations/commitments that are intruding in on his obligation to teach the course (or, more generally, be prepared for the course). These include graduate student advising, personal issues (family most probably - their health seems fine), and research-related stuff. As a result, the professor has literally ended class early and even cancelled class altogether on multiple occasions because, as they have openly disclosed, they "didn't have anything else prepared". On top of that, they have severely cut down on the number of exams and homework.

For students who really only care about getting the course over with, having no intention of using and exploring the material covered in the class, this is heaven. But for those who care deeply about the quality of the class, most of which are paying, this is hell.

What could I do to make this situation better? I haven't talked to the professor about this, because (1) I believe the problems are external to the professor, and (2) the professor is a bit hot-tempered. I don't know if I should talk to his authorities, because then I'd feel bad/mean. Obviously I try hard to supplement by studying the material on my own, but that shouldn't be the case for a payed class.

One important thing about higher education is that in general nobody else than you takes responsibility for your learning. So if you decide to learn the material from books/other resources this should be fine. However, teachers/lecturers are still responsible to deliver good lectures. So the teachers set the stage to learn, but you can learn in any way you like.

That said, it still makes sense to try to improve the teaching. You write that the problems are external to the professor. This should make it easier to approach him. For example you don't have to say "I would like more explanation and better answers to our questions" but you can ask for additional material where you can find answers to your questions.

However, if you think that the assignment of this professor to this class was in general a bad decision (due to, for example, lack of expertise, lack of time, too many other commitments…) you can bring this up to people in the department who are responsible. However, it is important to focus on facts and describing the situation in neutral, non-judgemental terms.


How essential is your GPA for admissions to PhD programs to US universities in Theoretical Physics? I am a Physics undergrad aspiring to pursue mathematical physics(string theory etc) as a future career. How much importance is given to your GPA by grad schools in the US or Europe for admitting students to PhD programs. A comprehensive account of the importance given by universities of different tiers would be appreciated. Example what are the guidelines followed by unis like harvard, princeton in comparision to something like texas, rochester, UCLA, etc. Also, what GPA is considered 'good' by a uni like princeton compared to the lower tier universities.

The importance of any single metric is binary and its value (important or not) depends on the size of the department. If the department is big admissions committees use metrics to weed out candidates. Basically anyone with GPA/GRE below X is triaged (doesn't matter what school you went to, how good your references are, etc). Smaller departments generally look at all applications. Once your applications is looked at, it is considered as a whole. There is no formula by which good GRE scores can offset a bad GPA. Obviously a better GPA doesn't hurt, but you really want to worry about the things you can control. For example, good research experience tends to trump everything else.


Why do some research centres and university department publish a multi-year future strategic plan? I noticed that a few research centres and university departments provide a multi-year strategic plan document on their websites.
For example, IIT (Italian Institute of Technology) and Stanford Computer Science Department.

The plan usually describes the main goals and purpose of the institution, both in science and in research management.

Why do they actually do it?

Is it just a way professors and researchers try to predict their future?
Or is it a solid way to show their future scientific directions to the world?

What happens if the strategic plan is not respected by scientists and events during the following years?

And why so many institutes actually don't do it?

Another reason may be funding at a large scale. Governments sometimes have plans to strengthen the research in a certain area (ex. biosciences). By making an institution-wide plan, you can make a very strong case for the funding agency and possibly secure a large amount of money. The time scale is also important. If you have money guaranteed for seven years, you can buy expensive equipment and hire experts knowing that you will not have to let them go after a year, for example.

In the particular case of Stanford I imagine their main target is private investment. The aim of the plan is then showing off a strong commitment to their objectives.


How to avoid my advisor as a reference? I had a bad relationship with my advisor. He told me evidently that he won’t write the recommendation letter for me in the future.

Of course, I will not put him in my reference list in my future career. But I don’t know if the future employer will contact him or question my working performance or attitude? I feel very bad about this. Can you guys give me some suggestions?

There are two issues in my mind. The first is not having the post doc supervisor as a reference. As you get further along in your career, you will have to leave someone that knows you well off your list of references. If you can develop a strong enough network that you have 3-5 people who know you and your work well and are willing to write you strong letter, then the absence of your post doc supervisor will not be seen s odd.

The second issue is more problematic and that is if your post doc advisor is contacted informally, he may actively or inactively sabotage you. In order to get around this, you need to repair the relationship, such that it is not a problem. As a first step, make sure that he is really unwilling to be a reference. If that is the case, then make it clear that you will not use him as a reference. Ask him if he is willing to tactfully deflect informal enquires. If he is, and you believe him, that you do not have much to worry about. If not, consider having one of your letter writers address the issues you have with you post doc supervisor.

Having a reference point out bad things is always dangerous in that it makes the hiring committee aware of something they might not find out about. The advantage is it is the only way to really get your side of the story told. It is worth talking to your other references about how to address the issue.


Two potential advisors are interested in me as a master’s student – should I meet with both? Last Wednesday, I first contacted one potential advisor (PA) with a well-thought out email and my CV. He contacted me a day later and was very interested in me. I sent him my transcript and we had a phone conversation over the weekend. He seems very interested and we are currently talking about projects, how to apply for grants, etc.

Before he emailed me back, last Thursday, I emailed another potential advisor, expressing interest. She just replied back and is interested in me. She requested my transcript and offered to talk over the phone.

To be honest, I did not expect any PA to reply back to me, let alone two. I have heard that most of the time, PAs don’t even reply to these kinds of emails. I’ve contacted six PAs: Three got back to me and said they are not expecting graduate students in the next year, and two of them got back to me expressing interest.

So, should I still meet with the second PA? I hate the awkward situation of saying, “oh nevermind” to one of them, especially if I like the second PA better since I have already been talking so much about research to the first PA.

Mostly everyone contacts multiple potential advisors before starting any project (or multiple schools/departments when exploring program options, such as PhDs), and advisors/departments are fully aware of it. You want to be honest, if you are worried, and tell them, when you meet or talk to them, about the ongoing conversation with the other potential advisor. Assure them that you are interested in what they are offering to you, but you want to make sure that, whatever you work on and whoever you work with, it will be a good fit. And, once you decide for one of the projects, contact this advisor to confirm it, and the other advisor (over the phone if this is how you've talked until then, not email) and tell them that you finally decided to work on the other project because it was closer to your interests or any other reason. Don't have anyone on the hook, be clear to everyone as soon as you make a decision so they can take another student.

Overall, be polite and honest, and they will be fine with it.


Requesting review of short proof by professor I'm a student enrolled in an university in Italy. I'm currently taking a course on probability theory, but the way is it taught is, whilst very good, not very thorough; I mean that in class some of the most difficult part are skipped. As such, I'm studying those part on the book by myself. Since this is a completely new topic for me, I often wonder if I'm understanding the proofs correctly, and if I'm able to correctly apply the theorems.

For this reason I sent an email to my professor, kindly asking to review a short proof (that I've written in latex, so it was pretty and all) specifying that I wasn't sure if all the operations and the theorems employed were indeed well used. The professor did not answer my mail.

My question is, was I wrong with sending the email in the first place? Is it bad etiquette to do so? I especially don't want to appear like some sort of "smart aleck" or anything, I am honestly trying to understand the topic. Of course I don't mind that the professor didn't reply, I know he must be pretty busy. On the other hand, I also have the feeling that if I can't get any feedback I may as well study the books by myself. What is even the point of being enrolled in the university then?

I hope someone with experience (maybe a professor!) can share their thoughts.

As @paulgarrett has said, there's nothing wrong with sending this sort of email, and (one hopes) many professors will be pleased that a student is showing more initiative than the average.

However, from the professor's perspective: unless the answer is "Yes, that's exactly correct", or "No, you clearly haven't understood the first thing about this course", providing a helpful answer can be quite time-consuming. Explaining why your proof is not quite right may require material that's outside the scope of your current course; it may also require the professor to sit down and produce a lengthy response. Sometimes, there are also nuances of "it's not exactly wrong, but it's not entirely right either" that are difficult to translate into written form.

Thus, it's all too easy to put this sort of question to one side, with good intentions of replying later that never quite come to fruition. I suggest the best strategy, assuming you've given the professor a reasonable amount of time to respond, is to go see the professor in person (perhaps during his office hours, or after a lecture), and (politely) ask if he's had a chance to look at the proof you sent. Take a print-out with you. You will at least get a better sense of whether this professor welcomes your questions or not.


How do I help minimize interruptions during group meetings as a student? The project I work on has numerous members -- several graduate students, a couple of postdocs, and my advisor. We meet every other week to discuss progress and update one another on our status. Almost to a point these meetings run over, as we continuously find ourselves in tangential discussions.

One effect that I've noticed from these tangents is that certain individuals in the group tend to get interrupted more than others. Specifically, there's a single female postdoc (hereafter referred to as postdoc A) in the group, and it seems to me that she gets interrupted more often than anyone else.

There are multiple guilty parties here -- my advisor, the other postdoc (who is male and is hereafter referred to as postdoc B), even my labmates and I (the other graduate students). We (my labmates and I) have noticed this and are making a strong effort to no longer interrupt postdoc A while she is speaking. My advisor and postdoc B seem to be oblivious to this, and often times will discuss potential ideas and pitfalls about postdoc A's research during her own presentation.

I'm guessing there may be multiple factors at play -- issues of gender, societal norms (postdocs A and B and my advisor are all from different countries outside the US, while my labmates and I are all from the US), power dynamics, etc. And I also realize that I'm a bit biased here -- I work most closely with postdoc A, so I have a sense of loyalty toward her especially. But it's gotten out of hand in my opinion, and I'm not sure as a student how to best assist her.

This post has some suggestions for students and advisors on how to conduct effective group meetings, but it doesn't directly address this issue. I'd appreciate any advice the Academia S.E. community has on how I, as a student, can best support this postdoc during group meetings.

This sort of thing has roots way beyond academia.  There is a lot about the dynamics of women having difficulty being spoken over in meetings (though I imagine it could apply without respect to gender too, based on differing levels of assertiveness).  Maybe a few things to try:

When someone, even your advisor, talks over her, say "Wait, what were you about to say?" addressed to her, so it's not directly confrontational toward the interrupter.  This is as opposed to something like "Wait, let postdoc A finish" addressed to the interrupter, which is more confrontational.  That is, assuming you want to avoid a confrontation with your advisor.
Mention it casually to her after a meeting.  She might appreciate and/or be emboldened by the support.  Something like "What was it you were going to finish saying before soandso took over?"  This way you show you're both interested in what she had to say and also noticed that she was talked over in the meeting.
Wait until the interrupter finishes, then bring the focus of the meeting back to postdoc A.  "Sorry, what were you about to say earlier?"  or "Hey, postdoc A, what was it you were saying about X a minute ago?"  This is probably the safest thing to try, and if you do it enough the others might even get the point!


What to do when online instructor not giving meaningful feedback on research project? I am enrolled in an on-line graduate course (US public university). I do not live near the campus, so I cannot attend office hours (which aren't even offered).

For 3 months, I've been working on a research paper for the course. At regular deadlines, I've submitted my progress electronically, however, the instructor's feedback was sparse in each case:

No feedback on whether my chosen topic was okay.
No replies to my public posts/E-mails about some concerns I had in approaching the topic.
Only minimal markings, e.g. pointed out a few grammar/MLA mistakes, no comments focused on my ideas, organization, etc.

I do not even know if the instructor read my work. The project is worth a significant portion of the course grade, but the instructor has given such little input and I have no idea if the paper is good or terrible. What can I do?

I see three likely paths for you to take, depending on the quality of the program that you are enrolled in.

If you haven't already done so, explicitly ask the professor for more concrete feedback on your work.  You might simply be having a communications problem, where the professor assumes "no news is good news."
If the professor doesn't not respond constructively, escalate to somebody higher up, like a dean.  Approach delicately, as a student concerned and asking for help, rather than making demands.
If you don't get a satisfactory response from the dean, then it may be that the online program you are enrolled in is crap, and you should not bother investing your time and money in it.  Some online programs are quite serious and good, while others are essentially just for-profit scams, and yours might well be one of them.


How can an undergraduate challenge a professor on a misleading homework question? Thinking back to when I was an undergraduate, one of the homework assignments in a probability class was:

  In a lottery, is it possible for the winning combination to be 1,2,3,4,5,6?

To paraphrase the lecturer's answer:

  No, because the combination is very unlikely.

The official answer clearly is an error, but how does an undergraduate approach a lecturer when the given answer is wrong?

I have found the best way to handle that requires that first the student realize a few things:

the professor has a great deal of discretion to determine how to grade and mark things
professors are humans and make mistakes, and most are aware that misunderstandings and miscommunication can occur, and
like all other humans, being directly and publicly challenged or put in a position of being told "you are wrong" tends to evoke defensiveness which is rarely helpful to anyone in any situation

What I've found works the best for most situations is to meet the professor at an office hour or immediately after class (if they stick around for a few minutes), and ask about the issue. Go in with an open, learning attitude clearly wanting to understand - not trying to make a point or prove someone right or wrong.

To avoid defensiveness as well as allowing the person to "save face", you can put your question something like this: "I have a question about this homework problem, as I think I'm misunderstanding something." You are asking the professor for their help in understanding something important to the course, rather than framing it in a way of "defend your wrongness", and usually this results in a more pleasant conversation.

It can also be good to explain your reasoning clearly in answering the question, such as: "based on the principle we talked about in class a few weeks ago, of how all possible combinations of numbers are equally likely with a true lottery draw [showing you were paying attention to other things in class], I figured {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} must be a possible outcome. I looked up combinations and lotteries in the textbook, and rechecked lecture notes, and I haven't found anything that indicated otherwise [shows you did due diligence in trying to figure out the problem without just asking, and thus aren't wasting their time]. Am I misunderstanding something?"

Then, the most important part: listen carefully to the explanation. If they don't explain and direct you elsewhere, such as to the book or part of a previous lecture, then make sure you have enough information to do that, such as indicating you absolutely will do that right away and, "just to make sure, we are talking about chapter X on combinations, right?" Then go do that.

If you don't find out you were mistaken, then take the materials back to the next meeting time and show them again. "I did what you advised and I read this part here in the book, which seems to support that the combination is equally likely. Can you please help me see where I'm going wrong?" Polite persistence is incredibly difficult to defend against, even for very cranky people.

Alternatively, you can be more direct and try to handle this in class respectfully. Doing this in class varies much more by professor, your developed social skills and attitude, your standing in class, and your local culture, but at least in my part of the US I've rarely had a problem. You just politely ask, at an appropriate time, to go over the homework problem, and ask for an explanation of what it is. If it contradicts what you thought you learned, then you bring it up and say so. "I thought that principle X meant that...how does that effect this problem?"

One or both of these methods has resolved every problem I ever had in classes that were worth the effort, and the remaining ones were so minor (a few points here or there) I just didn't bother if a the first thing tried (usually a quick question or asking for an explanation) didn't work. A more extreme situation might call for more, but that should only be after you tried all of the above and no resolution was reached of any kind, and the result is so dire to you that it's worth trying to go farther.


When resubmitting a paper, should I write individual letters for each reviewer or one common letter? My question is simple. When resubmitting a paper after review was done, should I include different response letters to each reviewer, or should I include my comments addressing each reviewer remark in a single letter?

Edit: I usually send one single letter. However, recently, I was in a situation where the reviewers made only minor comments while the editor had a major issue. I'd think the editor would not necessarily want to share his major comments with the reviewers, so I sent separate letters so the editor might choose which ones to send to the reviewers. This made me think that always sending separate letters is possibly the best practice.

Edit 2: Please note that I'm not asking how to write good response letters in general. I'm sure there are plenty of good advice about that on Academia.SE. I'm particularly interested in pros and cons of using single vs multiple letters.

Usually, you sent back one single letter in which you answer the reviewers questions one by one. I always start with a short note to the editor, listing the major revisions done as bullet points. I also thank the reviewers for their time spent on the review and that their comments advanced my manuscript (of course I write this only if the review really improved my work). Then I start with "Reviewer 1" and list each of his questions or remarks and mark my comments either in bold or in a different color.


Is a general GRE score of X sufficient for entry to postgraduate degree Y? Question: I got general GRE scores of VR (verbal reasoning), QR (quantitative reasoning), and AW (analytical writing).  Is this a good score to apply for entry to postgraduate degree in field X?  How will this score look to the selection committee?

Note: This is an intentionally generic GRE question (with unspecified scores and field of study) which is intended as a template for a large number of questions asked on this forum regarding evaluating the scores on the general GRE test (e.g., this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this).  This question seeks answers that are applicable for an applicant for graduate-level programs in any field, based on any scores in the GRE general test.  The goal of this question is to provide a general reference to avoid the need for specific questions with particular scores/field of study.

Preliminary remark: There are differing opinions on the important of the GRE in admissions to postgraduate programs, and its weight largely depends on the preferences of the academics making admission decisions.  Some regard the GRE general test as useful information, and take it into account, and some regard it as unimportant.  Meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the GRE can be found in Kuncel et al (2001).  Nothing in this answer should be read as implying that the GRE is determinative of entry, but if you are going to submit scores on this test, or if you are required to do this, it is good if your scores compare favourably to your cohort of applicants.

Assessing your score relative to your field of study: Assessing your score on the general GRE test can be done by comparing your score to data on the scores of test-takers, broken down by their intended graduate major.  Unsurprisingly, different fields have applicants with different levels of ability in the three sections of the GRE general test.  A score that would be considered good in some fields will be considered weak in other fields, depending on the average standard of applicants to that field.  Hence, it is important to look at your scores relative to the cohort of test-takers with your intended graduate major.

The Educational Testing Service (ETS) have published test data for test-takers (seniors and non-enrolled college graduates) who undertook the general GRE test in Financial Years 2014-17.  This data shows score outcomes for each group, based on their intended graduate major.  This data can be used as a reference to check how your score compares to other students who are intending to pursue the same graduate major as you.  It can also be used by academics to help them to interpret your score.  (ETS also produce annual 'snapshots' of score outcomes that give information on the scores across demographics and majors.)

If you would like to get a good idea of whether your GRE score compares favourably with your cohort (students seeking admission to study the same postgraduate major), the simplest thing to do is to compare your result to the published data for students in that cohort.  The data gives score frequencies in bins, so it is not usually possible to obtain your exact percentile in the cohort, but it should be possible to see roughly where you fall in that cohort.  The data also give means and standard deviations for the scores, so it is possible to obtain a standardised score relative to the cohort.

Example: In this related question the test-taker was seeking entry to an applied maths graduate program, with GRE general test scores of VR 167 (98%), QR 161 (78%) and AW 5.0 (93%).  This can be compared with histograms of scores from this cohort taken from the aforementioned data (means and standard deviations are also given in the data):

If we place the scores of this student into the data for the cohort of test-takers seeking entry to an applied mathematics graduate program we see that his quantitative reasoning score is actually below average for this cohort, despite being substantially above average relative to all test-takers.  The standardised scores for this student (standard deviations above/below the mean) relative to this cohort is VR 1.875, QR -0.500, AW 1.875.

This result shows that this particular student has a lower quantitative reasoning score than the majority of the cohort, and so this is likely to be a weakness of the application (to the extent that GRE is considered).  This is unsurprising when considering the fact that applicants for mathematics programs tend to have extremely high levels of quantitative reasoning ability.


Pros and cons of CV and cover letter for Ph.D. position in the same document I am going to present my candidacy for a Ph.D. position. For this, I have prepared a version of my CV using Latex and moderncv. The moderncv template includes both the CV and the cover letter in the same document. This is the first time I have seen this, and I wonder what are the pros and cons of including both of them in the same document vs. sending them in separate PDF files. Also, which approach is the most common?

Just in case it is relevant: several positions are offered (each one in a different topic under a different advisor) and I am presenting my candidacy for the subset of topics that I am interested in. The recipient of the email is the department account, so I have no idea who is actually receiving and dispatching my request.

Separate is the most common thing to do in general (for graduate programs, jobs, etc), probably because it is the most convenient for applicants, who will often have only one CV but different cover letters for different applications.

Also, you will keep updating your CV throughout your career, and use it for many things, whereas cover letters are position specific.  This makes it somewhat more covenient to keep your CV separate.

The only pro I can imagine to keeping them in the same file is that it will take whoever's looking at your application one less click to see your information, but it seems unlikely that the person receiving this will care very much whether they get one or two pdfs (if they do, they should say what they want in the instructions).


Researching with someone as a stopgap I am currently an undergrad student looking to research with one particular professor. On talking with his colleagues, it was suggested that I first get some research experience under my belt; the professor in question is a high level professor who is currently not looking for students and it would significantly help my cause when he opens up if I have research experience already.

There are other professors that I'm not particularly interested (interesting, but not amazingly interesting to me) in working with, but are open and would be willing to take me in currently. Is it ok to use these professors as experience builders on the premise that I would switch as soon as the professor I would like to work with opens up? If so, should I tell the stopgap professor that I intend on switching as soon as the other group opens up?

Just to be clear, I would put in the time required for the stopgap work - I would not just blow it off. I am just concerned about using someone as a stopgap and potentially leaving them high and dry if they expect me to be there for the next 3 years of undergrad.

If you came to me and said upfront that you wanted to get research experience and wanted to work with a variety of professors rather than making a full commitment to only one, I would try to find a way to accommodate you.

Or at least I would let you know what my expectations are. But, in any case, we have an honest relationship.

Now there would be no question of an ethical bind if you later decide to work with a more prestigious professor.

But the honest relationship is very valuable given that the professors know one another and you don't want to get caught in a bind between two professors.


Nationality on Academic CV in USA Is it acceptable to put your nationality on a CV when applying for a position at an American university?

For your interest, in some countries it is customary to put your date of birth, marital status, or even your religion on your CV. As far as I understand, this gets an application binned immediately in the USA. But what about nationality?

I've seen it many times on applications, and it made not a shred of a difference. We did occasionally have Iranian applicants, which is probably the most problematic case, but again it made no difference -- if we wanted to hire someone because of their qualifications, we still did not care about visa issues because that's someone else's problem. For any other nationality, it was a non-issue that wasn't even talked about.

To show you what else doesn't matter: Because I'm German, I put my nationality, birthday, and marital status on my CV for all my postdoc and assistant prof applications. It made no difference: I got invitations to interviews and offers regardless. I don't do it any more because I've learned that that's not typically done in the US. But it really made no difference one way or the other, neither legally nor as far as the hiring committee is concerned.

In summary: You're overthinking the issue :-)


Scholarship Information I have a question regarding how schools decide on who to give scholarship to.

Is it appropriate for me to ask my graduate school department on their guidelines in giving out scholarships?

I feel like I have been cheated from scholarship because I have found out people who have worse undergrad GPA/GRE got scholarship and I didn't. I am an architecture major and will study in USC this coming Fall. I submitted my application 2 weeks before the deadline, but they emailed me that I was missing my community college transcript so they couldn't forward to the architecture department they finally forwarded my application early March. I responded to their email the next day with the transcript, but they just took their time to file it. Could that be a factor? If scholarships are given out based on performance then I really think I deserve it after, again, knowing that people who performed worse than me in undergrad received it.

Your best bet would be to make contact with the scholarship people and ask (nicely) for feedback as to why you did not get a scholarship. This way, you'll know for certain as to why they did not award you a scholarship.

Often, scholarships are not just based on GPA/GRE scores or any other academic performance, there are often a myriad of other criteria they use to assess an applicant's scholarship suitability.  Did you have to fill out a form with some details or supply a personal statement?

How do you know that they

  just took their time to file it.

If they did (which I doubt), then yes, it could be a factor, but I doubt a malicious one considering the amount of information that they would have to file, collate from the many applicants.  More likely, they filed your additional transcripts as soon as they received it (or very soon after).


Half good and some not good results in a research paper? I have made some research about a computer science topic. The initial idea seemed good, but when I implement the idea; this works in some cases and in some others it does not bring conclusive results.

How can I write a paper about this subject in particular? I mean, I do not want to hide the bad results. I want to include them, but I feel scared that my paper could not get accepted because of that.

I was thinking also to submit it in a not so prestigious conference, but also I do not see any advantage on doing so.

It's important to remember that a paper is supposed to make some kind of contribution. It's not merely a report on "things you did". So if you have some good results and some inconclusive results, what's the contribution ? As sr3u says, you need to work out what's going on and come up with some answers. It's entirely possible that you fail in this endeavour and end up with NO paper. That's not fun, but it's something that you must accept as a possibility.


Plagiarism - bachelor thesis I recently turned in my bachelor thesis and just now realised that there is a missing citation in the text. it's kind of a grey area since i'm mentioning earlier formulas that are cited and based on that say that it will conclude in a specific mathematical expression. I'm unsure if this would be considered common knowledge. since it is a general mathematical expression. If not, would it be considered plagiarism?  The transition from the equation im talking about and the expression that im not citing is not 100% clear. What would you do?
Edit: I’m not explicitly deriving the expression. In this specific instance i have explained the nature of a specific model, which im citing. I then go on in a later part and say: ”because of the nature of the ”..”model, When we perform the transformation in equation ”a”and ”b”we can show that the expression will be ”x ”. In this case, ”x” is the amount of deegres of freedoms.

If I understand correctly, you state and cite formulas, then derive a further formula. Presumably, the derivation isn't new, and you are concerned that you didn't provide a source for the derivation. Given that you consider the further formula to be well-known, it perhaps doesn't matter so much. Nonetheless, to protect yourself, you could email your examiners and explain that you inadvertently forgot to mention that the derivation is not your own, it is a well-known result, perhaps providing a citation.


How do schools determine their curricula? What is the process that gets a textbook into the course schedule? To what extent is the degree program considered, rather than just the individual course? What part does each party play, from administration to professor to publisher/author? Further, how is it done for alternative media such as videos or video courses and software?

A bit of context: I have a business that sells videos of CME conferences and would like to explore how I may provide access to that content to the students (and faculty), whether part of a curriculum or not. With this in mind, I'm looking where my business might fit in and make a deal with a school.

For example, I'd be happy to offer access to individual lectures to augment a course, entire courses to augment a program, or just exposure that might convince students to purchase the videos for their own interest (e.g. a link on their website, a place in the book store, email list, professor's "extra reading", etc.)

(This applies to US universities; not sure if the rest of the world is similar.)

Textbook decisions are, by default, made by the individual professor teaching the course, based on what they feel is most suitable for the course.  They would of course consider how the course fits into the degree program(s) that require it, but there usually isn't a concerted effort to have consistent textbooks across all courses in a degree program.

For "standard" courses that are taught regularly by many different professors, the department may choose to adopt a standard textbook.  This decision would typically be made at the department level, led by the professors who teach the course most frequently, with input from others in the department, other departments whose students often take the course, etc.  For courses in which a particular piece of software is central, the choice of software might be similarly standardized.

Higher administration usually has little or no direct role in such decisions.

Supplemental materials (additional software tools, videos, extra reading, etc) are usually selected by individual professors, and are not usually "standardized" like the main textbook can be.

Bookstores will by default stock all books and other materials that are listed as "required" or "optional" for the course.  Everything beyond that is at the discretion of the bookstore manager, based on whether they feel it makes business sense.


How is the mathematics academic job market outside of North America? Most of the information online concerns academic positions in math at research-oriented US universities?  In summary, it is extremely competitive.
I'm just wondering, what's the situation at teaching-oriented institutions in the US, and other institutions around the world in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, East Asian countries etc.

Thanks,

It's very dependent on where you are. I'm from Europe and here it's extremely competitive. In some developing countries though, it's less competitive because there is a great need for university-level teachers, but research is far from the priority in these jobs (according to some of my friends who took them). It all depends on what you're looking for. If you want a research-intensive job in a developed country, expect as much competition as you would in the US: you're not the first one who has the idea to move to get a job.

  But are all university-level math jobs posted on mathjobs.org

No. Outside the US, posting job ads on mathjobs.org is the exception rather than the rule.


My name on transcript has no surname. Should I list it as a "former name" when applying for universities in U.S.A. and Canada? I'm in the process of applying to graduate schools in U.S.A. and Canada as an international student and run into this issue:
The name displayed on my passport and national ID consists of first name, middle name, and family name. However, on my transcript, my family name is not shown. I presume that this makes a difference.
Some of the universities' registration page has fields for former name(s) listed on previous records/certificates. Should I indicate the name on my transcript in the former name fields since it lacks the family name while the one on my passport has my family name?
In addition, should I make an affidavit letter to state that the name on the passport and the transcript belong to me?

About on how I ended with only my first name and middle name on my transcript:
In my country, as far as I know, the way the name is put on every academic record must be the same as the one on those preceding them. Also, it's usual here to write the only the given name in full and either omit the surname or make an initial of it if the space permits since many ethnic groups here do not actually use family names. I have many friends at college who did not use their surnames for their records. Back to academic records, my name has been written without a surname in academic records since elementary school, when my dad did the application process.

It sounds like the forms you have been provided already give a sufficient means of clarifying, particularly you indicate the form is specifically meant to link a current full name to an alternative shown on formal records.  While the university may have been thinking about different cases, like names changing via marriage, it fits your situation as well.

I would suspect getting an affidavit or other formal attestation is not necessary: if they are not asking for it in the other cases where a name does not match, they should not expect it for your case either.


Dimensionless axis plots How to properly label graphs that can be dimensionless?

One of reviewers of my document strongly emphasised on labelling plots with which I generally strongly agree. On this occasion, however, I was explaining a general mathematical model on generated time series and by time series I mean an observation (value of a variable) that changes. Non of the variables I'm plotting has any units and the only reason why I added label Time [s] on x axis so that reader doesn't have to think too much what is there. Reviewer suggested adding units to all other labels, such as dimensionless amplitude, amplitude square and inverse of amplitude square. It seems that adding Density [1/|1|^2] or making up a unit might be considered a bit offensive.

Here are examples, where I am supposed to label axes. None of used variables requires a unit.

Density of dimensionless variable.

Time series

Lack of a unit never implies that a clear label isn't necessary.  How can time not have an appropriate, non misleading label?  How about "Index" or "sample number"?  Just because it doesn't have a unit doesn't mean that you can't come up with an appropriate label?  Even "Normalized Amplitude" or something.  If the lack of a  unit isn't immediately apparent, sometimes "unitless" where you would normally include a unit will clear things up.

Lastly, look toward your literature.  If you can't find an example close to what you're doing, you may be reading the wrong literature, or not reading enough of the right literature.  Having to ask about something like this is somewhat of a red flag on your due diligence.


Should I tell on them? Student here. I've worked as a tutor for a while now at a tutoring center. There's one student that I started private tutoring. During the course of their classes they discovered they had a learning disability. I'm infinitely patient so I didn't really notice. Also i'm unfamiliar with this sort of thing so I wanted to break it off just in case there was something I didn't know how to handle. But apparently the student wanted to have a tutor present at all times, and the other tutors were charging up to a hundred dollars an hour to work with this poor soul. I was charging way less than that so I felt some responsibility to be the one to not screw this student over with high prices because everything was going okay and they were learning (or so it seemed). I probably should have just gotten out of there at that point. Time goes on and near the end of the semester they tell me they paid some PhD to take their exam for them. That's a shocker. They also started paying someone to do their homework. They said it was because they would not have an income from a certain organization if they dropped out of school. So basically they would go jobless in a pandemic unless they passed the class. My stupid self still wanted to help them the way I had been doing, explaining things step by step and having them do the problems- and encourage them to stop paying people to do stuff for them. It was awkward to try to tell them that they shouldn't be paying people to do their homework, since they are at least a decade older than myself.
It kept getting worse instead of better. I stuck to my guns and made them work, never answering for them (to their extreme frustration) but now I realize it may have been better to do exactly what I was so committed to not doing: leave them be so they could learn their lesson. I don't tutor them anymore but I still don't know what to do. I didn't want to give up on this student. But I think I was wrong to even take on this work. Should I tell about their cheating? I stopped tutoring them when the end of the semester came, that was a no-brainer. But I don't want them to keep working with whoever it is that's completely taking advantage of the situation, and I also worry that their professors will think it's me who helped them on their exam. I know, I must be a clueless idiot, but that's why i'm asking for help.
And feel free to give me a talking to if that's what I need. I just don't trust my judgement anymore. I'm quitting private tutoring.

Not reporting them does no one any good in a case like this. If they have a learning disability then they need to deal with that, and cheating isn't the proper way. If they don't really know the material then an employer will eventually catch on and they will be unemployed anyway. The PhD student has an ethical violation as do the people paid to do the homework.
If I were to beat up on you it would only be to suggest that they should have been referred to a professional when the learning issue became known.
But letting it go isn't a solution here.


Books Like Rota's Indiscrete Thoughts One of my favorite books about academia is Indiscrete Thoughts by Gian-Carlo Rota. I am looking for similar books that can be from different fields. (Since this book is heavily about academic figures and academic life, I think that it is on-topic here.)
Requirements for books that are similar:

The author is an active participant in the academic department and writes about their experience.
The author talks about personal interactions, biographies and impressions of notable figures in the field.
Preferably entertaining.

It can be from any time period, and could be about any academic field.

Consider

The Double Helix. A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure
of DNA. James D. Watson. Atheneum, New York, 1968. xvi + 238 pp.,
illus.

It's available in many places online in many editions, along  with reviews and annotations.


Updating a paper on arXiv that was accepted by a non-open access journal I have uploaded a paper on ArXiv a few months ago, and then submitted it to a non-open access journal. After appropriate revisions, the paper has been accepted by the journal, and will be published in the future. At the moment I would like to replace the old version of my paper on ArXiv with the current one that has been accepted by the journal. The journal’s guidelines are as follows:

On a noncommercial free-access preprint server such as arXiv:
The right to:

Post the preprint prior to submission and/or acceptance for publication by AIP Publishing.

Post the AM immediately after acceptance by AIP Publishing.

Update with the VOR 12 months after publication.

(An appropriate credit line must be included that references the full citation for the published paper, along with a link to the VOR on AIP Publishing’s site.)

I have a few questions:

What do AM and VOR abbreviations mean?

Where do I add the credit line? On the research paper itself? On the front page at the bottom? Or elsewhere? How can I reference “the full citation for the published paper with a link...” at this stage if it hasn't been published yet?

I appreciate all feedback. Thanks.

[The comments mostly answer this, but posting an answer as well for completeness]

AM - Accepted Manuscript (you may see the term AAM/Author's Accepted Manuscript or "postprint", as well). This is the version of the text at the point the journal accepts it - so with any revisions that were requested by reviewers, but before any final copyediting, formatting, etc.

VOR - Version of Record - the final published version from the journal with pretty formatting, pagination, and so on.

You should add the credit line (effectively a citation to the final version) to the arXiv landing page, but it's always a good idea to put it on the paper as well - perhaps a note on the first page to ensure that the reader has a handy reference for the correct citation.

The credit line should be to the published version (with DOI etc) but if this has not yet appeared, then something like "Accepted for publication in the Journal of Widgets, copyright the International Widget Research Society, posted with permission" will do - you can then update this as and when you have the correct details.


What books, biographies or survival guides are helpful for women in engineering in academia? Recently, I was giving a small informal talk in a local college. The audience comprised of engineers and my talk was based on current research in engineering. One of the girls asked about the position of women in academia. I answered that stating that academia was like just another field for women but now that I think of it, it might not be entirely true.

I thought that perhaps I could refer interested female student to resources explaining any gender specific aspects of academic life. I've read 2 books "Surviving your Stupid Stupid Decision" and "What you came for." Both were books to read before PhD to discuss common problems and their solutions presented as a preparatory handbook or survival guide. I am looking for something similar, but specifically addressing the aspect of gender in academia. I don't have a specific question in mind. A cursory Amazon search failed to yield any fruitful results.

I'd like to find resources applicable to female students:

Engineering in North America but maybe even Europe. These students showed some statistics of bias within academia.
Interested in joining faculty positions or industrial labs.

Are there books, biographies, or survival guides for women in academia?

About a month ago, MIT published their most recent Report on the Status of Women Faculty in Science and Engineering, following up on previous reports from 1999 and 2002.  It's not exactly a "survival guide"—it's written for existing faculty and administrators more than for prospective academics—but it does clearly describe several barriers to gender inequality, both past and present.  The National Academies published a similar report in 2006.

Even more recently, Nancy Hopkins (one of the authors of the MIT reports) gave a fascinating talk about MIT's efforts to attract and retain female faculty.

(Hopefully someone else will suggest something more useful for prospective academics.)

Update: One of my female colleagues sent me the following reply, which I'm posting with her permission.  (I'll delete this update if she decides to post an answer herself.)

  My more recent reading has focused more on survival with children in
  academia, which is not quite the same thing.  However, some of the
  issues might be the same.  Two good books are Mama,
  PhD and Motherhood: the Elephant in the
  Library,
  both of which are essay-based, with women sharing their stories.  Both
  are available on Amazon, and are quite good.

  Some of the best survival guides these days are the blogs - there are
  a bunch of good ones which provided sanity and good advice along the
  way.  My two favorite aren't active anymore, but their archives are
  nice, and there are plenty of good ones still active:

  http://scienceblogs.com/sciencewoman/
  http://scienceblogs.com/seejanecompute/
  http://science-professor.blogspot.com/

  There are tons of research papers on the issue, but to be honest, at
  least for me, those tend to be more depressing than helpful.  For
  example, an interesting (but outdated) one:
  http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/EKNU.html There was a recent
  article that retention is going better among faculty (except in math,
  which surprised me):
  http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6070/864.abstract