Is January admission possible/common? MSc Statistics in Canada I am interested in studying for a master's degree in statistics as an international student in Canada. I would like to begin my studies at the earliest opportunity and so would like to start in early 2018 (Jan/Feb) if possible.

I'm aware that McGill's program has a January intake, but most others do not specify either way.

Generally speaking, is it possible to begin in January, even if this start date is not mentioned on the program site? Are there any particular draw backs to starting at this time of year?

Thanks in advance for any help with this.

Regards,

Andrew

I am enclosing the following link. If this is the course that you are looking into, it does have a fall and winter intake.

Many of the Canadian programs have two intakes - a Fall and a Winter, especially a thesis based Masters which can progress towards a Ph.D.


Should I leave out research in my NSF fellowship application if I'm not getting an LOR from the professor I worked with? I'm pretty sure that my former advisor lied to me, manipulated me, and thinks I'm an idiot, so understandably I don't think it's a good idea to ask him for a letter of recommendation for the NSF graduate fellowship. However, my most recent academic research experience was with him, during the Spring quarter, and it's probably the most impressive research I've done, especially since he's a well known professor. I do have other research experience to talk about, but it's not quite at the same level.

But if I write about that project in my application, I imagine the committee is going to wonder why I don't have a letter of recommendation from that professor. Should I strive to minimize that research or even leave it out completely? Or is the benefit of talking about that research experience greater than the risk of being judged for not having a letter from him?

EDIT: This is why I think my advisor lied to me, manipulated me, and thinks I'm an idiot:

1) He said I couldn't work on a certain type of research project I wanted to work on because I hadn't taken a particular class. He then let two other students (undergraduates) who had not taken that class work on that type of project. One of those projects led to a publication.

2) I asked him why he let those other students work on those projects and he said it was because, while they were working on the projects, they learned stuff from that class on their own. I asked why I couldn't have also learned that stuff on my own, and he just said, "ehhhh" and refused to answer any further. [Response to comment below: those students, former classmates of mine, had not learned the material from that class on their own prior to being assigned the projects.]

3) There was only one project he said I was capable of working on. I asked if he thought it was publishable, and he said yes. I worked on it for months, and then met one of his collaborators, who said that it was not in fact publishable, but reassured me that they would post it on the internet somewhere. [Response to comment below: The collaborator didn't say this because something in the project was revealed to be less promising than they originally hoped. He said this because he viewed the piece I was working on as a small addendum to the larger project, which had already been published.]

UPDATE: In case anyone is curious, it turned out that my advisor did in fact lie to me and think I was an idiot. He did not, however, manipulate me -- that part was due to a misunderstanding.

As someone who has reviewed applications for the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship program, it would definitely be weird to see someone talk extensively about a research project and then not have the advisor write a supporting letter. It would certainly raise questions among the panelists assigned to review the application, especially if no other explanation were provided.

Normally I would not make such a suggestion, but this might be an instance where you should list the experience (if you can), but not talk about it so effusively or in great depth.


how to reply a professor is not available for research guidance Thanks for your interest. But I am not available for guidance or mentorship.

This is my professor's reply.

I don't know how to reply back formally. I want to know if this professor can suggest my name to his colleagues. I don't how to formally ask him to do this.

Can anyone please help.

You should not reply to this at all. He has made it abundantly clear that he is not interested in helping you in any capacity. This is actually nice of him: many professors would not reply at all, or would make promises and then not follow through.

  I want to know if this professor can suggest my name to his colleagues.

Consider just approaching his colleagues yourself. Or, if you have the opportunity to speak to this professor in person (e.g., office hours), you could ask then if they could recommend someone to advise you. But replying to this e-mail is unlikely to have the desired effect.


What is the best approach to write a literature review paper? I'm completely new to writing a review paper, so how would I best write it? Do I need to read every single paper? Or just a few sections like the introduction and results and get the info from them?
How would you approach this?

Usually review papers are written by established researchers in that field. They already got good knowledge about the topic and a library to work with. In that case you won't read all the papers in detail again, just the parts you need. You might read newer/additional papers and yes, ofc you read the whole.

Writing a review while you are not familiar with the topic is common if you start working on that topic. Often profs want new students to write a review which means they have to read the whole literature and afterwards they are familiar with the topic. In this case you should read all the papers. In the end the prof usually gives additional input in case something is missing or wrong.

If you write the review "on your own" you definitely got to read every paper very carefully, otherwise you might miss important details. I advise against doing this.

Writing reviews correctly would be very important since it helps everyone who wants to get knowledge on that field. Sadly reviews are often completly full of errors.


Letter of reference without referee email and phone My university has shifted to a new location. I have a letter of recommendation in hardcopy form on old letterhead (i.e., with the old campus address) but with the current date. Moreover, my letter of recommendation does not have the referee's email and phone. The website is present on the letter but the university website also does not have the same email address from which my referee has sent an electronic email to my supervisor in their university abroad.

Is it necessary to have the contact details of the referee in the letter of recommendation? Can it affect my opportunity negatively?

People reviewing your application will want to be able to get in touch with your referee, one way or another (among other things, they may wish to request a copy of the recommendation directly from the referee rather than from you).

Normally, this is indeed included in the letter. If, as in your case, the letter of reference does not include this information (or the information is obsolete), there are two other simple places to include the correct information:

Some positions have a form for entering referee information.  In this case, you can enter all of the necessary contact information in that location, and possibly also a note on the change of location.
Your cover letter is the ultimate "exception handling" location; you can easily include a post-script with a note about the changed location and contact information.

Bottom line: while it's better to have the contact information correct in the letter, there are other simple ways to provide such information, and as long as it's easy to access and to understand what's going on, any reasonable hiring committee will not hold it against you.


Are hand made posters acceptable in Academia? Are hand assembled posters acceptable in Academia?

When I say academia, I mean formal presentation settings such as conferences and symposia.

I ask because I am preparing for a symposium and came across Colin Purrington's guide to conference posters found here.

On his site, Purrington writes:

  If you’re crafty, a handmade poster is far superior to anything that you could make with a poster printer. Plus you’d be the highlight of a meeting.

My field is engineering by the way.

I couldn't find this anywhere else and every academic research poster that I have seen is printed. I can print my poster, I am just wondering, would there be any issues with presenting a professional looking hand made one?

On my hand made poster, all text would be printed, it would just be assembled on the board without a template.

Thank you.

You should present the best poster you can make

It is far easier to make a professionally looking, high quality poster using LaTeX or any other software than by hand-drawing it.

However, there are some really good artists out there who can manage to do a hand-drawn poster that looks better than a printed one could.

So don't use hand-drawing as a way to save time or money. A good hand-drawn poster is more work than any printed one.

If you are 100% certain that you can get your message across better with a hand-drawn poster, then go for it, otherwise use a printed one.


How to publish an academic book but make the PDF freely available online? Background

I like the idea of writing an academic book.

It currently looks better on a CV when applying for jobs, grants, promotions, etc. than a blog post, or a website.
Libraries and people archive the work
Most of the best academic content currently seems to end up in books and journal articles, rather than on websites.
People have an attractive physical copy to engage with if they want.

However, I don't like the constraints imposed by a book. In particular, readership is limited to those who buy/borrow the book or have access to a library.

Aim

In some cases, I'd prefer to write something like an "open access book".

If readers want the physical copy, they can purchase the book. Ideally some of this revenue would go to the author, but I'm not too fussed if the publisher just uses this money to fund promotion, editorial assistance, production, etc.
However, access to a PDF of the book is free online.
The book gets an ISBN, archiving, availability on Amazon, etc. and all the academic recognition associated with publishing an academic book.

Questions

So, are there any options for doing this, and what might be best option?
Are there any case studies of others who have done this?

Cambridge University Press allows authors to freely distribute electronic copies of the books that it publishes, at least in mathematics and computer science.  (Of course this has to be explicitly negotiated into the publishing contract.)  Two good examples are Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology and Steve LaValle's Planning Algorithms.

You could also just release the book on the web, let people create their own physical copies through a book-printing service like Lulu or Blurb, and rely on the quality of the text to bolster your reputation instead of a traditional publisher's imprimatur.  See, for example, Pat Morin's excellent Open Data Structures.  However, I don't recommend this route unless (a) you write an amazingly good book, and (b) you already have tenure.


Creating contacts during a PhD Who should create contacts with other universities/departments/researchers during a PhD study?
The supervisor or the student?

How these contacts may affect the continuing of the academic carrer of the student? May be possible that a specific contact during the PhD will evolve in a post-doc position later on?

Should contacts always be made?

Who should create contacts with other universities/departments/researchers during a PhD study? The supervisor or the student?

Both:

The supervisor will already know plenty of people and help the student establish contact when it is on topic.
The student should just as well try to get in touch with other researchers who might provide opportunities for collaboration, depending on the context the student is in. For instance, the student has particularly good chances for that when being funded from a project that involves researchers from different institutions, or when attending conferences in fields where conferences are commonly held and visited.

  How these contacts may affect the continuing of the academic carrer of the student?

They provide opportunities of getting in touch with different fields, possibly exchanging some data that can be used in the other's research, and learning how to autonomously organize little "projects" (by this, I mean e.g. studies and ensuing papers).

  May be possible that a specific contact during the PhD will evolve in a post-doc position later on?

This is one of many theoretical possibilities, though probably not one you would normally strive for in most cases.

  Should contacts always be made?

This is somewhat vague, but as a general rule of thumb: If there is an opportunity to get in touch with another researcher, at least have a brief conversation to check whether the two of you are "compatible" to start with.


Teaching while doing a PhD If I have understood correctly, most people doing their PhDs do their best to avoid any teaching duties while in their programs. However, I think I might want to do some teaching too. Of course, I have a hidden agenda. I would hope that:

Usually, (good) skill to teach is required later on your career, when applying for tenured positions. I would receive good experience.
Giving lectures related to my research topic might get someone interested about it. I could delegate some minor (boring :-) part of my research topic for someone to do as his/her master thesis.

Am I hoping too much here? Any experiences?

Most doctorate programs have some amount of teaching/ta/facilitator/etc as a requirement of the program. Some people try to do more, some try to do less, but unless you're working in a research lab (with its own endowment :-) expect to do some teaching.

Re 'good skill': if your goal is to find a tenure track position then yes this would be good experience.  Assuming that you enjoy teaching, and who here doesn't grin, this would be a good opportunity to enhance and refine your teaching skills.
Re 'lectures on research': be careful here.  Odds are that any teaching roles you would be offered at this point in your academic career would be pretty low level undergraduate type stuff.  Depending on your area of research you might also run into some problems 'presenting' un-vetted data.  There are always exceptions to the rule but I wouldn't expect for you to be teaching anything so specific that your research would come into play.  YMMV but that has been my experience (since you asked).
Suggestion: Be careful with overloading your schedule. Teaching is one of those jobs that finds a way to embed itself in many aspects of your life that you didn't expect. For example: I expected to spend my middle years sitting on the porch reading books with my wife, not reading term papers.  Oh well.  While it is good to gain experience you don't want to spread yourself too thin and suffer an impact to your research (remember, the reason you're here in the first place :) or your personal life.


From thesis to a real project! I'm currently writing a master thesis, which slowly became a real project which a "very big" institution is interested in using to create a product of their own. Eventually, I'll be involved in the implementation of this project (I'll be hired by them). My supervisor and my thesis partner (who is working remotely) still don't know about this.

I'm not sure how to proceed from here. Should I tell my supervisor and my thesis partner about this opportunity? Also, how can I write this thesis? Should I include them in the thesis? I need feedbacks and examples of similar thesis papers.

You'll need to carefully review your academic institution's intellectual property policies.  Many academic institutions consider the work done by their researchers (including students) to belong to the institution, not to the person that created the work. If your institution has a tech transfer office, they would be able to advise you on how to legally patent and license your work for use by the "very big" institution.  Also, your collaborators have a right to know how the work is being used (it belongs to them as much as it belongs to you), and you need their permission to share the work.

Note that I am writing this from an American perspective, so the legal (but not the ethical) portions of my answer may not apply if you are outside of the US.


how to handle a problematic previous advisor? Luckily I got in academia after having a serious conflict with my previous advisor.  The problem was that he gave my dissertation proposal to his previous student (another his previous student said that he loved her a lot).  She even got $100,000 NSF grant with the proposal.

I said it was unfair.  Then he did his best to kick me out of the school (he even called the police for the reason I was shown up in his office; contacted all people to say that I am not qualified for a Ph.D. and so should be kicked out).

A school dean saved me and so I graduated. However, for the conflict, I couldn't get in my field (I am in totally different field); still I need to take medicine to get in a sleep, to meet people and to control my anger.

Anyway, I'd like to go back to my own field again because it is too tough to struggle in a new field.  Any advise?  Also I'd really like to pay all back to him regarding what he did to me.  What could be the best way?

Anyway, he is a full professor in a well-known research school; also he is a big name and so about 30% of faculties in this field are his previous students & 50% of senior faculties are his good friends.

Get on with your life. Best way to get revenge would be for you to become successful and renowned in your field despite conflict with previous advisor.


Postdoc interview presentation doesn't explcitly mention a research plan, should I include one? I was invited for a postdoc presentation of 10 minutes. The title of the presentation is "Challenges and Opportunities in problem Z". The email didn't give any other information whether I should give a research plan or my future ambitions during the position. Is a bad idea if include a specific research plan?
Context behind my question:
From my understanding, challenges and opportunities in problem Z means I should talk about the different (perhaps potential) research directions in studying problem Z. This could mean I can stay general without proposing a research plan to work on a specific area.
In another postdoc interview, the panel told me that they were hoping for a general research plan and not something specific.

Given that 10 minutes is very short, a quick mention about aspects for which you do have some ideas would be in order. But be prepared for questions about details if there is a follow up question period. You needn't spend much time on this.
However, if you have special expertise and interest in some particular aspect, then spending a couple of minutes outlining your ideas might be good to do.
In any case, spend some time/words on those aspects of the problem that appeal to you and that you would like to explore further, giving any quick insights you might have. But don't oversell yourself. They have probably thought about this more than you have and you don't want to give naive/facile explanations.


Should one refer to the title of an article or to the title of the magazine when the author is unknown (MLA/APA) I think the title is quite clear.

If the author of an article is unknwon, should one refer to the title of the article, or to the magazine itself? The same goes for electronic sources.

Let's say this is my source.

  “An Interview with Susan Bassnett.” Channel View Publications Blog.
  Channel View Publications. n.d. Web. 5 dec. 2013.

Would I refer (inline) like so:

  Bassnet states that ... ("An Interview with Susan Bassnett").

or like so

  Bassnett states that ... (Channel View Publications Blog).

According to the MLA Style Manual, which is excerpted on many sites (such as the Williams College Library homepage), they recommend using a partial title as the citation.

So, in the case above, you'd probably write

  Bassnett states that . . . ("Interview" 201).

unless you have multiple works with unknown authors whose title starts with "Interview." Then you'd need more of the title to distinguish it:

  Bassnett states that . . . ("Interview with Susan Bassnett" 201). Smith responds by claiming . . . ("Interview with Robert Smith" 12).


On what factors is a dissertation approved What are the factors that are considered when granting a PhD degree. For example, if a person has published excellent papers, but their dissertation is not perfect i.e. omissions and typos, would the committee consider it?
Also, what happens if they have good papers published, but the oral defense is not great.
People generally believe that if the dissertation advisors says OK, then everything works out. How true is that?
P.S. I am asking in the U.S.

Although the exact process varies from university to university, the general form of the process in the United States is typically as follows:

The student needs to do work that makes a novel contribution to the sum of all human knowledge.  This is the universal part of the process, and the key thing that a Ph.D. really certifies that you are capable of.
The student, with guidance from the advisor writes up this work in a thesis document.  In some areas this is not-yet-published work, in others it is a summation of things already published.  In either case, it should be a complete and thorough presentation of the ideas and work.
Eventually the advisor and student are both satisfied, and the advisor judges that the student's work will pass external review.
External review is obtained from some combination of oral or public defense and input from other committee members.  Sometimes the defense is a serious part of the process, sometimes it is not; in either case, an advisor should never allow a student to stand for a defense unless they will pass.
The student satisfies any additional requirements imposed through the external review.  Sometimes this is just correcting typos, sometimes this is a lengthy period of additional research.  If it is the latter, then the advisor has generally screwed up.
Submit the final document for archive, and graduate.

Note that this process assumes some flexibility in the length of a Ph.D., which is typically the case in the US.  I know that in some other places, such as many institutions in Europe, there is often a shorter and fixed schedule.  I'm not sure how one deals with not being ready on time in that case...


How to prevent Google Scholar from merging two different papers? I have two papers published at the same IEEE conference (at the same year).

Since they have been indexed in GS, they are being merged every few days. That is, I manually need to "unmerge" them, just for GS to automatically merge them again a few days later.

I'm not sure why this happens. They have completely different names. Perhaps the reason is that IEEE has page numbers of 1-9 for all papers that year (i.e., they didn't actually allocate page numbers but just had 1-9 for all).

How can I make GS stop merging these papers?

[Update: Multiple users have reported that this doesn't work.]

Go to your Google Scholar profile and bring up the add article dropdown, click on "Configure article updates":
Select the radio button for "Don't automatically update my profile" and click the "Update settings" button:
When Scholar wants to merge your papers, instead of going ahead it will send an email to ask if that is the correct course of action.


Do I need to focus my writing to specific paper? I'm a master student and I'm the phase of preparing my thesis. I've searched many papers related to my thesis but I'm a bit confused in what to focus. Do I need to take only a paper (or few papers) and to focus basically on that?

I think the best answer to this question has already been given as a comment:

  You should ask your advisor. The fact that you are asking this question suggests that you and your advisor haven't discussed in detail what your thesis should consist of. It's important to have this conversation, even aside from the particular question you are asking here. (You don't want to risk discovering much later that you and your advisor had different visions for what the thesis should be like.)

This is a good answer to so many questions on this site (I have started to think that there should be an "Ask your advisor!" closure option), but it seems especially true here.  From the OP's comment I can see that the master's thesis is being done in mathematics.  The expectations and requirements for a master's thesis in mathematics are so highly variable across institutions and countries that I can think of almost nothing (other than "Ask your advisor!") which would be guaranteed to be universally applicable.

In mathematics programs in the US, it is especially unclear what work constitutes a master's thesis, especially in pure mathematics.  Unlike the situation in many other countries, there are relatively few full-time master's students in American universities, even compared to the number of master's degrees awarded: in my experience, more master's degrees go to talented, ambitious undergraduates who get them alongside their bachelor's degrees, or to PhD students who have decided to drop out of the program and get a consolation degree.  In my case I got a master's degree along with my bachelor's degree at the University of Chicago, and for such a top university you might be surprised to hear how minimal the requirements were: I had to complete all nine trimester courses that first year graduate (i.e., PhD) students take (I did so over two years) and pass a pro forma foreign language exam.  [In particular I did not write a master's thesis.]  When I went on to my PhD studies (at Harvard) I found that I was about as well prepared as most of the other students.  I don't recall that my having a master's degree came up once during my five years in a PhD program...with the possible exception that some students would, a year or two into their program, fill out paperwork and pay a small fee to get a master's degree, whereas I already had one of those so chose to keep my money.

Having been heavily involved with the graduate (mostly PhD) program at the University of Georgia in recent years, I can say that here a master's thesis is whatever the advisor and student agree that it is, subject to the approval of two other committee members.  Writing a thesis is one route; there is another route involving more coursework and some exams.  Among master's thesis advisors I've talked to, the sense is that the student should take the thesis as an opportunity to engage with some piece of mathematics at a deeper level than they have done before, to the extent that they have mastered it and can show this mastery with an original (or at least, independent) exposition.  This description seems rather at odds with the one given in another answer to this question:

  NO. Undergrads may get away with using one (or a few) papers to synthesize the essence into their own viewpoint, but at the post-grad level you should be reading for width and depth, which means using every seminal work in your field as well as exploring the newer papers on the topic.

This is probably a correct description of some academic fields, but not for mathematics.  Very few mathematics undergraduates are reading "real" math papers at all.  The task of reading, understanding and writing about even one "real" math paper may in fact be sufficient for a master's thesis.  There are even certain papers out there for which rewriting them so as to contain the level of detail and completeness that would satisfy a master's thesis committee would be a real service to the mathematical community.  I think that most PhD students in mathematics do not use every seminal work in [their] field: I didn't, for instance.

I am not saying that just any old thing will suffice for a master's thesis in mathematics: I am saying that the global requirements are very few, so it becomes more important to talk to your advisor.

I have so far supervised one master's thesis.  My student carefully read and wrote about two papers concerning geometry of numbers and Legendre's Equation ax^2+by^2+cz^2 = 0.  She then tried to extend the techniques of the second paper to diagonal quadratic equations in n \geq 4 variables.  Much of this was easy, but the key was the existence of a "magic sublattice" defined in the three-dimensional case by the necessary congruence conditions for Legendre's Equation to have a solution.  After much trouble (and some help from me), she was eventually able to prove that for more than three variables such a magic sublattice did not exist.  She wrote up a thesis which contained expositions of the two papers she read plus a proof of this result (plus a few more small things, totalling a few pages).  I remember that she was concerned that her thesis was rather short: 45 pages double-spaced.  I thought her thesis was an unusually strong one and told her so.  (If people are wondering, I think her result is not yet publishable -- it's along the lines of showing that a certain proof strategy cannot work, and such things are hard to publish in mathematics -- but that the work could be continued and made publishable.  I honestly think that makes it an above average American master's thesis in mathematics.)


Writing a report/paper etc. - How to deal with citations that have poor English? I've tried looking for suggestions on the internet to my question but haven't found any useful information.

I'm writing a paper and I'm quoting/citing various books, journals etc. However, I'm coming across of papers that are relevant to my paper that I would like to take quotes from, but were either originally written in another language and have been poorly translated, or were written with bad English to begin with.

Can I quote/cite the papers with corrected English or put the quote as-is? I'm worried if I don't correct the spelling mistakes/poor grammar etc. that the reputation/validity of my paper will be impacted. On the other hand I don't want any corrections I make in the quotes to be considered plagiarism. What should I do?

Edit: I'm writing a literature review section for the paper, if that is relevant.

It the material is technical in nature, then you should not be quoting verbatim in the first place.  Instead, you should be paraphrasing the information in the paper, which should not be affected by language problems.

If, on the other hand, you actually do need to precisely quote, e.g., for a work on the anthropology of science, then you should use "sic" to indicate that the errors represent a faithful transcription of the original.

An example of its use:

  Sir Puffington was a tireless if somewhat incoherent advocate of faster-than-light travel:
  "Why should Her Majesty's subjects be so arbitrarily limited, when Vulkins [sic] and Star Trucks [sic] are not?"


Do I need to include page numbers when citing indirectly in the text? I'm referring to APA citation. Say I'm picking up a train of thought of an author and I know which book he states it in. I just don't have a page number. Is it okay to just say (Muller, 2008) without page number? Will I have to include page numbers for the book in the references?

It depends on the context, of course.

I am a reviewer on an academic journal and there, we ask authors for the page.

I've also been told by a prof that, for a homework essay, he only spot checks a few cites because he "knows the author's voice," (may be more applicable to certain fields than to others) and if the quote is suspect then he will check more thoroughly. If I were you, I'd include the page cite just to be safe. I'm assuming this is for a class - has your prof said anything about how stringent the cites need to be? That would be more determinative than SE's speculation.


How to inspire people to learn things they don't understand I have seen far too many people that just cannot or are unwilling to learn due to the subject being rather uninteresting or boring. They tend not to want to learn things they don't understand because it requires effort and dedication.

For example, people wanted me to teach them how to create robots, android apps, games, etc. but when it came to programming and using database, no one really wanted to pay attention or cared about it, and what was worse, they complained about how difficult the assignment was even it was just creating a simple calculator program. I gave them tools to solve the problem. They had everything needed to create the program on their own without hand-holding but it seems like it just wouldn't happen.

Is this due to a lack of experience in teaching based on the method used or is this the student's fault for not even trying to learn? If this looks like a problem with the method of teaching, how should I improve or inspire learning?

In my opinion, you shouldn't ever try to spend time educating someone without ensuring that the person actually wants to be educated. There's a difference between, say, "wanting to be a programmer" and "wanting to learn how to program". You could ascribe the first sentence to literally anybody. Who doesn't want a free skill? It's only the people who also fit the second description that you should educate.

The difficulty is that people usually don't know the difference between those two things. I often don't know it: I once decided I wanted to learn how to play the keyboard. Picked one up, played a few tunes, but could never find myself interested in sitting there for hours and playing the same tune over and over until I had mastered it. Turns out, I didn't really want to learn how to play the keyboard: I only wanted to play it.

So, it's up to the educator to help decide whether the person really wants to learn it. There are a few ways to do it. First of all, be honest: don't advertise your education with what the students will learn, but how they'll learn it. Because that's actually what they'll be doing. So when people want you to learn them to teach games, tell them from the get-go what they'll be doing, how terse and repetitive and basic it can be. But then, during the education, ensure that the end goal is always in sight. So if you're teaching somebody to make a game, instead of them applying their skills solving some math problem ("compute the nth prime with property y", e.g.), why not give them a piece of code from an actual game, and have them solve a small, intermediary step - and then show them the result, the before and after effect of their contribution?

TLDR:

1) Students should come to you for how you'll teach them, not for what you'll teach them,

2) During the study, always keep the end goal in sight. Don't let them drown in repetitive theoretic stuff ... let them .... swim in it, I guess, always taking in fresh air whenever they need it.


How to search for upcoming conferences for Hardware Architecture? How to find upcoming conferences in a specific field? I can get some references from answers to this question.

I had already tried WikiCFP but it deosn't have the option to filter CFP's according to the subject. The other options such as (How to find upcoming conferences in a specific field? I can get some references from answers to this question.

The other options such as ACM Calender of Events but this also has no classification.

Any pointers on where to search will be very helpul.

WikiCFP does have an option to filter by subject: go to the "Categories" option and you will find a list of keywords such as "Computer Architecture" that will give you listings of all of the CFPs in that subject.


How to write a recommendation letters for an undergrad student applying to transfer to another university? As a new faculty member,
I have just received my first request to write a recommendation letter
for an undergrad student who is looking to transfer
to a more prestigious university.

I taught this student in a class in his first semester,
and have met chatted with him twice informally for about one hour each time
because I am his academic advisor.

What should I write in my recommendation letter?
I have some information about the student,
but I don't know the student as well as
I might know my PhD student for example.
Is there some kind of standard template that I can follow,
so that I can do a good job but also be done with it quickly?

A second smaller but related question.
This student has a very high GPA.
Should I persuade this student to stay,
or let someone in my department know that this student wishes to transfer,
so that someone can persuade him to stay?
Needless to say, I would not try to sabotage his application
by writing a bad reference letter.

A letter for undergraduate admissions need not be long.  Just write what you know about the student.  Since you had him in a course, you can mention his grade and (more helpfully) where he ranked among the students in the course.  Did he ask insightful questions?  Write especially clear solutions? If not, that's fine -- just say what you know.

Since you have spoken with him at length, you can probably also comment on his personality.  Is he easy-going and likeable?  Intensely passionate about his ideas?  Thoughtful and organized?

If you would be sorry to see him leave your program, say so and explain why.


How can one find a research mentor to fulfill a research paper requirement prior to PhD application? I will be applying to a Ph.D. program in the fall for Marriage and Family Therapy.
One of the programs I am applying to would like to have me complete a research paper before a completing my application. To do this, I really need the support of a research mentor.

I am currently working in a non-profit and don't have access to university professors. What are ways that one could conduct a preliminary research study, with guidance, in this situation?

Considerations about the paper

Before anything else, I would suggest checking with that program about what they consider a research paper. It is possible that something like a literature review, or a research proposal, rather than an original research study, would be adequate for their purposes.

If they mainly want to use this to gauge your writing ability or your familiarity with the scholarly literature, then a literature review should give them most of the information they need.
If they want to see your understanding of experiment design, then a research proposal would help give them that, on top of containing a literature review section.

Do you have any past coursework that has produced anything remotely like a research paper? If so, starting from there and revising would be a good start.
To actually conduct a research study, you will need to either reanalyze publicly available data or gather new research data.

If you're reanalyzing data, you might do some sort of statistical project, or a qualitative project using, say, library archives of old or anonymized interview or case data.
If you're gathering new research data, you need to make sure you are getting informed consent and using confidential data correctly. This might be very challenging outside of a university and/or hospital Institutional Review Board setting, so a research mentor would be critical here. (While class projects and pilot projects are usually exempt from such review, you want to make sure that nothing you do appears to cross ethical lines.)

Approaches to finding a research mentor to work with

Through your work

Do any of your colleagues at/through the nonprofit have a Psy.D. or a Ph.D.? They may be able to help you with this.
Do any board members of the non-profit have academic affiliations or doctorates? They, too, may be good to approach, either as research mentors themselves or as people who could connect you to appropriate people.

Through your alma mater

Even if you have not been in close contact with professors from college (and/or your Master's program, if applicable), you can still ask them for advice.
If you are far from those colleges, you can also try to do some "cold-calling" through the alumni network, if there is one with information available to you. (If there is no official one, you could try through LinkedIn, looking for people with a Ph.D. or Psy.D. in a related field in your geographic area.)

Through nearby colleges

Is there any summer psychology course at a community college, college, or university nearby that involves producing a paper? Check with the faculty there and see if there's a way you could get their guidance on a research study through that course.
Faculty at nearby colleges who are actively conducting research (see if their website/online profile mentions "research") may be willing to help you with this in exchange for, say, you helping conduct interviews for their research. You could reach out to the associated departments at the colleges, offering research assistance in return for some mentorship (and the department will share info with the professors), along with perhaps a few personalized emails to professors whose work would be a very good fit with your own.

People in other fields

The more "generic" parts of writing a research paper, such as structure, doing a literature review, and tone, don't require someone who is specifically in counseling/psychology to help, and getting others to help edit your work can improve it immensely.
See if your local librarians can help you get access to the research literature, and/or recommend ways that you can gain access to a local college library. They may also be able to help you with the basics of approaching a bibliography or literature review.

Through the program you're applying to

If you've talked with the program specifically about this requirement, perhaps you could volunteer to work with one of those professors to help conduct research and/or analyze research data this summer.
This would take some chutzpah but would potentially get you a strong advocate for your admission, if done right.
At the same time, faculty may be leery of (remotely) mentoring someone new at research, before the admissions decision. Plus they might have other plans for the summer.

In short, you'll be more likely to be able to do a literature review or research proposal rather than a research paper on this time frame and without university resources (human subjects procedures, etc.). However, depending on how widely you reach out, you may find people who are able to mentor you through this.  Good luck!


Is relevant self-citation an effective way to promote your work? This question was inspired by the confusing headline (now edited) for
How should I respond to a reviewer's complaint about self-citation?

Does self-citation actually promote your previous publications?

We have questions about inappropriate self-citation, but what about self-citation that is relevant?  Does it bring attention to research?

The answer might depend on how you define "effective promotion", but there is scientometric research concluding that self-citation leads to more citations - crucially including more citations by others. Instead of a comprehensive literature survey (which I'm ill-equipped to write), I'll just refer you to one of the more important papers on the topic as an inroad to the field.

Studying citations to Norwegian scientists, Fowler and Aksnes: "Does self-citation pay?", Scientometrics 72, 427-437 (2007) found (non-paywalled version)

  that the more one cites oneself the more one is cited by other scholars.  Controlling for numerous sources of variation in cumulative citations from others, our models suggest that each additional self-citation increases the number of citations from others by about one after one year, and by about three after five years. Moreover, there is no significant penalty for the most frequent self-citers — the effect of self-citation remains positive even for very high rates of self-citation.


What matters most : published papers or GPA? (for scholarship and future career) I studied BSc chemistry and because I didn't like it, my BSc GPA is 2.46. Alongside with BSc duration, I studied mathematics at home as a self-learner. Since my BSc-GPA was too low, so I got admission to a very low ranking university in MSc-Maths. However, in my first year of MSc I got GPA 3.78 p. I am discouraged to apply for a PhD for a nice university because:

1- My current university's world ranking is >>4000 and I doubt that it would be a 'university' from the viewpoint of universities that I am trying to get my PhD admission.

2- I don't have BSc in math and very low BSc-GPA in completely different field.

My questions are:

1- Is it possible to get admission for PhD (with full scholarship) to a high-ranking universities in mathematics with such a conditions that I have?

2- If I have to study my PhD in the same university or a little better one, do my university reputation and and low GPA-in-BSc threat my future career after PhD (even if I show strong research ability and good recommendation letters)?

My target for PhD admission is countries: Canada (first priority), Europe and Australia. And I am not targeting USA.

Thank you for your helps. And, sorry for my terrible English.

Please feel free to edit the question to improve it.

The whole package is important.  An admissions committee will be very interested in your ability to pass their coursework. It doesn't make a difference how productive you are, or how deep a thinker you are if you flunk out on grades, which would just be wasting their resources.

You would need them to believe that your MSc grades would be indicative of future performance.

By all means, apply, and do the best to make your package look right.  Lot's of students can have mediocre undergrad grades, but figure things out as they mature.  The MSc with good grades was step 1.  Good GRE's would be important, as would letters from the profs of your most difficult coursework confirming that you breezed through it without trouble.

You might also pay attention to those programs with a big die-off at qualifiers.  If a department PLANS that 1/3 of their students will not successfully reach candidacy stage, then their grad program is built in a certain way that can deal with this efficiently.  For example, programs like this do not tend to offer much in the way of financial support until you're paired up with a mentor, and then you're in the budget of that person for support.  In a way, those programs are willing to gamble on you so long as you're willing to gamble on you.


Is really PhD necessary for someone who wants to work in industry I am wondering if my goal is to work in an industry as an electrical engineer, is it better to get PhD? I know PhD might open some options for me such as working in industry and teaching in academia at the same time or research job. However PhD is a long term commitment and during this time you can gain a lot more experience by working at a company and this will be considered as a professional experience, which may be more useful.

I would like to know what do you guys suggest? is it worth it to spend 5 years and obtain PhD?

The title of your question is rather starkly phrased.  Since most electrical engineers working in industry do not have PhDs, clearly a PhD is not "really necessary".

There have been a lot of questions asked about this on the site already, which you may want to look into.  In the absence of more specific information, one can only answer in general terms.  What I would say is that PhDs are first of all for people who want academic careers and second of all for people who have a good, specific idea of what non-academic career they want and how the PhD will help them with it.

If your goal is to work in industry as an electrical engineer, I would try to realize that goal as soon as possible: i.e., as soon as you have a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering.  Then you can find out whether you really like it, get experience and so forth.  You'll have a much better idea of the pros/cons of coming back for a PhD after spending time working in the field, you'll have plenty of people to ask about it, and you may even get financial support from your employers (so that for instance you may not need to do the teaching and grading that other grad students will, though as I type this I realize I don't know how much EE grad students teach or grade).


Math subject GRE to fill gaps in undergraduate education for PhD application BACKGROUND: I'm beginning a computer science MS program this summer.  My undergrad background is a 2.9 in non-related sociology sub-category.  The last time I took an actual math class was AP Calculus in my junior year of high school cough 8 years ago because I did well enough on the AP exam to get credit for everything my major required.

GOAL: Ultimately I plan to pursue a PhD in the Computer Science/Computer Engineering/Electrical Engineering with strong leanings toward AI/Machine Learning/Robotics.  "Dream School" is Caltech but any well-respected school with connections to the aerospace industry would be stellar (couldn't resist the pun, sorry.)

Assuming I have solid grades in my MS program, 90th percentile general GRE scores, and a few publications do you think it is worth it for me to take the Math subject GRE in order to show that I have taken it upon myself to fill the gaps in my undergraduate math education?

EDIT: The program I am going to has a provisional entry option where you take 2 accelerated courses at the beginning which catch you up to speed on programming, data structures and foundational computer science.  The min GPA is 2.75 in any BS/BA program and as long as you get at least a B in both classes they let you continue.  I've worked as a developer/IT person for the last 3 years, my general GRE score was 27 points above their suggested minimum and I took a few random graduate computing courses at SPSU a few years ago and got As in all of them so I think those were contributing factors to my admission.

Okay, here's some advice:

I like that you have an ambitious, but clear, long-term goal: to work at NASA's JPL.  That puts you far ahead of many PhD program applicants in a very important aspect.

Getting into Caltech's PhD program seems like a less realistic goal to me, honestly.  They have one of the US's very best programs in CS/EE.  Very top programs have their pick of applicants.  They are likely going to not seriously consider applications with a low undergrad GPA just because that's one of the easier of many cuts they need to make in order to get the applicant pool down to a reasonable size.  Or another way to put it is: imagine that your application is very strong except for this one noticeable flaw.  They will be looking at plenty of applications which are similar to yours except that this flaw is not present.  What do you expect them to do?

Fortunately you don't need to go to Caltech to get a job at JPL (although it wouldn't hurt, obviously).  You need to go to a serious, reputable university (think UGA) and acquire and demonstrate the talents and skills that will get you hired at JPL.  One's academic pedigree is important but it is certainly not all-important, even in academia and still less in industry.  (I got my PhD in mathematics from Harvard, which afforded me the largest possible head-start on the job market.  It was quite an awakening to discover that my Harvard degree was much closer to a foot in the door than a golden ticket, and the amount of work that I had to do after getting my PhD from an absolutely top program in order to land a job at a serious, reputable -- but not at the very top -- university is still remarkable to me.)  You should be shooting for more like a top 50 program, I think, although you should not take my word for it but rather apply to a range of programs when the time comes.

Your undergrad GPA does look like a bit of a problem to me.  Since it happens that you got your undergrad degree at my university, I know that your GPA is significantly below the average.  In fact having a GPA of below 3.0 is significant at UGA for reasons that you understand and thus I don't need to get into.

You mention that your undergrad major is in sociology, and the big question is how much that will be discounted given that you want to study CS.  I'll be honest with you: it still doesn't look that great.  The best case scenario is that your undergrad GPA will be viewed as something which does not have much to do with your future graduate performance in a different area.  So "irrelevant" is the best case scenario.  As a member of an admissions committee, a student's undergraduate GPA in whatever subject is not irrelevant to me.  Succeeding at coursework is a skill unto itself, and while it is not the highest or most important skill that is necessary for success in a PhD program, it's definitely on the table.

As an aside, I see that in this and another question you describe your major as "irrelevant sociology".  I don't think you should say it in quite that way.  How relevant your undergraduate studies in a different discipline are to your candidacy as a CS PhD student is for the admissions committee to decide.  I detect a hint of disdain for sociology in your language, which to me is also not great: you are the one who chose your undergraduate major.  Just because it is very far from CS doesn't mean that you shouldn't have done well at it.  Candidates like you have a fine line to walk, e.g. in your personal statement: you need to show but not tell that there is every expectation that you will be an excellent CS graduate student notwithstanding the fact that you were a not-quite-mediocre sociology undergraduate student.  Your task is to frame your academic journey in a positive light.  Faculty reading graduate applications love to see improvements in students' academic records: among other things, this shows not fully realized potential, and that's really important because almost no one comes into a PhD program fully equipped with the skills they need to graduate from it: it is a very dynamic process, over a period of years.  Especially we love to see that students are doing better in the graduate level material than the undergraduate level material.

Back to your specific question: should you take the GRE math subject exam?  Other answers have already addressed this question, and I agree with them: if it's required for a CS PhD program (unlikely), then of course take it.  If it isn't, then don't: it's a tough exam, to the extent that much above the 50th percentile for an American aspiring math PhD student at UGA looks good enough for us.  You could really know undergraduate mathematics perfectly well for all your future needs, take the math GRE, and get a score in the lower quartiles.  That won't look good for you.

What should you do instead?  I recommend more undergraduate level coursework.  You want to launder your GPA by showing that you can nowadays get excellent grades in the undergraduate courses that count for CS PhD program.  In most master's programs you can also take undergraduate courses.  You should look into this in your program.  If it is not possible, you should look into separately enrolling in some kind of "post-bac" program concurrently at the same institution.  If you can get mostly A's in undergraduate level math courses, then while your relatively weak undergraduate performance in sociology will not be completely forgotten, it will probably be forgiven by some top 50 program.

[You might ask: isn't graduate level coursework better than undergraduate level coursework?  Not necessarily, no.  First of all taking graduate level CS courses doesn't necessarily show the mastery of mathematical foundations that you're rightly concerned about.  Second of all, GPAs in graduate programs are an entirely different species from GPAs in undergraduate programs.  I am unimpressed by a high graduate GPA.  I am only negatively impressed by a low one.]

I really do wish you the best of luck and hope you are working for NASA someday.  I encounter lots of un-stellar students teaching at UGA and think "Well gosh, they're so young.  If they got their act together, they could probably be much more successful.  I wonder what lies in their future?"  If you succeed in turning your career around like this, I'd really like to know.  Somehow your story will be inspirational to me and help me put more effort into reaching students who don't yet have the academia thing all figured out: we all have so much potential lying beneath the surface.


Paper unknowingly describing technical bias as if it was a biological phenomenon of interest Let’s take a very hypothetical situation. Suppose that a scientific journal (let’s use Scientific Reports for the sake of the example) recently published a paper that seems to be completely off track. By completely, I mean that the phenomenon described in the paper can be completely explained as a technical bias that has been ignored by the authors.

Some papers have an official means to address such concerns. For example, Nature has Matter Arising and Replies formats which can be used to engage in post-publication critics. The thing is, Scientific Reports does not seem to have such a mechanism.

I was wondering about the polite and efficient way to address such issue.

You have to live with the fact that academia is an imperfect system like any else and scientific knowledge underlies evolution. Seeing the bigger picture, in the long term journals that don't allow or implement criticism/replies on their journals papers will likely vanish.

Your (very hypothetical premise) is simply very wrong that you have to find a way to correct wrong/bad content (in your opinion) in every journal.

Technically, this is the same answer as Wolfgang gave, but from a bigger different perspective.

You can also see it like this: Scientific reports doesn't believe that in the long term negative comments on their articles help to avoid more the publication of falsehood than for other journals or just creates "editorial noise/extra-work" (unworthful extra-work probably being the main reason to not offer this option). Do you rememeber facebook offering a downwote button, now it's gone. Or look at stackexchange, upvote +10, downvote -2 karma. When you have scientific branches like biomed/psychology in which over 70% of studies cannot be reproduced, it's questionable if article replies overall and in the long term have much value as this evolution is driven mainly by affirmation, reproduction by other groups instead of scientific discussions in a journal, as the system to create true new scientific knowledge works differently, less efficient and theoretical than in branches like mathematics or physics, which is not surprising if you have a bit of interdisciplinary methodological knowledge.


Consequences for a tenured person of not getting grants As far as I heard in (some of) the universities a person having a tenure track position who fails to get grants may not get tenure.

  I am wondering what might be consequences of not getting grants for a tenured professor. (Say may he or she get more teaching load? more administrative load? What will happen if he or she will not agree for that?)

In your answers please indicate about what country are you talking about.

In the US, once you have tenure it is difficult to get fired other than for misconduct and hard even then. But, you don't need to get annual raises or further advances in rank unless you are seen as a contributor. What constitutes contribution depends on the institution. For some, grants are very important. For a few, they outweigh all else, partly because they fund students. But not all institutions are like that. For some, grants are nice but not essential.

But, whatever the mission of the institution, not contributing will leave you in a bit of a dead end with little chance to choose courses or committees, etc.

While it may be possible to have a 30+ year career without doing more than the minimum, you will likely still be earning at the end about what you were at the start.

Moreover, department heads, have subtle ways to punish you, by assigning you things that you won't really like doing. And who knows where your office will be.


Is there an overview of alternative approaches to voluntary and ideal review process? I was chatting with some colleagues earlier and we talked about about a case where a reviewer was caught consistently asking the authors of the papers reviewed for up to 30 or so of his/her own papers cited. The conversation steered towards how this kind of abuse would not be caught earlier and the idea of professional refereeing was debated around the coffee table.

One of the seniors said that paying reviewers was tested several times and in general was more problematic than not, which got me a bit curious if there is an overview of what was tried and how it was evaluated. I would be very interested in any publication that looks at the concept in a more rigorous and less anecdotal manner.

You can refer to the following article: "Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey" to begin with.

The following extract from the results abstract is quite interesting:

  Most respondents agreed that financial incentives would not be effective when time constraints are prohibitive (mean 3.59 (SD 1.01)). However, reviewers agreed that non-financial incentives might encourage reviewers to accept requests to review: free subscription to journal content (mean 3.72 (SD 1.04)), annual acknowledgement on the journal’s website (mean 3.64 (SD 0.90)), more feedback about the outcome of the submission (mean 3.62 (SD 0.88)) and quality of the review (mean 3.60 (SD 0.89), and appointment of reviewers to the journal’s editorial board (mean 3.57 (SD 0.99)).

So basically, this study confirms what your colleague mentioned about financial incentives not being the best approach to incentivise reviewers (maybe though for different reasons that you might have expected).

However, keep in mind that people in academia are not motivated only by money (as in that case they wouldn't be in academia in the first place). There are other means to motivate people that are keen to review papers, such as acknowledgements or free subscription to the journal they review, as the article states.


Do scientists using user facilities (such as Advanced Light Sources) have to travel frequently? I recently met an experimental physicist who does his measurements using the X-ray beam-line at a national lab. Since the university he works at is not too close to the facility, I wonder how much travel do people in this and related fields of research have to do for taking measurements on their samples.

Also, do people have any personal opinions about how strenuous the constant travelling can be?

I did my PhD in experimental nuclear structure physics, in a similar situation to the one you've described here. Within a month of starting my PhD, I was sent to the IFIN-HH lab in Romania for a week or so, to help a collaborator with their experiment. A few months later, I traveled to the experiment which provided my PhD data at Argonne National Laboratory in the US. This level of travel kept up for the 3.5 years of my PhD, to Germany, Italy, Switzerland, France and Romania, all on multiple occasions, although it tail off a bit towards the end when I was writing up my thesis. I have to admit, the travelling did get a little tiring, but I generally enjoyed the experience.

So not only are you attending your own experiment(s), but also those of collaborators from both your own institute and others. I was ok with this as I wasn't in a long-term relationship (well, I eventually was for a while, but with a PhD student on the same course), and didn't have children, so had few commitments which required my regular presence.

Really what a person looking at this level of travel needs to decide is if they actually want to travel this much, and if their commitments can handle them not being at home for days or weeks at a time, on a regular basis. (Admittedly, this is much more thought than I put into it at the time!)


Contact information on CV and cover letter for US mathematics postdoc applicants I am in the process of preparing various applications for postdoctoral positions in the US, and I need advice on what is the appropriate way to include contact information on my cover letters and CVs.

Presently, I am an international student studying in Australia. I foresee completing my PhD program (including conferral of the degree) by the end of Jan. 2017. Most of my applications will be lodged through the MathJobs system by early Dec. 2016. My Visa expires at the end of Feb. 2017, and I'm not sure if I can get a visa extension. Meanwhile, my current lease agreement terminates mid-Jan 2016. As you can see, there is a fair amount of uncertainty about my situation next year.

I have always thought that the purpose of writing addresses on any document is not primarily based on the desired affiliation with an institution but so that the recipient of the letter knows whom to reply to. However, and I might be wrong in this, it seems to me that putting your home address in your cover letter and/or CV, as opposed to your current departmental address, is deemed unprofessional. Bear in mind, though, that upon submission of my thesis, I am effectively no longer a student at the university, and hence, I think it somewhat dishonest to use the Maths department address for my mail. By the way, I expect to submit my thesis around mid-October.

So my first question is: Is it considered unprofessional to put my home address as opposed to my institution address on my CVs and cover letters?

My second question is: In light of my situation and the answer to the first question, what is the best way to address my cover letters and CVs?

I understand that I can update my application materials through MathJobs. Thus far, my plan is to use institution addresses (with a c/o Secretary of the Mathematics Department) throughout and then update forwarding addresses through MathJobs as things become more certain. What do you think?

As you probably know, your communication with search committees will almost certainly be via email until late in the process. So as long as you use an email address that you will retain access to through the spring, there's not much chance of a communication breakdown.

In fact, you would probably be fine not listing a physical address at all. But since it looks slightly weird not to have a mailing address, go ahead and use your address at your current institution. You will still officially be a student there at the time the applications are submitted, so there's nothing even arguably improper.


Asking a Professor to sign me to a group I have a class assignment coming up. On the syllabus, it was indicated that groups would be assigned this week. I assumed that the professor would be assigning groups. However, last week the professor said that we need to choose the people we work with and come to him afterwards. I don't know anyone in my class and have a class directly after and before. I asked a few people and they had already chosen their friends to work with.

I sent him a polite email last weekend, asking him If he knew of anyone looking for an extra group member since I've been having a difficult time finding a group. It's now Monday night and he still hasn't answered. I'm panicking now since groups are due tomorrow and I have no form of contact with anyone in my class to even try and form a group. What do I do?!

Send another email stating that you have been unable to find anyone and have been refused by a few teams. You will try to "catch" him before class.

Then (choose one) if you don't get a suitable reply:

(a) Show up at his office in the morning before class and present the problem. Ask for a solution. I.e. "How should I proceed?"

(b) Catch the prof in the hall just before class and ask for a solution.

(c) When class is about to begin, raise your hand and ask for a solution.

(d) After class catch the prof and ask for a solution.

There isn't really much else you can do. Prefer a to b to c to d, I think. But, I assume the prof has seen this before. You might not be the only one with the problem so a group might be formed immediately.


Bad undergraduate grades, decent research experience, what are the chances of PhD admits? I'm an undergraduate student in Electronics and Electrical Engineering but am more interested in research in computer science and have decent research experience. I have done a summer internship at a very reputed place in France and our work during the summer was published and we also won Distinguished artefact award at the conference. I'm now writing my thesis at a prominent computer science research institute in Germany with a senior researcher and now am thinking about pursuing PhD. But I don't exactly have good grades and people have suggested to go for a masters to improve my academics but I feel like its the same issue there as well, isn't it the same case for masters? I need good grades to get accepted for a decent masters program so I don't see how it helps me.

I would really appreciate the community's help and advice on how best to proceed for this.

I am writing as a American about American universities in case you want to apply here.

A Master's Degree is basically a "halfway" step toward a PhD. That is, it requires two years instead of four (or more) after an undergraduate degree.

As such, a Master's degree represents a lower risk for a university. In your case, they're dealing with a student that has a weak academic record and a strong work record. They are also, potentially, dealing with a "late bloomer."

So the feeling at a Master's Program might be, "let's see if this strong worker can fix his academic record. If he can, that's great, and he can go on to a PhD. If he has the same problems in his Master's work as in his undergraduate work, that's two years, not four that were wasted. (One year, if you are asked to leave the Master's program.)


Will pursuing master degree increase the chances of Ph.D. admissions if the Ph.D. is in different field than Undergraduate is the goal? I am a Pure Physics and Pure Math graduate. I wanted to do Ph.D. in Computer Science on AI. I am currently a research assistant on AI. if my undergraduate is not related to my area interest for Ph.D., will pursuing a master degree in CS increase the chances of Ph.D. CS admission? Or should I focus on research and getting publications and go directly to Ph.D.?

Are there any other disadvantages to go to master in different fields? Is it better to stay at undergraduate focusing more in research experience?

Related:
The first answer said that there are disadvantages getting M.Sc when applying to Ph.D. rather than staying in Bsc, but I guess it doesn't cover
the case when the Undergraduate and Ph.D. area are different.

Would getting a faster MSc instead of just BSc affect admission chances for PhD?

I assume you mean a master's in CS.

This might depend somewhat on where you are, but in the US it would probably have little effect. The way to learn if your background is adequate for doctoral admissions is jut to apply to a program or two. There are aspects of your education that would be good to have when studying AI.

In the US, I think that if you could get in to an MS program you could also get into a doctoral program with the same background. It might be different in EU or elsewhere, of course, especially in places that have strict rules.

But everywhere, you need to make your best case that you are qualified to begin and are a good candidate for success and that you have shown success in the things you've already done. You will find a lot of competition, of course, but no single thing will be determinative. Make your case.


How to network as a new graduate student in a new country First of all, let me admit something from the beginning; I don't understand exactly what is meant by networking in an academic setting.
I am a new Master's student in a country where I never studied before (Germany). Until now, as an undergrad, I have done several internships, worked within a couple of research groups for some time, attended many seminars & workshops, taken several graduate-level courses. During each of those occasions, I had the opportunity to meet with several academics who could (I guess) help me while I am shaping my career, but I've never tried to communicate with people whom I didn't have to. Sounds quite a bit of lost opportunity, but in my defense, I don't like socially interacting with people whom I don't know and don't comfortable being around.
My first question is that what have I (possibly) lost by not networking?
Secondly, what is meant by "networking" exactly in an academic setting? Just knowing each other exists, or being some kind of friends, or just knowing who is interested in what?
Thirdly, how can a graduate student network in events where most of the people are way older, and academically more senior?

Addendum:
I've just come from my first, proper academic event. It was more for a celebration than a networking event, but still, I've met a lot of people and it was great. There were a lot of people who think in the same way as I do (not necessarily we agreed on everything, just our way of thinking were the same; analytical, based on data, etc.). I think I've made some "academic friends", and there was a lot of interesting discussion on almost everything but above all, it was really fun.
But, all the things were with the people whom I had already known a bit, and I found it a bit hard to join the discussion with the people I hadn't know.

Since you

have done several internships, worked within a couple of research groups for some time, attended many seminars & workshops, taken several graduate-level courses

You have probably done a fair amount of networking already. And I'd say likely more than other Master students. You're maybe not as "connected" as someone who introduced themselves at seminars or workshops, but you still know better now what the various speakers are working on. This is a big part of what networking is about.

 Secondly, what is meant by "networking" exactly in an academic setting? Just knowing each other exists, or being some kind of friends, or just knowing who is interested in what?

Since you indicate you are in Germany, networking is about getting acquainted: knowing each other exists and what their professional interests and topics are.
You may also become professional friends (and since you are in Germany, beware of the difference between English friend and German Freund - which is reserved for close friends in English terms)

 how can a graduate student network in events where most of the people are way older, and academically more senior?

The most effective way is IMHO attending conferences.

If you are at a conference on your own (noone else from your group), attach yourself to various other groups that are there in somewhat larger numbers. Easiest IMHO to attach yourself to some fellow students, who are there with also postdocs or their professor around.
If you are attending together with more senior people from your group, I'd expect "your" postdocs or professor may introduce you to their acquaintances.

You can also attend e.g. PhD student seminars. There it should be quite easy to get acquainted with your peers. This is also very relevant and useful networking: a) you can get e.g. information on working conditions in their groups when you'll be looking for a postdoc position later on. b) Like you, they'll "grow up" academically/professionally. In a few years, they'll be your experienced professional peers, PIs and professors that you know already.
Last but not least, I think it also important to get acquanted also with a group of people outside your field. In Germany, I'd recommend joining some sports club/university sports or a theater group or... depending on what your hobbies are.


PhD in UK or PhD in Spain? I have won fully funded Ph.D. positions one in the UK and the other one is in Spain.
UK job position offers me a job as a teaching assistant in addition to Ph.D., however, I would have a fellowship (research assistant) in Spain?

Ph.D. is itself is a big commitment and requires focus and hard work. I want to choose something with which I can focus on my studies as much as I can. Yet, on the other hand, I want to have professional experience in academia for further career development.

I have to choose one now and I am not sure which one would be better in the long run?

Suggestions would be appreciated!
Thank you!

I don't think anyone is going to be able to give you a straight answer to this question. It will depend on many factors, which only you can really answer:

Do you prefer to live in UK or Spain, and also the city in particular both countries are big and diverse.
The research groups involved and/or the research project (this also includes obviously the supervisor)
The details of the position (salary, possible benefits, etc.)

I probably missed other important factor but the point is this is a personal decision where no one but you will have enough information to answer.


Should I mention the mutual acquaintance who recommended me to a professor in an email? I'm applying for graduate school in the coming fall. I asked a professor - who I never worked with, but who liked my CV - if he could get me in touch with one of his colleagues to see if I can get a research position at his lab. The professor did so, and his colleague was interested in my CV enough to tell my professor to ask me to get in touch with him.

I didn't want to email this professor until I was done researching his stuff and sending my application. It's been a couple of weeks. I don't know if I spent too much time not sending the email, but I didn't want to make a poor job of that. But the question is, now that I'm writing the email, should I mention the professor who recommended me in the subject line?

My current subject line is:
"Cady Heron - Prospective [major] Graduate Student"

The one I was thinking:
"Referred by Dr. Karen Smith - Cady Heron"
(Frankly, I got this from a Business Insider article.)

Any help, please? I just don't want to sound like I'm shoving nepotism or something in his face.

It's a good idea to remind the prospective advisor of who you are (namely "prospective student that colleague X recommended"), but doing so in the subject line might be overdoing it. I'd suggest writing that reminder in the first line of your email, since most people seem to read emails using applications that will display the first line, even if they don't open the email. Also consider cc'ing your referring professor on the email.


How hard is it for a graduate from Canada to find an employment in the US? I'm an international PhD student currently at a university in the US (F1 visa). My professor is moving to the University of Toronto, and has invited me to move as a part of his research group. While I understand that my decision to move should depend on the advisor and not on the school, the following question bugs me since the school is in Canada.

How easy or difficult is it for an international student in Canada to find an internship or employment after graduation in the US? I'm interested in CS companies such as Google, IBM, Microsoft Research and start-ups in Silicon valley. If its difficult to get work in the US, what are equivalent opportunities in Canada?

Not exactly an advice, but just based on what I know of my friends working in US.

I am not familiar with international visa issues, but I have at least 2 Canadian friends (as far as I know they don't have US citizenship) who graduated from Canadian schools and now work for Google and Twitter (actually one of them has BSc). So I agree with scaaahu's comment to your question, that it is much more important to have the skills that your potential employer wants.


Should a student shake hands with the professor? Strangely I could hardly find any information about it on the internet. The question is simple: should a student expect to shake hands with a professor who is

academic advisor
the supervising professor who you're going to do your final year project with
A teacher who taught a class this semester and you're saying thanks to him/her on the last class

I'm an undergraduate student so the above refer to undergrad situations. Though I guess the question is equally valid for a graduate student.

Greet them in whatever way is natural to you. In university settings (where contact with different cultures is common, more so in graduate studies) they'll probably take it in stride. If they offer to shake hands, do so. Doing otherwise is certainly rude.


Is it appropriate (as an undergraduate) to email an academic with a question on their publication? I am currently studying a published article as part of an undergraduate research project I am doing. I am having difficulty understanding specific parts as the article is quite dense and makes some leaps in logic that I am having trouble following. The article is of a mathematical/computer science nature and suppresses many details.

I would like to email the article's author to ask a question or two, and I am wondering, is this appropriate? If I were a post-doc or something I would not hesitate. My concern is that as an undergraduate, perhaps my questions will be silly and/or a waste of time for the author. Or worse yet, I am concerned that it is inappropriate for an undergraduate to email at all. Can anyone offer some comments on this?
Some relevant info:
- I have studied the problem and am unable to answer the questions thus far.
- My supervisor does not know the answer either and would have to study the paper (my job) to determine the answer.  As noted, this is nearly identical to a question asked by a Masters student, but I feel it justifies its own responses. My concern here is that I may be asking questions that would be obvious to a Master's student.

It is definitely appropriate. Further, I wouldn't even tell the author that you are an undergraduate. Just tell them you read their paper as part of a research project and had a few questions. Should be as simple as that.


How does funding at UK universities work? The process for obtaining funding for graduate work in the UK seems much different than it is in the US. In particular, in the UK, funding decisions often come after offers of admission. What is the process by which a good, accepted graduate application at, say, Oxford, is given funding?

The funding depends on your nationality/residence by a lot, as well as the field, the university, and the supervisor.

UK or EEA residents can get funding from national research councils (such as ESPRC, STFC and many more) which give them (usually) the cost of tuition plus a small living stipend (when I was applying the living wage was about £13,000).

Non UK/EEA people generally have to self-fund outside of a few special circumstances (competitive international scholarships such as Rhodes, university bursaries for internationals). This is very very rare. However, it's not terribly uncommon to see students from an above-average financial situation self-funding, but then they need to pay not only their living costs, but also the cost of tuition (at my old university it was about £20k per year for international students).

I wrote an extensive response on all of these issues here and here and here. The other answers from other users on those posts are also excellent.

So what happens is that you apply, and then you will be (hopefully) asked for an interview. If you are able to compete for the 'normal' funding pot, you will be interviewed much the same way as everyone else. First a shortlist, then the interviews, and maybe follow-up interviews will be used to select the best candidates from the pool of applicants. If you're non-UK/EEA, you may or may not interview with everyone else; it's up to the university. If they don't have the money to fund you, many departments will make you an offer anyway (especially for foreign students) which you will usually have several months to accept or decline.

The research councils will grant the department a certain number of PhD studentship bursaries, and they will distribute them. From what I've seen, you don't have to do much self-application for scholarships unless you're foreign. Though you will always be told where the money is coming from, and there may be some requirements (a yearly seminar, for example) to get the money.

If you are given a stipend, it is tax-free, unlike in many other countries. Your funding is all-inclusive, not split up into RA or TA like in the US. You can normally make extra money marking coursework or demonstrating in labs, although the 'estimated number of hours' taken by these activities doesn't always match up with the actual number of hours you spend on them !


How to thank someone who proofread my scientific paper? A colleague working in my department helped me out in proofreading my English before submitting a paper. I would like to acknowledge his help.

Is it common to acknowledge such help? Is there any standard sentence to do it?

The author would like to thank [colleague name and title] for constructive criticism of the manuscript.

No need to get into additional details as after all you are thanking your colleague.


How to reference original paper in expanded journal version Many journals allow to submit an extended version of a conference paper as, for example, Springer:

  Expanded versions of papers which have previously appeared in
  conference proceedings will be considered and this request must be
  made at the time of submission; the authors must clearly state the
  conference publication and provide a statement of revisions/updates
  that have been made to the journal paper.

When writing such an extended version how do you reference the conference paper? I can imaging several possibilities:

Treat it like every other paper in related work
Ignore the conference paper completely and present all results as if for the first time.
Clearly indicate that you wrote the conference paper as "... in [1] we showed that and shortly review the approach ..."

What is correct way to write an extended journal (in CS)?

You write the journal version so that it is entirely self-contained, as if all results were new (regardless of whether they were already present in the conference version).

Then, in appropriate places, you refer to the conference version and explain how the current version is different. For example, you could have a footnote on the first page or an acknowledgement in the end of the paper, along these lines:

  This is an extended and revised version of a preliminary conference report that was presented in FOO 2015 [1].

Here [1] is a reference to the conference version, and you include it in the list of references as usual. There is no need to cite it elsewhere.

If it makes sense, you can also discuss the difference between this version and the conference version in more detail e.g. in the "Related work" section. This might be a good idea especially if the journal version is not just an extension but some results are fundamentally different. However, in straightforward cases this is not usually necessary.

(Please note that this answer is specific to computer science, which has its own peculiar approach to conference publishing. All other fields are different.)


Math PhD application references from a postdoc Will a reference from a postdoc be considered less than a reference from a lecturer/professor?  This is assuming that I have done a dissertation under him/her and that the postdoc is in his/her (at least) third postdoc position.  It may be worth to note that he/she has graduated PhD for around 10 years.

Will a reference from a postdoc be considered less than a reference from a lecturer/professor?

As a general rule, yes, but it depends who the postdoc is, how strong (and effectively-written) their letter is, and what the letter is for. As an example, I am currently working with a smart undergraduate, and he got accepted to several very good graduate programs (US, mathematics) on the strength of his application, which included a reference letter from a postdoc he did a research project with last year. So such letters can certainly be effective and have value. It all depends on the context.

The main point is that the most important factor in how seriously a reference is considered is not so much the job title of the letter writer (although that is still a factor that has some significance), but their credibility and reputation in the research community. Certainly many postdocs already have high credibility and name-recognition, and a letter from them (at least for a grad school application and to a lesser extent for a postdoc application; less so for a tenure track job application) will be taken quite seriously.


Is it rude to request a read receipt when emailing the professor? Today I suddenly found that my email server requests a read receipt every time when I send emails. Since I am recently exchanging messages with a potential Phd supervisor, I wonder if this will make him feel that I am rude and annoying? I have already turned this feature off!

Unless you have reason to suspect that emails are not being delivered successfully, email receipts are pretty much useless. Here's why:

Not all email clients support read receipts - Mail on OS X doesn't, for one prominent example. If some of the previous emails you sent requested a receipt, and it wasn't returned, obviously either the prof's email client doesn't support it or he didn't bother clicking that button.
Unless the receipt is returned, you can never be sure if the email was read or not.
Unless the email is replied to immediately - which is unlikely if the reply will take some effort - it can easily be forgotten about. Receiving an email receipt is no guarantee that you'll get a reply.

If you have no response to an email after a reasonable period of time ("reasonable" can vary between 3 days and a month or more, depending on what is required), just send a quick reminder email.


Leadership Ph.D alternative (asking for a friend) I'm currently teaching at an undergraduate institution with a Masters in leadership. However, for accreditation purposes (and making the higher-ups happy) they want me to get a Ph.D.. I'm not interested in getting one, and honestly it won't help my courses. In short, are there any post-graduate alternatives to a Ph.D. in leadership that would satisfy accreditation statistics?

There is a wide range of choices in managerial education, in general, and in leadership education, in particular. Most universities' business schools offer various executive education programs, which range from continuous education / professional development programs, such as (hereafter, I am using Harvard University just as an example for some types of programs) these smaler scale programs, to comprehensive executive leadership programs. Executive leadership programs can be general as well as industry-oriented, such this higher education-focused or this healthcare-focused. Other leadership education options include more lightweight alternatives, such as relevant MOOCs with certificates (either single courses, or thematic tracks), university certificate programs (such as this one at MIT) and relevant educational programs by think tanks (like ones by Aspen Institute), non-profits (like ones by Center for Creative Leadership) and similar organizations.


Have I offended my professor by applying to summer research at other universities? Yesterday I applied to a bunch of internships and sent my professor a request for a recommendation letter. He denied me the request, and sent my request email, along with his reply, to everyone in the lab. He wrote that he didn't understand why I would apply for a research internship in (our research area) when I am already a research intern at his lab, and that he assumes that I was only here for a reference letter and I have no intention of contributing to the lab.
This was shocking to me for several reasons. He had previously wrote, 2 months ago, that he was happy to write me a recommendation letter. In addition, I had already applied to a research internship in (our research area) at a national lab and he provided me a recommendation for that. On top of this, I have been working with a grad student with in-person lab work 4 days a week. I always show up on time to the group meetings but I usually don't have much to share since the grad student I work with share our results.
I also thought that it was obvious I would apply to research internships in our research area, and that it was common for undergrads to work on summer research elsewhere. I don't understand why I would apply to internships in other research areas that are not related to our lab. On top of all this, these REUs are funded and I applied because I can get paid over the summer. My position at the lab is a volunteer position.
Was this an offensive request? I'm not sure why he felt so strongly about this since he has always been very nice.
Edit: Thank you for all your suggestions. I emailed him explaining my decision and he sent the group an email saying that he values my contribution and supports my application.

Tell him that you do intend to participate as previously agreed, but that funding for the summer was an important consideration. If he is at all reasonable, then that should be enough. If he is offended, then he isn't being reasonable.
If he offers you summer funding, then consider that, of course, but he should have little controlling say over a volunteer.
Perhaps he values your work so much that he thinks losing you for the summer would be a blow. Alternatively, he is just a jerk. If he hasn't got a reasonable response, you should find a way to be done with him. What he did is unprofessional, probably unethical.


Is it rude not to take a course with your adviser? This semester I need to take a course that is offered in two sections, one of which will be taught by my M.Sc. thesis advisor.

The problem is that I personally prefer to take the course with the other professor instead of my advisor because:

The teaching quality of my advisor is not as good as the other professor.
If I take the course with my current advisor, the TAs would be my labmates, and it makes me a little nervous that my grades and activities be exposed to them (and also to the professor).

I want to know generally: is it OK to not take a course with your advisor, especially if that course is the main focus of your lab and your work.

Expanding my comments from earlier...

Most importantly, talk to your advisor. Either you should be able to convince him/her that the other course will benefit you more or he/she should be able to convince you that his/her course will benefit you more.

I disagree with RoboKaren's answer. Working with your advisor is far more important than taking a class with him/her for a letter of rec. You may have other opportunities to take a course with him/her anyway.