How to prosecute plagiarism when the discoverer of the plagiarism is an outside third party? Recently a group of students have investigated the the alleged plagiarism in the thesis of one of the most famous alumnus's of Glasgow Caledonian University. In one specific case, a crowd-sourced project highlights very convincing evidence of plagiarism throughout the process. Is there any global authority to investigate this type of issue and put it through required legal steps?

There is no single global authority that deals with academic plagiarism.

While the current legal system stands, there's no quick and reliable way to prosecute anyone because everyone has a right to defend in court, and court processes are long, tedious and don't always result in a way that you expect. Your question seems to assume that plagiarism should lead to immediate dismissal of the president; this will not happen. Actually, this should not happen without a thorough investigation.

This being said, I sympathise with your cause, but you have little legal ground here. The university has the right to revoke his PhD degree, should the university decide so. If the university does not, it's the reputation of the university that is at stake. You have the right to distribute this information and show that the university officials are caring about politics more than about science.

Also, it is highly unlikely that a plagiarised PhD thesis would get a president of any country to quit. I have been closely following the work of Dissernet, a similar group in Russia that examines PhD theses for plagiarism. While they have uncovered plagiarism in theses of several high-ranked officials, including the Minister for Culture, no one in Russia bothered to admit it, much less quit, zu Guttenberg style.


How do you choose a textbook for a new class I am teaching a new class next term and I need to choose a text book (or create a reading list) for it. The class is a hands on introduction to programming with MATLAB. A quick search of my library's catalogue returns nearly 300 titles, 100 of which are on-line books. When you are creating a new class from scratch how do you go about choose the text book?

These are some criteria I usually use:

Published within last 5-10 years, preferably in 2nd edition or beyond: This ensures the materials are reasonably up-to-date and major errors had been cleaned up.
Have physical and e-book versions: To tailor different types of readers.
The e-book version should be freely available through the institute's subscription: This is to lower the barrier for acquiring the book.
The titles have been commonly adopted by other syllabi: Perform a search using your course title or subject plus "syllabus" and "filetype:pdf" or "filetype:doc" will get some nice results. Sift through them and get some ideas.
For software book, I would also check if the publishers provide all codes and data sets online. In additions, I'd make sure the book's examples use the software with the same version that my institute has or the students have.

Some other thoughts:

From my experience in teaching statistical software, I found that books are really not that popular. Online workshops and support websites seem to be a lot more welcomed by the students. If you can identify any of online resources, I'd at least suggest that as a secondary option.

I elaborate to students in the first class on why I chose this particular title. When I teach a class with very diverse backgrounds I also suggest some secondary books that are more specific to their interests. For instance, if I have medical and veterinarian students in my class, I may pick one software book on medical data analysis and another one on analyzing zoological/ecological data, etc.

Another thing I do to show that I am serious about the text: I often put footnotes on my notes or slides pointing students to the relevant section if they'd like to learn more and try that particular analysis/function.

Once you have found a few candidates, read the forewords. All else equal, I often prefer books that were written with a syllabus in mind. The authors usually explain that in the forewords.

Isolate the "must learn" techniques in your syllabus and make sure they are all included in the chosen text. That would make sure the texts and your teaching are coherent, and lower the chance of getting evaluation comments like "the text has nothing related to what was covered in the class."

One format that always thrills me is inclusion of self-assessments and case studies. Even I don't end up using those titles, I often borrow the case studies to make all the codes that I teach relevant to the contents.


Can you do research at home, without being backed by a university? [electronics] I am wondering this because I love electronics, but I go to a college which is mostly for vocational training. Often times I feel like our courses are 40% waste of time (usually too much industry software and/or uninterested lecturers giving compulsory classes).

So I had this idea of taking a year off to focus on my own projects as I did over last summer.

Since I am not sure a masters degree will teach me anything that a book can not, I was wondering whether I could do applied research at home permanently and potentially make money off of it? Right now I earn some money at home online via a site I own. Not much, but enough to get me by. I know how to read and I spend 10 hours in the library with ease (as I have been told this is how grad students work their way through projects). I mostly work on small-scale electronics, like currently an abbreviated type of joystick for paraplegics (that a paraplegic friend suggested). I work alone, at least at the moment.

Could I work on projects on my own and make a life out of this or should I try to join a good university for my masters? How are people without degrees regarded?

In the academia, degrees matter, being used as the main gatekeeping mechanism for identifying the pool of eligible applicants for positions at universities. Typically, the higher up you climb up the degree ladder (Master's, PhD) the more (and fancier) doors open.

In private industry, the majority of companies still require at least a bachelor's degree. So if you are considering working for a company at least for a short period of time to develop additional skills, I would highly recommend finishing a bachelor's degree. In some startups (especially Internet startups), you may be able to secure a position through networking with the founders (who sometimes themselves are dropouts).

But it sounds like you prefer to lay your own path in this life. I think you could make a living out of this by becoming an independent inventor, receiving and then either selling patents to corps or developing them into businesses on your own.

You could also work as independent consultant (formally, a sole proprietor) offering software and/or hardware engineering solutions to businesses. In this case, it is important to develop expertise in a fairly narrow niche, such as robot sensors, a programming language (e.g. Java), or a particular manufacturing process in a specific industry (e.g. programming car electronics for auto manufacturers). Typically, a way to develop such skills is to actually work for a company with a focus in this niche, then striking on your own.

To build up experience, also consider design competitions (e.g. dexigner.com/design-competitions). While some of these are for students affiliated with universities, others are open to anyone.

These options are not necessarily either/or, so you might be able to stitch a successful career and comfortable living by combining two or three of them at once, varying only the extent to which you allocate your time and energy to each of these pursuits. The most important thing is, to make sure you have fun no matter what you do. If it ain't fun, it ain't worth doing. You seem to have the talent and motivation to pursue your interests, which many people dream of but only a few have the guts to actually do. Good luck!


Formulating research question I am international student and have a problem with formulating a research question. I know the gap, but I could not make it clear. + my supervisor is not convinced of what I am doing and believes that there is no problem really(the research gap).
Any advice.!
Thanks,

The question is very general so the answer is going to be as well.

A research question is a plan for working on some specific piece of research. Making the plan clear is an essential step. You should be able to give a specific answer to the three standard questions:

What is it? What is the object of the work and what is the context? Are there any similar questions already solved or studied in the literature?  How does your goal/question differ from existing works?
Why does it matter? What are the motivations for doing this work? What problem does it solve (or contribute to solve)? what use cases does it apply to?
How? Which method can be used? Why this method in particular? What are the potential limitations of this approach?

Having a clear answer to all these questions will allow you to have a discussion about the details with your supervisor: either they are convinced by your plan, or they can tell you exactly where is the problem in your plan.


Is it ethically questionable for me (an undergraduate) to hire "research assistants"? I am an undergraduate student being paid a (relatively speaking) hefty monthly research stipend. I need only some of this money to pay off my university fees and living costs, since I have wonderfully generous parents.

The research projects I work on officially revolve around applied problems in math biology. Lately, I have been interested in Baez's work on "network  theory", but  because of full course load, along with the research project I am responsible for, I don't have the time to explore these ideas as I'd like to.

I have some ideas for pure math projects that involve extending Baez's nascent network theory ideas to problems in biology. I also have some ideas for tools that could be made in order to help a researcher formally analyze interaction systems.

These ideas are completely tangential to my own work (for the moment), although if I were able to set up the groundwork for them to the point where I am able to see that they do have potential, I'd love to bring it up with my professor.

One idea I have had recently is that I could hire my own "research assistants" out of my stipend (I am allowed to spend it as I like, right)? I could provide them with my motivations, and give them "guidance" (I don't know how capable I would be of this) through ongoing communication. This way, I would be able to explore my ideas, even if I don't personally have the energy and time to see them through right now. The alternative of course, is that I buckle up and find time from somewhere (e.g. by not writing this post) to work on the ideas, or put them away for a later date when I do have time.

So, is hiring my own research assistants at this time ethically questionable?

All that jumps out at me is that you won't be able to find and supervise someone capable enough for the amount of money you have, which I assume is on the order of tuition or less. You know research is really, really expensive right? People like Ph.D. students - and yourself - do it for cheap out of extreme valuing of their own educational and research experience.

You can't provide a six figure salary (what an industry researcher costs), you can't hire out your own research passions to someone; you have no play.

This, in theory, comes up in the professional world too. As a rule you can't really hire someone better than you to solve your problems... you'll run out of budget for them as they bleed your personal checkbook, or they'll get hired and take over your work (which is probably very bad for you). There's no "ethics", it stops at the pragmatics.

I think the ethics of this are kind of a moot point because there's cultural reasons this can't really come up. A more practical ethical question might be if you can hire researchers to work on parts of your project for you. That's a pretty different question, but I'm pretty sure the answer is yes, that's what a research budget is for (and your undergraduate underlings would of course appear as co-authors, which is a big part of why they took the opportunity).


How to overcome my resistance to lecturing? I am in a situation where I have several adult students for an all-day career training program that runs for about a year. So, they and I sit in the classroom most of a normal work-week. I decide when to get up and lecture. Although I tell them to raise questions any time, they rarely do unless I ask.

I enjoy speaking in front of the class, but because it is not on a particular schedule, I usually find that I have trouble motivating myself to get started. I don't have employee reviews or a mentor. My feeling in class is similar to how I have never gotten used to making phone calls: every time, it is like jumping into cold water, it never gets any easier. (I would rather talk in person. I am almost 50, by the way, and male.) How do I get beyond this basic motivation hurdle?

I don't enjoy lecturing either and yet my student reviews ask for more lectures even if I prefer discussion. What I've done for some classes is prepare a portfolio of 15 minute mini-lectures that are on one specific point, targeted, succint, and within the attention span (maybe) of 18 year olds.

You might also want to create a similar grab bag of canned material so that when a particular topic arises, you can easily lecture on it.

Otherwise, the only other way is to practice. I've realized my own aversion to lecturing is something I need to work more on, so I deliberately designed a large lecture course that was 100% lecturing, rather than the smaller seminar courses that I prefer.


Is having a co-adviser a good idea in a PhD program I'm currently doing a PhD in mathematics and have been working with my current adviser for almost a year. My adviser is at an advanced age, however, even though he still has a couple of more graduate students apart from me. My work has been going decent, but with oral qualifying examinations coming up, I'm confused if having a co-adviser may be a good idea for me. There are a couple of reasons for me to think so.

First is the fact that my adviser is at an advanced age. Secondly, while my adviser was away for a semester last year, I worked with another faculty member, who recently told me to consider if I wanted him as a co-adviser. I've not spoken about this issue with my adviser yet.

In this situation, I'm really confused about two issues. Firstly, will it be a good idea to have a co-adviser at all in my case, or should I continue having a single adviser while continuing my work with the other faculty member and keep him in my committee? Secondly, if I indeed choose to have a co-adviser, how should I bring it up with my principal adviser so that he doesn't mind? This has left me very confused recently and I'd love to hear some general advise in this situation.

I wonder why it is necessary to formalize an advising relationship at this time. If you are getting good advice from a second person, you are fine. If something happens to remove your principle advisor from the picture, you have a backup.

I also wonder what you mean by "advanced age". Many grad students think that 55 or so is old. I passed that milestone 20 years ago and am still kicking mentally (though you can judge that from my writings here).

But if you do think a formal relationship is advisable, you might tell your principle advisor (a) that you have been getting good advice from the other person and (b) s/he has suggested a formal relationship. Ask what they recommend. But don't bring up age - please. Such a formal relationship can be good for the other person, of course, and may be the principle reason why it was suggested.

It doesn't need to be a "touchy subject".


Deciding graduate school... easier way out or face the challenge? I was accepted into two good MS programs and need to decide which one to attend next fall.

One program is at the school where I will be finishing my undergraduate degree. I am holding a student intern position and have been told that I could continue to work in the lab if I decide to go here. So it can be said that this decision will leave me within my comfort zone.

The other program is at a new school which is ranked higher. The graduates from the program seem to be doing well upon graduation, either pursuing a PhD degree or getting a job. However, I am still in the process of looking for a faculty adviser with whom I can possibly do a research with.

This process of looking for a research lab is much harder here, since most of the position requires a knowledge in the field that I do not currently have (I'm a CS going into Bioinformatics... with many of the labs requiring some specific biology background). With this decision, I will be facing multiple challenges.

My end goal is to apply for a PhD program at the end of my MS degree and I think having more research experience and publication will help when it comes to applying for programs. Should I stay at my current school where I can continue to work with a faculty advisor and graduate students? Which decision will benefit me more down the road?

I think having more research experience ... will help when it comes to applying for programs.

This statement answers your own question (in terms of what you believe). By choosing a new school you will inherently be exposed to more research methods and ways of working. While it won't be in your comfort zone and more difficult to find an adviser, you expand your horizons by meeting new people.

  Which decision will benefit me more down the road?

A diverse education is often seen as a huge plus to universities when choosing their PhD candidates; especially if they are at prestigious universities. It shows that you can adjust and adapt to new environments. That being said, maybe a professor at your current university has a great connection to the school where you may want to get your PhD and you wish to leverage that connection? There may be a few reasons to stay, but by not going you risk missing out on countless unknown opportunities.


Does the time spent doing a PhD count towards research experience for job applications? There's a job application (UK based) which says something about having to have around 2 or 3 years research experience, but not necessarily have obtained a PhD.

What if I have a PhD and 2.5 years research experience postdoc? Does the PhD also count towards the "research years" ? I increasingly view a PhD as "training" rather than "research"...

EDIT

Of course there is a research element to any PhD, but the emphasis is on training to become an effective researcher.

Typically, time spent as a graduate student counts at least to some degree as research / professional experience.  For example, the IEEE counts education culminating in a Ph.D. as five years of "professional practice," no matter how many more years it may have actually taken you.  Those 2.5 years of postdoc most definitely count, though, so it seems quite reasonable for you to apply.


Is it bad style to include a list in an abstract? If I am writing a study paper and I have given some descriptors as to which systems will be measured (things such as "openness" and "availability" in my case) is it acceptable for me to provide a list of this after with a short sentence expanding on what metrics that word in intended to include?

e.g.

Openness - Measured by the proportion of the human population has access and the ease of entry for those who meet the requirements
etc...

One important thing to keep in mind is that the abstract is typically copied to various article databases, which have varying support for markup. As such, much of the formatting will not necessarily be carried over. That nicely formatted bulleted list which appears in the pages of the journal can turn into a confusing mess in online article databases. (e.g. It might lose the bullets and be smashed into a single paragraph.)

For this reason, it's generally recommended to avoid any special formatting in article abstracts - even things like italics should be kept de minimis.

If at all possible, skip the bulleted list, and keep the list in plain text format. If you do want to keep the bulleted list, be sure to format the list entries such that things stay readable even if the bullets are removed and everything is collapsed into a single paragraph.


My master’s thesis’ results will be published without my consent. What should I do? Last year I finished my master’s. I spent the whole year working on experiments for my master's thesis. Part of the results I obtained were published in my master’s thesis, which was submited via an online tool to my university; so there is proof that that work is mine, I guess.

Then I was offered to stay in that research group and do a PhD, but I refused. They went as far as to threaten me with publishing my data without crediting me. I still refused.

Now it has come to my attention that my data has been used to write a paper that will soon be sent for publishing. Besides that threat from months ago, no one has asked for my consent or permission to use my data, and I don’t even know if my name will be among the authors. Even if it does, I won’t be first author, because they will be assigning that to the person who wrote it.
(I’m not sure how much they have written themselves, as I already had written nearly everything myself for when I had to hand it in for it to be graded for my master.)

My questions are: if I am actually asked for permission before they send it to a journal for publishing and they say they will include my name but not as first author, is it worth accepting or should I refuse? In the case they don’t ask me for permission, what should I do? Mail the journal once the paper is published along with my master's thesis and the raw data (all I have are excel files) to prove the data is stolen?

I understand the confusion in some answers, as my case is very chaotic.
As far as I'm concerned, my thesis is not available to the public. Only my advisor and the director of the master have access to it (maybe more people at the university, but it's definitely not available to the public).
I also know from a case of a person who did his master's thesis in this same research group and then left, and he was asked for permission before the paper using his data was written. He was also credited as an author.
Sadly, the fact that the boss holds a grudge against me for not wanting to stay and her having a favorite (the one who will be credited as first author) also plays a major role in this.
In my field, being a first (or last) author means you are who worked the most in that paper. It's usually the boss/advisor and the person who obtained most of the data by working in the lab.

Part of the results I obtained were published in my master’s thesis, which was submited via an online tool to my university; so there is proof that that work is mine, I guess.

Let me first say a meta comment - once you publish a set of results, they are no longer 'yours'. They belong, in part, to the institution that funded you, to your advisor who helped you write your thesis, and to other coauthors/colleagues who helped you along the way. Research is a collaborative act.

To your specific case, I strongly doubt that you have proprietary rights to the data. You got the results as part of a Master's thesis supported by an academic institution that has rights to the data. What's more, once you published your thesis, anything in it can be used in future publications if it is properly credited (for example, if the dataset was published as an addendum to your thesis, it's fair to use it). That's basically the essence of academic progress.

Just like any other idea that appears in your thesis, the moment that you decided to publish it (as opposed to, say, patenting it and starting a company to commercialize it), others can cite it and potentially use parts of it in their work (doesn't even have to be the advisor, literally anyone can).

If the data is not published, I still argue that you could possibly be in the wrong in this case as well. From a proprietary perspective, you did not work alone. Your advisor and academic institution supported you, offered you tools (free access to software to develop your tools, access to your advisor, an office, classes you took, perhaps a laptop and computing services etc.). It is unethical (and a bit selfish) on your part to ignore all of the effort put into your thesis by others, and withhold the work from being published.

See a similar discussion here.


Acknowledge previous advisor/collaborators for ideas in article A PhD student switches to another PhD program and writes an article based on an idea or proposal on which the PhD student has worked, but which was written by the former advisor.

The PhD student leaves in good terms, and then contacts 2-3 times the former advisor to know whether they are interested in contributing to the article, without never getting a response.

If the PhD student publishes said article, should a note be added to the acknowledgments mentioning something like "we would like to thank Dr. Smith for some of the ideas that generated this article"?

Note that none of the original proposal is part of this article but some similar ideas are mentioned.

Acknowledging the contribution of someone, however small it is, is seldom a bad idea.

Usually, when I acknowledge the contribution of someone, I send a copy of the paper to acknowledged people before the final submission, informing them of the acknowledgment. In possible critical cases, I ask whether they are ok or not with the formulation of the acknowledgement, specifying by which date I intend to go on with the submission.

I think that the above approach can be used also in your situation, and should there be no reply by the specified date, I would keep the acknowledgment as it is.


What are CNRS research units and how are they staffed The Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS) is the major funding body in France. With nearly 32,000 staff members it is bigger than the US NIH and US NSF combined, yet only has a 1/10 of the budget.

Both CNRS and NIH have multiple institutes (although the NIH institutes are all health related and CNRS covers a range of science). The CNRS then has 952 mixed research units, 32 proper research units, 135 service units, as well as 36 international units while the NIH has a large number of intramural labs.

What are these different research units and how are they staffed (full time researchers or academics with other teaching duties)? Is it at all like NIH intramural labs or MRC centres?

Wikipedia is your friend. Read the CNRS wikipage, and look at CNRS official website.

CNRS is the largest public pure research organization in France, with a staff exceeding 31000 persons, located in many geographical areas in France; many CNRS teams share office buildings with e.g. some French universities; several French research teams (UMR) have mixed staff, some funded by a University, and some other funded by CNRS, perhaps even working in the same office room on similar research. Getting employed by CNRS is really very hard, and there is a lot of competition. BTW, CNRS researchers are not very well paid, and most of them are not only very competent, but generally passionate about their research. They are not (contractually) tenured members of some University, even if most of them do teach a few courses somewhere (in addition of their researcher work), either at some University or at some Grande Ecole.

  It's supposedly some unknown research center somewhere in Europe

CNRS is the largest basic research agency in Europe (mostly funded by the French public State budget). It is French (even if of course it gets some research grants from outside, e.g. from French ANR or European Commission's H2020...)

CNRS researchers are working in all kind of science and research (e.g. biology, history, computer science, physics, sociology, paleontology, chemistry, mathematics, etc etc etc ....). Most of them have at least a PhD (doctorat d'université), usually even their HdR (habilitation à diriger des recherches). Even if CNRS researchers are French civil servants, they are not all French citizens (even if most of them are).

There are some other public (French state owned) organizations in France doing research, e.g. INRIA, INRA, CEA, INSERM, (and dozen of other smaller research institutions) etc... Unlike CNRS, these other organizations are usually dedicated to some specific science or technological domain, and usually work on applied research.

  Online material on the cnrs isn't helpful at all

Why do you say that? The Overview page of CNRS website is quite informative (and looks quite objective to my French citizen eyes)! And the CNRS wikipage gives a complementary look.

French economy is not used to fund research (in the sense that private corporations in France spend much less money in funding research, notably in public labs, than their counterpart in the USA or even in Germany). So the funding of French research works differently from North American country (and is lower, in terms of percentage of GDP).

BTW, I don't understand well what the NSF exactly is in the USA. My perception is that it mixes the role of CNRS and of ANR in France.


Why journals ask for potential reviewers' details during submission of a manuscript? I am wondering the reason why most of the jounals ask for 4-5 potential reviewers' details during submission of a manuscript? Whether does the editor really send the manuscript to the suggested reviewers? I always select potential reviewers from my reference list whose work/methods is largely similar to my work. But still the reviewers ask some unexpected questions in their comments.

The editor, who selects the reviewers, may not be familiar with the particular sub-area, when a journal is not hyper-narrowly focused. In that case, providing a list of potential reviewers directs the editor's attention to possible scholars in the area. Once your attention has been drawn to an individual, you can spend some time discovering whether they would actually be good in that area.


How to register for GRE if you have multiple surnames? I've just completed the registration of my GRE account, and was going to schedule my test, when I read the guidelines on how to fill in the "First name" and "Last Name" fields and realized that I may have filled them incorrectly.

From what I've understood, if you have multiple surnames then you should fill in the "Last name" field with all of them, without spaces in-between. So, if my name is Alberto Oliveira Castro Alves Saracaia, the "Last name" should be "OliveiraCastroAlvesSaracaia". Is this correct? Or should the "Last name" be filled as "Saracaia" only (which is what I did).

I've tried contacting ETS by e-mail, but got no response so far. Any help would be appreciated, thank's in advance.

Yes, you made a mistake, because "last name" means surname or family name (sobrenome in Portuguese or apellido in Spanish). It is NOT the last of your names.

So your question now is how to fix it. Have they answered your email yet? If not, call them. You can also call your testing center and ask if they'll allow you to take the test. If they say they are OK and understand that you made a mistake, then you have more time to fix the problem. If not, you need to fix it before your test date.

If they do allow you to take the test before you fix the problem and you still have issues with ETS (and cannot fix your name), then you'll need to contact the universities you are applying to, and make sure they are aware of the problem and are able to find your test grades once ETS reports them to the University.

I know of people from Spanish-speaking countries that have registered for the GRE using only their first surname and have had no issues during the test taking or the reporting of the grades. However, your problem is different because you are using the last of your surnames, and unless in your country that surname is considered your "main" surname, they may not let you take the test.  For the case of the people I know, in their countries the first surname is considered your "main" surname, so using the first or both of their surnames works, but using their last surname would probably have raised questions at the testing center.


Is it acceptable for the secretary to have full access to our entire Outlook agenda? Today we were asked by the management of our department to give full access of our agenda in Outlook to the secretary. By full access, I mean the possibility to look, read, write, delete (own) slots in the agenda. It was mentioned that it's imperative not to alter any settings so the entire agenda will be visible to them.

The rationale is that sometimes people come in the department looking for us and by giving full access of our agenda, the secretary can advise these people on when/how to contact us.

On a personal note, I have never experienced something like that. People who want to find me can call me or send me email. I do not see why I should give access to my Outlook agenda, where I also store personal events.

So my natural question is: Is this normal/acceptable? How can I
politely say that this, in my opinion, is an unacceptable practice
possibly violating privacy?

My department is located in the Netherlands for what it's worth. No prior communication of this problem has been done/discussed.

My own perspective on this from the UK is that it is completely normal outside universities that outlook calendars are made fully accessible by anyone in the org. Many of my non-academic friends continually express surprise that I am allowed to keep my calendar private (I just share busy/free information). Even within universities, all of my professional service colleagues are expected to make their schedules accessible. On the other hand, this would seem to be a place where in general academics tend to be privileged, and I've not heard of faculty colleagues who have been forced to make their calendar public.


How to avoid getting basic facts wrong in an exam? I suffer from the problem that during an exam, I cannot recall basic facts, such as:

In a given equation, is a given variable the numerator or the denominator?
Is this a capacitor or a inductor?

I’ll know everything afterwards, but I will get stuck on these simple things.

I had nearly the same question on a practice test that doesn’t count and had proper mental clarity on the answer. However, as soon as it comes down to it, I get confused, waste time, and end up writing the wrong answer when my first natural instinct was the right one.

A little googling shows that it could be stress related, but I don’t really feel that that’s the case with me.

How can I address this issue?

Exam stress and anxiety is a real thing and is most likely what you're experiencing, despite your subjective experience. By being under pressure that this the exam you're taking is the real thing and not a practice, you're likely to second guess yourself and overthink things to a degree that makes you unable to easily recall the basic knowledge.

An analogy to this is 'red light syndrome' that musicians experience in the recording studio. From Urban Dictionary;

  Red light syndrome: Where a person has musical talent, but once they are being recorded, they fall to pieces. symptoms of red light syndrome include pale skin, cold sweats and frequent mistakes.

You're simply more likely to make mistakes when you're under pressure to perform correctly than when you're just studying or practicing.

Doing exams, like a lot of things at University/school, is something you need to learn how to do properly. You get better at test taking by doing it, much like you'd get better at performing a song in front of a crowd by doing it more often. The more you expose yourself to it, the more confident and relaxed you will become with it.

Replicating exam conditions as much as possible during practice papers is a first step. Go through the motions of sitting down and timing your exam, turn off your phone, don't look up an answer when you get stuck, etc. Doing this can help you feel more relaxed in a real exam situation.


Reference request for research on images or colors used in quizzes and exams For my exams and quizzes, I print them on colored paper, and I usually try to make them aesthetically appealing with the design. I include pictures that are usually relevant to the material they are being tested on.  I sometimes include funny cartoons.

I do this because I think it makes taking quizzes and exams an experience that is a little more relaxing and fun than if I just had plain white paper with no images.  I also enjoy seeing my students chuckle at a funny picture or cartoon.  I teach undergraduate mathematics, and given that many students have math anxiety, I like to try to take the edge off of that.

Has there been any research done on whether or not having colored paper or images on exams and quizzes are beneficial or detrimental?

With a quick Google search, I found the following, but I am interested if there is anything more than these, especially with mathematics or studies with images:

"Effect of Paper Color on Students' Physics Exam Performances" by David R. Schmidt, Todd G. Ruskell, and Patrick B. Kohl

https://www.academia.edu/5702205/Effect_of_Paper_Color_on_Students_Physics_Exam_Performances

"The Non-Impact of Paper Color on Exam Performance" by Michael J. Meyer and Jennifer Bagwell:
http://aaajournals.org/doi/abs/10.2308/iace-50142

"Effect of Paper Color and Question Orderon Exam Performance" by Ilanit R. Tal, Katherine G. Akers, and Gordon K. Hodge

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233180281_Effect_of_Paper_Color_and_Question_Order_on_Exam_Performance


Should I mention that I will be opting for the non-thesis option in my statement of purpose? I am planning to apply for Master's in Electrical and Computer Engineering. I have prepared most of the application requirements (GRE,TOEFL,transcripts,LORs,Resume). The only thing left is my SOP. I intend to take up the non-thesis (project option) in my final semester. Should I mention this in my SOP?
If yes, How do I go about stating this?

As a prior commenter noted, you can be silent on the issue without prejudice from the admissions officer.  In fact, it's quite common for graduate students not to make the thesis/no thesis decision until they have a semester or a couple of quarters behind them.  The decision to write a thesis is often the product of one's evolution during graduate work.  For example, if you were to decide that you want to pursue a doctorate, then writing a thesis has distinct advantages, the most important of which is that it prepares you for writing a dissertation.  Conversely, if you want the broadest knowledge and lab experience, course work is preferable.


What's expected in a UK postgrad letter of recommendation Note: This is specific to the UK. My experience of recruitment more generally is that it varies a lot internationally.

I've been asked to write a letter of recommendation for an undergrad applying for further study.  I'm happy to do it, and want to pitch it at the right level for a good student who's well suited to .  I'm more familiar with writing references for job applicants (students moving on from academia), and I'm not sure if the same tone is appropriate.  Most of the advice I can find online (and there are plenty of related questions here) is tailored to the American system, where such letters (i) seem to carry more weight, and (ii) seem only to be helpful if they describe the candidate as the most amazing student the referee has ever met.

In this case I'll be using an online form, so the format isn't really an issue, just the content

You can separate a reference letter into three sections.

In the first, you describe your relationship to the student and in what capacity you know him: modules X, Y, Z, dissertation supervisor, personal tutor etc. Add some standard introductory phrases and you should have a paragraph.

In the second section your refer to hard evidence: details of the student's performance in your courses, coursework/ dissertation topics, grades, performance in percentiles (top 10 - 5 - 2%), where the student has been particularly strong or the topics that interested him and, depending on the type of the relationship, you provide details on the dissertation (supervisor) or the student's engagement (personal tutor). I focus on the qualities that are not apparent from the student's transcripts, e.g. if a particular methodology has been used skillfully in research, if the student participated in societies or university events, organised something, led a group etc. Also, look at the course outline to hughlight performance in relevant areas. This can be important for a student that did exceptionally well in closely related modules but the average or performance in unrelated classes is not that impressive.

In the third section you refer to personal qualities related to academic performance: focus, commitment, initiative, interest, engagement, individual worker/ team player, easy to work with or not, independence, self-motivation, intelligence, academic skill, discipline, stability and continuity in performance, mental fortitude, resilience. You do not have to say if the student is funny, pleasant, introvert/ extrovert, well-mannered, social, with a good taste in wine etc. You should refer, however, to how student dealt with difficulties (very relevant for a personal tutor) or, if you are aware, if the student's performance was affected by certain factors or if there were were any special circumstances. Say nothing you do not feel comfortable with, and if you are not sure what to disclose ask HR or admin. Try to think what you would be interested to read in a reference letter, what would help you decide and what would make you decide. In that way, the colleague reading the letter is more likely to have a clearer idea of the candidate. Do not exaggerate, do not try to make the student look better than he/she is and try to provide examples. In a nutshell, would you suggest that person working with someone or attending further education, and why?

In the conclusion, you can provide a bref overview of your opinion, why the student is particularly suitable for the programme and whether you recommend him. Some people add a phrase such as "I recommend X to all but the highest-ranking institutions" to show objectivity. I prefer showing that in different ways, especially if the student is indeed applying to a top university.


Submitting a paper, and presenting it at a conference - conflicts? So, sorry if this is a daft question...

I've recently completed a paper that I'm hoping to submit to a journal later this week.

I think we have something important to say, and I want to disseminate the results more widely, in particular there's a conference I have my eye on. Their deadline is also at the end of this week.

Is it acceptable to submit the same paper to both journal and conference? Or will I get into trouble in the same way that I would if I submitted to two journals at the same time?

Thanks!

I have been in the same situation, written a paper, and wanted to disseminate the findings to a wider audience and hence, presented the work at a conference. I am in applied environmental science, and I feel that this is relatively common in my field.

My approach to this situation, bearing in mind there was to be published conference proceedings was to focus on a very specific element of the new methodological development that I worked on, and presented this at the conference, under a similar - but 'different enough' title than the paper. This parallel journal/conference writing also has to be used to be able to honestly answer the journal question, 'is this work being submitted elsewhere?'. Clearly you need to be able to answer no - its not.

This approach allowed me to go into some very fine detail of the new methods that was of interest to the specialist audience at the conference, that otherwise was far too detailed for the journal readership.

At the end of the conference presentation, I also signposted to the paper that was under review and the journal it was with, and some folk said post-conference that they would look for the journal paper when published.

So, in short, I would say that there has to be differences between the two submissions, but there is no problem in having them linked by common ground and to highlight an upcoming journal paper.

All the best.


Choosing between a Post-Doc and a faculty position at "2nd-tier" institution I am Ph.D. student in India working in computer science. I will be graduating soon. I have two options: 1) post-doc 2) join a "tier 2 institute" (i.e., an institution ranked between #11 and #20 in India) as a faculty. I don't have sufficient publications to join a tier 1 institute.

I am inclined to go for a post-doc because I want to improve the quality of my research. Many people are suggesting that I join tier 2 institute and then keep working. My research field (computational mathematics) is such that if I have to work alone then I can only publish one paper per year, but in a collaboration I can publish with more speed. Some people told me postdoc will impact you badly if you do not publish enough. I don't know what to do, but I want to pursue my carrier in research.

What are the pros/cons of doing the post-doc vs. taking a tier-2 faculty position?

This depends on a number of personal factors. Here are some questions that I'd be asking in your situation:

How happy would you be with a career at the Tier 2 institute? Is this what you were aiming for, more or less, when you started your PhD? If so, then consider taking the job.
If you do a postdoc, how likely would you be to get a "better" academic job afterwards? And how much "better?" I wouldn't focus on the distinction between Tier 1 and Tier 2 so much; the characteristics of universities will differ greatly within each "tier". Here I'd ask the opinion of some senior scientists -- whoever wrote your recommendation letters, for example.
If you do a postdoc and don't get any academic job at all, how would you feel about this? If, for example, you would also enjoy an industry job, and those are widely available in your field, then you could consider taking on more risk.
Are there any personal factors at play? Are you eager to "settle down"? Do you have any responsibilities that require financial stability? Is the Tier 2 institute in a city where you'd enjoy living? If you do a postdoc, do you mind the prospect of moving again in a few years?

None of us on this website can answer any of these questions, but I suggest them as good questions to ask yourself. Best wishes to you!


Is an instructor position a possibility to pursue research (semi-)seriously? I have been offered two positions, in two different countries, and I am trying to determine which one is a better fit.

POSITION 1: The first position is as Instructor - a teaching only position - which is offered in one year contracts for the first three years, then in three year contracts, until certain conditions of excellence have been satisfied in which case I may qualify for the status of "senior instructor." This position comes with the summer's free to pursue research or any other opportunity.

POSITION 2: The second is an Assistant Professor (equivalent) position in my home country, where the pay is less than half, and this position comes with the same teaching load, but also the expectation of research. This type of position is known to be strenuous and I have rarely met individuals holding this position that seemed happy (it comes with the usual tiresome academic hassles). The only silver-lining - and at this point I am not sure I consider it a silver-lining - is that this position comes with lifelong job security.

Both positions are in top 10 universities in their respective countries.

I guess I have two questions.

First: I am being told by the recruiting committee of position 1, that people recruited in this position have found it easy to continue working on research part time. Yet this could be to convince me to take the job. And it could also be a case of the "Most say that they would do research, but instead discover that teaching fulfills all their needs" (which might be the case, or rather might be that most people are susceptible to inertia). I do not have the perspective to judge how likely this is.
Second: I cannot either determine if this type of position - by contract - is meant to be long term or not. Even though it is something favorable to me, I am intellectually opposed to tenure, even if I understand how it is important for research where month to month (or yearly) productivity is not guaranteed - but it seems less pertinent for a position evaluated on the basis of teaching alone.

Yet if this position is only going to last me a year or two, it seems suicidal to turn down another more permanent position - however weak it is.

Any opinion on this would be truly appreciated.

(Finally, for full disclosure, I should mention, to be fair, that position 2 is in a city that has a significant richer cultural life.)

I will not be able to provide a full answer, but here are some assorted thoughts:

  First: I am being told by the recruiting committee of position 1, that people recruited in this position have found it easy to continue working on research part time. Yet this could be to convince me to take the job.

I am sure this depends, but I would certainly not take the committee's word on that. Instead, I would talk to other instructors informally. To be honest, if the summer is the only time where you could do research (as in, during the term you have no time at all), I would assume that you will be out of the research game entirely before long. Further, if you are not evaluated by your research outcomes, it may be hard to keep up the motivation to do any research and not focus solely on teaching.

  Second: I cannot either determine if this type of position - by contract - is meant to be long term or not.

It sounds like it's supposed to be long-term by default, but keeping the window open to get rid of you should you (a) underperform or (b) your expertise not be needed anymore short-term.

  this position [the assistant professorship] comes with the same teaching load but also the expectation of research.

Something seems off here. If the first post allows for research only during the summer, and the second post requires research and teaching, with teaching load being as high as in the other post, when would you do the research?

My experience is that it is very hard to estimate in advance what teaching load one really will have at a new place. Number of courses, number of students, etc. are all relative coarse-grained instruments, as it is entirely unclear how much work teaching X courses per year will actually be. I tend to look at what the committee expects you to do in addition to teaching, as this will be based on what other people in your post manage to do. If they expect you to do teaching and research in the second post, I would assume that the actual teaching load will be measurably less than in the first post, where they seem to assume that you have time to research "during summer".

  This type of position is known to be strenuous and I have rarely met individuals holding this position that seemed happy (it comes with the usual tiresome academic hassles).

Yes, assistant professorships tend to be hasslesome, because you have to juggle a lot of balls. However, if you plan to take the instructor position and do serious research on the side, you will have the same problem (maybe worse).

  The only silver-lining - and at this point I am not sure I consider it a silver-lining - is that this position comes with lifelong job security.

It is a silver lining. Lifelong job security does not mean you are chained there and can never leave. Even if it is not your dream job (which it clearly isn't), you can stay there until you are able to secure a better position, and then move on. Having an unbounded contract can almost by definition not be a bad thing.

  the pay is less than half

This is clearly an important argument, but do take costs of living into account. Typically, the places that pay very well are also very costly to live in (I work in Switzerland, I know what I am talking about here - I would not have deemed possible how much more expensive living here is than in my home country).

  Both positions are in top 10 universities in their respective countries.

But how are they in relation? Being Top 10 in Austria says next to nothing (we have less than 10 actual research universities in total). Being Top 10 in the US is pretty cool...

  Finally, for full disclosure, I should mention, to be fair, that position 2 is in a city that has a significant richer cultural life.

I consider this a very important factor, but judging whether the same is true for you is an entirely personal thing, which we cannot help you with.


Nuances: PhD F1 Visa/i20 issuance for someone who did their undergrad in the US I am currently almost done with my undergraduate education as a physics major in the US. I'm applying to graduate schools for Fall 2018, and when applying, I noticed that many (if not all) universities require that my 'Home/Permanent' address be an address from my home country.

So, when they issue an i20, is that going to be sent to my home country's permanent address (where my parents live), even though I'm already living in the USA?

If so, I have two questions:

i) Can I re-apply for a fresh F1 Visa (as a PhD student) while still living in the USA, or would I have to go to the consulate in my home country and go through the formalities as I did the first time?

ii) If the answer to i) is that I can do so while in the USA, do I simply ask my parents to send the i20 to myself once they receive it?

Please feel free to move/suggest a more appropriate forum for this question!

The main point is that the I-20 form is from the Department of Homeland Security and the F1 sticker is, like all visas, issued by the Department of State.

The F1 visa sticker in your passport is needed for the actual physical act of entering the country, and its validity has nothing to do with whether you're legally allowed to be in the country - that has to do with the dates on your (latest) I-20. This is why the stamp that you get in your passport when you enter the US has 'D/S' written on it, which means 'Duration of Status', meaning that you can stay in the US as long as you maintain your status as a student even if the sticker expires (but if you leave, you would still need a new sticker to re-enter the US). Conversely, if you stop being a student, you can't then use your F1 visa to enter the US even if the sticker still appears to be valid.

There is no way to apply for the F1 sticker without leaving the US (the department of state is fundamentally meant to work outside the US). It is highly suggested that you go through the process in your home country; technically it's not impossible to try in a third country, but there is a (small) possibility that they will reject your application as a citizen of a third country, unless you have a compelling reason for being there. Some US consulates, I believe, specifically say on their websites that they do not process visa applications from citizens of other countries.

What does this mean for you?

Don't worry, you'll have plenty of contact with the universities before they mail your new I-20. They are used to people in your situation, and they will ask you where to send your I-20. Alternatively, when you accepted an offer to a graduate program, directly contact the international students office and tell them where to send it, to avoid any controversy.
You don't need a new sticker to continue to be a legal resident of the US, as long as you get a fresh I-20. So you could have the university send you the I-20 directly, or have your parents mail it to you while you stay in the US. You only need to apply for a fresh sticker in your passport if you leave the US and wish to re-enter on the F1 status. (There is an exception for short travel to Canada and Mexico. )
Bear in mind that the sticker application process takes a bit of time. The break between undergrad and grad programs is probably the easiest time to apply for a new sticker. You can apply for a new F1 sticker even if your old one still has some time left in it. Probably good to apply sooner rather than later, given the state of US politics too.
The process for applying for a new sticker is the same as applying for a first one, except it might be easier since you've already had this visa and not caused any trouble.
There is a grace period where you are allowed to stay in the US between your undergrad I-20 expiring and your graduate I-20 starting.
You should confirm all of this with your local international students office, as well as the folks where you decide to go.

Best of luck with your applications!

PS: I think this is the right place for this question.


Seeking Feedback on Research Topic Outside Department/University I am about to start my third year in an economics PhD program and I'm starting my dissertation. Part of the dissertation involves subject matter that none of the faculty in the department know enough about to give specific useful feedback.

I want to ask faculty (who I know are knowledgeable) from different departments/universities  for some basic feedback on my current progress before plunging more into the research topic blindly (with only my understanding of the literature to guide me).

I'm thinking I will ask my current committee members to introduce me to anybody they know who might be helpful. If they don't know anyone I will consider cold-emailing.

So my question is:

Is my current plan a bad idea and is there a preferred alternative approach?

I too had a topic which was outside of the expertise of my committee. If you are set on your topic, this seems like a good approach. After talking to your current committee and getting their buy-in on the plan, you could also approach other faculty at your current institution to tap their networks.

Another way of doing some networking to get feedback is to attend local or subject area conferences. The big AEA conference is pretty difficult to use for networking, but you could make contacts at these other conferences which could be helpful. Especially once you get your work to a poster stage.

I would also like to advocate a second idea, which is to change topics to something more similar to your committee's area of expertise. While this is not what I did, I definitely saw the merits of it as my friends who took this approach were able to coauthor with their committee, have more useful RA experiences, and come out with more lines on their CV for the job market.


What should I do if I end up without an adviser? I am a 2nd year PhD student and I have passed all prelims. However, I am facing a problem: I may not be able to get an adviser.

There were several potential advisers I was trying to approach. One of them suddenly left, others are either "do not know anything about my topic", "too busy to take a student", or simply ignored me at all (It seems that they were always not in their offices, and they simply ignored my emails.)
And now I have trying my last shot on one of the faculties, but it seems that (s)he is not willing to take me and (s)he claimed that (s)he may not be a good adviser.

I talked with my friends and we got possible solutions. However, I am not sure if they are good or possible. So I would like to get some advice here:

(1) Switch field:

(I tried approaching all faculties with similar interest.) The problem is I know nothing about their fields and I didn't take any basic courses related to these fields.
So the two problems are:
(a) I know nothing, is it too late to start over now?
(b) To be honest I am not interested in these fields. However if I stay here I think I need to switch my field probably. Is it really a good idea because I may need to face something I don't like for 3 to 4 years.

(2) Staying in my school and try to get an adviser elsewhere:

Is it hard to do so given that I am not a brilliant student? Since they do not have the burden to take a student from somewhere else.
If I approach them, how should I explain my situation? Since there are some faculties working on my field.

(3) Transfer to another school:

If I am going to apply another school, how will they think of me? Will they think I have no adviser because I am dumb? Or will they think I may end up without an adviser again?

Also, in general, do I have to restart everything again? (Including the prelims.)
I know that some schools will force their student taking the prelim courses irrespective to their background, in this case, I think I will waste time on the same material.

[Added] And one more problem for (3) is I doubt I can get 3 reference letters again...[/Added]

Finally, is it good idea to reapply those school who accepted me before?

Do you have another possible solution? And how do you think about these solutions? And if it is field dependent, do you mind indicating which field you are talking about?

Sorry about my poor language and thanks a lot.

I think that your best option is the first, but that is based on my personal preference and may not be yours. So let me explain.

Many students choose an advisor late and are then guided by ideas of the advisor. There is nothing wrong with that.

Finding an advisor at another school will cause lots of complications both in the short term and in getting everything finished up.

Moving to another school may not find you an advisor for "your topic" in any case. It will require a new advisor.

As a student, your short term goal is to get a degree and then move on. There is nothing to prevent you from then going back to your original ideas and developing them. There is nothing but time and hard work to keeping your hand in on those ideas so that you don't get too far out of the current loop if the topic is popular.

To expand on the first choice, I would choose a highly regarded advisor who has a lot of ideas. Work with him/her on something that is as close as you can get to what you really want to do, but, primarily, work to finish and move on. Your career will last beyond your student days, but you have to get there first.

I didn't have an advisor (in math) until about your stage.

I'll note that there is another option that may be open to you. I mention it for completeness, but it is a difficult path to follow. Some students work without much of any advice from an advisor, being very self directed. They need a formal signature and some letters at the end, but the behavior during the course of studies is more like that of a colleague, rather than as a student. You need to arrange this sort of relationship in advance, of course, but it works for some.


Using first person or third person in papers? Are there written or unwritten rules for avoiding the use of first-person while writing research papers? I was advised at the beginning of my grad school to avoid use of first person - but I still don't know why I should do this.

I have seen that, at many places, authors refer to themselves are "the authors" and not "we". At the same time, I have also seen use of first-person to a good extent.

Do these things differ in different Journals and Conferences (and in different disciplines as well - mine happens to be CS)?

@earthling's accepted answer -- to use the passive voice -- is perhaps the convention in certain disciplines, but it is crucial to note that the active voice is the convention in others. Using the passive voice will make a paper sound daft and amateurishly pompous in certain communities.

My preference is very much for the active voice, first person (plural in almost all cases). This is also the most prevalent convention in my community (applied CS).

The strongest argument (and it is a very strong one!) against passive voice is that it removes all responsibility from the doer: it leaves ambiguity as to who did what, which is crucial for proper attribution in scientific writing.

For example:

  The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. The software was implemented in Java.

Who implemented the methods? The authors of the current paper or Franklin and his pals? Who should be contacted if there's errors in the software? Who's to credit and who's to blame?

Even aside from ambiguity, in the hands of a deceptive author, the passive voice could be used to subtly claim credit for others' work.

  The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. These methods were extended to incorporate the inputs previously described.

... the authors make it sound a bit like they did the extending, but maybe they didn't?

The second argument against the omnipresent passive voice is more subjective: that for many people (including me), it sucks to read, it sucks all humanity from the writing, any modesty it provides is entirely false, and it just generally sounds pompous.

So if using the active voice, which person to use? Again this is convention, but talking about yourself in the third person is again considered silly in many communities (although mandatory in some journals!). Also using the third-person can introduce the same ambiguities regarding what was your work and what was the work of others:

  The methods of Franklin et. al. were taken. The authors extended these methods to incorporate the inputs previously described.

Leaving convention aside, first person is the only voice with a clear objective argument in favour of it: it avoids ambiguity as to who did what!

All arguments for passive voice refer to subjective matters of style or (false) modesty. (Aside from which, I feel that first person active voice is a more natural style!)

However, you should follow the convention of the venue you are submitting the paper to!

See these letters to Nature, for more on the debate.
(The second author sounds ridiculously pompous to me.)


Etiquette for dealing with supervisor comments on written work I have a lot of respect for my supervisor; I get very good feedback from them, they are very knowledgeable in their field and I feel that they want me to do well in my reseach. When I submit written work, my supervisor adds comments and then returns, which I think is fairly standard procedure.

Short Version: Is it appropriate after receiving comments on written work to respond with: "I've addressed 90 of these comments but would like to discuss the remaining 10, which I was unable to resolve."

Long Version: I find that comments on written work usually fall into the following four categories:

The comment is justified and I can resolve and close it. (~90%)
The comment asks for clarification of the text. (~4%)
The comment is not justified due to them misunderstanding my text, due to my text not having been written in a clear and/or unambiguous enough manner.(~3%)
The comment is not justified and the text is clear. (~3%)

For the first two types, I can usually just update my work and move on. It's the last two that I'm not too sure how to deal with. Do I ignore or flag for discussion (as well as clarifying where relevant)? I have been flagging these but feel that I annoy my supervisor by doing so (likely since they are very busy with other work). The alternative is to ignore but then I worry that my supervisor will notice later that I haven't applied the change. Another option for the second (and third) bullet is that I clarify my text and move on and I do do this sometimes but on other occasions I feel it requires further discussion in order to convey the correct meaning.

It is an important acquired skill to know when to gently push back against your supervisor or referees in your field of study.

You should not implement suggestions you are not comfortable with without asking for clarifications.  You need to know when to hold ground and defend your position in a courteous but firm way, and this might as well be in discussions with an open-minded and competent thesis director: you may have to yield in the end but in many cases gentle arguments are synonymous to constructive discussions.


Research paper with experimental results from a small amount of data I have written a research paper in image processing that I will be submitting to an IEEE conference. I have proposed a new method to detect 'X' in images. However, due to hardware failure I could acquire only 4 sets of images. Thus, I have applied my method only on 4 images and I have also compared the results of previous two methods in literature by applying them to the same 4 images. The results obtained by my method are much better.

My question is, is it OK if I submit the paper showing results only on 4 images? The previous two papers have demonstrated their method on around 10 images or less. Also, is it OK to quantitatively compare the results (accuracy in percent) with just four images?

The amount of experimental evidence that is needed in order to adequately demonstrate a result depends strongly on the current state of the art that you are comparing against.

In some cases, even a single instance will be interesting and publishable, as there is much knowledge that can be gleaned from it. See, for example, the discovery of homo naledi: even though specimens have, to the best of my knowledge, only been found in the one cave, they are nevertheless clearly of interest and scientifically significant.  On the opposite end of the scale, if you want to assert that you have a better method of determining significant websites than PageRank, then it will likely be difficult to convince readers unless you apply to datasets of a similar scale to the "whole internet" scale that PageRank is routinely applied to.

Without knowing details about your exact image problem, it is difficult to know how much can be learned from a single image.  In general, image processing is a very well developed field in which most things are applied to large data sets, so my zero-knowledge guess would be that you need more data (though since you say the prior papers have <10 images, it may otherwise).  On the other hand, you might be doing something where four images are actually significant.  Finally, you can always send it in anyway and see what feedback you get.


How to mention analysis tools/functions developed during a thesis I am just about to finish my Master thesis. During the analysis, I wrote two functions which simplify certain tasks and put them into a R package. Furthermore, I extended an existing R package by parallelizing it.

While these actions do not have any value for the scientific outcome of my thesis and just simplified my analysis by saving me time, I wonder if I should mention these tasks within my thesis?

If yes, in which section? My idea was to put it in a section in the discussion called something like "additional outcomes of this work" and link to the specific packages on my Github account. However, as the package I wrote is not yet published to the public and the package I parallelized is not yet updated, I question myself if I have enough "serious stuff to mention".

If not, what are the reasons for not mentioning such results in a scientific work? If I would be the supervisor, I would like to know about such outcomes of a thesis although they just affect the technical analysis part.

If one-sentence descriptions would be enough for another researcher to replicate your work, you owe the reader nothing more. I would only link to a code repository if it were both topical and substantial (and if it were, that code might be a major theme of the paper).


How to find possible donors? In the US universities, many positions are endowed by donors. Is it possible/common for individual academics to directly contact possible donors with some plans? If so, how one can find possible donors?

For instance, an academic can propose a plan to university officials for establishing an innovative research center. University officials check if they can raise fund for the plan or not. In parallel, the person can individually find donors to raise the necessary funds.

How this is handled probably varies between universities, so you should check what is considered customary or acceptable at yours.  I don't think there would be any explicit rules against contacting potential donors yourself, but it could antagonize the administration.  Securing a large donation is often a lengthy process of building a long-term relationship with the donor, identifying shared goals, and convincing the donor that this would be the best use of their money.  U.S. universities have special staff who are (or at least should be) skilled at handling this, and they would probably not appreciate individual faculty members interfering.  Working with them would probably be more effective and would keep the university administration on your side.

A further issue is that it's not good for anyone if competing faculty members try to convince the same donor to support their project instead of the competition.  It's better to sort this out at the university level, rather than undermining each other.

The best case scenario for fundraising by an individual faculty member is if they already have a personal connection with a potential donor who is not otherwise being asked for funding.  If you are not in this position, then it will be difficult to identify the right people, and you are better off seeking professional advice from the administration.


What is a Chartered Scientist/Engineer & how do you become one? British societies (and commonwealth countries) offer the title of chartered scientist/engineer.

Is it based on my education only or work experiences (and research outcome such as publications)? How do they judge an application?
Do they need a final degree for the process: do they just contact my university to verify the degree or must I have obtained the degree from specific universities (e.g., accredited programs)?
Is this British professional qualification useful outside the commonwealth countries? For instance if applying for a job in US or Germany?

I'm basing my answer on Ireland, where my Brother became a Chartered Engineer.

In relation to the points of your question.

Normally in Ireland you obtain a Bachelors (Hon) degree (up to 2012 now a masters degree) and can become an Associate member of the Engineer Institute. After a period of time, or either further study or in the workplace you may apply to become a Chartered Engineer Regulations here. I know in my brothers case for his application he had to write up any course he took after becoming a member and also any details of any project that he worked on.
It appears a masters degree is needed now but a Bachelors (Hon) degree awarded up to 2012 will be accepted up to 2020. Page 7 of the regulations linked above have details of progression routes available.
There are a number of accords that ensure cross-border recognition of the qualification. Again as an example, my Brother was able to secure a Engineering Job with a European multinational Engineering firm in the UAE within about 6-8 weeks of moving there.

It is possible that the Irish and British systems are similar due to the historical link between the two countries. Unfortunately as per your question I have no information on the term Chartered Scientist.


Applying for two Assistant Professor job posts on different subjects, but very related I am preparing my application for two job positions for the same university on different subjects, but they are highly related to each other. Based on my knowledge and experience (PhD in applied machine learning and statistics), I am capabale of teaching both. Suppose, one job position is for assistant professor on statistics and the other is on statistical programming. Two different subjects, but (very) interrelated.
The question is: will it be detrimnetal or in anyway seen as a counterintuitive, or negative to my chances if I apply for both these positions given that they are so close to each other and is for the same university?

Assuming both jobs are in the same department: Ask the contact person. (If that contact person won't be on the hiring committee, then get in contact with someone who is.)
Assuming both jobs are in different departments: (IMO) Departments are independent and two applications will not overlap at the department level. (They will, of course, overlap within the university.) I see no reason not to apply for both.
(Traditionally, this would have been easy: You'd write two applications, put them inside two envelopes, and put both envelopes inside a third along with an extra covering letter explaining that you're applying for both positions. You could even mention in both applications that you're applying for both positions. These days, with automated systems, this might not be possible. Depending on the system you're being forced to use, perhaps you can manage something along these lines.)


Dear PIs: How can a new hire politely probe you for details? How can a new postdoc joining a lab probe their PIs for more information concerning the project they are going to be working on, what skills they need to acquire to prepare for the job, ...

Just ask, actually. But a good way would be to ask for a list of publications of the group and a list of colleagues you would be working with. You could then introduce yourself to one or more of them and ask for information so that you don't need to ask too much of the PI.

Some groups will have already made some or all of this available on a web site associated with the institution or the project. You could get started there if it exists.

I'm assuming that you already have been offered a position, rather than just being in the application stage.

You could even consider visiting the lab and meeting a few people if that is an option. Speaking with other postdocs might be especially valuable.


Literature searches in publications when you have limited access to journals I'm currently at an institution that has a phenomenal library system.  I think every journal article or book I've ever needed, no matter how old or obscure, was available to me.  I consider myself very fortunate, and always try to hold on to resources that I may not have access to in the future.  I may be transitioning to a new institution soon, where a colleague of mine tells me the library is significantly smaller, and has far less access to journals, especially to those in science/engineering, which can be pretty pricey.

I'm concerned that in the future my manuscripts will be rejected because my literature searches will be limited to only the journals I have access to.

I was trained to never cite articles that I have not read, understood and could justifiably show are relevant to my work; I agree with that philosophy, so picking citations as "filler" is not something I am comfortable doing.  If all that is available is an abstract, I know that can help, but it's no substitute for the article itself.

I know that reviewers and editors are supposed to consider your contribution as a whole, and not just look at whether or not you cited the articles they think you should have, but the world is an imperfect place.

For those at institutions with limited journal subscriptions/small library systems, how do you justify your literature searches that are missing articles that the reviewers and editors feel are necessary?  Aside from your research contribution itself, assuming it is sound, worthwhile, and well-written, is it just the case that, those at institutions with fewer resources inherently have to publish in more accepting (less competitive) journals by default?

UPDATE  Thanks for everyone's interest and suggestions.  The answers so far have focused on how to get those tough-to-find sources, but I'd really like to see some suggestions on how to handle the other side:  communicating reference shortfalls to reviewers when the aforementioned suggestions don't pan out.  Thoughts?

You have several options - but they'll all take a bit more time. For one, check if your university can get access to articles "on loan" which usually just means another university sends you the pdf. Alternatively, check the corresponding authors university website. Often, they'll put their publications there, or on researchgate. Finally, if you can't find it via other methods, just email the corresponding author. A quick email letting them know you want to cite their work, but your university doesn't have access to the journal/book, and they'll usually be more than happy to email it to you (we all want to increase our citation counts!).


Should Textbook chapters Contain a "Summary" Section I am far enough along with an introductory textbook in the computing field that it looks like I might finish.  For each chapter so far, I've written a final "Summary" section that recapitulates the most important points.  I've begun to worry that students will read the summary sections only and thereby miss the other gems of knowledge in my deathless prose.  (After all, the summary can't contain everything, and if something isn't important, why include it at all?)
It is my intention that the summaries reinforce the most important points in each chapter and so are an aid to learning for the student who has read the chapter.  My worry is that there will be students who believe, incorrectly, that a page or two of summary covers the whole chapter.
Is there research, pro or con, about the usefulness / harmfulness of summary sections in textbooks?  (I've looked and haven't found anything, but I'm a computer scientist and so am out of my field.)

I've been struggling with this for months.  I think I've found the answer to my implied question in the words of another textbook author, Ken Saladin.
"...tell students what they should know about, but not what to know about it."
Following Saladin's advice, I've re-titled the summary sections Summary of Learning Objectives. Each summary section now starts with the following:

This section of the chapter tells you the things you should know about, but not what you should know about them. To test your knowledge, discuss the following concepts and topics with a study partner or in writing, ideally from memory.

That's nearly a direct quote from Saladin's suggestion.  I hope the first sentence will dissuade students from thinking they can read the summaries only.
I suggest those interested in the question read Dr. Saladin's entire, but short, blog post: https://blog.taaonline.net/2020/02/textbook-pedagogy-improving-chapter-summaries-encourages-collaborative-learning/


How to select a publishing venue for interdisciplinary research? I am curious to hear some words of advice on how to select a publishing community for multi-disciplinary topics.

Your contribution is that methods in area A, which is your main area, can solve problems in B more efficiently than traditionally used methods from area C.

Where do you publish, A, B, or C? You are contributing a new application domain to your main area A, along with theory that supports the bridge between A and B, but your reviewers are not familiar with domain B and do not find it relevant. You are contributing new tools to the problem domain B. Finally, all of the related work is in C.

This is CS research, if that helps.

The answer of jakebeal seems pretty good to me, but there is another option (to be considered with care, as the line between wise publishing and salami publishing is rather thin): to publish two papers in both A and B. The first paper would describe in depth the technique of the method and could assume knowledge in A; the second paper would assume the conclusion of the first paper (proofs and evidence and technical discussions being there) and would explain how good the method is for the B-problem you are considering, i.e. it would focus on the application of the method. The point of publishing two papers is that community B might have a hard time getting into the technical details of the A-heavy method, while you need to have them documented somewhere.

The first paper might only get published in a lesser venue if community A is not appealed to much by it, but I guess that if community B is excited by your work you might be able to publish the second paper in a first-tier journal or conference. And, as mentioned in a comment, it might be that you have a good starting point for a career in B -- one need not stay in the same field for 40 years, and switching can potentially happen anytime, given the opportunities.


Should you always report to faculty with equal or higher rank? We're restructuring but the new org chart has me reporting to an associate prof, instead of an equal-ranked full professor.  Is this defamatory or typical?

Universities are not like the army, in which your commanding officer is always someone of higher rank than you.

For instance, it is common for an academic department to have a chair or head who is drawn from among the faculty.  Many (most?) universities allow an associate professor to serve as chair (some would even allow an assistant professor).  In such cases, an associate professor can certainly be the "boss" of a full professor.

I don't think there is anything unusual or worrisome about the proposed organization you're describing.


Is tenure also meant for becoming an assistant professor? The announcement below from Japan sounds like one becomes an assistant professor at the end of the tenure process. I thought the tenure is always meant for becoming associate professor.

Terms of Appointment:

  Evaluated in the final year of the term, and if satisfactory, eligible
  to become a tenured assistant professor as of April 1, 2018.

Japan's academic system is still closer to the continental system where there is only full Professor (教授） in a department and several assistant professors (助教授）and a mixture of adjunct and full-time readers/lecturers　(講師）. The assistant professors can be tenured.

Some schools in Japan are moving to the American system where there can be several full professors in a department and there are now some colleges that are introducing the category of associate professor　(准教授）).

Japanese labor laws tend to protect full-time faculty, so you can assume that you have lifetime employment if you pass the first employment review -- if and only if you haven't been hired as a part-time (非常勤) or otherwise term-contract employee (非正規雇用).

In this case, it sounds like they want to emphasize that you are NOT being hired as part-time  or other non-tenure track (such as the new "jokyo" 助教 which is not the same as a tenure-track assistant professor 助教授).


What should I do if I want to withdraw my paper from a journal but they ignore my request? I submitted my paper seven months ago and it is still under review. I sent several emails to the handling editor but I didn't get any response except every time I sent an email the status date was changed. So I decided to withdraw my paper from journal and I have written a letter to the editor-in-chief  but he didn't reply except the status date was changed again! What should I do now?

One possibility to put this to an end would be to submit to another journal by an e-mail where you would explain the situation (the paper has been submitted elsewhere, you withdrew it when you realized it was not handled properly, and you got no acknowledgment of this withdrawal), and with a CC to the editor-in-chief of the first journal. That way, the editors of the new journal would know for certain that you withdrew before submitting again, and you would be covered from possible accusations by the first journal. However this corners the first journal in a difficult situation, so it might make them react violently; I would warn them before hand, and only use this as a last recourse.

You can also try to get advice and help from a senior in your field, who will know the editors and might help smooth things out.

A third possibility would be to contact a relevant committee in an academic society (EMS has an ethics committee that could be contacted about a publication in a math journal for example).


Will rejecting more papers than I accept reflect negatively on me as a reviewer? I made a little statistics about my review decisions. I found out that I reject way more papers than I accept. I honestly try to accept the reviewed papers, I read them carefully and my review are always long. But most papers I review are low quality (in my opinion). Some colleagues told me that I should be more gentle in my review, as this will affect my profile somehow (negatively of course). Is that true ?

Also: should I adapt the toughness of my review to the quality of the journal/conference I am reviewing for?

It is of course impossible to say if you are overly critical. But, some statistics might help. With prestigious journals the rejection rate might be 90% (very high in any case). I am Editor in Chief of a smaller journal and we have a steady 50% rejection rate. The extremely high rejection rates in some journals come from limited space, in my case we simply impose strict guidelines and the rejections come from reviewers assigned by associate editors. So the rate in our case is fairly certainly upheld by what the community sees as acceptable or not.

So if you end up finding you reject large numbers (at least around 50%) I would not say that it is out of the ordinary. I do not of course know what typical rejection rates are in the journals for which you do reviews, so the number may of course vary.

So getting to the question of how this affects you. I very much doubt that you get a negative effect by being a fair reviewer. If you do many reviewes over time and you are not considered fair, I am sure you would notice the numbers of appointments dropping. If you get re-invited by the same journals/editors, I think they appreciate your work and I would take that as a sign that you do fine.

Should you try to adapt to the journal? In general, no. You should apply your knowledge and understanding to provide a critical review of the submitted work. An editor should take your comments along with comments from one or more additional reviewers and provide a recommendation to the authors. You are not solely responsible in this process! If the journal is such that it publishes material with which you are familiar but where its audience is in a  different field, you may consider handling the paper differently, but obviously not ignoring errors and misconceptions.


Emailing potential supervisors in the US before submitting application I'm applying to PhD programs this year. How common is it to email potential supervisors before submitting my application, asking if they have a spot available? Could this improve my chances of admission? I've heard that this is the norm in European countries. What about in the US?
I have a masters degree (Mathematics) and know roughly the area of research I'm interested in.

As @Buffy comments, the other answers do not seem so accurate about R1 and R2 grad math departments in the U.S. That is, funding is mostly as Teaching Assistants, administered through the department, not by individuals, and funding-and-admission decisions are also made at a department level, by a committee.
Yes, having a faculty person ardently promoting your case to the admissions committee is definitely a good thing, but is not necessarily decisive, depending on that faculty person's record of following through (or not), mentoring, etc.
Yes, asking faculty ... not whether they "have a spot", but... whether they are currently taking PhD students can be a relevant question. Both people with lots of students already, or who aim to retire very soon, might say that they are not currently taking more PhD/research students. It would obviously be useful to know that, rather than show up and be negatively surprised.
In any case, as other people have commented, do NOT write generic emails with a huge bcc list. Take the trouble to address people by name (!!!), at the very least! And if you describe your own interest as X, which is not much connected to what the faculty person does, don't email them at all.
True, people seem to often "reckon" that sending inaccurate emails to people is harmless, because they can just delete them. It's not that I myself keep a grudge list of people who've sent me spammish emails... but it is fairly antisocial to spam people, in my opinion.


Comparative quality of articles in questionable journals This question on citing from publications on Beall's list got me thinking...

The list itself details predatory publishers, who follow bad practices or bad business models. However, is there any evidence that the papers themselves that are contained within those journals are any "worse" than articles in non-predatory, low impact factor journals? I'm not comparing to Science or Nature here, just any other run-of-the-mill journal. By worse, I mean:

Poor research practice
Lack of citation of previous relevant research
Higher incidence of fraud
Non-academic writing
...?

Does anyone know of a study that looked at this?

Maybe what I'm about to write was obvious to all.  But just in case:

As I understand it, a "predatory journal" is a journal that will accept anything that is submitted to it so as to financially profit from the authors (and the buyers of the journal, perhaps).  Moreover, they are not forthcoming about this practice because that would drastically lower their submissions (not to mention sales!).  I would guess that most predatory journals would not want to accept papers of the sort created by Nate Eldredge's wonderful mathgen package: although it did happen at least once, I'll bet that incident was embarrassing (or rather, recognized as working against the game they are trying to play) for the Advances in Pure Mathematics.  If that journal published a full issue of gibberish papers, then I think it would seriously jeopardize their profit line and possibly cause them to fold (and yes, get replaced by the next journal, but evidently people like Beall are paying attention not just to the journals themselves but the publishing companies behind them and even the people behind the publishing companies).

Sometimes predatory journals will still publish your paper if you tell them that at the end that you can't or won't pay.  I found this strange at first, but I think I understand it better now: these journals want some papers that are actually for real in order in order to acquire a penumbra of plausible legitimacy for all of their papers.  At the higher end you get journals most of whose papers are written by real researchers who need their work published somewhere and for various reasons they have chosen not to go through the time and effort of a selective journal.  (I don't mean to imply that this practice is not still shady: of course pretending there is contentful, critical peer review when in fact there isn't is highly, highly academically inappropriate.)

What's my point?  I don't think there is going to be any uniform sense in which papers submitted to predatory journals are worse than papers published in "real" journals.  Demonstrably, some of these papers are real papers.  However, if you agree that part of the definition of a predatory journal is that they accept virtually 100% of all submitted papers that are not too clearly gibberish (as well as some that are!), then it would be an amazingly strong indictment of the peer review process not to believe that the papers which have gone through a selection process and are among the X% of accepted papers for some number X bounded away from 100 are going to be, on average, better in every way than papers published by predatory journals.

Is there any evidence of this?  I sure think so.  Any kind of statistical study is either going to concentrate on a very limited range of journals which need not be of direct interest to any given reader or going to take a massive amount of work.  I would rather suggest: select a predatory journal in your field and a legitimate, though run-of-the-mill journal in your field.  Page through, say, the articles published by each one in 2010 (or some reasonable subset thereof).  First evaluate the articles yourself: can you see the difference?  Then look at official reviews of the article (in mathematics there are two internationally recognized services that write reviews of every single math article published -- except that certain journals they drop as not being worth their attention; I believe that similar things exist in many other academic fields).  Then track citation statistics of the articles.  Is there a difference?  Is the difference subtle enough to warrant statistical analysis, or does it just stare you right in the face?  I have done a little bit of this practice myself.  I am getting inspired to try it more systematically.