What is the etymology of "Assistant Professor"? In the US, "Assistant Professor" is a junior rank among permanent university faculty. Generally, Assistant Professors are independent researchers with more or less the same job responsibilities as more senior faculty (Associate Professors or Full Professors), but without the perks of tenure. That is, they teach classes, advise graduate students, apply for grants, and have administrative responsibilities. (In other countries, the term may have a slightly different meaning. It is roughly equivalent to a Lecturer in the UK system.)

As far as I know, Assistant Professors are not assistants to anyone. So why the name?

Usually an Assistant X is someone who works under the supervision of X and helps X carry out their duties, but that is not the case here. In contrast, other university titles containing "Assistant", such as "Research Assistant" or "Teaching Assistant", do fit the more conventional definition of the word.

After a bit of searching, I have not been able to find any information about the origin of the term. Although it has apparently been in use since 1827. Does anyone know more about the history of the term?

Perhaps the job has evolved from a true assistant position into what it is today while the title has remained the same. Alternatively, it may be a (mis)translation or the meaning of "Assistant" has changed. If someone can find a source documenting a history like that, I would happily accept that as an answer.

The OP dictionary is inaccurate.  The term assistant professor was in use prior to 1827.

In the 1805 book The College of Fort William in Bengal there is an article dated 20 September 1804, beginning on page 225, that uses the term several times, to name several assistant professors of various languages.  The term is used in this article at pages 226, 227 and 228, and the book also list four assistant professors on page 237.

Also, the 1801 The New Universal Biographical Dictionary, and American Remembrancer, volume 4 says, under the entry for James Hay Beattie:

  On the 4th June, 1787, the king, upon the unanimous recommendation of the university, appointed him assistant professor of moral philosophy and logic, although he was not then nineteen years of age.

And volume 2 of the same Dictionary, in the entry for Euler says:

  he was called to St. Petersburgh, and was admitted as an assistant professor in the university of that city ... In 1730, he was promoted to the professorship of natural philosophy; and in 1733 he succeeded his friend D. Bernoulli in the mathematical chair.

However, there is an earlier (1785) version of the Euler biography that uses the term "joint professor" instead of "assistant professor".

The 1802 book Travels through Sweden, Finland and Lapland to the North-cape, in the years 1798 and 1799 discusses assistant professors, saying for example concerning University of Abo:

  In the branch of theology there are six professors, three assistant professors, and three private teachers or magiltri docentes: of law, two professors and two assistant professors : of medicine, three professors and two assistant professors : of philosophy, ten professors and twenty assistant professors: of genteel exercises...

Also, in the US, a law was passed 29 April 1812 concerning the Military Academy (meaning West Point):

  each of the foregoing professors to have an assistant professor, which assistant professor shall be taken from the most prominent characters of the officers or cadets, and receive the pay and emoluments of captains, and no other pay or emoluments, while performing these duties.

So, at least according to this US law, the assistant professor was assigned to a particular professor.


PhD approved by advisor, rejected by examiners This has recently happened to an acquaintance of mine.  A bit of background, in Australia, we do not 'defend' the thesis, we submit it to be examined by, usually, 3 academics (in the country or overseas).

The situation is, the thesis was approved by the advisor, after several drafts and some feedback.  However, when it has come back from the examiners, it has come back as 'failed'.  Some of the errors detected are ones that the advisor should have picked up on (as they are within their field of research).

Asides from the appeals procedure (dependent on the policies of the University), what are some practical options?  Should they start again? Take her research elsewhere?

Edit for clarification:

This has not happened to me, it has happened to an acquaintance (as said above).
My acquaintance submitted her thesis well within time and underwent several drafts (as said above).
The advisor is young/new to the academic scene.

It is difficult to answer the question without also judging the supervision and other aspects of the student-advisor "relationship". I have been involved in a case which also resulted in a fail. I, being non-Australian) got the impression the thesis was done either by meeting a time deadline or by the student "deciding" so. I cannot imagine any advisor would recommend the thesis as completed in the shape it was. I could not, as examiner, figure out what rules made the thesis judged as competed, it would simply not go in my own system.

In my case we bring in an examination committee from other universities and mostly from abroad. The thesis must stand an international scrutiny. This also means the advisors and students are aware of this requirement. In your case, as well as the one I experienced, I ask myself what sort of system is in palce to safekeep the general scientific standard?

As you can see there are many open questions which makes a simple answer difficult to provide. In some cases it might be possible to use the feedback to improve a thesis. In the US system it is common that a thesis is given revisions to complete. In my system (Sweden) all this quality work has to be made before time, there is no recouperation after a fail. Hence, the options depend on what is possible within the Australian system. If it is possible to revise and re-defend? then that is one way. Tpo take the work elsewhere might be possible but if the work does not stand international scrutiny then that option does not look bright. If there are deeper misunderstandings that lead to the verdict then it might be possible to claim a "mistrial" but failinga PhD thesis is not a good thing under any circumstances. I am just left wondering why it happened, not so much to put blaim but it seems something(s) must have failed in the process and finding out the reasons may provide a better view of possibilities to go forward.

finally, start again? another 3-5 years ona different project will require both a strong interest and financing (I would presume). It is possible but usually, I do not think anyone would subject themselves to another PhD period lightheartedly.

EDIT:

An example that just occurred.


What might be some reasons to ask to stop reviewing an article by the editor? Recently I have been asked by a journal to review an article as a referee. I did it within 3 days, and the very next day another mail came asking me to review another article. I was reviewing it when, aft after 2 days, the editor sent me an email saying I don't need to review it anymore. What might be the reasons behind this?

There are many possible reasons. Perhaps the author(s) withdrew it. Perhaps the editor made a decision somehow, though given the time, probably a reject.
Of course, you can ask the editor, and you may or may not get a real reason.


Why is 3.0 GPA used as cut-off for job offers, etc.? My GPA is 2.97 and I am a junior in University. My resume is pretty strong, having around 2 years experience in the industry as a software engineer. I also include work samples with my resume, including small games and web apps. Recently I have been applying to several co-op jobs. In a few of them, I have been contacted by the employer and asked "Do you have a 3.0 GPA?". I respond honestly and say "no". Many of them seem to completely decline based on this alone, despite everything else I have on my resume.

This always seemed odd to me, because in and of itself, this focus on grade-point average influences poor academic behavior. It influences students to avoid taking anything challenging because the risk is too high. Also, many students have the advantage of being full-time students, whereas people like me work full-time while in school.

So why do companies base so much on GPA? And why is the 3.0 cut-off so strictly enforced?

“why do companies base so much on GPA? — And why is the 3.0 cut-off so strictly enforced?” — Because it is practical! As any numerical indicator, it allows one to make decisions very fast. Thus, it is not used the main decision factor, but simply to weed out a large fraction of applications, thus reducing the amount of work required by individual examination of the remaining applicants' files.

Does it mean that some exceptional applicants, with poor GPA grades, are left out? Yes. Is it understandable from the company's point of view? Yes, also: you have to compare the amount of work it would require to give each and every application a thorough review (huge) to the risk of loosing a potential top-notch-collaborator-who-had-a-poor-GPA.

Why 3.0? — I'm not sure there's any good reason for that, and it would probably depend on the company/program. But 3.0 is a nice round number, easy to remember, and it falls in a convenient place in the statistical distribution: if you set the limit to 2.5, your threshold does not filter out enough applications; if you set it to 3.5, you're at risk of loosing to many good applicants (making you rely too much on this simple numerical indicator).

How to combat it, if your GPA is lower than 3.0? — Rounding is one trick you might try (2.97 is 3.0, if two significant digits). More promising, though, are getting very strong recommandations, if possible from inside the company. Whatever the announced requirements are, there usually are ways to get your application file into the right pile, if you can get someone to speak for you.


When are reference letters requested during applications for a professorship (W1/W2/W3) in Germany? When applying for a professorship (W1/W2/W3) in Germany one always has to list three and sometimes more previous employers/supervisors who are willing to write a reference letter. At which stage of the application process are these people ususally contacted and asked to write this reference letter? Before the applicants are invited, after the invitations are sent or after the visits/talks of the applicants?

I've never heard of the custom of requiring the candidate to provide a list of references for a faculty position in Germany; the hiring process is very different from the US and UK. The procedure is usually as follows (there's bound to be a more complete answer on this site, so I'm summarizing):

The hiring committee meets and decides on a text for the announcement as well as on criteria by which applicants are excluded (wrong subfield, no service teaching experience, that sort of thing).
After the deadline, the hiring committee meets again and selects (usually) four to eight candidates for a formal interview.
After the interviews are completed, the hiring committee meets again and decides which of the candidates to keep in consideration. It is for these candidates (usually three or four) that reference letters are requested -- but in a specific fashion: Two or three eminent experts in the subfield are selected by the committee (often beforehand, i.e., in step 1) who are then asked to review and rank all candidates. Needless to say, previous employers or supervisors are not the best candidates for this (but sometimes can't be avoided).
Based on the reference letters and their own opinions from the interviews, the committee decides on a ranked list of candidates to be offered the position. Then the administration takes over...

Note: I'm going by my own field -- mathematics -- here, details and especially the numbers may differ in other fields. But from what I've seen of the process in other fields, the general procedure is the same. If individual reference letters are indeed required in addition to the comparative ones, I'd assume they are requested as late as possible -- and only if necessary -- to avoid needless work for the writer. (There is significantly less of a "reference letter industry" in German academia.)


How to increase the productivity of undergraduate research assistants? I supervise a few undergraduates doing independent study and internships in Computer Science. Some of their tasks are to assist me with various back-burner research projects. I can offer them college credit in exchange for their work. However, their labor is difficult to utilize. Their commitment may only be for a few hours a week, they can take a long time to ramp up work, and they sometimes disappear mid-semester. What strategies are out there to make the most of working with this mercurial resource?

Accept that what you are doing when working with undergraduate researchers is teaching and developing young scientists. Make that mental shift, and your view of productivity changes enormously.

Even the very best undergraduates I've had -- students who now have R1 faculty positions or equivalent -- were time-sinks at first and break-even after a year or two as undergraduates. But increasing productivity is not why I invited them into the lab.  What was so cool was to see them turning into independent scientists while in my lab.

I suppose if you really care about productivity rather than developing scientists, assign them very simple tasks: scraping data or building interfaces or whatever. But if you can manage to see productivity as students building skill and confidence in independent research? The sky is the limit.


How to politely reply to adviser for his mistake I sent one abstract to my supervisor, which he approved and said it is fine. Later on, when the same abstract was published and circulated on university email, he sent me an email and stating that this Abstract is not good and you should have checked it with me before sending for circulation. I have his email of approval and I know he also does know that I checked this abstract with him before submission but seems he want me to take the blame. How do I cope with this situation, I don't want the relation turning bad or aggressive for both of us.

I suggest a slightly longer response than Nicole's answer that allows for a somewhat graceful exit and has less potential for coming across as reproachful between the lines:

  I am not sure which part you are referring to; you did approve the abstract as such (see attached), but were you maybe referring to another piece of text?


Should I ask for each recommendation letter separately? I will be applying for a PhD this year. So, I would like to ask for recommendation letters soon. Should I ask for each recommendation letter separately, or may I group email all the letter writers? Is there any general benefits or caveats in either approach?

My primary supervisor would like me to stay for a PhD at my current university. So, the group email might make the case seem "more decided". I'd like to avoid any further discussion on staying, since I thought to do so earlier (kind of promised) but have changed my mind since. It might negatively affect the letter to some extent.

I would recommend that you do not send a group mail to professors you plan to ask for help. It will look somewhat lazy, and some may be offended that you were not willing to take the time to write a separate email (which should barely take any time). Another reason why this is bad is that hopefully each recommendation will not be saying the exact same thing, and you may want to reflect differences when you ask for the letters.

In fact, I would probably recommend approaching the professors (or others) that you plan to ask in person first. Of course, this depends on your relationship with the professor-- if they are very busy and have already previously agreed to write a letter then this step might not be necessary. However, when asking professors for letters it might seem a bit impersonal if you do not ask in person, and you also will not be able to gauge their reaction to be asked if the correspondence is online.


How to make a software documentation "officially" citable? We are currently finishing the implementation of a scientific software library. It's the first project of this type for me and I'm curious, how to make the software citable in a similar way to Molpro or R?

I was thinking about writing a short paper introducing the library, which could be subsequently cited. But I'm not sure, how to deal with the different versions? I don't think it's possible to write just some "changelog" paper once a year to summarize new released version.

There are about as many approaches to citing software (and making software citable) as there are software packages.

One way is to create a DOI for your software via Zenodo. This DOI can then be updated for each version of the software. Another way is to write a paper about the design and features of your software and see that it gets published somewhere. There are numerous journals for this -- for example, SoftwareX or, for mathematical software, the ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software. (Disclaimer: I'm a co-Editor-in-Chief of the latter.)

There are numerous other projects that have guidelines of how to best do this. You may want to take a look at the Force11 project, for example, as well as the outcomes of the WSSSPE series of workshops.


Publishing in Open Access journals I heard somewhere that publishing in open access (OA) journals is not a good strategy and such papers may be less valuable (specially for who want to apply for a PhD program in EU and North America)! However, I think this is not a strong remark but publishing in low level and paid journals form unknown publishers is thought to be less constructive for the resume. Specifically, I mean journals and magazines by highly esteemed publishers such as Elsevier, Springer and Hindawi.

What's the fact about OA journals?

Strategically, it gives better chances to aim for journal that are recognized by your peers. This need not be related to openness of the journal, but it is true that there are fewer well-recognized OA journals than subscription journals. Ask around (to several peoples, taste can vary in a field).

Do not forget that you can in many cases publish green Open-Access (self-deposit into an Open repository) your manuscript even if you publish at a paywalled journal. This gives a good compromise between openness and strategy for beginning careers. Information about what you can do publisher by publisher and journal by journal is available at Sherpa/Romeo.

Last remark: judging a paper by the journal it is published in is quite bold, but judging it by the publisher of said journal is far worse. Elsevier has crappy journals in its portfolio, as most publishers do.


Formulating research interests — context/motivation or not? How do I formulate research interests in my CV?  When talking about my field, I like to include some context, such as:

  The climate of planet Earth is a complex system. Detailed observations are needed for improving our understanding of individual components and their interaction. Additionally, long-term, large-scale monitoring is required to study the climate system in its entirety. Observations from space are important for both kinds of observations. I am particularly interested in applying space-based observations the atmosphere, for example, for the hydrological cycle. Additionally, I think foo is important because of bar, and would like to research foo deeper.

But on a CV, space and attention are scarce.  An alternative would be:

  Space-based observations of the atmosphere
  Foo

But this appears a bit bald to me.  I think the context, the motivation, should be relevant: why are my research interests as they are?

What is a better alternative for describing research interests on a CV?

Don't even use bullets; just provide a list of keywords/phrases identifying your subfield.  At least in the US, departments ask for a separate research statement in addition to your CV.  That's the place to explain your research interests in detail and give them context; there's no need to do that in your CV, too.

For example, when I applied for faculty positions, my CV included the following lines between my contact information and my education history.

  Research Interests

  Algorithms, data structures, and lower bounds; computational and discrete geometry; computer graphics

I've served on the faculty recruiting committee in my (top-10 US computer science) department for several years; this approach seems both standard and effective.  Personally, when I read a CV, I only spend a second or two on the self-declared research interests and jump straight to the publication list.

(Posdef's answer suggests giving more context in your cover letter, but I think this is pointless.  I don't know anyone who has ever read a cover letter.)


How do disabled computer scientists publish? Given that computer scientists publish in conferences, which typically require that presenters be present, how do computer scientists who are disabled, have broken legs due to a car accident, or have any similar travel restrictions, publish?

Equality of access for disabled people is a legal requirement for public services such as transport and buildings in many jurisdictions, particularly in the EU and North America. There are many disabled academics and researchers who teach, research and publish.

One only has to look at examples like the late Stephen Hawking to see how it is possible.


Is it fine to contact a conference organizer for references to prepare for the conference? I'm a PhD student in theoretical Physics. There will be an online conference in one subject I'm very interested in and in which I want to start doing research. I have studied a few papers on the subject but I'm still a beginner. In particular I don't know what can be done in the field and I'm in hopes that attending the conference will help with that.
In that case I think it could be a good idea to prepare myself for this conference studying some relevant papers. Is it OK to send an email to the organizer asking for some references which would be a good idea to study before attending?

I would recommend against this. Not that it is wrong, but that it is unlikely to get you anything you can't get yourself from a literature search. Most such conferences are recurring, perhaps annual. Find the proceedings of the conference for the previous few years and see what you find. The abstracts of articles may be enough to see what the landscape looks like, though a more careful reading is needed for methodology and such.
But the organizers are busy enough without doing a literature search on your behalf and would probably also suggest looking at previous proceedings.
Read widely to discover the terrain, and deeply to discover the gems.


Will an internship in biology benefit me when my major is not biology? I'm an undergraduate majoring in chemistry. But I'm very much interested in the field of biology too.

Will an internship in biology benefit me, say when I apply for graduate school? I don't yet know what I'll be specialising in later on. If I decide to specialise in biology, then all's good. But what if I stick with something primarily chemistry? Then will it look like I don't have enough experience in chemistry?

Also, can I ask my department's HOD or any other chemistry professor for a recommendation letter while applying for the internship in biology? Since he's a chemistry professor, even if I did ask and he did write me one, will that count for much? After all, it's going to talk about my skills, etc. in chemistry, and not biology.

On the other hand, if I didn't ask him for a recommendation letter and I asked only some of the Life Sciences professors for it, will it be unethical, or would he take offence? ( I have no idea about etiquette regarding these things)
I don't want to do something that's going to get me in his bad books.

I completed undergraduate summer internships in biology although I ultimately wound up applying (and attending) graduate school in psychology. Although the internship did not directly align with my current career path, at the time it helped me narrow down my professional interests. In applying for jobs and graduate school, my internships, regardless of discipline, were seen as evidence that I was motivated, organized, and had some experience in professional settings.

At the undergraduate level many skills (including solid record keeping, attention to detail, and proper lab technique) are transferable across scientific disciplines. Further, completing one internship outside your discipline shouldn't significantly stunt your ability to prepare for graduate school in chemistry.

Having a letter of support from any professor should be acceptable, provided it is a strong letter. In all likelihood, your advisor will know you the best and be able to write the most supportive letter. However, if a life sciences professor knows you well, a second letter or co-written letter might be helpful.


How would I justify that my work isn't just 'normal' design and creation Quick info. I'm a 4th year student (i.e. I'll be doing my masters when I complete my 4th year). Some of the work I'm doing now will however influence my masters.

One of my assignment questions in my research module is to come up with a few research strategies that would suit my research project. Whilst I cannot say exactly what my project is, it will in general be a new built system that will make decisions based on what rankings were given by people. (somthing similar to clicking the 'like' button on facebook or giving a review star rating for books as on Amazon.com).

I'm also using the following book (Researching information systems and computing by Briony J Oates) as a guide. I've identified the 'Design and Creation' research strategy as what would be the most fitting research strategy for my project seeing as I would be creating a new system. One of the questions in the evaluuation guide for the 'Design and Creation' research strategy is:

What makes this piece of work research and not 'normal' design and development work?

How would one go about answering such a question? What criteria would one have to look at to say that such a research project is an actual research project and just not your normal run of the mill application?

I should've read chapter 8, design and creation properly. The answer is in the textbook (Oates, B., Researching information systems and computing, 2009).

According to the author, the major differences are that in the typical software industry is that the less that is learnt or the less that needs to be discovered the more successful the project is deemed to be. If all is going according to plan then using existing knowledge, avoiding backtracking and changing of design or avoiding having to redo analysis would be seen as a part success. Having to change your design, backtracking and redoing analysis are perceived as a negative risk which needs to be mitigated. These risks could overrun the project constraints such as time, budget etc. Therefore industrial practitioners often leave out risky or uncertain parts of a project.

A researcher on the other hand focuses on these risky and uncertain items because tackling these risks and uncertainties successfully would lead to new knowledge being created. Hence you can claim to be doing research rather than 'normal' design and creation through the risk taking of your software product or process. You can further claim justification for your design by using theoretical underpinnings such as mathematical formulas and or formal methods from the field. You should also be able to say how the knowledge aquired from your design can be applied generally to other situations.


How to Remain Competitive at a Mediocre University? I am attending a university with a mediocre mathematics department. The courses at my school cover fewer topics and are less challenging than the same courses at top universities.

How can I avoid becoming behind in coursework compared to students at top universities?
How can I ensure that I am competitive when applying to mathematics graduate school?

Read as many mathematics books, lecture-notes, and published articles as possible. Not just "textbooks". Not just "undergraduate textbooks" as these contain very little substantive mathematics.

Even if your faculty people are not stellar mathematicians, they surely know some advanced mathematics and can give you guidance about what to read. Uninformed self-study can be a huge time-waster so you will want some direction to be productive and your mathematics faculty will be the best & most available people to provide you with productive guidance.

Definitely talk to faculty to get guidance! This can be done officially through a "reading course" or "directed study." It can also be done informally through frequent check-ins with interesting questions. Either way this will enable those faculty members to write excellent letters of recommendation about your interest and motivation based on your capacity to appreciate the things you will have read and your perceptive questions.

It's not so much whether you (as a novice) can handle random questions, which novices rarely can, but whether your sensibilities are heading in the right direction, which would be manifest in your reaction to substantial mathematics.


Plagiarism if different term used? I wrote my bachelor thesis but now I saw that from one source I mixed up a term, instead of term that was used I accidentally used a different one. this happened because I translated that from a language. And I saw that I put my quotation marks at the wrong place, I quoted only the last half of a sentence but I accidentally put my quotation marks more at the beginning of my sentence, even tho the beginning was not a direct quote from the source. Can they now accuse me of plagiarism?????

Screwing up a single small quotation in the manner that you describe could not reasonably be considered plagiarism.

While yes, it is true that you did not correctly attribute some words, from your description is appears that the attribution is not so much missing as misplaced.  Moreover, while I cannot entirely judge without reading the actual text, it seems likely that any reasonable reader would likely be able to tell from the context that you are not attempting to claim the quoted text as your own.

It's still good practice to go back and correct, if your institution allows it, but don't worry about being accused of plagiarism over a single typo-level error.


Is it plagiarism if only a short phrase or construct is the same? Suppose we have some text in a scientific journal article A. It is a verbatim copy of some text published in a related article B which is referenced by A, and this phrase is used to explain the same topic in both articles. However, the phrase itself is short, not a complete sentence and not very relevant (it could have been written in many different ways) but it seems the author of A has taken it from the original (B). Is this text plagiarism? I would rephrase it because it looks like a copy (it's unlikely it happened by chance given that the paragraphs in the two publications are related and the reference to B appears in a nearby paragraph) and that's not elegant according to my style and taste, but is there a general rule?

There is not a fixed set of rules for what is considered plagiarism (e.g., "5 or more consecutive, not quoted words"), although several guidelines are available. Unless entire paragraphs are copy-pasted, each case has to be evaluated on a single basis.

As for a partial sentence, it is likely not considered to be a bad case of plagiarism.

That said, it depends on what the actual sentence is about. Are those 500+ papers plagiarizing each others because of that partial sentence? Certainly not.

If the partial sentence was about a particular discovery reported in a particular paper, and that partial sentence was copied to a new paper as if the sentence belonged to the new paper, without a direct quotation.. that would likely be considered as a candidate for plagiarism. Quite for sure, it would be considered as plagiarism if a reference was missing, as well.

You might have some fun taking this Turnitin quiz on plagiarism.


What does a brief quick referee report mean? A rather prestigious mathematical journal asked me recently to referee a paper.
More precisely, they asked me to provide "a brief (but relatively quick) report".

Does this mean that this is only a pre-referee report? What should be included in such a report?

Some years ago, a few of the top mathematical journals began asking for "quick opinions" (or variants of this wording) on submitted papers, and this practice has spread a little since then.  A quick opinion is not a full referee report, but just an indication of whether the paper looks like it could plausibly meet the journal's high standards.  For example, are the main results truly exciting and important?  The idea is that separating the high-level evaluation from detailed examination of the proofs greatly speeds up the time until rejection for most papers.  This is good for authors, since nobody likes to wait nine months to hear that their paper wasn't remotely exciting enough for the Annals of Mathematics to accept, and it makes it easier to recruit good referees (offering a quick opinion is relatively easy, while full refereeing is harder but at least the paper is likely to make it worth your while).

Given that you describe the journal as "a rather prestigious mathematical journal", I'd bet that this is what's going on.  In that case, all you need to provide is a single-page report offering your conceptual evaluation of the paper (interest, importance, novelty) and whether it merits further, more detailed consideration.

However, I'd recommend asking the editor if there's any ambiguity, for example if they used the word "referee" to describe you (which to me would indicate a full report).  As an editor, I'm happy when referees ask for clarification, since it indicates that they are taking the process seriously.  And it's safer to ask than to spend time writing a report that may not be what the editor wanted.


What is a 'Chair' in British academia? I understand that a 'Chair' is a traditional title of a professor in the UK.
Nowadays, what is the difference, if any, between a Chair and a Professor in the UK?

It is the difference between the role or job and the person who is doing that job.
The person has achieved the status and title of Professor. That person can take the position of the "Chair of Computer Science at the University of Somewhere".
Sometimes a particular Chair will have been endowed or funded at a University and then a Professor is recruited to take that Chair. That  person could have  moved from another Chair at some other University.
Some of  the Chair endowments are quite old, like this example from 1702 in Cambridge: https://www.ch.cam.ac.uk/alumni/new-name-our-oldest-chair


How to get students to highlight academic text more effectively? When I give students readings (articles, textbooks, etc), they sometimes literally come to class with entire pages colored yellow with a highlighter. I cannot begin to understand how they discern that everything on a page is of equal value to know.

As such, I would like to know of some suggestions for how to teach my student how to approach highlighting academic texts effectively.

Don't.

Dunlosky, John, et al. "What works, what doesn't." Scientific American Mind 24.4 (2013): 46-53. -- What Doesn't Work:

  HIGHLIGHTING

  Students commonly report underlining, highlighting or otherwise
  marking material. It is simple and quick — but it does little to
  improve performance. In controlled studies, highlighting has failed to
  help U.S. Air Force basic trainees, children and remedial students, as
  well as typical undergraduates. Underlining was ineffective regardless
  of text length and topic, whether it was aerodynamics, ancient Greek
  schools or Tanzania.

  In fact, it may actually hurt performance on some higher-level tasks.
  One study of education majors found that underlining reduced their
  ability to draw inferences from a history textbook. It may be that
  underlining draws attention to individual items rather than to
  connections across items.

  WHAT YOU SHOULD DO INSTEAD:  Highlighting or underlining can be useful
  if it is the beginning of a journey — if the marked information is
  then turned into flash cards or self-tests. Given that students are
  very likely to continue to use this popular technique, future research
  should be aimed at teaching students how to highlight more
  effectively—which likely means doing it more judiciously (most
  undergraduates overmark texts) and putting that information to work
  with a more useful learning technique.


the paper status was back from "decision in process" to "under review" I submitted a paper to Journal of comparative physiology-B. After major revision, two reviewers gave me minor revision (only change one word) and the editor was pleased to consider publication. After re-submission, the status changed from "under review" to "decision in process". However, the status was then back to "under review". What does it mean?

The question presupposes that the behavior of such an editorial system has a meaning. Granting that presupposition, my first guess is that the editor got the reviewers' reports and was about to make a decision ("decision in process") but then noticed that something was unclear in one of the reports and asked the reviewer for a clearer report ("under review").


Does "corresponding author" carry an implied meaning? After reading the question Mentor trying to be first author?, I got the impression that (at least in the writers' field) the "corresponding author" flag could carry an implied meaning, such as "did more work than the other authors", or "is a more senior author". Is it the case?

I am in mathematics, a field where we typically sort the authors alphabetically, and I've never given any importance to that role (apart from "this author is willing to answer a couple of extra e-mails, if needed").

Corresponding authorship is often used to signal the person who is the primary contributor to the work. I've seen this in fields like economics where there is a relatively strong norm of listing authors alphabetically. In these cases, the primary contributor is signaled with the corresponding author designation. I've seen people go so far as to list corresponding authorship on their CVs when they list their papers although I think this is far from the norm.

In fields where authorship is not simply alphabetic, I've seen the corresponding author designation used to flag the second author as a major contributor because, even in cases of so called "dual-first authorship," somebody's name has to come first.

In lots of other fields, it caries little signal value and really is just used to mark the person who is in the best position to answer questions about the work. Of course, the person marked as best able to answer question will, mostly likely, be someone who was involved in a wide variety of the research reported in the paper.


Should I include web pages in the references I am doing a course in a university. Course has 60% of weightage alloted to the project (which involves implementing algrithm to solve a problem), which we may turn into thesis if at all we succeed to find out something new (we have only one semester duration). I have to write a initial document of the work. I want to know if its ok to specify webpages (which I went through for some related information, not strictly of referred jornal papers, but some articles on some site) as references. I have never seen any journal paper to include webpage URL in the references. But, at least now, mine is a project and not a thesis (not yet come up with something new). So, I was thinking whether should I include webpage references.
Q.1 I was thinking I should include them as long as its a project (implementation of existing algorithms). Once I come up with something new, I can skip webpages and specify only non webpage references (books and journal papers which helped me find new algorithm) in the thesis. Am I correct with this?
Q.2 Also if I have to include webpage as a reference, in what format should I?

The general rule for such things is that if you use the work of others for things not commonly known, then you must cite them. So, yes, cite web pages as needed and quote, formally, from them also when needed. But cite them even if you paraphrase things.
You also probably need to do more than just include a list of references at the end of the paper. The reason for including a reference should be made clear, usually in the text itself. There are exceptions to this, but it is better to be clear about why you include a reference and to be specific about what you have used within any referenced article.
The form of the citation/reference is a bit less important than the fact of it and unless you are given some specific format, use examples from things you read. Use something similar to what is used in Wikipedia or a textbook if you have no better source.

One note about citing web pages. Since such things can change without notice, the correct thing is to include the date at which you last read/used the web page. "Last accessed 29 Jan 2021" for example


Is it appropriate to follow up on a faculty application? I am currently applying to faculty positions, primarily teaching positions at 4 year colleges and universities. I am told many of these jobs have more than 100-200 applicants. Some of the jobs ads themselves say they get hundreds of applicants, and go on to say something to the effect 'you probably aren't going to hear anything from us', which says to me - 'don't bother us'. I have 3 questions, which overlap:

If I don't hear back from them at all, is it appropriate to contact the department?
If I hear back that they got my application and materials, is it appropriate to contact the department?
People that I know from the business world encourage me to be more aggressive by calling the departments to check in, and even asking if I can come visit the department. I am concerned that this sort of attitude can have a backlash effect. Is this sort of aggressive approach accepted in academia?

You should keep in mind that the people running searches are busy academics who are doing this as service to the department. Checking-in aggressively — following your intuition for how this would work in business — will annoy and will be very unlikely to help. At the moment (early/mid- February), it is still early enough in some job markets that interviews have not been scheduled so asking for updates might be seen as pushy. I think it's unlikely that your chances will go down if you ask, but it still might be nicer to wait.

That said, there are many situations where contacting in normal and you might to do it through one of those channels:

For example, if you have another offer from somewhere with a deadline, it is normal — and a good idea — to contact other departments to let them know that you will have to move forward without them. I've had friends who have had interviews offers within hours of telling a department this.
Also, if you have updated material on your CV (e.g., a paper accepted, positions changed, an award, whatever) go ahead and send your updated CV. You can mention in that email that you're excited to hear about any updates from their search.

Contacting search committees in this context is normal and can signal that you continue to be very interested in a job. I was told by a search committee that ended up making an offer that they thought I might be unlikely to accept an offer and that one of these update emails rovided a useful signal. Of course, if they're not interested, emailing will probably just be noise and extra work for them.

I think that emailing or not-emailing is unlikely to tip the scale either way. They're going to make a decision based on the intersection of the quality of your work and what they're interested in having in their department. But out of kindness for the work of the search committee and its chair, try to do it as little as possible.


Statement about previous doctorate applications One German university asked me to write an oath about my previous doctorate applications. They are going to take me as a PhD student.

What should I write in here? Should I tell them I was rejected because they found someone better. Would this university think me not good enough?

I do not want to lie. However it is better to write that I have never applied to any university.

Please give me some advice.

Don't lie. But make sure you understand what exactly they are asking.

Most likely, they are concerned that you might already have submitted a thesis elsewhere that was rejected. Of course, universities don't want you to go "university shopping", submitting your thesis over and over until it gets accepted somewhere, so you will need to sign a declaration when you submit your thesis that it has not been submitted elsewhere. (This may be helpful.) I very much recommend that you don't lie here. If you do double-submit a thesis and this becomes known, you will lose your Ph.D. at the very least.

However, they most likely don't care whether you have applied and been rejected from other doctoral programs.

So: make sure you understand what exactly they are asking. If you are unsure (and German official documents can be confusing and intimidating), ask them.


Group-work course, part of the group failing This question is based around a hypothetical, but realistic, scenario.

The situation revolves around a group-based course in which the main deliverable is a report. Every group member is responsible for the report. The report is graded as a whole and counts for the entire group but individual adjustments in grade can be made by the supervisor based on peer reviews and other considerations by the supervisor.
The issue arises when part of the group fails (due to the report grade) and another part passes the course. Let's assume the failing students did their part, just not enough to pass.

I am particularly wondering about the fairness or ethics of part of the group passing on contributions by the failing of the group.
I have taken part in many such courses and luckily the issue never arose in any of the groups I was part of. Thinking about it, I have mixed feelings about the situation the failing students (in this scenario) find themselves in.
On the one hand, you could say the failing students did not contribute enough to the report for them to pass the course. On the other hand, placing yourself in the failing students' shoes, their contributions are used to pass the other part of the group.
Concrete questions:

From a supervisor's point of view, should only those parts written by the passing students be considered to grade them so they don't fare on the work of the failing students?

This is almost impossible, you would first have to consider all the work (how else do your know some students won't pass?) then unconsider (if that's even a thing) part of it.
One option would be to either pass or fail the entire group, but that might be unfair on the hard-working group members (who do enough to pass if they were in a group of people who as hard as them).

From the failing students' points of view, it might seem unfair because their work is used to pass the others. Should those having received a failing grade be entitled to any compensation on the grounds that they did some work?

I'd compare it with starting a company, suppose three people build a company, two people do 40% of the work each, the other does the remaining 20%. While any two people in this case do over 50% of the work, I don't think they can just decide to dump the other person (this might depend on how the company was founded, but it seems unethical).
How this type of assignment works in my experience
A group of students is assigned a problem for which they need to write a report. The students get a list of requirements and it is up to them to divide the work and make sure everyone does their part.
If a student does very little work, the others can report that so a solution can be found (student has to make up for lack of work or quits the course). It's mostly encouraged to report bad group dynamics early so something can be done about it (that becomes harder as the project progresses).
The projects often have a tutor assigned to them, sometimes academic staff, sometimes a (more) senior student. Students also review their peers on how they felt the others participated. The tutor advises the one(s) responsible for grading the reports. Based on the report, the tutor's advice and the report itself, each student gets a grade (according to some rubric).
The courses I have in mind are mainly aimed at this report. The report will be the main deliverable and make up over 50% of the course's grade. The remaining part of the grade is made up by a combination of individual work and other group deliverables (e.g. presentations or computer code).

I assume you're asking about a situation where different members of a group are given different amounts of credit for a report that they all worked on. (For a different assumption, see the next paragraph.) The only way I can see this happening is if the professor has, in addition to the report itself, some information about the individual students' contributions to the report, information that forms the basis of the variation in the grades. In such a case , the students who pass are not doing so on the basis of the work done by the failing students but rather on the basis of what the professor knows about their individual work.

Another possible (though less likely) interpretation of the question is that all the students in the group got the same grade on this report but their other work (other assignments, exams, class participation) were different, so that some passed the course and others failed. In this case the ones who passed didn't benefit any more from the failing students' work than the failing students benefited from the passing students' work. The difference would be only that this work was, for some but not all students, enough to bring their overall grade for the course up to the passing level.

(Contrary to what you might infer from this answer, I'm not a fan of group work, except insofar as it makes grading easier. But my concern about its fairness is not the concern raised in this question.)


Students self-assess which exercises they attempted – how can I make this more homogeneous? Background

I am organising and conducting the exercises for a graduate course.
The exercises mainly exist to give the students the opportunity to learn by doing.
However, the students also need to participate to some extent to be admitted to a final exam.
Exercises are given out as homework one week before the class.
During the class, students present their solutions to the exercises, which are discussed by other students and me.
We evaluate this as follows (which is mostly standard at my university):

At the beginning of each exercise class, a paper containing student names and the numbers of the exercises is passed around and each student checks those those tasks for which they feel that they can present a reasonable attempt to solve it.
This attempt does not need to be complete or correct; they should just be able to show what they tried and, if they failed, elaborate where they are stuck.
During the exercise class, the student presenting a given task is selected at random from those who checked it.
Tasks are so small that most of them cannot be reasonably divided into subtasks.
(This should reduce the uncertainty how to report when only half of a task was attempted.)
To be admitted to the final exam, a student has to have checked at least half of all tasks.
There is no benefit for students who have checked more exercises.

Mainly, the system seems to be working well:
I haven’t spotted an overly optimistic self-report yet and I currently expect that 0.3 students will fail the exercise criterion.

Actual Question

My biggest issue with this system is that there is a huge variation amongst students regarding how optimistic or pessimistic their self-assessment is.
In particular the system can make life more difficult for pessimistic students.
For example it happened that a student who (legitimately) checked a task and was chosen to present her attempt was stuck at some point, and another student volunteered to help out even though he did not check the task.

Hence I am asking: Is there anything I can do to effect less variability in these self-reports? In particular, I would like to flatten the pessimistic side of the spectrum.

And just because somebody is bound to remark that life is harsh and the pessimistic students need to be more optimistic anyway: Yes, but I may be able to help them learn this.

If the problem (being too pessimistic) is not too common, let the student check the exercises not only in the usual way, but also with "?".

Announce at the beginning that if students are totally unsure whether or not the may check an exercise, they may check it with "?". Then, whenever a student checked an exercise with "?", let them present this exercise (with no negative consequence whatsoever) and then say, if the attempt was resonable enough to warrant a checkmark. Announce when explaining "?", that students with "?" will have to present. (This has also the advantage that students see a not-so-perfect solution which is often more helpful and more intuitive then a perfect solution.) However, this only works if exercises do not get too often marked with "?" (as otherwise, this system could be gamed).

Some additional thoughts:

In my experience with similar systems, the "pessimistic" students are often the excellent ones, that is, the ones that pass the course anyway.
A lot of students have exactly the number of checkmarks they need to pass the course (and not more). I do think (but without proof) that if students are just at the border between passing and failing, they will do enough work to pass and get more "optimistic".
Announce in the first lesson as clearly as possible when an exercise can be checked and also, when it cannot be checked. It is often useful to give examples when it can not be checked as students may compare their situation to the example.


My mental health has been damaged. I don't want to quit my PhD but I don't know how to continue? I have been in the lab for more than a year and my mental health has been damaged seriously due to the harassment of my PI, and I believe my PI has breached my confidentiality by sharing information I told in confidence with other group members and the administration.

I have thought about going elsewhere to continue my PhD. However, I realized my academic progress has been delayed due to the mental health problem and I would need time to recover. I am afraid of jumping into another lab. Also, I do not find any other professors in my department whose research interests me, perhaps because  my mind is currently occupied with all the negative experience with my PI and that clouds my thinking?

I want to change university and start totally fresh but obviously I would not get a good LOR from my PI.

I want a career in academia but I really need sometimes to recover. How should I proceed?

(Edit: adding update posted as answer) Thank you very much for all the suggestions. I avoid talking all the problems with my family since they are not in academia and I do not want them to worry about me. Writing all my thoughts here helps me to release everything I've tried to keep inside myself. I think my mental health seems to not as serious as I thought because after reading all the comment, I feel more positively now.

If your mental health is suffering, then the first thing you need is to seek professional counseling for that.

Once you feel you are in a space where you can make decisions clearly, you need to get out of your current situation in the least harmful manner possible—whatever you perceive that to be. If it means leaving with a master's, great. If you have to walk away, then you need to do that instead. No outcome is worth risking your long-term mental health.

Moreover, the fact that your advisor aired the dirty laundry in public is a serious violation of trust, and a clear sign that you can't really repair this relationship. You may be able to make something happen with the help of the human resources department or university ombudsman (or similar resources).


How can one come to conclusion regarding topic for PHD I am trying to get my topic from few days yet I am in unable to narrow down it
So I would like to know how budding research scholar narrow down it

PS : Don't include as Google I tried all of it but most of papers are not for Free access like IEEE one so it's more difficult

Unfortunately, narrowing your research plan actually requires, well, research. This is why commenters have noted that it might take a year to come up with a problem suitable for the dissertation. Not knowing your specific academic culture (country, university, ...) it is hard to give precise advice here. However, it is possible that you are thinking that you must do more, now, than is actually being asked of you.

I think that it is pretty rare for a beginning PhD candidate to actually have a worked out plan. It certainly happens in some cases where a person has worked in an industrial lab and has already found an interesting but unanswered question. It might also be true of some exceptional graduate of an exceptional Master's program. Most, I think, new doctoral students, however, come as seekers, initially.

Let me suggest two things. First, talk to other students who have been in this situation in your new program to see what they did and what was actually expected of them. What sorts of questions were asked in the interview? This will give you more realistic expectations of the requirements.

Second, assuming that you are not actually expected to have a fully formed research plan already in hand, be prepared to discuss both what you know in the field and what specific things interest you the most. Why do you want to study Machine Learning? What makes it interesting to you? What has clearly been solved and what (in general) still needs to be done? What sorts of real world problems would be solved if advances were made in a particular direction? ...

That may be all that is asked for at this stage. Perhaps the faculty is interested to know your deep interests so that they can help you find the correct advisor. It may be no more than that.

But ask other students first so that you are more sure about it. If it is as I describe you can be more comfortable. I can't guarantee that they don't want more, of course, but I think that would be unusual and expected only at an exceptional institution.

I often tell students that "You aren't here to prove that you don't need to be here."


What are the publication options for academic contributions that don't lend themselves to a journal article? What are the publication options for academic contributions that don't lend themselves to the journal article format? In the case of datasets, there are some suggestions here, but I'm also wondering about other types of resources, such as

software packages for scientific computing, and
presentations of information that include interactive elements that are integral to the usefulness of the resource.

It seems to me that a common practice is for creators of such resources to publish an accompanying article, such that there is an avenue through which the resource can be 'cited'. But my impression is that often such articles do not add much value beyond that of the original resource. So a two part question:

Are there other options for 'publishing' such resources directly?
Are there pathways for having such resources peer-reviewed?

With regard to interactive resources, I'm thinking of a broad range, from this kind of interactive exposition to, say, a formal rubric-like taxonomy with more than two dimensions, such that some interactivity is required to toggle between which pair of dimensions are displayed (assuming only a 2D representation is used). To have such resources peer-reviewed, the closest option I know of is Distill, an web-only journal for machine-learning that facilitates interactive elements in the articles it publishes. But, for now at least, that option is limited to contributions in machine learning.

What are the publication options for...software packages for scientific computing,

The software can be made available on the Internet, e.g., via GitHub. (A personal website could be used too, but GitHub has many advantages.) A tutorial for the software could be published using traditional channels.

  and  presentations of information that include interactive elements that are integral to the usefulness of the resource.

To include interactive elements you'll need a medium that can support such elements. Publishing a video on the Internet might suffice, e.g., on YouTube. (A personal website could also be used.)

My answer doesn't address the (new) peer-review aspect, which was added to the question after my answer was written.


Is it possible to cross over from chemistry to biology? I'm currently a chemistry major. However, I am more interested in the life science and want to be a molecular biologist in the future. However it is too late to change my degree to biology so I am wondering how to cross over into biology with my chemistry degree and whether is it possible for me to be a molecular biologist in the future? Will my chemistry degree be useful in helping me to become a biologist? Is there any relations between chemistry and biology?

I am a theoretical physicist reconverted to biology (bioinformatics) in his masters. I am sitting next to computer scientists, mathematicians, chemists... all working on life sciences.

Biology is a very complex subject. Most of the concepts are easy, but there are many devils in the details. Ergo, it is very suitable for multidisciplinary work, where people from different branches can contribute with solutions from their own field.

Focusing on your question, depending on your set of skills, you have several options: biochemistry, wet lab, computational chemistry oriented to biomolecules... You can probably swing by the molecular biology department and ask what kind of problems they would need a chemist for; and perhaps ask if they are willing to take you on board for an undergaduate project.


How do senior faculty change universities? I am starting a permanent position this year, and while I am very happy here, the admin part seems a bit overbearing. I know from my previous positions as a postdoc, that other places are not that bad.
And it made me think about changing universities in some ten years or so. But that raises the obvious question. If I were to look for a new job now (not that there are any, with the global recession), I'd just apply like everyone else, and go through the usual hiring process.
How do senior faculty change universities? Do you apply for a job ad, or do you talk to your colleagues at another university, or does the department hear that you're unhappy and they make you an offer directly? Do you need to get recommendation letters at all (I know mostly these things happen "in secret until they're public") or would that be just a formality at the end?
I've seen a handful of people change universities immediately after being tenured, or even when they were full professors. And I always found it a bit odd.

In the US, universities are normally bound by rules that require public announcement of all positions and and open process. You occasionally see announcements in professional academic publications of senior positions. If you think you meet the criteria you can apply. You can also be encouraged to apply by colleagues at your own or other institution.
But all applicants are supposed to be fairly considered "on the merits", just as for employment at any level. Sometimes an Associate Professor who realizes that promotion is unlikely (budget constraints, conflicts with colleagues, ...) might want to seek such a position.
Senior people might also want to change institutions for personal reasons. The economist Paul Krugman, for example, moved from Princeton to City University of NY, at least in part, because he wanted to live in NYC. Of course, creating a position tailor made for hime didn't hurt. But their rules probably required that others be considered if they had applied.
I moved twice as a Full Professor. Once because the institution was having serious problems and I needed escape, and once for personal reasons.
But, there are normally fewer openings for senior faculty than there are for junior positions.


Should I do a thesis, no thesis, or a capstone project in a master's in statistics? I intend to work in industry after finishing my Masters in Statistics and am considering some universities in the United States. How will a Masters in Statistics with thesis, no thesis or with capstone project impact my career prospects? I've read that having written a thesis that is relevant to the employer's business  would be beneficial. But how does that compare to a capstone project? It sounds to me that a capstone project and thesis mean the same thing as both involve research.

Could you give us some more detail about what the capstone project would entail? That seems pertinent to the question at hand. I'd say that you should try to get a perspective from people currently at work in the industry, rather than academics. My two cents worth is that a thesis would look good if it could showcase your written communication abilities and demonstrate an ability to do self-directed work. But consider the time involved and ask if the time spending acquiring/demonstrating these skills might be better used doing something else equally or more applicable to entering industry, such as networking, internships, or the like. The question isn't whether a thesis is good: it is. The question is whether it's the best use of your time, which we aren't going to be able to tell you a priori, I don't think.


How are these kinds of published errors managed? Context: Say author A writes: "the authors B in Ref [30] found two consequences of the standing posture i.e sitting in the workplace on the health of industrial workers".

Actually, it should be "the authors B in Ref [30] found two consequences of the standing posture i.e not sitting in the workplace on the health of industrial workers".

From the original reference i.e [30], the authors B have implied the latter i.e "not sitting" and A didn't include "not..." mistakenly.

Also, it is well known that standing posture does not imply sitting. A has made and detected the error in his published survey paper and its a mistake on his part.

Should this error be overlooked? or Does it require an Errata or Corrigendum?

Note that this error does not in anyway affect the conclusions, deductions and contributions made in A's paper. It is just a portion where he/she reported from literature. Also, the mistake can be verified by everyone who checks back at the original reference.

I suggest that you write to the Journal to point out this error. It is, after all, still an error and needs to be corrected.

If someone were to write to us describing such an error, one of our editors would confirm the validity of the claim. If upheld, then this will result in a small correction (perhaps one to two lines) to be printed in the next issue of the journal. This is the practice at least in the journals in health and medicine that I help edit.

In the electronic versions of the manuscript, we would make the change in-house and release a new version of the paper with a notation at the end of the article specifying the change. That way, no new versions would be released with the error still in place.

We would issue an apology, too, and a statement that the inferences and conclusions were not affected.

This error would not be significant enough to alert indexing services. Also, this would not trigger a need for us to investigate the source of the error or to review our processes.


I am lost with my career path. I am questioning my ability to be in research field, academia or otherwise. What to do? I am 31 soon to be 32, I don't know what I am doing with my life. I have a PhD in computational chemistry from a top 50 world ranking university. But, it did not turn out well and took too long to complete(6years), mostly my fault. I published few papers in applied journals, but my knowledge is just mediocre. My grades in the graduate courses were abysmal and many were irrelevant, so had to do a lot of self study. I believe I am just not smart enough for academia or research.
Everyone in my research group and my friend circle were always high achieving as students, they have in-depth knowledge about their subjects. They also struggle during their PhD and Postdoc, but they are smart and knowledgeable in their fields unlike me. I have been a mediocre student throughout. In undergrad my GPA was 3.4, 3.75 in master's and PhD degree. I even flunked three subjects in my undergrad. I had to repeat them. I shouldn't have gone beyond my undergrad degree.
I just got lucky with my master's degree and PhD completion. I would have been thrown out for not being upto the mark in any other university. I think my advisor and my committee members took pity on me.
I have no industrial experience or internship experience. I am not confident about my career path. I like doing research and working in my research field, but I am no good. I just don't have the knowledge and intelligence to do work of any significance. No, it's not imposter syndrome.
I am just making myself unemployable as time passes. I am suffering mentally and current situation is not helping. I am going to be stuck alone and poor in this world.
Currently I am a postdoc with my advisor as she probably took pity on me. I have a year contract to be expiring next year in April.
Any advice?

Academia has convinced you of things that are not true.
Your post has a strong air of imposter syndrome about it, but let's assume that you are largely correct.  You managed to get into a PhD program with an undergrad record that was not truly excellent, but you still managed to get into a PhD program.  Most undergrad records are not sufficient to do that.  GPA of 3.4 isn't "mediocre student" unless your school goes in for some severe grade inflation.  You stumbled through your PhD in 6 years - longer than you would have liked - but you still managed to get through it.  Many who go for PhDs drop out somewhere along the way.  You would have gotten thrown out at any other university... but you got your degree from a top 50 school?  No.  No, that does not compute.  You got your degree from a top 50 school.
From the facts on the ground, you do have good qualifications.  Further, your core is a lot stronger than you think.  You state the it taking too long was "mostly your fault".  Probably you're describing running out of psychological resources of various sorts and therefore not being able to utterly power through at every point.  Yeah... that's the kind of marathon a PhD is.  The fact that you had to pick up a bunch of this stuff from self-study actually reflects well on you.  It's additional difficulty that you had to plow through on your way up, and your willingness and ability to do so are also good traits.
Mostly?  You sound seriously burned out.  You spent all that you could of your psychological resources in order to make it across the finish line, and then you went looking and dug deeper and found more, and spent those too.  You finally got your degree (go you!) and now the bill is coming due.  This is normal.  It sucks, but it's normal.  Coronavirus is almost certainly making it suck worse, because Coronavirus makes basically everything suck worse for everybody.  What you need is rest.  Rest, take care of yourself, re-establish a degree of a social life, reconnect with the things that you enjoy, and generally take care of yourself.  Nourish your soul, and allow yourself to heal.  You have a solid position until April.  There's time in there to recover, and you should take it.  Once you've had some time to recover, I suspect that you'll find the situation is not nearly so terrible... and there are places in industry where "I have a PhD" is a serious qualification all by itself.
Actually, I suspect that that's the final part of your problem.  You've been aiming at the top of your target range at every level up until now.  You got into a PhD program at a top 50 school, after all.  That's how you do that thing.  Now you've hit a point where you look at the top of the target range for "graduated a top 50 school with a PhD" and you don't think you can hack it.  You know?  You're probably right about that... but that's also normal.  Every time you hit that top bracket, the people around you get smarter and the challenges greater.  There's no shame in being the middle of the best of the best rather than the best of the best of the best.  Once you recover emotionally, start looking at positions a notch or two down from where you were looking before.  I suspect that you'll be able to find places where you can do things you enjoy and contribute meaningfully without burning yourself out in the same way, and places that will be delighted to get you... especially with your demonstrated willingness and ability to self-study when necessary.
One little anecdote: I have an aunt who ran one of the shared biochem labs at her university for many years.  It was a position that only required a Masters, but she had a PhD.  Still, they were happy to have her there, and happy with the moderate amount of low-pressure experimentation and publishing that she did with spare time and resources.  She, in turn, rather enjoyed being able to talk with the grad students without being terribly intimidating, but also pull out her doctorate when one of them was insufficiently respectful.  There's lots of positions out there that you're plenty qualified for, or even overqualified for.  If you're willing to put them in your view, I suspect that things will not look so dire.


Submitting a paper based on another yet unpublished paper I am in computer science. I am currently working on an applied paper that is based on a certain algorithm, let's call it method A.

Method A has been explained deeply in a my previous paper, that now is under review. So it is in arxiv, anybody can read it, but it has not yet being published on a peer review journal or conference.

I am now going to submit the applied paper to a conference, and I have a doubt: even if the results are interesting, how affected are the chances of being accepted for the applied paper, by the fact hat Method A has not yet been reviewed/published?

This should not be a problem. The reviewers of the conference paper should focus on the application you treat, but since the paper is available as a preprint, they could also have a closer look at the method if they want to.


Is industrial organizational (I/O) psychology considered a STEM subject according to USCIS/DHS? I'm looking to do a PhD in I/O psychology in the US. I learned that only a few psych subjects were considered STEM according to the list released by ICE in 2016 and I/O psychology is not one of them. However, on the list is "42.2799 Research and Experimental Psychology, Other". I'm wondering two things:

If this is the updated list
If a PhD in I/O Psych would be considered under "Other"

TIA!

I believe that is the updated list, since it's linked from here for example. While that list doesn't name your field, there is a separate CIP code for Industrial and Organizational Psychology defined by the Department of Education. As you can see here it falls under category "42.28 Clinical, Counseling and Applied Psychology" rather than "42.27 Research and Experimental Psychology". The ICE list includes all categories under 42.27, but none under 42.28. As such, the major itself would not be classified as a STEM subject or eligible for STEM OPT. However, do check with the International Office of your potential US university. My speculation is that, depending on details of your program, it might be possible for them to classify you under another code.


Collective PhD by a research group When being accepted individually in a PhD program, one needs a certain amount of publication work to come up with along with their dissertaition. Are there any rules regarding the number of publications, papers or books created collectively by a research group? If some want-to-be researchers team up, how can they pursue their PhDs together?

If some want-to-be researchers team up, how can they pursue their PhDs together?

This is not generally how it works. One does not "team up" and work on a PhD together in that sense. By definition, a PhD is a proof of an individual's capability to do research. Of course, many PhD students can collaborate a lot, and work on a joint project - but even in that case, each student needs his own research questions, his own papers, and, ultimately, his own thesis.

EDIT: just to clarify a bit more. Collaboration is entirely ok, but when PhD students work together, every research contribution (not necessarily each piece of e.g., code or data) needs to be mappable to exactly one student, and each student needs to have a few of those contributions that clearly were his part in the project. I have seen very bad collaborations, where, essentially, person A was churning out ideas and papers, and person B was writing all the code (because he liked programming). In a company, this model is perfectly fine, in a research context this is highly abusive towards person B.


Is it common for universities to have scientific development plans? Many times, research teams and departments just perform research on topics that the Department Chair or Research Head initiate -- but do some universities structure their research, postdocs, and departments according to an encompassing plan or agenda?

In the United States, at least, this does not generally happen except at a very coarse level.  Thus, for example, many universities engage in "cluster hiring" in which a number of positions are hired together as a strategic investment in making something interesting happen in a particular area, often coupled with some internal monies being set aside to support collaboration between those hires.  Likewise, a department may often decide to hire in a particular area where they wish to grow or to shore up weakness, or a university may set up an internal funding program for something that it is interested in.

Once faculty have been hired, however, the traditions of scientific freedom of inquiry mean that it would be looked on very askance for any person or group to try to assign faculty to work on specific research projects as part of their job.


What criteria to use when evaluating an invitation to be an editor from a legitimate publisher? Some academics receive invitations to join editorial boards or to act as a managing editor for a book or journal special issue frequently. Most of these invitations are spam, and many come from Beall's list publishers. When they come from legitimate publishers, however, what are your criteria for whether to accept? So far, I have:

Is it a journal I'd publish in myself?
Is it a book that I'd buy myself?
Do I have time?
Is it a topic I'm passionate about?
Have they committed to a print run (vs. eBooks only, which to me suggests a lack of commitment on the part of the publisher)?

Is there anything else that you consider?

I'd be wary of requests to join the editorial board of a journal that you must ask these questions. In many (legit) cases, one is asked to join the editorial board after having established a relationship with the journal. Two of my colleagues, after having been asked, remarked 'well, I'm already reviewing for them 3 times a month so why not make it official?'  If you haven't reviewed for, or published in that journal, it may not be worth your while.


Should/Can I retract a paper that has fatal math error after this paper has been accepted, presented, and released in the proceeding? This paper has been accepted, presented in the top conference of computer science, and released in the proceeding since last month. However, recently, other readers find a fatal and ridiculous error in the proof. For this fatal error, I think I cannot amend it. Even if it can be amended, some important claims and nearly all proof steps will become total different.

Something to stress:

1, My claims and other proofs are motivated by the wrong proof rather than the experiments.

2, I then used experiments to demonstrate the correctness of the claims.

How can I handle it?

For a journal paper you could either retract it, which means to "unpublish" it, or you could add an erratum, i.e. a short note where you explain what parts of the paper are wrong (and how to fix them, in case you know it) and which parts are still correct.

If I understood your case correctly, it seems like an erratum stating that the mathematical proof is incorrect, while the experiments still support the claim, would be appropriate.


Is it harder to get into PhD programs for some disciplines compared to others? Anecdotally it seems much harder to get into a good math program than a computer science program. How true is that? Are there any statistics available on the selectivity of different disciplines?

Statistics might be hard to come by, but you can always checks the requirements of the Phds on the webiste of universities.

In my alma mater (Canada), two were particularly easy to enter: psychology and semiotics. You could start them directly after a simple bachelor degree, you did not have to go trough a Master beforehand and, the teachers would try to entice you to do one. Anybody could do one even with relatively bad grades.


Is it unethical to edit the text of my undergraduate thesis prior to sharing online? My undergraduate thesis was completed almost a decade ago and is not available online, nor was any publication made from the findings. I would like to share it online, but looking back on it I notice many grammatical errors and conclusions that make less sense to me after gaining research experience. Is it unethical to make considerable changes to the text, or should I produce the document as it is to provide an honest representation of my early work?

IMHO it depends on why you want to make it available.

If your primary reason is that you want to make information available more publicly, you could produce a "revised edition" of the thesis and add a preface stating that this is a substantially revised and edited version of your thesis - just like other books do. If you just correct typos and grammar, just say that.
There is also the possibility to comment on the conclusions you don't see like that any more in a way (formatting, footnote) that makes clear that this is a point where your opinion now differs.  (like a commented edition of some work).

If your primary reason is to give the text your online CV refers to, then leave it unchanged.


What do I do if a teacher fails me after they said I'd pass? I just failed a university-level course that the instructor assured me I was passing.  We've discussed my grade in emails but we continue to disagree on how it should be calculated and even on what assignments should count. (The instructor did not adhere to the grading policy in her syllabus - this is a passing/fail issue.)

I have proof that I did enough to pass.  Grades are in and the school is out for the holiday break, but I feel like I need to do something before this becomes permanent.  What should I do?  As a student, how do I challenge a grade I think is unfair if can't resolve it with my instructor?

Contact your teacher (email) and start a paper trail where you outline the assignments in question: when they were due, when they were submitted, and if the teacher received them.
Given the break, schedule an appointment with the teacher after the break to sit down and discuss the issues at hand.
(As per aeismail's comment) I would agree to escalate to the department chair and inform your academic advisor before the dean.
At the same time as 5, should you choose to and if your institution has such a department, contact your ombudsperson office to create an informal avenue of conflict resolution outside of formal (and time consuming) solutions. They offer a means of conflict resolution that tries to arbitrate issues before you take formal action.
Depending on the results (no meet, meet but no success) escalate by appealing to your college Dean the issues and ensure that all paperwork is in order: an executive summary documenting the chronological order of events, all of your correspondence with the teacher indicating that you abided by the syllabus.
If and when you have a hearing, dress nice and present your case when you are called in for an appointment with the dean. Be factual and punctual. Don't demean or insinuate personal characteristics of the teacher in question, stick to the facts and what is the issue at hand.
At the end of the day, if all else fails, I would stand to believe that your college Dean answers to a higher 'officer' of the school. There should be a means to escalate your appeal to this final authority. There might be more, but for most if not all issues, this would be the highest authority to appeal to.


Would it be rude to ask a famous professor who doesn't know me personally for a recommendation letter if I have published in a high ranking journal? Would it be rude to email a famous professor asking for a recommendation letter to Dphil, if I had published in a high or moderately high ranking journal in her/his field and just have letters from foreign unknown professors?

The professor does not know me apart from the published paper. Information about whether the professor knows the paper, or knows me due to the paper, might be edited in later. I was thinking to add my grades (the lowest is an A-), curriculum, and send to professors that work in my subject (it is a very small field). But if it is rude doing this, I don't think it could improve my case.

The benefit of recommendation letters is that they give insight into abilities that are not reflected in the rest of your application. Your grades and your publication are already in your application. A professor who doesn't know anything else about you has nothing to write that will help you.

To directly answer your question: it comes across more naïve/inexperienced than rude, but either way I do not see how it will help your case.

P.S. This answer assumes that the professor is not already familiar with your work before your email. To be more specific, I'm imagining you sending unsolicited emails to a bunch of the biggest names in your field (selected purely because they are "famous"), who have not previously heard of you or your work (as far as you know), asking them to write a recommendation letter for you entirely on the basis of your having published a paper in a journal.

If the professor is already familiar with your work (e.g. has cited it, or has had an email correspondence with you about it), then I agree with this answer that his/her letter can potentially be helpful. Similarly, I think Ben Webster offers some useful advice about attempting this in a more nuanced - and potentially more effective - way.


Write a reminder about a possible undergraduate project I am currently doing some research for choosing a topic for my M.Sc. thesis.

A week ago I sent an email to an external professor (I mean, not one in my University) asking about whether we could discuss about the topic I chose. The mail was (I believe) properly structured - not spammy and personally tailored on the prof, citing some works on the topic I took a look on, explaining my motivations on why I would like to study this topic, maybe a bit lengthy but not that much and divided in paragraphs - yet I had no answer.

For what I know it seems that this is not necessarily a "no" and a common suggestion is to write a reminder.

Now, I would really like to work on this topic and taking contact with this professor would be a great chance for me, especially in order to continue my studies with a PhD. At the same time, this professor is quite important and maybe he just doesn't care too much about a M.Sc. thesis, so I was thinking to write a reminder asking, in short, if he could send me the contact of one of his PhD/postdoc students that may be interested in helping me with my work.

My question is: is this considered a bad etiquette? writing first to a prof and then rolling back to one of his students...may sound like I underestimated his position or I am just not motivated enough.
In case, how could I structure the message? It seems to me that "if you are too busy" is a bad way to start (sounds like I don't know whether the professor has anything to do or that he could be doing nothing). Also "I know you are very busy but..." sounds bad (but what? but I don't care? but I think it is more important to stop and talk with me?). So what could be a polite way to go for it?

I'm not in the best position to advise you, but, perhaps, he/she hasn't answered you back, because he/she was busy to do so.

Thus, you definitely should e-mail back. Quoting a professor, maybe something like this:

"My e-mail server has been acting up lately, so I'm not sure whether my previous message was delivered properly; here it is again, just in case. Thank you!"

Read the following before:

Email Writing Tips
Read This Before Cold-Emailing Me
Examples of Good and Bad Cold Emails

Best of luck!


Corrigendum to correct formatting/aesthetic errors previously brought up during proofing process After a lengthy review process, I finally published my first paper. Unfortunately, upon seeing it in print, I was immediately dismayed.

During the proofing process, formatting errors appeared on the table, presumably as a result of the conversion to the journal's table template. The table in question was supposed to have three 'sub-headings' but was formatted such that two sub-headings appeared different from the other two (bold vs framed between two horizontal lines and capitalized). Amongst other corrections, I brought this up during the proofing process by highlighting that the three sub-headings were formatted differently and to correct it so they were all stylized in the same way. When I was notified of my article being published online, however, I found that the changes to the table were ignored. I sent an email asking what could be done and was informed that although they understood I had certain corrections, that no changes could be made now it was online and instead was offered to publish a corrigendum.

Since these changes are aesthetic and not related to the content, a corrigendum (at least to my understanding) would not change anything to the appearance of the figure as corrigenda are published as a separate note, making a corrigendum not really worth it. At the same time, I'm frustrated that after having put so much time into proofreading the article to ensure no mistakes appeared, that one appeared anyway that had nothing to do with me. I wish I could say it's a minor aesthetic point that only I would notice, but after sending out my article to colleagues and friends I received numerous comments about this particular formatting error.

I suppose I have two questions. First, how cut and dry is the rule of not being able to correct articles once they are published? Or is it simply indicative of a lack of willingness or goodwill on the publisher's part that could, perhaps with some more insistence on my part, give way? And if there really is nothing that can be done, is it worth publishing a corrigendum?

Thanks for any insight you can offer.

EDIT: Looking everything over for the n-th time, I now see a couple other errors (eg. inconsistent capitalization in the legends). The thing is these mistakes were not present in the proofing stage (I have the proof file as proof); they were tacked on after the fact, when it was too late to do anything about it. Is this something I should contact the editor-in-chief about?

EDIT 2: Thanks to all for the feedback and suggestions. I ended up contacting the journal manager, informing her that I would not be requesting a corrigendum but that I would be placing a complaint to the editor-in-chief. I was contacted the next day and informed they would fix all the errors in the article.

EDIT 3: So all the original errors were fixed, however I noticed yet another error was introduced that was absent in the previous version. I'm giving up my crusade for now, and will simply not publish in this journal in the future. Thanks again for all the advice.

How cut and dry is the rule of not being able to correct articles once they are published?

While nearly all journals are inclined not to make any changes to the content after publication, they do encourage the use of corrigendum or errata (see AMS policy). However, some publishers allow minor changes to formatting with the version of the old publication archived. This can be acceptable as long as the change does not affect the result or conclusion in any way. In your case its just minor formatting changes and it seems fine in this case.

There are some bureaucratic publishers (such as the one you've encountered) who disallow this feature. This would be especially in the case where print versions are involved to preserve the integrity of the article. Or, just to save the time and effort involved in the process. Hence, it is up to the author to make sure that formatting errors are minimized before making the final camera-ready copy of the manuscript before publication.

  Is it worth publishing a corrigendum?

In your case, no. Corrigendum is useful for minor content changes, error and grammatical corrections but I haven't yet come across one for defining formatting errors in tables and uniformity in capitalization.


Is it fine to mail the Associate Editor in his personal email provided in his homepage? Is it okay to mail an Associate Editor in his personal e-mail?

I have submitted a manuscript in a journal and I want to know the status of my manuscript.

The publisher of my journal is "World Scientific".
There is no option to mail the Associate Editor of the journal to whom I have assigned my manuscript.
Neither is any email address of the Associate Editor provided in the Journal Hoempage.Only his name and affiliation has been given.

Also there is only two templates of email address provided which are
1.Extending Submission Deadline.
2.Extending Revision Deadline.

There is no template to ask about the status of the manuscript.

Is it fine to mail the Associate Editor in his personal email provided in his homepage?

Kindly comment.

I would avoid doing that, except as a last resort. The person is likely to be confused (best) or offended (bad). Try to work first through the journal itself.

But also, it often takes quite a while for information about progress to filter through the system and it often takes quite a while for reviews themselves to be conducted.

If it just "wanting to know" for informational purposes, I recommend patience. If it is "needing to know" for some other purpose then you can press it, but, again, go to personal accounts only as a last resort.

You could, of course, ask the journal itself how to contact the editor and whether it is appropriate for your needs.


Withdrawing a chapter proposal: Is anything else required here? I have been invited to write a chapter with a publisher, so I wrote a proposal for the chapter using the abstract of a write-up (short primer paper) I had. After sending the proposal, I eventually found out that the publisher’s reputation is controversial.

So I gave it a second thought and wrote an email shortly (within two days) indicating I will like to withdraw my proposal. The next day after sending the email, I got an email from the author service manager stating that the editor has accepted my proposal and 'he has no further suggestions for you at this time. Please continue with the writing process' and that after the review of the chapter, I will get an email of definitive acceptance.

Now, I am about to send the short paper to a magazine. Is there anything else required of me with respect to the first publisher to absolve my work from their publication process.

Tell the author service manager again that you are withdrawing your proposal. Use clear language: explicitly say that you're no longer willing to contribute to the book. It sounds like the author service manager didn't realize you're withdrawing and is still expecting a submission from you, and it would be unethical to not correct them.