How to convert german undergrad grade to US GPA How am I supposed to provide US Universities during my application process a GPA if there is no official way to convert a 1.6 (German grade) to US GPA ?

I have tried to find a ressource but every website sais something else and there is no official conversion table.

Do the admission offices calculate it anyways on their own (based on transcripts) or how does it work?

You can always call the school to find out.  I'm sure you won't be the first foreign student to have applied.  That said, it looks like Wikipedia has a pretty good page on how to convert, and your score should be somewhere in the 3.75 range or so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_grading_in_Germany

You'll have to go course by course to find the right number.  Good luck!


Are there any telltale signs that an academic job interview went well (or badly)? I am currently in the agonizing period shortly after an academic job interview at a regional research school and I'm trying to analyze the day to estimate my chances of getting an offer.

Overall the interview seemed to go well. The talk was fine and the one on one interviews and meals seemed to go smoothly. But, I wonder how much of that has to do with my interviewers just being nice people.

Are there any people here with experience - on either side of the interview process - who can provide any feedback about how the interviewers might behave before they do (or don't) ultimately extend the offer?

If it's relevant, I happen to know I was the last of four finalists invited to campus and it's been at least two weeks since another candidate was interviewed.

Even if a department loves you, it's unlikely they'll show any overt signs (especially in an official capacity) because they want to maintain a reasonable negotiating position.

But individual faculty are not always "with the program". For example, it's happened to me that someone said (during an interview) "I really like your profile and will be making a strong case to make you an offer". But while this might be flattering, it also depends on how much power that individual has over final decisions.


Applying for a graduate-level Research Assistantship as an undergrad I am undergraduate student, applying to be a research assistant for a relatively new professor.

During the interview, after discussing the research project he was currently working on, he made the comment that "this is hard stuff" and asserted that the research would be worthy of a PhD dissertation as well as saying that none of his previous assistants were able to produce anything of substance. It's worth noting that this university does not offer a PhD in this subject, so there are no PhD students to work with him and no chance that the work with him would lead to a PhD.

I believe I have a solution to solve one of the early, relatively easier, problems that we discussed. This piece would be integral for all further research for this project. I had considered writing proof-of-concept code to submit to him to show that:

I know what I'm doing and can produce results without needing him "hold my hand" through it, and
I am interested in working with him and on his project

My question is two-fold:

Why would a professor ask for research assistant applicants for an incredibly complex project worthy of a PhD at an institution that does not offer one?
As an undergraduate student, would it be a worthwhile investment of my time to develop the proof-of-concept for essentially an interview boost if the advising professor is certain that the project would be far too complex for an undergraduate student?

Why would a professor ask for research assistant applicants for an incredibly complex project worthy of a PhD at an institution that does not offer one?

I think you’re answering your own question. The professor really wants to work on project X; no PhD programs are available, so he’s taking in research assistants.

  As an undergraduate student, would it be a worthwhile investment of my time to develop the proof-of-concept for essentially an interview boost if the advising professor is certain that the project would be far too complex for an undergraduate student?

I’m fairly certain nothing magical happens to students once they start their graduate studies that makes them suddenly capable of working on complex problems. If you’ve done well in your undergraduate studies and are curious/handle failure well, you can do graduate work. What would raise red flags for me is that other RAs worked on this problem and failed. I would ask the professor for more details and perhaps see if the problem can be broken down a bit so you can successfully manage it.

Showing good results in an RAship is much more than an interview boost. It’s an excellent way of checking whether you like research work, getting a very warm reference letter and maybe even a decent publication or two! Good RAships can get you into top grad school even if your undergraduate degree wasn’t amazing.

Good luck!


How does one change to engineering for graduate school after undergrad in a science field? I've always had an interest in electrical engineering (actually all engineering in general) and I've decided that I'd like to pursue a graduate degree.  I guess I'm wondering if I should really try to do this or just keep it as a fun hobby I spend all my free time doing.

So, the question is,  how does one change fields between undergrad and grad school?  A specific example follows, but please provide answers that address a more general case, so that your answers will be helpful to other people with the same general question.

I already have a BS and MS in chemistry with a minor in applied math.I published three papers during my MS, one first author in the top journal in my specialty and two as coauthor in an average and a so-so journal.  I hope those will count for something.  I finished my BS with around 3.1 and my MS with a 3.9 gpa.  I'm sure that my MS advisor would write me a great letter.  My GRE scores are too old to count so I'd have to retake it or try and get a pass on it since I already have a graduate degree.  Since finishing school I've been working for 4 years as a chemist.  I can get great recommendations from my supervisor who is a PhD chemist.

I've been working for a while to cover some of the things I would have learned in a BSEE to try and make up for my lack of one.  I worked through some texts on analog/digital design, lots and lots of programming, built a balancing robot that got a bit of internet attention, and I'm currently working on an autonomous robotics project that's looking really good so far.  After that I have more project ideas than I have time or money for.

I want to apply for PhD programs (specifically in controls/robotics) but I'm worried that my application will get tossed right away because I don't have a BSEE.  Maybe I should just apply to MS programs?

I will answer a slightly more general question.  How does one change fields between undergrad and grad school?  The answer very carefully is correct, albeit unhelpful.  The single most important criteria when applying for a strong PhD (at least in math, engineering, or the natural sciences, but probably true in other fields too) are letters of recommendation and demonstrated research ability.  Bad grades can sink your application, but good grades (even from a top school) are not enough to get you in (nor good test scores, although they help).

If you want to get a PhD, but don't have any experience in the area, you should first apply to a masters program, where you can gain experience and impress potential letter of recommendation writers.  Often admission to a masters program is less competitive than to a PhD program (if even getting into the masters program is difficult, you could start as a non-degree student).  But if you can publish a few papers during your masters and convince a few of your professors that you have both the ability and desire to succeed in grad school, then you're application to a PhD program will be much stronger.  I also recommend that you talk with the schools where you plan to apply and ask what they suggest that you do to strengthen your application.

You might also like to read this question and answer Is it possible to attend graduate school in pure math after undergrad in CSE?


Email to a professor after long time for recommendation I did my bachelor at university A in which Prof. X supervised my graduation project. I asked him for a recommendation when I was applying to university B for masters and he wrote me a great one. That was a year and a half ago, and now I am applying for PhD at university C. I need his recommendation again but I feel bad for not emailing him for a long time. I don't know how to write my email. I don't want to jump directly for the recommendation. Could you share your suggestions on what to write ??

After a decade of teaching, I get these quite often. While people use a variety of styles, the one that I am most responsive to is:

Initial formal e-mail asking me if I remember them (with hints such as "I was the student who wrote the thesis on faster-than-light dog walking"), then telling me what they've been doing for the past X years (with a recent CV or resume as an attachment), and transitioning to their desire to move on to a new career or grad school and asking me if I could write a letter of recc for them. Close with an offer to talk on the phone (or come up to campus) to help refresh their memory of them.

Once you get the ok, make it as easy as possible for me to write the letter. If there are things you want me to emphasize, be blunt about saying it ("Please don't mention the folly of FTL dog-walking" or "Please emphasize my familiarity with temporal dilation and astrophysics").


Scholarship asks for copy of diploma, old university slow to print it I have just completed my undergraduate studies in the United States this June. I have completed all degree requirements and have paid off all financial obligations. I received a scholarship for my masters for a school in Europe but I need to upload a scanned copy of my Diploma by the 15th of this month to be able to maintain the scholarship, otherwise I will lose it.

Last week I was told that the school would pre-order my diploma for me, however, when I went there today I was told that I would not be receiving my diploma until four weeks from now. None of the people working there seemed to care about my scholarship.

I understand that the school in not contractually obligated to provide me my diploma any sooner. How could I solve this problem?

Calm down

Getting angry at your university and/or its staff is tempting but solves nothing; if anything, it will make them less inclined to help you.  Focus on solving the problem and being respectful to everybody, even if you don't want to.

In particular, it will help to act as if everybody involved is doing their best in good faith to help you, but may be unable or unsure how to do so.  Don't treat them as though they're just trying to obstruct you, even if it seems like they are.  Don't focus on the amount of tuition money you've spent; that's not going to seem like a relevant issue to anyone who can help, and it might be a distraction to you.

Understand the problem

At the root of your situation is the fact that you're stuck in the middle of a cultural misunderstanding.

In US academia, the diploma is strictly a ceremonial piece of paper. Nobody uses it for anything except to hang on the wall.  If you want an official document that verifies your degree, you get a transcript instead.

As such, within this academic culture, there is no reason why anybody should be in a hurry to get a diploma, so university systems won't be set up to provide it on any particular timeframe; they'll schedule production of the diplomas in a way that is most convenient and cost-effective for the institution.  This most likely means producing them as a single batch, perhaps by an outside contractor.  Trying to do one as a one-off may well be quite expensive and/or a major disruption to their existing process.  It's not necessarily a simple procedure that they're just putting off because they're lazy or uncaring.

However, my understanding (based in part on things I've read in this site) is that in European academia, the diploma is an important official document, which serves as the standard proof of a degree.  Thus, a European institution would expect that anyone who graduates with a degree will get the diploma immediately, and the most likely reason for someone to be unable to show a diploma is that they didn't actually graduate.

I would focus on trying to help people at both universities understand this disconnect, and asking for flexibility from them in helping you navigate it.

Pursue all avenues

It seems like so far, you've been focusing on trying to get your university to speed up production of your diploma.  But it looks like that could be a dead end.  So try something else.

They've offered a transcript and a signed letter.  Take it for sure.  Then, I'd try to get the European university to compromise by accepting these documents as proof of your degree, at least temporarily.  Try to explain to them that these are the standard documents that US universities expect to create and see.

Get faculty involved

It sounds like so far, you've been trying to negotiate directly with administrative offices on both sides.  That's a good place to start, but at the end of the day, they don't have the same investment in your academic success that faculty do.

I'd look for any faculty at your current university who know you, and who might be able to make an impression with a letter to the European institution.  For instance, is there anyone with contacts at the European university, or who at least is familiar with the academic system in that country?  They might be able to help convince them to accept your alternative documents.

Likewise, get in touch with faculty in the European department; either someone in charge of your specific graduate program, or some other faculty member who you've had contact with.  (If it's someone who has some familiarity with US academia, all the better.)  Make sure they understand that this issue, if not resolved, might prevent you from attending their university at all.  They went to the trouble to accept and recruit you; they'll be very disappointed if bureaucratic issues wreck it all.  So they have an incentive to help.

Have a backup plan

Although hopefully you'll be able to get this resolved, there's always a chance that you might not.  Life isn't perfect or fair, and unfortunate things happen sometimes.  But your life will go on.  Make a general plan as to what you will do if this problem can't be resolved and you don't get the scholarship.  Attend a different program?  Take a year off and apply again in a year?  Follow a different path entirely?


Post-tenure move: Reference letter from institution to which I'm applying I'm a tenured faculty member and am applying for a lateral, mid-career move at University of X. Unlike a normal search that would be handled by a department, it is for a prestigious research position and the search is thus being handled by University X's Office of the Provost. They'll shortlist candidates and then the successful candidates will end up essentially as bonus positions for departments.
My question thus has to do with using a reference for a position at University of X from a professor at University of X.
I have been a long-time collaborator with a full professor at University of X. They often write me reference letters for fellowships, awards, nominations, etc. Normally, this colleague would write me a letter.
But, I am applying to work at his university! Given it is a lateral move, would it be weird to draw on a reference from this collaborator when applying to the University of X? On the one hand, it would be an opportunity to highlight the great fit I might bring to several faculties at this university. On the other hand, they might be seen as having a vested interest as a new line for their department would be, well, a new line.

A letter written by someone the reader knows is likely to be more credible than a letter written by someone unknown.  So it makes sense to get a letter from someone at X when you know the reader will be at X.

they might be seen as having a vested interest

Most letter writers have an interest in the success of the person they are recommending.  A writer who works at X will have additional knowledge of the interests of the whole university, which could result in a more useful letter.

would it be weird to draw on a reference from this collaborator when applying to the University of X?

No.


What to do about a citation that may be wrong I am writing a paper and I needed to cite some fact. I had difficulties finding something that I could cite. I have found a paper that also cites this fact and they cite some other paper without further explanation. I have gone through this paper that they are citing and I cannot find how the fact that I want could follow from it. It seems somewhat relevant but going through all the theorems, none of them seems like they could imply what they claim. I do not have a deep understanding of that paper and it seems it would be rather difficult for me to carefully read the whole thing.
I suspect that this result should be somewhere in the literature but cannot find it.
I have emailed the authors but did not get a response yet. I have contacted the corresponding author who forwarded my email to another co-author so I know they have received my email.
At the same time, it is not too difficult for me to prove the claim myself. Therefore, I need the citation only to give credit to the original author and to make my paper a little shorter (not very important as there is no strict page limit where I intend to submit).
What should I do if the authors do not respond before the conference deadline? I can think of the following:

Say something along the lines of "paper A cites paper B but it is not clear how the fact follows from B. For completeness, we provide a proof here"
Ignore that paper, as I was not able to determine whether the citation is correct. Do not claim my proof to be original but rather say I was not able to find any reference but I suspect that it has been proven before.
Just cite the paper they cite

Of these, (3) is clearly not good. Is it OK to choose (2)? Should I contact the authors once more before the conference deadline and inform them about what I intend to do?

A polite way to deal with this is to say "We need the following known result (c.f. [A] and [B])  and include the proof for the convenience of the reader."  If someone writes you to clarify before this is finalized, you can revise.
If you are worried about giving credit that is inappropriate, take a moment and reflect on how citation counts are often misleading.  Your primary concern is the reader (including referees) and the above allows them to be as informed as they need to be.
If someone (say a referee) asks you to cite [B] for the proof, ask for a page or theorem reference.


Is it possible to submit a preprint to viXra and then submit my physics paper to PRA? I really want to submit to viXra to stake my claim on the paper's idea.
I don't want to submit it to arXiv.
I searched PRA's policy on this without much success.
I have read the following documents, yet I can't figure out what is their stand on the issue.

authors/submission-faq
web-submission-guidelines-physical-review
editorial-policies-practices
Information for Authors

Physical Review is unlikely to notice or care what you post on viXra, or nearly anywhere else, so long as you hold the copyright and your work has not been accepted by a journal.
For opinions on viXra, see What are the differences between viXra.org and arXiv.org?.


Responsibilities of instructors to students when teaching controversial subjects When teaching a course on a topic that might be controversial, what are the responsibilities of instructors to facilitate an open learning environment?  If the instructor has a strongly held opinion, is it appropriate for the instructor to structure the course and the readings around this opinion?  Does the instructor have a responsibility to structure the course in a way that is agnostic about the topic?  When selecting the readings and the lecture schedule, does the instructor have a responsibility to give equal time to opposing viewpoints, if those opposing viewpoints plausibly have equal intellectual merit?

I'm familiar with the notion of academic freedom for instructors, where instructors should be protected from external influence (from outside the academy: e.g., from politicians) in their ability to shape their courses and express their findings and opinions.  Is there a corresponding responsibility to protect the academic freedom of students, by structuring courses so that they do not make students feel uncomfortable expressing views that disagree with the instructor's?

Are there any guiding principles or resources for how these issues should be navigated?  What are the social norms within academia?  Are there any lines that, if crossed, might lead to disapproval from a significant fraction of fellow academics?  I'm mostly familiar with engineering/science/mathematics courses where this sort of issue rarely comes up, so this is new to me.

If the students are being assessed by you, some (most?) will start to tell you what you want to hear in order to get the highest grade. This is rarely what we as educators want in our students. We want to build within them critical thinking skills.

Controversial issues are common in some fields. For example, one of the subjects I teach is Business Ethics and I have clear beliefs and values in this area. Is it OK for me to focus on the arguments in favor of my view and discount competing arguments? No, it is not.

Can I tell my students my opinion? Opinions differ on this but I believe it is OK, as long as it is done very carefully with LOTS of evidence that my opinion is wrong. Again, students must be taught to think for themselves, including how to critically evaluate what they consider right and wrong. If I just make my points then it is not education, it is indoctrination and that is not what higher ed is about.

As far as social norms, I would say that if you are trying to get your students to 'believe' anything, then you are doing it wrong. If you are trying to get them to think critically, then you are doing it right. If the students feel they must agree with what you say, you are doing something wrong. If they feel like they are getting balanced information and a class ends up with many different opinions, then you are doing something right. If everyone is thinking the same, then nobody is thinking...and that's not good for anyone.


Contemplating about a second PhD in statistics/machine learning I have been thinking about a second PhD for the last year. I am currently a doctoral candidate in civil engineering at University of Texas at Austin (ranked 6th in my discipline) and working as a student statistical consultant at the university consulting center. I am working on spatio-temporal modeling of count data using Bayesian hierarchical models, with computationally efficient techniques for my dissertation. (I will have publications on this very soon; two of them are in review). I do have 2 publications in my area but their topic is the application of statistical models. I am also going to get a Masters in statistics next semester along with my PhD in civil engineering. I have done many courses related to Bayesian statistics including graduate level mathematical statistics, theoretical MCMC, stochastic volatility and time series models, statistical consulting, advanced econometrics (non-Bayesian), discrete choice modeling and one course on data mining (graduate level). In my field, I see massive datasets but very minimal statistical expertise, particularly on the big data side. This has motivated me to pursue something beyond my Phd and beyond my discipline.

I am very interested in handling large datasets and perhaps, machine learning applications. I would like to know whether a PhD in machine learning is going to help me realise my dreams. I do not have any formal research experience in data mining or machine learning. But, I do a lot of Bayesian hierarchical modeling on smaller datasets. Given my experience, I am not sure whether I can secure admission to a good program in the machine learning area. I appreciate any suggestions and advice on whether to pursue another PhD and the feasibility of securing admission to a good program in a PhD machine learning track. I am assuming basic financial assistance for any PhD program.

Thanks much in advance.

As other people already stated, multiple PhD's is almost certainly not a good idea. How to transition into machine learning depends on where you want to work:

academia, you can try to get a postdoc position in machine learning, in that way you can build your career by writing publications and get up to speed with machine learning during your postdoc research. This could be problematic as you might have to compete with people that have a PhD in machine learning. But this can be overcome during the interview stage.
industry, you can simply apply to entry level machine learning positions (look for data science positions) and take it from there. Once you convince a company that you are a worthwhile addition, you can learn the ropes on the job.

In general, I would recommend already getting up-to-speed a bit in machine learning, try some online tutorials, etc. This can really help in securing a new position in either academia or industry.


How to address being interested in two areas in statement of purpose I am applying to graduate school in US. I am wondering how I can write statement of purpose If I am interested in both signal processing and communication system. Should I talk about why I am interested in both and talk about researches  and projects I have done in both areas and my future research in both fields since I like both equally?. However I was thinking this is too much and is going to pass the word limit for statement of purpose. I am looking for some advice about this. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

I assume when you say "communication" you mean an area of engineering closely allied to signal processing, rather than communication in the context of the arts or social sciences.

In this case, you may as well just talk about some specific problems you are interested in, without worrying too much about how to categorize them. If you can talk in detail and with confidence about your past projects and potential future plans, then you can write a good statement of purpose. It is more important to spend words on demonstrating your understanding of the actual research problems (What do you want to do? Why is it important? Why is it hard? Why is it original? etc.) than on classifying topics within the overall field. The former is what readers really want to know about.


What to do with letter of recommendation if you left program unhappily? I was forced to leave a STEM program after a fight over whether I could apply the NSF sponsored summer abroad fellowship. I was given a letter of resignation and 2 month of notice. The situation was not good before the fight anyway. I left after those 2 months. The MS is not from a prestigious program albeit a good undergraduate school.

I was not thinking about grad school. But I graduated 2 years ago for a MS, and haven't found employment using my BS. I was tempted to apply again, if only for better employment perspectives.

My question is: if I apply to a PhD again, I have to ask my previous adviser for a letter of recommendation which I have no faith will be good. Even if he writes one, I worry that the wording would be cautious. I want to bypass this, if possible, but how? If it can't be bypassed, what can I do ?

The program I left was a PhD. So perspective programs would possibly ask for it.

My understanding is that you finished your BS 2 years ago, took a year off, entered a PhD program this year but just left due to some dispute about wanting to spend a summer abroad, correct?  (Or maybe you left the PhD program last year?)

Anyway, you should not ask someone to write you a letter of recommendation unless you think they can write you a good one.  If you think your erstwhile advisor thinks well of you and will be supportive, then it makes sense to ask him.  If not, then you should probably stick to letters from your undergrad professors.

If you apply to one PhD program after having left another, the admissions committee will naturally wonder why you left and if you would have reason to be successful this time around.  Just hearing that you left because of a fight is a big red flag, particularly if it was from a reputable department, so it would be best if you can suitably address this in your application.  You should convince first yourself, then your letter writers, that this is unlikely to be an issue at another department.  Then your letter writers can try to convince the admissions committees on your behalf.


Asking a PhD interviewer about preparation I am having a PhD interview at a university in the US. The application procedure didn't involve submitting a research proposal, so I am not very sure what kind of questions I should expect.

A professor contacted me to schedule an interview, I wanted to ask what kind of questions are expected, because I do not know the project they think I fit in, in fact, one of the purposes of this interview is to tell me about the project.

So is it okay to ask the interviewer what to prepare?

Firstly, I want to point out that my opinions are based on my own experiences. Having said that a few years ago I interviewed with professors form several "top" ranked computer science, information science and business programs for potential doctoral admissions. Second, I have an admissions season's worth of experience from the "other" side where I have interviewed potential PhD applicants as well.

You do not need a research proposal. In fact, treat this "interview" as a conversation between an academic and a potential future colleague. There is nothing to "prepare" per se. Basically, what's going to happen is that the professor is going to ask you about your research interests and experiences in greater detail than what can be evidenced from your CV or publications. You will have the chance to tell him all about yourself. Do not mis-represent yourself or veer off paths you have not trodden before. What's also going to happen is that this professor will tell you about his project or his lab if he a potential adviser or person whom you want to work with during your PhD.

tl;dr

There is nothing ask him about preparation. Just be ready to discuss your own works and have some questions ready to ask him. Just treat it as a discussion between two professionals and you will be fine.


Withdrawing conference submission before notification Is it unethical thing?
It's been a week since submission and a month left until the final decision.
I'm so worried about it.

Yes, you can withdraw it. There is no issue. The paper is yours. With a month to go you will cause little disruption.
Sooner is better, though.


Do I not have the personality for a PhD? I've been in the PhD program for a couple years now and I feel like people have a lot of expectations about the way I should think and feel about things.  Not just my technical competence, but also my motivations and personality.  I am wondering if my motivations disqualify me from being a good PhD student.

People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested in.  I would be fine working in any area and I'm not particularly passionate about any specific field.  They also expected me to know who I wanted to work with before I applied to the school (or even choose the school based on the advisor), and I only started thinking about that during visit weekend, when professors pitched their research to the students.
I chose which schools to apply to based on the US News rankings, and I went to grad school because it was more prestigious than the jobs I would be capable of getting.  It seems like nobody in grad school does this, even though I feel like for most people it is natural to go with the most prestigious option.
People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun.  I don't understand how most people could possibly find talks fun.  Honestly I would rather watch a movie or play tennis.  I also find papers boring and difficult to read, unless they are in very soft subjects with no math.
When people come to my school to give talks, people invite us to meet with the speaker one on one.  I have no idea what students would talk to the speaker about or why they would want to sign up to talk to a stranger.  I guess they could collaborate with the speaker on research, but I would expect the professors to set up these kinds of collaborations instead of the students.  (It would seem weird to finagle my own collaborations because the advisor might not want to collaborate with those people.)
I have seen professors leave my university and expect their students to go with them.  I think if my advisor left my university, I wouldn't want to leave, because I have good friends here and I am dating someone.  It seems weird to be expected to uproot your life and move across the country just because your boss is leaving.
I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he says that I need to be more independent.  But if I did that I would be going against what my advisor tells me to do, and I think it's weird that my advisor tells me to do things and then tells me not to do what he tells me to do.  He said he expects me to "push back" and I find that kind of intimidating, because he is a professor after all.

It seems to me that many of these points could hit on very superficial differences — e.g., use of different words to describe essentially the same thing, or emphasis of one type of feeling over another, although most people have both.  On the other hand, taken together these could be signs that you are not interested in a long term (i.e., post-PhD) academic career.  Or not: that's up to you to figure out.  Let me quickly address your points:

  1) People expect me to have a specific research area I'm very interested in. I would be fine working in any area and I'm not particularly passionate about any specific field."

The negative way to spin that is that you're not passionate about anything.  The positive way is that you're interested in everything and willing to be versatile.  I am a tenured academic, and construing the above sentences in the positive way as I did applies pretty well to me.  Why are modular forms or Shimura varieties more interesting than Galois cohomology or geometry of numbers?  Answer: they're not, and I think it's slightly weird that most of my colleagues work exclusively in just one or two of these areas.

  They also expected me to know who I wanted to work with before I applied to the school (or even choose the school based on the advisor), and I only started thinking about that during visit weekend, when professors pitched their research to the students.

You didn't mention your academic field.  In mine (mathematics), most American PhD students don't give any serious thought to their research area until their second year.  So… clearly not a fundamental tenet of "PhD personalities".

  2) I chose which schools to apply to based on the US News rankings...

So?  I see no issue here whatsoever.

  3) People expect me to go to talks and read papers for fun. I don't understand how most people could possibly find talks fun. Honestly I would rather watch a movie or play tennis.

This seems like a conflation of what "fun" means.  There is professional fun and leisure fun.  You watch movies in the evenings and on weekends, and (except for weekend conferences, which I freely admit are not necessarily the events that I look forward to with bated breath) you attend talks during normal business hours.  On the other hand if you never read papers except when specifically asked / required to do so, that could be a problem.

  I also find papers boring and difficult to read, unless they are in very soft subjects with no math.

You didn't say what field you are in.  (If it's math, this is concerning!)  It is also worth pointing out that reading papers is really hard for most graduate students for the first 1–5 years or so.

  4) When people come to my school to give talks, people invite us to meet with the speaker one on one. I have no idea what students would talk to the speaker about or why they would want to sign up to talk to a stranger.

I felt exactly the same way as a graduate student.  Why would a famous mathematician want to meet a 24 year-old who is not yet fully fluent in the language the mathematician has been speaking for the last 20–40 years?  I found it very strange that some of my classmates saw no awkwardness there.  Now as a thesis advisor I wish my students interacted more with visiting mathematicians…

Somewhere between being a grad student and advising them I began to view myself as a professional. I now know that most academic jobs are offered based on some prior knowledge of or interaction with the candidate, so having visiting luminaries be able to connect a name to a face and view you as someone who is actively participating in the profession is very valuable. Getting students to understand, believe in and take part in their own professional development is one of my major goals these days (I've just accepted the job of departmental graduate coordinator)

  5) I have seen professors leave my university and expect their students to go with them. I think if my advisor left my university, I wouldn't want to leave, because I have good friends here and I am dating someone.

Here I think you are probably suffering from "small sample size" issues.  The majority of graduate students do not leave when their advisor leaves.  It's nice for the advisor to offer the option, but it is not practical in many cases… for the reasons you say.  On the other hand, if the idea of being uprooted seems sufficiently bad to you, then the academic lifestyle may prove unappealing, because the "uprooting" is probably going to happen several times before (if!) you land a tenure-track job.

  6) I follow my advisor's instructions on things and once in a while he says that I need to be more independent. But if I did that I would be going against what my advisor tells me to do, and I think it's weird that my advisor tells me to do things and then tells me not to do what he tells me to do.

I think you are not properly understanding what your advisor wants.  You make it sound like he wants you to sometimes stand up and refuse to do what he asks.  That's insubordination / contrariness.  Independence means that you do what your advisor asks and you do other things on top of it that you thought of yourself.

In summary: I see nothing definitive here.  I could try to read the tea leaves but… it doesn't matter what you or I think right now.  Unless you are miserable and/or failing out of the program, you should continue on in the PhD program, both doing your best work and doing your best to be happy about it.  As you proceed, keep an eye out for both things.  As you near graduation, you will have a better idea of where to proceed from there.  You don't need to "figure out your personality" as a second year student, and I don't see much of anything positive coming from it.  Definitely resist the idea that you must have a similar personality and/or similar practices to those around you in order to be successful.  Even — especially — in academia, there is more than one way to skin a cat.


Is Math GRE not worth it? Finished bachelor's and master's in mathematical finance. Applying for PhD in math, which may or may not be in a university that requires General GRE or Math GRE

Based on my other questions (like this) and what I read online, the General GRE and the Math GRE are taken only as required for application or taken with the intention of possibly applying somewhere where it is needed. Like a high grade helps little in admission but a low grade helps a lot in non-admission.

So showing a high grade in Math GRE to a school that doesn't require it in general would be all the more not very helpful in applications?

Let's say I apply to a set of universities in different countries where none of them require any GRE.

It seems to me that the only reason for someone to take for example the Math GRE other than being required is to strengthen your application based on your bachelor's or master's not being math.

The vast majority of math Ph.D. programs in the US will require both the general and math subject GREs, so unless you specifically avoid those schools specifically, you probably will have to take them.  How schools use the GRE varies a bit, but for someone whose record isn't as strong, it can play a valuable role in reassuring schools, since it's the only thing they have which is uniform across schools and recommenders.

For schools that don't require them, they will likely assume that you have taken the subject GRE, and will assume that not sending in your score means it is really bad.  If your score is really bad (less than 30th percentile), then it's probably better to not send it in, but if it's not abysmal, then probably you should send in the scores.


Are picture-perfect acknowledgement sections the norm in Academia? When I read other theses, I am often astonished by the sheer number of people whose help the writer is acknowledging in a multitude of ways. Here's an example to demonstrate what I am talking about, but I am sure you get the point: http://www.mit.edu/~alvarso/thesis-phd/Acknowledgements.pdf

In comparison, in the thesis that I am currently writing, I am getting close to the end, and the draft for my own acknowledgment section is currently

  I would like to thank my advisor **********, as well as my close colleagues at the department of ********** at *****************.

I might spice it up with some adjectives, but that's pretty much it.

Are acknowledgement sections, like the one I linked to, the norm? If so, would a paper with a lackluster acknowledgement section be considered potentially subpar?

You seem be concerned that people may judge the quality of your thesis in part based on the length of the acknowledgments section.  I don't think that anyone will do that.

You may be missing a required acknowledgment of one or more grants from a funding agency.

A separate question is whether you have overlooked people who could to be acknowledged in your thesis, or whether it would be appropriate to include a more specific and detailed acknowledgment of the individuals you are acknowledging.  As the Ph.D. is the culmination not only of years of research but of years of your life, it's not unusual to think more broadly regarding acknowledgments than you would for a paper.  You may want to include, for instance:

Faculty outside of your committee or university who also mentored you or gave helpful comments and suggestions;
Anyone who developed code that you used in your thesis;
People who helped you do a better job with the writing itself, e.g. through teaching you better grammar, better Latex skills, etc.;
Family members (particularly a spouse) who have supported you during your doctoral work or inspired you to be a scholar;
Fellow students who have given you encouragement or proofread or otherwise commented on your work.

I suppose you can go too far in being inclusive, and perhaps the example you linked does, though I doubt anyone will get very upset about that either.

In my own acknowledgments I tried to be rather specific about what each of these individuals did, or how I benefitted from their help.  For instance, I acknowledged my advisor

  ...not only for providing continual support and guidance, but especially for allowing (and even enthusiastically encouraging) me to pursue research that I found fascinating but that is only indirectly related to his own research program.

Some of these kinds of acknowledgments would be considered out of place in a journal article, so the thesis gives you an opportunity that you may never get again (unless you publish a book) to express gratitude to these individuals in a somewhat official way.  You have nothing to lose by being more inclusive in expressing your gratitude, and you may make someone who reads it very happy by including them.


Found startup or finish PhD? I'm on last year of my Ph.D. However, I got an offer from investors for my project and investor required to full-time work in a new company. Would it be an advantage or a disadvantage to have worked for a couple of years, when continuing Ph.D. again later?

Ultimately this is a personal decision, but I'll offer a few things to consider. Depending on your field and your specific research, taking time out might be a large set-back, or not. The world of research won't stand still while you are away and you might get pre-empted by a delay that might wind up to be longer than you first plan for.

Your advisor should also be able to give good advice on this as s/he likely knows the field and what are the prospects of returning smoothly. Your advisor might, also, be willing to wait for you, or not, so it is good to check.

Finally, what do you really want to do with your life? If it is to be an academic, primarily, think harder about finishing. If it is to be an entrepreneur, then the degree may not mean as much to you as taking advantage of the new opportunity. The industry experience might have some, but not likely a lot, of advantage in seeking an academic position later. Not a "slam dunk", anyway.

Finally, make sure that you understand what the conditions would be if you join up with these investors. Are you a full partner, or are you being used? Either is possible in the somewhat messy real world.


Will working as a Teaching Assistant as an Undergrad help for Graduate Admissions? Graduate admissions in an EECS field, either Ph.D or Masters. I know research experience is the most important but is having prior teaching experience also desirable?

I want to TA (it seems fun), but I'm debating on whether it will be worth it or not if it won't help me with either job prospects or graduate school.

Here's my opinion, based on being a faculty in a math department. When you apply to a graduate school, it's really a two-in-one application, i.e. there are two questions to be decided: will you be accepted or not; and if yes, then with or without financial support.

Having or not prior TA experience probably won't have any effect on your admission to the program. But getting financial support is a whole different story. If you have existing connections with a research professor in the department where you're applying, then he/she may be able to support you out of their research grants. Otherwise, especially for departments with a lot of service teaching — such as math or computer science, for example — having teaching potential can be decisive when it comes to awarding graduate assistantships. Of course, prior TA experience would be a huge plus for that.


How to politely, mildly, and tactfully ask for a minor revision before the presentation of the conference paper? I just have a paper accepted at a very selective conference but now I am going to make a minor revision before my presentation because I found a few grammar errors. The organizer seems unaware of my errors.

What is a mild and roundabout way to inform the organizer that I would like to "update" the paper? I do not want them to think that I was ignorant or negligent.

Does saying something like "I would like to do a minor revision" sounds too formal and could potentially scare the organizers, making them double-think about the acceptance?

I'm no journal editor, but the following seems like it would do the trick:

  Are you accepting any revisions on accepted manuscripts? I've noticed a few stylistic things that I'd like to fix (nothing that impacts the results or the page count).


What is the academic weighting of being a project associate on a cutting edge research project? I am taking a little bit of a break from academics and I'm looking to do a job before I move on to doing my Masters. While I have a job lined up, it's going to start in 3 months. I was also offered a project associate job in the meanwhile. I am a BEng (bachelors) graduate, and I was wondering if this would actually help my chances at doing a good masters at a good university. Talk about your experiences at your university if you cannot generalize.

Graduate admissions typically gives high weight to evidence of technical proficiency and research potential.  It sounds like working on this research project is likely to give you such experience.  If this can further turn into a strong recommendation letter from a well-reputed faculty member, then it will almost certainly be a significant boost to your chances.


Can I apply to a PhD program if I will be graduating with my undergraduate degree in the summer term instead of the spring term? I am interested in applying for PhD programs for fall admittance. While I think most undergraduates will graduate in the spring, take the summer off or do something otherwise productive, and start their program in the fall, I want to use the summer semester to finish up some general education requirements.

So my basic timeline would be:

Apply for grad schools in the late fall/early January, and of course be doing coursework in the fall semester
Take more classes in the spring, and hopefully be accepted somewhere
Finish up final degree degree requirements in the summer (only general education requirements), and graduate
Enter grad school in the fall

I want to do this so I can take more math classes in the fall and spring, and finish up my required art class and economics class in the summer. I have never heard about undergraduates doing this. Is it common, and is it okay to do? I cannot find much about it online. Is there any reason NOT to do this?

(Assuming USA) Yes, you can apply if you are graduating in the summer.  No, I do not see any reason why you should not do this.  You should probably explain your plan and the reasons for it in your application.


How does the class time in the day and week impacts the students' learning outcome? Is there any research/study/survey that looked at the class time in the day and week impacts the students' learning outcome? E.g. students often complain when class are too early in the morning, students on Monday might be more rested than on Friday, etc.; I wonder whether there exist any significant impact on how well students understand and remember the class materials.

I came across the following study:

  T McElroy, L Mosteller
  The influence of circadian type, time of day and class difficulty on students' grades.
  http://vjbennett.pbworks.com/f/circadian+rhythms.pdf

In the conclusions of the work, they mention that the students have a best performance if their optimal time-of-day (i.e., if they are monrningness type or eveniningness type) coincide with the class schedule. By contrast the classes that require less cognitive functioning are less sensitive to the advantage and disadvantage of optimal and non-optimal time-of-day.


Keeping academic credit on work with human rights impacts but fearing repressive regime retaliations I am from a country controlled by a repressive regime. I was able to leave the country and continue my academic activity in a top US university. Most of my work is focused on equality, human rights and distribution of resources. Until now, I couldn't publish using my name. Always ends up collaborating on different projects but without being an author (this is my request and other co-authors are just respecting my wish).

Not all my works are in those themes but this is the field of research where I think I could contribute the most, and feel like I am achieving something.

I was arrested by my government (kidnapped and tortured for 5 months) before leaving the country. Arrested for humanitarian activities, ended up tried by court-martial and then terrorism court, while I am a civilian. This was the one reason for me to focus on those issues. I fear that if I go public this regime may arrest my family members and/or confiscate my properties.

Is there a way for academics to publish (in peer reviewed journals) and do research while earning credit for their work without using their real names? Or at least a way to prevent their identity from going public ?

I think that in academia there are so many ways depending on personal identity to thrive. I have this negative feeling that there is no way to advance professionally without using my personal identity. I do not know how to do it, but it is still early to make final judgments.

This is a highly speculative answer - just a thought experiment.

It may be that you will never be able to publish, safely, under your own name. The secret police in such regimes may have a long reach into other countrie,s as Russia seems to have in GB.

It might be possible, however, to create a second identity for yourself that is known to only the fewest possible, most trusted, allies. It may be too late for that if you already have worked with others on these issues and they can connect you. The difficulty, of course, with a second identity is that it is necessarily not connected to your history, including degrees, employers, etc.

But academic publishing is normally by individuals and their institutions and credentials are not as important as when seeking employment. But, then, your human rights work would be attributed to a fictitious person, which I'm pretty sure is legal as long as you aren't using such a pseudonym for fraud.

I wonder if you already have connections to reputable human rights organizations (Amnesty International, ...) that can help you with legal advice on this. Certainly a human rights lawyer familiar with the issues in your home country would be worth consulting. If you work with a reputable lawyer, that person can cache the relationship between your true-name and the pseudonym, so that if it ever becomes possible to reconnect them, you have the legal means to do so.

I don't know if the US government would be of assistance, but I don't have much faith in it at the current moment. Even our own spies identities have been "outed" here for political gain.


How to judge length of exams when teaching undergraduate engineering I am a first-time lecturer for an American university (am a PhD student), and am giving midterm and final exams in the course, which comprises an introduction to engineering and how to work with systems in a methodological way.

I am designing the midterm exam for the course, and the students have an allotted 50 minutes to complete it. Most of the questions are brief short-answer questions (around 2-3 sentences for an answer is sufficient), followed by some multiple choice and fill-in-the-blank questions.

I took the midterm by myself and timed the length of completion, which was around 12 minutes for me. From other professors that I have taken classes from, this seems to be the standard (i.e., if the professor can complete the exam in 1/4 of the allotted time, then it is an appropriate length).

Does this seem reasonable? I'd like to hear some related experiences from other instructors.

The "1/4" rule of thumb is reasonable in a lot of cases, but it can be unreasonable for particular groups of students.  In a very low level course (like yours) it may take students much more than 4 times as long as you to do the test.  In an upper level course the students might be able to do the test in something less than 4 times as long you take.

As an example, my rule of thumb for lower level undergraduate math courses (calculus, intro to linear algebra, and differential equations) is 1/8 rather than 1/4.  I've been teaching mathematics for almost 30 years, so solving these kinds of problems is second nature, and I'm mostly limited by the speed of my handwriting in producing a set of solutions.  It also helps that unlike my students, I can do arithmetic and algebra in my head without having to pull out a calculator.

I would suggest that you discuss the exam with a professor or TA who has previously taught the course and see whether they think it might be too long.


References in statement of purpose I'm applying to math PhD programs in the US.  In my statements of purpose, should I include references to the literature?  I haven't done so yet, but I keep thinking I probably should.

Most mores in academia are idiosyncratic. I wouldn't put references in my personal statement - it's seen as over-doing it (in my department - Psychology, at least). If you want to include literature in your statement, you should try to discuss the literature more generally and only cite specific authors if those research studies actually contribute significantly to your statement.

If you were to include a specific citation, I wouldn't advise that you include a reference list. Keep in mind that committees read through hundreds of applications every year and likely won't look favorably on you adding more paper content to their already large stack of applications.

Many schools also have page limits for their applications, and they may see your reference page as additional material and disqualify your application.


Edited volumes in bibliography: (eds) or (eds.)? I was recently informed that (eds) NOT (eds.) was the 'correct' way (i.e not simply down to journal style guidelines) to describe volumes with multiple editors. Conversely, according to this same source, (ed.) should be used rather than (ed). Surely both (ed.) and (eds.) are abbreviations and therefore both require the full stop to indicate this?

APA 6th edition uses "Eds." So there's at least one reputed style guide that abbreviates in the plural with a fullstop.


Does a present-day editor tend to sieve out submissions before sending them out for review? Out of curiosity, I would like to get a feeling of what is the attitude in general for a present-day editor of a prestigious (not an objective modifier, of course) journal to deal with a new submission before sending it out for review.

I notice that some journals of high impact would state it as an editorial policy that an editor may desk-reject (so to speak) a submission without finding a reviewer if the submission is so-and-so. Then I think that, if I am an editor, I definitely do not want to waste any reviewing resources; hence I become a pre-reviewer in this sense. Does this line of thinking apply to most editors? If this is the case, then a submission passing over an editor's inspection means at least that the editor feels that the submission is potentially publishable; but to what extent this implication is true?

When you are running a journal, no matter how where it sits in the prestige rankings, all sorts of things wash up in the submission box.  One might think of these as roughly falling into four categories:

Clearly plausible and on-topic papers
Papers whose focus or quality is dubious, but are still worth sending to review
Papers that are clearly off-topic
Papers that are clearly below the journal's quality threshold

Until you actually see such a stream, you might not realize just how bizarre the material can be that shows up in the third and fourth categories.  I'm talking about likely-schizophrenic ramblings where the text changes color and font multiple times per paragraph, blatant plagiarism, or papers that don't even bother to connect themselves to the research field of the journal.  Heck, even as a graduate student I was once sent a videotape by a man who had decorated his trash can to look like a robot and explained in great length how the "robot" can would react to All in the Family episodes so that it could save humanity by terraforming the Sahara desert.

In a highly interconnected world with people working at all sorts of levels of quality, a lot of this type of junk shows up.  It's entirely appropriate for an editor to reject category #3 and #4 material, so as not to waste everybody's time.  I really don't want to ask people to review plagiarized or insane material.  I also don't want to waste time asking them to review things that are probably science of some sort, but still absolutely certain to be rejected.  It is thus the case that nearly every editor will be asked and find it justified to perform some degree of pre-evaluation and desk rejection.

Where it becomes difficult, however, is that different editors and different journals have different standards for determining where to draw the line.  When authors disagree with the journal, it can get rancorous, especially for the "glamour" journals that can be so high value for authors to publish in.  Thus, we hear primarily about the mistakes, the borderline cases, and the places where politics and prejudice hurt the scientific process.

The key questions are this:

What percentage of the time is the system going wrong?
What can be done to improve it?

I'm almost certain that #1 is a pretty small percentage, simply because there's a lot of detritus that nobody is likely to object to desk rejection on.  Despite that, the number may well be too high: study of this topic would be both useful and likely very difficult, given the subjective nature of the judgements.  There clearly are places where the system goes wrong, and reducing that fraction will likely be good for all of us.


Where can/should I, as a high schooler, publish a paper regarding the derivation of a formula? For a high school engineering project, a friend and I have found ourselves deriving an equation for how to most efficiently configure a system.

We found an equation that, given a few parameters about the system, equates the amount of material added (and thus weight), to the amount of energy this system will gain. Along the way, we needed to find an equation that, given an amount of material, would describe how to most efficiently use the material.

We were thinking we'd write this up in a nice paper, and publish it somewhere. (For resume building, college applications, etc.).

Where/how could we do this (if anywhere), and how long would it take?

I posted this on Physics StackExchange and it was recommended that I post it here as well.

The big question here is whether what you've done is new to the world - whether it's a genuine new advance that nobody in the world has done before, or whether it's something known to the world that you, and perhaps your teacher, have not seen before. Without meaning any disrespect to you and your friend, the second option here is more likely - but the first is of course possible.

If it's genuinely new, you can look to publish in a scientific journal. If it's not new (but perhaps still unusually advanced for a high school student), you should perhaps look for other types of publication, which could still be good for your resume. The difficult question is how to tell which category your work falls into.

My suggestion is to speak to your high school teacher about this. They have seen a lot of different students' work. If they think that it may be a novel development, then either write, or get your teacher to write, to a professor in a relevant subject at a local university. See if they will look it over and advise you.


Can a private college disallow a club based on politics? I am asking this question in light of recent events, as well as from personal experience. Is a college, particularly a private college, allowed to not accredit or allow a club on campus that is political in nature. For example, College Democrats or College Republicans. Both have well established chapters throughout the country, but is there any law protecting colleges who do not want these organizations on campus? I am asking this question in regards to U.S. colleges only.

Of course!  For instance I'm pretty sure Bob Jones University does not have a LGBT club of any kind.  It might affect their ability to receive certain federal grants and other monies but other than that...


Are undergraduate math courses required to do well on the GRE subject test? I'm in the process of selecting courses for my third year, and I wasn't planning on taking certain mathematics courses (in particular, "pure" courses, such as Algebra). However, upon speaking to come colleagues, I've found that I might want to substitute Advanced ODEs for Algebra, given that I could probably learn the former on my own, and the latter weighs more on the GRE Subject Test, so I should have a good handle on it.

This has made me ask two things:

1) Is the Subject Test even required for all Grad Schools? I'll be doing the GRE, and the schools I'm planning on applying to fall into sort of an "Applied/Computational" category, so I don't know how much of the Subject Test they'd be interested in.

2) Do courses (and their subsequent grades) matter more than scores on the subject test, or is it vice versa, or are they both pretty equal?

I'd love to hear any and all advice. I'm doing a combined honours in general sciences and mathematics, if that makes any difference. I'm close to course selection, and I'd like to have a good idea of what would be useful to take.

Thanks!

It's difficult to answer this question because a lot depends on the programs that you're applying to and on the undergraduate program that you're currently in (because not all undergraduate programs are equal.)  The GRE subject test in mathematics covers a broad range of undergraduate mathematics that anyone going on to graduate study in mathematics should have mastered.  Your grades in undergraduate math courses should provide similar information to an admissions committee.

However, the graduate admissions committee might not be able to interpret your undergraduate grades (e.g. because they have no experience with students from your institution.) At some places grades are now so inflated that even a 4.0 GPA in math courses with the appropriate GPA says little about what you actually have learned.  A good score on the GRE subject test in mathematics will help to confirm your good grades.  Highly ranked graduate programs will want to see both good grades and a good score on the GRE subject test and for the very best programs this is simply a bare minimum- they'll want to see something beyond this in your admissions packet.

The subject test is really written from the point of view of traditional programs in mathematics.  For programs in computational applied mathematics, the test content isn't as relevant and the subject test is not always required.

To answer your specific question about taking an advanced ODE course vs. a course in Abstract Algebra, you'd probably be better off taking the advanced ODE's course.    In the other direction, if you were applying to a mainstream PhD program in mathematics, than you would almost certainly want to have an undergraduate abstract algebra course on your transcript.  Certainly if you were applying to my graduate program I'd rather see a second course in ODE's than a course in Abstract Algebra (although both would be even better.)


Undergraduate thesis main author credit and prestige Our thesis instructor, after rejecting our proposals, became one of our thesis advisers after we've accepted his suggestion. Every time he's telling us that our proposal doesn't seem like a thesis (in a mocking way), he inserts that we should do the "nobel" method he had discovered in detecting a feature/property in a sample. That's what his previous advisees did. Eventually, somehow against our will, he became our thesis adviser because he's the only one who knows the methodology and because he said that it was his idea.

One of the reasons why he also got us as his advisees is because he wants to submit an international paper (IEEE). He said it to our other thesis adviser.

I mentioned a while ago that his previous advisees applied his "nobel" method. We cited their paper as, let's say, A____ et al. with A being the last name of the student in their group who comes initially if their last names are sorted alphabetically. When we presented our paper to him, he said that it should be his name and not theirs because it was his idea and method.

I am asking this question because he might do it to us too -- claim that our thesis is his. Who shall get the thesis main author credit? If I may be permitted, I'd also like to know how to deal with our adviser who only got us as his advisees because he wants prestige after he claims that our thesis is his.

I am not sure about undergraduate theses, but in graduate school the thesis is almost always (at least formally) an individual effort, and the student's name is the first and only name on the thesis itself. However, when that thesis is revised into a paper for submission to a conference or a journal, it is acceptable to acknowledge one's advisor (and possibly other committee members) as 2nd/3rd/etc. authors. In some cases where an advisor makes a more significant contribution than the student to the revised paper that is being submitted for publication (e.g. time/effort), their name can be first.

For undergraduate theses, I would guess that the students' names should appear first and advisor's name should appear last, if the thesis is not published but merely submitted to the university to fulfill the graduation requirements. However, when that thesis is revised for publication, the same rule as for graduate papers applies - if the advisor actually contributed more, their name can go first. Experienced, well respected faculty with tenure are not concerned with pushing their name, so more often than not they allow students to go ahead of them on the author list.

Finally, having your advisor go first on a revised thesis submitted to a conference or a journal may not be a bad idea, if your names are still on that paper. This still provides you acknowledgement for academic research and publication activity, so I would not worry too much if your name goes first or second or third.

It is an early effort in your research career, which will be superseded by more serious research work that you will do. Rather than straining your relationship with advisor, it may be wise to let it go and instead make sure that you remain on positive terms, as he/she may be writing recommendation letters for you... ;)

Good luck!


Why do some papers have 10-20 co-authors? I am new to the field of academia, and when performing a literature review for really any topic, I am puzzled as to why some papers have so many co-authors.

Most papers have only about 1-5 authors which I can understand but I can't seem to understand how 10-20 people could all meaningfully contribute to a single paper. How possible is it that co-authorship is being gifted?

Are there any reasons why so many co-authors could be justified?

Update 11/11/19:
Some comments have suggested this question may be a duplicate. To clarify: I was not referring to large-scale taskforces that produce world-changing results such as the Higgs Boson project (What is the point of listing 1000 authors for a single scientific paper?). Those projects clearly play by different rules. I was meaning routine contributions to journals (such as a new formula or algorithm) where I struggle to understand how so many people could all meaningfully contribute to a small (albeit important) idea.

In my field, where author numbers between one and six are the norm, reasons for having more include the following:

The paper results from a large-scale collaboration between different groups that developed different parts of the overall work.
The paper is supposed to give a broad picture overview of something, like in the case of a survey paper or a research roadmap paper. The authors are experts for the different considered areas.
The paper results from a collaborative brainstorming effort. Such papers are sometimes written by the participants of a research meeting (like the famous Dagstuhl seminars), or a breakout group from such.
The paper results from a student project, and most of the co-authors are actually students.


Positions at satellite campuses I'm wondering what experiences people had who took up positions at satellite campuses, in particular of well-known and well-renowned universities. From what I see, satellite campuses are often the result of a merger with a small college and somewhat retain a focus on teaching and not so much research.

I'm particularly interested in to what extent positions at satellite campuses provide the benefits of working at the main campus in terms of working environment and research collaborations. Is the experience more like working at a completely separate institution, or merely in a different building at the same institution?

To give a concrete example: Often the satellite campuses don't have a graduate programme. Are the opportunities to (co-)supervise students at the main campus?

I'm looking mostly for experiences with faculty positions, but postdoc/graduate student experiences are also of interest.

I haven't worked at these campuses, but know some people who do pretty well. These comments are more in reference to regional satellite campuses, e.g. Penn State Altoona, CSU-Pueblo, UNC Charlotte. These are not the flagships, but have varying levels of research activity - some departments might have masters programs, or PhDs created to focus on an area that faculty specialize in, but not the generic PhD for the area.

To first order, satellite campuses should be thought of as independent from the main campus. You share similar funding trends and chancellor edicts, and some programs (e.g. faculty teaching/research awards) cross borders. But it is not common to co-supervise students at the main campus. Maybe this could occur if you had a really unique research specialization, so you were a critical collaborator, or if you were in the same city, or had a strong personal connection. But I don't think it is that much more likely that you would co-supervise a grad student as a satellite prof than as a prof at any other geographically convenient location.

What might be more common is that, as a research-active member of a satellite campus without a PhD program, you could supervise and train a Masters or undergrad student who then goes to the main campus. You might then continue to collaborate with the student and his/her new adviser.

Even things you might not expect can be separated between campuses, like journal access - satellite campuses may not have all the same journals as the flagship.


How long is a LOR valid? I was planning to apply for fall 2014. As the application required a Hard Copy Letter of Recommendation, I had obtained a Letter of Recommendation from my College Professor on the college letterhead.  But due to some reasons, I was not able to apply.

Now, can I use this same Hard Copy for Applying to Fall 2018, or do I need to get a recent LOR? Is there any validity period for these LOR's.

While the previous letter is still technically valid, I would strongly urge you to consider getting an updated letter or even a replacement letter from someone else. If you have done anything noteworthy since the previous letter was written, then that could be incorporated in a revision. Alternatively, you may find that someone else is able to provide a more useful evaluation of your talents and abilities.


Is paying participants below min. wage ethical? I am currently doing my PhD, finished all my modules and doing research right now.
My supervisor and I had a good idea for a research paper and I conducted a survey through a crowdsourcing website (e.g. Mturk). The decision was made to pay every participants 0.50 $ and the survey took about 9 minutes.

Our results are pretty good and I am currently writing the "Sample Collection" section of the paper. However, I am worried: should I include the compensation? Right now it came to my mind that we did pay way below the minimum wage. Was this unethical? Should I include the amount of payment in my paper or just state that we bought some data?

I've had this conversation with various researchers in the crowd-work community, and it is actually a bit of ongoing controversy. Right now crowd-work can be terrible for many workers - way below minimum wage, many tasks are a waste of time and just broken (cannot be completed), tasks take way longer than the poster estimates and ends up wasting workers time, there are few controls from being denied pay for completed task for spurious reasons...and on and on.

So there are communities of people who are trying to improve the situation for crowd workers, and this includes things like trying to improve pay standards, less time-waste, better designed tasks, catering to crowd-worker communities and "guilds" (people often cooperate to find and complete 'good' tasks), etc. Some propose voluntary guidelines for researchers to try to pay at least something vaguely like minimum wage, even for micro-tasks.

With that said, the current state of professional ethics and norms (and applicable laws) - as of the beginning of the year 2017 - is in flux. However, paying crowd-workers to complete online tasks is still regularly paid below anything comparable to minimum wage. So while you weren't on the vanguard of people advancing the standards for crowd-work, you weren't conducting torturous experiments on prisoners and orphans, either.

Therefore, you should be fine to just follow the norms of your field and state compensation (not all fields explicitly mention the amount of pay). Nothing to hide, and I definitely don't think you should try to skirt the issue and claim you paid for data.

That said, for future readers working in crowd-work, you should be aware of a few things:

- There is controversy on how crowd-workers (or "gig workers" more generally) should be classified, protected, and treated.
 - The current state of things is to consider crowd-workers as "not employees of anyone", and so minimum wage does not apply.

 - Researchers are treating crowd-workers as human research participants in some aspects (not subject to minimum wage and typically compensated very little monetarily when possible).

- At the same time crowd-workers are usually not recruited, given informed consent, and debriefed in ways entirely comparable to regular research participants.

- Minimal consideration is given to guiding ethical principals like "Beneficence" when it comes to crowd-workers (or even "Justice" and "Respect for Persons" for that matter). Most IRBs require that you at least pretend to make the participant better off then they were before in some way, such as learning about how science is conducted, but it really strains belief how this can apply to micro-tasks (like image tagging) performed on most crowd-work platforms.

- Some researchers seem to give no real thought to the idea that there are humans working on their research tasks, who are often putting in many hours of labor for them, and often subject crowd-workers to poorly designed, frustrating, time-wasting tasks.

- Some crowd-workers are in fact trying to make a living through crowd-work, and most are not even living in countries with wages so low that the pay is vaguely decent.

This is all very much a part of social advocacy, especially as many believe that crowd-work and gig work are major parts of the future of work in our civilization. Laws have (and will) trail behind these changes in the workforce, and so everything from labor laws to taxation is often a mess and does not apply with great consistency, and these things are highly likely to change in the next decade or two.

Finally, the state of ethics today is still that it is quite typical and normal, and only occasionally "frowned upon", to pay crowd-workers well below anything approximating a minimum wage. It is the norm of today, and you should be honest and forthright about it regardless of how you feel things should have been or should become in the future.


Visited website on different dates - apa style Ray, B. (2018, June 25). NB-IoT vs. LoRa vs. Sigfox. Retrieved January 4, 2019, from https://www.link-labs.com/blog/nb-iot-vs-lora-vs-sigfox

In the source reference of my paper I refer to a website. I consulted this website for example on various dates. Do I only have to write the last date or each date separately?

From the link you provided I don't think you need to include the retrieval date for the following reasons.
The blog post you link has a publication date.
A blog post in the APA Blog states the following about website dates.

Determining Website Dates
A second source of confusion is that many websites or webpages do not include publication dates. If no date of publication is provided, use the letters n.d. (which stand for “no date”). The copyright date on the website itself should not be used as the publication date for particular content on that site.
If multiple dates are provided, use the most recent date on which the content was changed. For example, if the site says the content was first published in 2010 and last updated on August 6, 2016, then use the date 2016 in the in-text citation and reference list. However, if the site says it was first published in 2010 and last reviewed in July 2016, then use the date 2010 because a review does not imply that any information was changed.

The following 2 guides also indicate to use a retrieval date if info on page is likely to change over time.
From APA Style Website

When a DOI is not available, and a URL is included, do not include retrieval dates unless the source material may change over time (e.g., wikis).

From APA 6th Edition - University of Lincoln guide

When citing sources that you find on the Internet you only need to include a retrieval date if the information you viewed is likely to change over time.  If you reference an article from a wiki, for example, you would want to include a retrieval date because information in a wiki can be subject to a lot of change.


Consequences for publishing final-version PDF, in violation of publisher policies? Are there consequences that are typically enforced when an author puts the publisher’s PDF on a personal website or social media (e.g. ResearchGate) in violation of the publisher’s policy? I see many journal policies which prohibit uploading the final-version PDF on repositories (see Sherpa/Romeo). But at the same time, I see many final-version PDFs freely available if you look on ResearchGate, Academia.edu or an author’s website.

If these are cases of technically breaking the publisher’s rules, are there typically consequences for researchers?

Much of the answer on this question is dependent on the specifics of copyright transfer and the specific policies of the journal. Here is a journal article about copyright and author self-archiving. Among authors, the topic of copyright transfer is not very well-understood.

What consequences are typically enforced:

According to this article by chroniclevitae.com , the typical consequences for authors who publish their site to a social media site (Academia.edu in this example) is a notice to the violating website to remove the copyright'd content, However, even this action is somewhat limited, as academia.edu received a peak of 2,800 requests over a few week span for a site that hosts over 2.3 million journal articles.

  Remember: As Bledsoe points out, this is still murky territory. Publishers, journals, and scholars are all feeling their way around.

Possible extent of consequences:

When an author agrees to publication from a publisher, the publisher receives not only the words and graphics, but also (sometimes) the copyright from the author. If the publication required a copyright transfer, a copyright violation is being committed by uploading a published paper, even by the author of the paper. The possible consequences are as diverse as typical copyright violations, but can be up to and including paying money to the publisher for loss of revenue.

  Money damages in copyright infringement actions are commonly awarded under three legal theories, actual damages, profits, and statutory damages.

Source for additional reading and understanding of copyright infringement and the possible monetary consequences from a legal point-of-view.


How should I announce that I'm leaving? I've been offered a 3-year Lecturer III appointment at a top 10 university in my field.  It's an opportunity that fell in my lap, not something I sought, but it's obviously not something I can just pluck from a tree anytime I like.  So of course I'm going to take it.  I'm trying to decide how to announce that I'm leaving and what to say about it.

I've been a lecturer at a state university for four years, PT since my FT contract ran out last year and not currently scheduled for any new assignments.  My colleagues like me and I'm leaving on very good terms.  Both my current chairman and my previous chair (who recruited me) insist I should take this.

How would you announce your departure? Or would you leave that up to your chairman?  What do you say to students?

Since your departure is known to and supported by the head of the department, there is no real issue here: you can talk about your departure in any way that seems most reasonable to you.  I don't think there is any canonically best way to do it.

In my (limited) direct experience, faculty who leave but do not retire often do so without an "official" announcement.  The exceptions have occurred when we want to rehire into the position before the new academic year.  Maybe it would be better in some ways if there were an official announcement.  If you feel that way, I would talk to your chair about it and ask if they would like to make an announcement on your behalf.

  What do you say to students?

That surely depends entirely on what kind of students you have and the nature of your relationship with them, about which I know nothing and you know everything.  I presume that as a PT lecturer you have not been advising graduate students in any kind of official capacity.  But if you know of specific students for which your departure would cause a definite and substantial disruption -- well, sure, I think you should tell them as soon as you know you're leaving.  That seems to be essentially common sense.

Good luck in your new job.


How do I cite same reference multiple times in a paper? I am writing a report on CPUs and I need to constantly need to cite technical information from a single reference multiple times throughout the report, specifically the datasheet for an Intel processor. Should I be citing my reference every time I cite some information from the datasheet like this?

  This sentence has some information. [1]
  ....4 pages later...
  This sentence has more information. [1]

Or should I only need to reference the data sheet once? I've searched around and it seems like it's a bad thing to cite the same reference multiple times, but I'm not sure how to handle this.

The most important principle to follow is that the source of the information that you are discussing should always be clear to a reader.  I thus find the following citation heuristics useful:

When you present a single statement in isolation, as in your example, each such statement should be individually cited.
When you are presenting a few statements in a chain, the first should have a citation, and the others be connected by prose.  For example:

  The Toast-o-matic processor has an unusual 19 bit word size [1].  It is also notable for its grilled cheese coprocessor and unusually high power demands.  Strong cooling is required, as the specifications note that its browning module is capable of attaining temperatures of more than 500F.

For larger contiguous blocks, such as a full paragraph or section, there should be an explicit delineation of the region covered by the citation.  For example:

  In this subsection, we briefly review the specifications of the Toast-o-matic processor[1].  The Toast-o-matic processor has an unusual 19 bit word size.  It is also notable...


Choosing a second option choice I am currently applying to MSc pure maths/maths courses.
One the universities gave me the option to fill out a second choice program. My first choice was pure maths but I put my second choice as applied maths.
I was wondering, could putting applied maths as my second choice hurt my application because they might think I am not committed enough or 100% sure of doing pure maths?

The university says on the application form that if you are unsuccessful they give you the opportunity to submit a new personal statement for the second choice.

I am considering ringing up the university and telling them to remove my second choice.

What shall I do, does it matter?

Admissions committees have been in the business of matching grad students with classes and advisors for a long time. To provide the best fit, they have asked students for their specialization preference knowing that while some students are sure of their path (pure, applied, or statistics), others will change their mind with a broader exposure. Listing a second option should increase your chances of acceptance, for it gives the admissions committee more options.

While I cannot imagine an admissions committee penalizing students listing a secondary option, they will likely be displeased with wishy-washy students calling to change minor application details.


Does my Anthropology PhD topic have to be the same as my Masters topic? I have a MSci in Social and Cultural Anthropology. While doing the masters, I chose a thesis topic that I ended up hating. I finished the thesis regardless and graduated with merit.

I want to now apply for a PhD, but I don't want to continue down the path of the masters thesis topic, instead choosing something I studied in a course in the program, but didn't write a thesis for (I did write some related essays on it, and took a related course on it).

Also the two topics would be in latin america, dealing with women (just different groups of women, one was urban women in brazil, the PhD topic would involve indigenous women in Guyana). I can certainly find some overlaps, though it might be a stretch of the imagination.

What do you think? How important is it that the masters topic overlap with the phd topic?

There is no such requirement unless imposed by some advisor that you might carry through with from the masters to the doctorate. But even then it is not essential in concept.

You are free to explore new directions, and it is probably a good idea to do so. Assuming the common case in which you have a different advisor, or even if you are at a different university, take some (maybe a lot) direction from your new advisor. If you have your own ideas, explore them with the advisor. If you are more tentative, the typical case, look for suggestions from them about directions you might pursue. Perhaps the ideas will be in line with the general research trajectory of the advisor in such situations.

And this isn't true just in anthropology.

It is also important that if you are going to do serious research in some topic, that you have some affinity for that - it needn't be love exactly, but it is better if you are driven internally by the questions, rather than just following a script.

Danger. Danger. Don't over stress my words just above. Be in love with the topic. But don't be driven to preconceived notions that you want to be true. Research is a search for truth. Be in love with the search, whatever emerges as the truth.


Ways to get around pre-registration? The question sounds bad but here is the context:

My area of focus is psychology where preregistering studies (e.g., methodology, hypotheses, analytical plans) is becoming more and more popular to avoid issues with p-hacking or HARKing (hypothesizing after results are known). Preregistration has garnered the endorsement of many prominent psychologists and it's now being encouraged by many top tier journals.

However, I've seen less than ethical behaviors among some behavioral scientists in which they attempt to still p-hack or HARK while getting the preregistration badge.

For instance, suppose that John decides to run an exploratory survey study on various topics with no real a-priori hypothesis. In this large dataset, John finds an interesting effect and thinks that this finding is publishable. He develops a post-hoc conceptual reason for why the effect may exist. John wants to publish in the journal Psychological Science. However, this journal encourages preregistering of studies. In order to get the preregistration badge, John preregisters a new study with a hypothesis on the effect that he found, making it seem like he had a theoretical and conceptual reason to develop that hypothesis (rather than it being from an exploratory analysis; basically the act of HARKing). Because he never published anything from the exploratory dataset, no one else knows about John's HARKing.

Sidenote: this is a relatively extreme example--many journals are okay with an exploratory, unregistered study if it's also followed up with preregistered, confirmatory studies.

In this scenario, one could easily bypass the preregistration honor code and HARK without much chance of ever being caught. In other words, while preregistering has good intentions, I'm under the impression that it also can result in people becoming more creative in their endeavor to p-hack and HARK.

I'm hoping to create workshops in my department regarding how preregistration is a good approach to minimizing issues in modern psychological research, but can also present a new flurry of issues. To do this, I'm trying to get a good sense of how researchers have found loopholes for preregistration. What kind of methods have you observed / engaged in / heard of / or can reasonable figure would bypass the preregistration process?

DISCLAIMER: I study ethics and decision-making so I mainly aim for behavioral economics and business journals where preregistration is not as strongly endorsed as in social psychology. If I misunderstood some part of the preregistration process or norm, do feel free to correct me.

The value of preregistration for a retrospective study is pretty marginal. Preregistration works best for prospective studies where the primary analyses and hypotheses to be tested are finalized before data collection begins. It is worth noting that preregistration does not prevent data fabrication or many other types of scientific misconduct. The main benefit of preregistration, beyond making the process more open, is by preventing p-hacking and HARKing. This only works for new data, or at least for new aggregations of existing data.

The worse abuse of preregistration I have seen is a study where the hypothesis and planned analyses where changed 6 months after data collection was completed. The paper then talked about the planned comparisons from the updated version of the preregistered study.


IEEE Access License on Arxiv I would like to submit an article to IEEE Access. As per their requirements, I need to add a license statement on my corresponding ArXiv upload, which will look like this:

  IEEE copyright notice. © 2020 IEEE. Personal use of this material is
  permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses,
  in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this
  material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new
  collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or
  reuse of any copyrighted

My question is: Which copyright do I have to select on ArXiv?
They offer the following options:

arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license to distribute this article
(Minimal rights required by arXiv.org)
Creative Commons Attribution
license (CC BY 4.0)
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license
(CC BY-SA 4.0)
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike
license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Creative Commons Public Domain Declaration
(CC0 1.0)
None of the above licenses apply

Thank you in advance!

Only the last option applies.

Once you assign all rights to the IEEE (or anyone), then you no longer have the right to license the work yourself.

And the IEEE statements is pretty clear that they retain almost all rights. It doesn't mean that they might not give a more permissive license at some point, but you no longer have that ability.


How to search for a PhD student opening in Japan? I noticed that the Japanese universities almost never advertise for open PhD student positions on the websites such as phdportal.com or academicpositions.com or researchgate.

I tried to check some Japanese websites, but they assume that the visitor knows the Japanese language, which is not my case.

However I really want to see how are the opportunities in this beautiful country.

Maybe I should search on more websites, than the ones I mentioned at the beginning?

The best option if you can get accepted is through a MEXT scolarship. Usually, the application process is detailed on the website of the Japanese embassy of your country. Of course there are other scholarships but this one is the most advantageous.
If you can self-finance, you may want to try to enroll as a "Kenkyusei" (research student) for 1/2 years. Being a kenkyusei allows you to do some research under the supervision of a professor (ideally the one who would advise you as a Phd), taking Japanese classes and more broadly getting adjusted to your new environment while preparing for the university's Phd entrance exam. The application process for kenkyusei should be detailed on universitys' website.