Interviews for academic teaching positions and "diversity" I am a Masters student in math, who loves teaching, and rather than go on for a PhD would rather teach at a community college. I've noticed in many of the schools to which I am applying the they emphasize the need to understand diversity and teaching to diverse ethnic, economic, and ability populations.

Now I'm just a simple boy from the farm, so can somebody explain why this is important to teaching mathematics? Aren't people, well people? And if a person knows how to do deal and relate well with others, knows how to respect other's differences and is a good teacher, what more is there to say really?

I'm not trying to be obtuse or controversial, but I just don't see what these factors really have to do with being an effective educator and they simply come off as being PCish to me, but I'm hoping someone can perhaps give me a substantive answer.

Now I'm just a simple boy from the farm, so can somebody explain why this is important to teaching mathematics?

Sure, I'll give it a try. The "this" that is supposed to be important are the qualities of being empathetic to, and understanding of, and passionate about, the unique challenges facing people who belong to certain racial, ethnic, or other demographic groups. Although the primary role of a mathematics teacher is to impart knowledge about mathematics, there are many ways and approaches to doing this, some a lot more effective than others. Part of the philosophy of diversity is the belief that a teacher (of mathematics or any other subject) who has a good understanding of and empathy towards those groups will be a much more effective teacher to students who are members of those groups, and, for example, in addition to successfully imparting the desired technical knowledge, would also have the ability to inspire their students, teach them additional useful values and habits, and overall improve their educational and life outcomes.

  Aren't people, well people?

Yes, that is technically correct but is probably not a very helpful way to look at a question such as what makes someone a good candidate for a teaching position in a community college. The sad fact is that humans are programmed in many subtle ways to treat different people in different ways. The ability and desire to be aware of such tendencies and overcome them are very desirable qualities for a lecturer in a country as heterogeneous as the U.S.

  And if a person knows how to do deal and relate well with others, knows how to respect other's differences and is a good teacher, what more is there to say really?

I think this question carries a premise that a person either relates well to all "others" or to none. That is not the case. Many people who belong to a certain group A will be able to relate fabulously to other members of group A and could be great teachers for them, while having a very poor ability to relate to members of another group B. In fact, we all feel more comfortable with and have a much better understanding of people who are similar to us - that is just human nature. But imagine that you are a community college administrator interviewing candidates for a math lecturer position, and along comes a member of group A who is able to convince you that he/she has a very good understanding of the challenges faced by members of group B and is really passionate about helping students from group B overcome those challenges and succeed. Wouldn't you be impressed and see great value in the possibility of employing such a person - at least assuming his/her general math lecturing credentials are just as good as the other candidates you're comparing them to?

Note that those sorts of qualities the colleges are looking for are of a much more specific kind that just someone having generally good people skills and a general ability to respect others. So yes, there is a lot "more to say" than the level of generality you are addressing.

With that said, of course having exceptionally good people skills can be impressive in its own right, and to some extent I believe you can tick off some of the right boxes without necessarily going down to the level of showing that you are passionate about helping very specific groups of people. Certainly showing a general respect for all people, whoever they may be, is a very good starting point for selling yourself in a job application.


Is there an advantage in including quotes from teaching evaluations in a teaching statement? For context, I am a mathematics PhD student, and I am writing up my teaching statement. In looking up examples of teaching statements, I saw that one of them included quotes from students from teaching evaluations. I thought it was a nice touch.

I am merely a graduate student and I don't have the perspective of someone on a hiring committee.

Would it be to my advantage to include quotes from my teaching evaluations?

I would consider student comments in teaching statements as "standard optional": they are not required, and probably the majority of teaching statements do not include them, but a substantial minority do and it is certainly quite reasonable to do so.  Here are some things to keep in mind:

Your teaching statement is your chance to convey your philosophy of teaching and, in so doing, show yourself to be a clear thinker, competent writer and to possess fluency in English (assuming that you are applying to a job where English is spoken).  Including too many quotes by other people in a short statement works against this.  I am a wordy person, but for me I think a teaching statement should be at least two pages long.  If you have a 1.5 page teaching statement and a third of it is quotes, then I worry that you're using the quotes to evade the short essay you've been asked to write.  Succeeding in an academic job is a lot harder than succeeding in writing a two-page essay, so that doesn't inspire my confidence.
The positive side of the last comment is that it would be much better not to just include quotes in a pile at the end but rather to use them to illustrate points about your own teaching.  Drawing an explicit moral from each quote would not be overdoing it.
Including quotes in your own teaching statement is a bit like including quotes on the back of a book saying how good it is.  These quotes can be part of a successful sales pitch, but let's be real: they are cherry-picked.  (If you're not cherry-picking the very best quotes, you're losing ground to everyone else who is. In particular, think ten times before including a quote that has the slightest hint of negativity or even measured praise about your teaching.  Saying something negative about yourself in application materials is a black belt level sacrifice throw.)  The idea that you fundamentally gain legitimacy from a teaching statement by including the students' own words is a dubious one to the jaded eye.  Most of the eyes reading your application will be highly jaded.
Consider feeding the quotes (especially if you have more than one or two) to a faculty member who can put them in a teaching letter.  It is harder to write good teaching letters than good teaching statements.  Along with cold, hard statistics about your teaching (but be careful about introducing negativity, as above), including quotes from students is a good way to personalize the letter.  (Saying that Ms. X is clear, attentive and well-liked by students only fills up so much space, and almost everyone else is saying it too.)


Do journals allow authors to bring their own reviewers Some papers are published under category "communicated by ...". Do this mean the author contact this person to review the paper instead of editorial board? My question is: do journals generally allow authors to bring their own reviewers for evaluating the papers? It seems that some journals allow that.

There are some journals that ask authors to suggest reviewers. There is no expectation that these people will necessarily be asked, but it gives the editor a backup at least. There are some journals that ask authors to suggest people who should not be reviewers, though I think that is a bit less common.

Most journals, however, have their own pool of reviewers and the author has no input at all into who will review the paper. Most of those use blind reviewing in which you never learn who reviewed your paper.

But in the case you mention, it is likely that someone other than the author sent the paper to the editor. That may actually be required in some situations. There is no expectation that review is then suspended.


To use bracket or footnote in the academic writing? For example,

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map (also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2]).

Or

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map1.
  1: Saliency map is also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2].

Or

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map. It is also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2].

Which style is better in academic writing?

To draw the most attention to human attention map, use the following, because the phrase appears in the main flow of text.

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map. It is also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2].

To draw less attention, use the following, because the phrase appears inside parenthesises in the main flow of text.

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map (also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2]).

To draw the least attention to human attention map, use the following, because the phrase appears outside the main flow of text.

  I'd like to introduce the saliency map.1

  1: Saliency map is also referred as human attention map in [1] and [2].

The style you should use depends on what you want to achieve


Should I lead an applause after introducing colloquium speaker? I am introducing my first speaker at my university and, since the speaker is rather famous, I wrote a 1-2 minute introduction.  The crowd will be interdisciplinary and between 100-400 people.

Should I lead the audience in an applause at the end of my introduction, or just finish with the title of his talk and a nod to him?  Or something else?

If it matters, it is an interdisciplinary topic, a public audience and in a science department.

"Please welcome our guest ..." and applaud with the crowd.

Presumably you have attended to invited speeches before?


Does it matter how long ago you took a course for graduate school admissions This might be a strange question, but I was curious how much weight goes into when you took a course.  I took some math courses 4-5 years ago and did well in them.  Will the fact that I took courses from that long ago carry less weight when applying to grad school?

This depends a lot on what you've been doing in the interim. At one extreme, even if you had a solid coursework background, but have not been exercising it, or anything related, for the last decade, and admissions committee will worry that you're not up-to-speed.

At another extreme, if you did well in coursework and have been doing serious stuff subsequently, more-or-less related to your future goals, that's obviously a plus. That is, the "stale coursework" potential problem is not a problem for you since you've not only maintained, but improved, your chops meanwhile.

True, it's easier to flash a transcript to "prove" some knowledge or expertise, while professional knowledge or expertise is not universally set up to be "documentable".


Rules for using an electronic text as the texbook for a class I have just completed my PhD in Mathematics and accepted a job as a visiting assistant professor. The course I am assigned to teach allows me to pick the textbook I wish to use.

I am currently looking for lower-cost/free textbook options for my students, and I have found a textbook that I really like in the SpringerLink database. My school’s library has a subscription to this database which give students access to an electronic copy of this book free of charge. Are there any rules which prevent me from assigning this as the textbook for the class and giving them the option to download it for free through the library?

Well .. one idea is to assign the book as the textbook then notify the students that they should get the book via buying from amazon ... or that your library has access to Springer resources free of charge for the students. University students are adults that can make their own decisions.

As the course coordinator you are not selling the book, and it is not your responsibility to hand in a book to each student. Students can: buy the book or use free resources on their own progeratives. Students are not liable, since they are just accessing your library to view already available resources.

As long as you do not directly post content such as homework questions or chapter text from the book or directly share such content in any way, such as on the course website or as handouts, you are not liable. You are just assigning a book as recommended textbook and notifying the students their options. Students are also not liable since your library enables them to access free material they wish to view.

I also just want to give an example of clear violation. If you buy the book and make a pdf out of it and share them in course site (does not matter whether public access or not) that would be a breach of copyright.


strange potential plagiarism case(missed the acknowledgement page) Forgot to mention supervisor's name in the thesis(due to pressure) and submitted it and got an A for it. Can I be accused of plagiarism at a later date, if this professor wishes to push it forward? This professor was my thesis advisor or guide.There were some portions of the thesis which we both worked on it and some portion was mine. I missed the acknowledgment section

First of all, the Ph.D candidate is always considered the only author of the thesis and the only one to respond legally in case of plagiarism. Despite all the input introduced by your supervisor along your research, he will never be entitled to accuse you of plagiarism due to the lack of acknowledgements. This is just an impolite thing to do, nothing more.


How to cite several papers at once with first same authors? I would like to cite both Potter, Granger and Weasley (1995) and Potter, Granger and Weasley (1998) for the same claim. I would write

  Hogwarts is a school of magic (Potter et al. 1995,1998).

Now let's assume I would like to cite both Potter, Granger and Weasley (1995) and Potter, Dumbledore and Snape (1997) for the same claim. Should I write

  Hogwarts is a school of magic (Potter et al. 1995,1997).

or

  Hogwarts is a school of magic (Potter et al. 1995; Potter et al. 1997).

I doubt it vary much among journals but FYI I am aiming Molecular Ecology who uses the APA reference style as indicated in the guidelines to authors.

The APA reference guide from Purdue denotes how the articles should be listed and referred to inline. So my understanding of the two links above would be something like (using the examples they have):

  [the claim you want to use the reference] (Wegener et al. 2000; Wegener et al. 1994).

would be inline reference and in the references list it would be

  Wegener, D. T., Kerr, N. L., Fleming, M. A., & Petty, R. E. (2000). Flexible corrections of juror judgments: Implications for jury instructions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 629-654.

  Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., & Klein, D. J. (1994). Effects of mood on high elaboration attitude change: The mediating role of likelihood judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 25-43.

On a separate note: Are you using a reference manager like papers3, mendeley or zotero? If so just insert the citekey for the articles and choose the style, let the software do the work for you. Saves you the headache..


Can ResearchGate upload preprints from ArXiv without author's consent? I recently uploaded a preprint on ArXiv (the journal I submitted the manuscript allows this) under CC BY-NC-ND. However, it can be found on ResearchGate (without my consent). While it can be removed from my profile, it still appears on ResearchGate. Can ResearchGate automatically upload papers from arXiv without the author's consent?

Yes, anyone can share your work as long as they follow these restrictions.
That is the nature of an open license. You have already explicitly consented to let them do that.
The actual licence clause that matters here:

For purposes of this Public License, the exchange of the Licensed Material for other material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights by digital file-sharing or similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment of monetary compensation in connection with the exchange.

To answer the (very relevant) question that got buried in the comments:

If I want the preprint to appear only on arXiv and restrict platforms like ResearchGate distributing it, what license can I use?

There is a licence that you can choose which leaves you with full control over the use and copyright: arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license. There is no legal right for anyone to rehost a manuscript that you give to arXiv under these terms. The only thing it allows is arXiv (and nobody else) to host your manuscript. Nobody else can use or reshare it for any (non-fair use) reason.


Why is having multiple PhDs frowned upon? I've often read that having more than one PhD is badly seen. Is there a good reason for this? Good obviously means with some kind of evidence to back it up beyond plain and simple "personal experience" and opinion.

I've seen many comments about this matter, but often rely on a kind of judgment that sounds highly personal and by no means endowed with the academic objectity that I would expect.

I think your assertion really is an overgeneralization, but there are some negative points to pursuing more than one PhD.

It's the same concern as it would be for pouring an inordinate amount of resources into the wrong pursuit.  It might indicate something about the recipients decision-making abilities, or "perpetual student syndrome".

That said, if that's what one needs to do to pursue the career one wants, that's what one needs to do.

Let's look at two distinct situations.  A college junior starts thinking about her career path, and thinks"

  I want a very specific, highly specialized pursuit.  I believe that I
  will need two PhD's to establish my credibility and skill set for this
  path.  I am setting out to get two PhD's, and have a good plan for
  doing so.  I've already considered whether I can acquire the skills
  and knowledge by doing one PhD, and then endeavoring to cover the
  shortfall by some other means, and I don't think I can.  I'm well
  aware that some of the skills I learn during one PhD will be redundant
  with what I learn in the second, but there's absolutely no way around
  it.

Contrast this with a senior, who doesn't manage to get a job, so enters graduate school -- gets one PhD, doesn't see the career prospects, then gets another PhD to fix things.

Clearly, the first situation is better (though, I'd argue, exceedingly rare, and often unnecessary).  The second situation is much more problematic, likely more common than the first, and arguably, what some people tend to think the path was when told someone has two PhDs.


Professors and Liberal Arts Colleges In general, do professors work at liberal arts colleges because they do not want to have to face the pressure of writing a lot of research papers? Instead they want their evaluations to be skewed towards their teaching quality?

You're not expressing the question in the most flattering way, but yes: most academic jobs are a mix of research and teaching (and also service / administration), and there is a lot of variation in the importance placed on each from job to job.  Some people are more interested in one than the other, and the faculty at liberal arts colleges have signed up for a job in which more emphasis is placed on teaching and student contact than a, well, a research university.

At a good liberal arts college faculty are still expected to be research active -- it's just that they spend more hours per week on teaching than their colleagues at a more research-oriented institution.  Someone who felt like writing research papers was pressure that they didn't want to face would probably be more comfortable at something like a four-year, junior, or community college, in which in most cases the research expectations are really nominal.


Is it suitable to discuss with several professors which of them would be best to supervise me? Quite simply, I have contacted several professors in the same department, and they have all expressed an interest in supervision, and several of them have also said, "you should also consider professors X, Y..." So I ask:
Can I disclose in my correspondences that "yes, I am also in discussions with professors X, Y..."? I feel like the scenario is a bit like being in Dragon's Den and I don't know whether it would be a good idea and then have them potentially discussing me behind my back? Or what does happen in these circumstances usually?

Yes, you can do that. You are taking their advice, actually, and giving them information they might want. But don't neglect to also say that you are (very) interested in either working with them or keeping contact.
But it is also essential that you have a conversation with each of them about how it will play out if you become their student. You want to know if they have good research ideas (in case you aren't yet committed) and that they will be able to spend sufficient effort on your behalf.
It is also useful to speak with  one or more of their current students to get feedback on such things.


Does a late reference letter to UWaterloo accepted? One of my referees had to take an emergency leave because of a family death and because of that she would not be able to complete the recommendation to University of Waterloo(for MDSAI program) by end of deadline. She has informed me that she could complete the recommendation 2 days later from the deadline but the university website mentions that the reference needs to be submitted by deadline. Can this cause an issue and get my application rejected?

This question can probably be best answered by the MSDAI's point of contact. You can find their contact information here: https://uwaterloo.ca/graduate-studies-postdoctoral-affairs/future-students/programs/data-science-and-artificial-intelligence-mdsai-co-op


How can I find out if a student’s thesis is just the translation from his native language (Spanish) to English? One of my student’s MA thesis is very well done. I know him and I worked with him enough to notice that something is going on. I talked to him and he always seemed confused about what he was doing and he did not seem to know the source so well.

Is it possible that he just translated and paraphrased another thesis from his native language, which is Spanish? How can I find it out?

The thesis contains citations and everything but it’s too accurate and I have some doubts.

Your question suggests that you are not sure which of the following is true:

Your student worked hard and produced an excellent thesis
Your student plagiarised a thesis from another language

In either case, this warrants extra attention from you.

The first step would be to discuss the work with him further. If he was able to discuss said work intelligently, this would be an indication that he did write the thesis. However, you said that you spoke to him, and he seemed confused about what he was doing, which raises legitimate suspicions.

To find out whether he can (and has) produced good written work, but finds it hard to discuss said work in person, you can ask him to edit his written work. Unless the thesis is 100% perfect in every way, you can identify a potential area of improvement that should not place an undue burden on the student. For example, you can ask him/her to

add some extra detail to one section
compare to another related work in the literature review section
etc.

If the student did the work and independently produced a great thesis, this is positive attention that will help improve the work. If the student did not do the work, it will become evident when he tries to improve it following your suggestions.

Of course, if you know someone who speaks the student's language and who can be counted on to keep your request quiet, you can (without sharing the student's name) ask him/her to search the web in the student's language for publicly available theses on the subject, and see if a match turns up.


what is the best software for drawing mechanical mechanism? I want a software which I can use to draw mechanisms like this picture:

Update:
the author told me that : "the figure was made in Adobe Photoshop/Illustrator by tracing the hand-drawn kinematic diagrams."

This type of request is usually something authors will gladly address. Since this images comes from recent paper (2018), you should write to corresponding authors or journal editor, asking how this image was produced. In fact, providing such information is part of obligation when people publish work, your request will not be unusual at all.


How does one find an academic career coach? Inquiring for a client with a PhD (public policy/labor studies) who has been hunting for a tenure-track position for 4 years (I'm an editor). Like many emerging scholars, she works at several adjunct positions each year. She has been very active in research and publishing, has won several grants since getting her PhD, and has applied for 50 jobs, resulting in 3 (unsuccessful) interviews. At this point she would like to find a career coach who specializes in working with academics in the North American market (Canada would be good, but perhaps not strictly necessary). Our google search for a coach hasn't turned up anyone so far. We investigated the website and book of a well-known coach and found that the information was readily available elsewhere, leading us to conclude that the person's high fee would not be a good investment. Any tips for finding and working with an academic job coach?

The only service I heard is "the professor is in" I watched some of their live Facebook videos and learn a lot. Even asked question in here relating their comments about job interview.
Also they provide couching and help with cover letter and statements for possition application with special emphasis on diversity.
Some members of Academia.stackexchange find them controversial due to unorthodox views on STEM field. But since OP friend is from humanities and whole team is more from that background I highly recommend them.


If I reworked an idea published by a paper which has a fatal error, could I publish a paper on my work? While doing my M.Sc research in Engineering, I encountered a nice idea published by almost an unknown journal. However, while studying that paper I found a fatal assumption which is made at the beginning of the paper, yielding the whole work to a ruin.

So I restudied the idea from the beginning, and I developed a whole mathematical form yielding to the final correct equations. And that's took me for about three months.

So my questions are:

Is it appropriate to publish a paper in this work.
And if yes, then should I cite the "wrong" paper, telling that it has a wrong assumption which I am avoiding in my work for example.

Kindly advise.

Sure, if your results are watertight you should publish them. When you point out the shortcommings of the previous paper, you have to do it with extreme tact. Ask somebody knowledgeable in the area of work, probably your advisor or respected faculty, to go over that particular part of your text (at least) before sending it out for review, and be specially careful with any suggestions in that area.


Forwarding a student’s question about exam modalities to a professor as a TA? I am currently working as a teaching assistant.

My tasks this semester include writing/putting together a formula sheet containing a lot of formulas and some graphs that the students should not have to memorize.
This sheet will be used in the final exam.

A student recently send an e-mail asking whether he should print it out himself or will be given a copy upon taking the exam. Since I am not responsible for the exam or anything grading-related, this mail should have been addressed to the professor, since I can only guess
(although I am fairly certain it would not be useful to let students bring the sheets themselves and thus giving them a chance to alter them).

Now how I see it, I have the following options:

Forward the e-mail to my professor.
Answer the student vaguely, recommending to mail the professor.
Contact the professor; ask him what to do.

I’m unsure whether forwarding this mail would be appropriate. I’d also feel stupid for asking the professor about something that should be obvious.

Which of the outlined possibilities would be the most efficient, yet still appropriate way to go?

You cannot answer this question, so you have to ask the professor.
You do not want to be responsible for the potential confusion caused by a wrong answer.
If your professor already made up their mind, it’s a matter of seconds for them to answer the mail (this is a clear case of this PhD comic).
If not, they need to make up their mind anyway some time, and you were right to redirect the question.

Check that the forwarded mail is concise; otherwise summarise it when forwarding.
Also make sure that the response goes to you as well (include yourself and the student in the reply to field) as you may get further questions along this line.

This does not really apply to this case, but for more complex or exotic questions you can also include a suggested action and rationale and just have it ratified by the professor, e.g.:

  A student asked me whether they should bring a print of the formula sheet or it will be provided. I would guess the latter since it makes it easier for us to control that the sheets have not been tampered with. Can you please confirm or correct this?


Different CV for applying to university and applying to fellowship? After reading through all (yes, all) questions in the cv tag, I have a thought that CVs for applying to a position of a university are different to CVs for applying to a fellowship. When applying to a position of a university, the quality of the CV is define by your papers, research experiences, education, etc. While when applying to a fellowship, a good CV is the one can show your leadership, volunteering jobs, etc. Yes, there are some overlapped sections, but these two are not the same. Are CVs for applying to universities different to applying to fellowships?

Unlike a resume, the contents of your CV should typically be comprehensive and complete, including both research experience and service.  You might want to reshuffle the positions of sections within the CV for a target where you want to emphasize one aspect vs. another, but the content should be no different.


When applying for a higher education job, do I need to list my bachelors? If I did a bachelors a long time ago in an unrelated field and I am applying for a job that requires a PhD And a Master's should I put the bachelor's degree? Is it necessary?

Yes.  An academic CV should list every academic degree that you have earned.

If you don't list it, it will look as though you got a PhD without ever getting a bachelor's degree at all, which would be very strange and perhaps suspicious.


When I call a person doctor If I call a person doctor, instead of Doctor XXX, will this person assumes that I forget his name?

When I talk with another person, I said:" I wish to study in doctor's lab." At that time, the doctor is just next to me.

It is not common in my experience (first-language English speaker in the US) to call anyone just "Doctor" unless they are a medical doctor. In non-medical settings, you should always use their surname after the title.

On the other hand, it is OK to use just "Professor", if you are speaking to the person.

So you could ask, "Professor, can I take the exam tomorrow?" But not "Doctor, can I take the exam tomorrow?"

If you are talking to someone else, you should always use the surname, don't just call the person "professor" or "doctor" as if that was a name.


4 Years in PhD. No publications and adviser keep changing my research First of all, I need to apologize for writing a really long description.

I started my PhD in Mechanical Engineering 4 years ago and working with a professor, who has no idea on what we are doing and keep changing research area based on the funding possibilities irrespective of our capabilities. He is holding an administrative position as an associate dean and he has no idea on latest methods. He always refer to the methods published in 1980's.

First, I worked on an experimental research and had to stop after 1.5 years due to lack of funding to continue that. Then, I moved to a numerical research and used an open source software as my adviser didn't have money to buy a commercial software. Even though I had some experience in numerical work it took sometime to learn an opensource software.

After spending so much time, I finally managed to develop a new solver to simulate my problem.

I didn't get any input from my adviser as he didn't even want to listen to my research issues. The only thing he ask whenever I met him is do you have results to publish and when you are going to write a paper. Whenever I explain a technical issue he get furious and blame me. Then he doesn't talk to me for at least a month and he forgets what happened. Most of the time, I have to explain what's the problem I'm working on.

Last year he asked me to change my research, as my problem takes at least 2 days to run one simulation, which is normal in similar simulations. He told me that my solver is useless and there is no point of having a such code if it takes more than 4 hours. I was explaining why it takes long time and it's normal in such simulations even with a commercial software. But he got really angry and scolded me. Finally, I had no option other than changing my research because, I'm funded from his TA position (though the funding coming from the department).

Now, I have worked on this research for 6 months and he is still complaining about the simulation time. Now he wants me to abandon my work again as one of his friends found a paper (which is published in 1975) on a different method that claims it can solve similar problems faster. However, that method is based on many assumptions and no one has used that method after 1985 due to its limitations.

And my problem has completely different physics and cannot be used at all. I showed him some of the review papers which explain why that method is wrong and why no one uses it. But, he doesn't believe it and told me don't trust all the papers you read because most of the review papers are wrong as different authors interpret things in different ways. And he scold me saying there is no error in that method and it's me who try to find excuses not to change it.

I have tried to change my PI several times, but no other professor wants to take me as they don't want to make any problem with associate dean. I tried to apply other universities and they are expecting a recommendation from my adviser. I know clearly that my professor will never give me a recommendation to leave the group. He once told me and our lab mates, it won't be easy to leave this group even if you want.

No one in this university will dare to take my student. and he once told me that he cannot see me graduating at least in 2020. I don't really know what I should do.

I'm an international student and my I-20 will expire in 2 months and I need his authorization to extend it. I'm 29 years old and I'm actually not in a position to take a risk.

Change your adviser. Probably time to cut your losses and leave, your time is more valuable


Citation and reference to a figure: which comes first? This may be a bit of hair-splitting, but maybe there is a proper way to do this: In my thesis I present an external application. I want to give a literature reference to the application and a reference to a screenshot. What comes first, the literature reference or the screenshot reference?

  The SuperFramework [1] (cf. Figure 1.1) ...

or

  The SuperFramework (cf. Figure 1.1) [1] ...

Figure 1.1 is the screenshot.

I don't think there's any way to stick a citation and figure reference right next to one another in a non-ugly way, so I cheat.  When faced with a situation like this, I reorganize the sentence so that they are separated, e.g.:

  The SuperFramework [1], for which a screenshot is shown in Figure 1.1, ...


Advice needed for completing my PhD thesis. Which timeline should I follow? First of all, I apologize for the nature of this post. I am freaking out inside and I am branching out to seek as much advice as possible.

I am a 4th year PhD student, and I am looking forward to defend my thesis this year. However, I am confused of the timeline I should follow. There are two initial submission deadlines in our university. First in April for defending before August and other in August for defending before December.

What should I do?

This would be easier to advise you if you told us what field, subfield you are working in.  Give us less scoop than needed to identify you, but the extra info will help with sneaking in tailored advice.  Although much will be general, there can be differences from STEM to "bull", from theory to experiment.  Maybe we sneak you a little domain specific advice along with the general.
My advice is to push for the earlier timeline.  You have the work done (or a decent chunk of it). And you have published before.  Worst comes to worst, you have to delay.  However...I wrote my thesis in 10 days (literally, and not how millenials use literally).  And I am far from a genius.  Yeah, there was a lot of cut and paste.  And my advisor was pissed off (dumped it on him along with the committee).  But I had lots of papers done and a job waiting.  I had really checked the box on doing what is needed for the union card and gotten him lots of ride along coauthors.  It worked out.

No reason to make a big tadoo about the thesis.  WORST comes to worse, you just bail later.  But I would put the pressure on yourself.  Go for April.  That is a ginormous amount of time.  In the corporate world (or God knows as a PI), you will be expected to produce huge amounts of content in much less time.  The "dreamy" part of grad school is over.  Buckle down and get that thesis out and sent to your committee and the "ruler lady".  Do a decent job but really at the end of the day...darned thing is pass fail.  What matters are papers.  If you are a bull major, than maybe it becomes a book, but there is time to worry about that later.
Use MORE chapters than the norm (e.g a chapter per paper plus methods, intro, conclusions).  You will still need to do a little work to format and perhaps abstract intro and methods to separate, joint chapters.  But it is much easier to write a thesis with more chapters and ones that mimic your papers (less synthesis).  [Don't let anyone else know...let it be sneaky advice that I share with you.]
If you are not already familiar with Tex, I recommend to avoid that and use whatever you published the paper in (probably Word).  Same applies to complicated templates.  Write how you did your journal articles.  [The techies here will scream, but anyone to the left of CS/Physics/Math will back me up...don't make your thesis the time you learn to type differently.]
Start a computer file with the name "Thesis rev 1".  Hit save.  Go in and add a title (doesn't matter if it changes later) and add the different sections, chapters (doesn't matter if they change).  Now you are ROLLING!  This is so much easier now with computers than in the day when you hired a typist.  Dump your papers (whole stock) into whichever chapter makes sense.  You are really started now.
Make a schedule and follow it.  Mine was painful (chapter a day).  But you can do a little better.  I guess give your advisor intermediate drafts but don't let the old goat discombobulate your flow.  Push, push.  Imagine you were doing this whole thing on your own.  The cynical truth is you are.

Good luck, peanut.


Rumor mill and math job After starting the application process this year, I found a wiki page at UC Davis that lists people who have supposedly been shortlisted, invited for interviews, or given offers for faculty positions in mathematics.  I am listed in couple of places, and I wonder if this can harm my application.  What are the pros and cons of this open source?

I am a professor at a top 20 school in mathematics and I have been on our department's hiring committee for the past several years. I can assure you that we take absolutely no notice of the contents of that particular website when making decisions. We consider ourselves competent enough to form our own judgements on any particular candidate. In the past, we have interviewed plenty of people whose name occurs frequently on that list, and plenty of those whose name does not appear at all.  Moreover, the accuracy of that website is dubious at best; at my own institution it sometimes lists people who are not at all under consideration, and usually doesn't list people who are - including those who have been given offers. The only time I made any attempt to edit the website was when it claimed that we  didn't have any positions available at all (which was false). I suspect that at least on one occasion someone invited themselves to our institution to give a talk and then put their own name on the website as a candidate (they were not). Thus, I suspect that the effect this particular website has on job offers is minimal at most.


How to effectively navigate a large library? I am looking to decrease the time I waste looking for a book in the library. I generally know exactly what book I want, but not where in the library it is located.
(Finding out what book you want, is a matter for a whole range of other questions.)

My university has 4 libraries across its campus.
One for Art/Humanities/Business, one for Education, one for Science/Engineering and one for Law. All are multistory buildings.

Normally I will just use the library for my area, (that I am familiar with) but occasionally I will have to visit another for something cross-disciplinary.

The libraries separately shelf, books, periodicals, quartros and a few other types of publication.

Shelves are not always laid out in a linear order -- for space constraints and historical reasons, no doubt.

How can I optimally find the resource I am looking for?

My current method is:

Look up the book online. This will tell me the Library, the Floor, the media type (Book or Periodical etc), and its spine information: Dewey Decimal, year, author name and title.
Go to that floor. Walk past each and every shelf until I find the one that lines up with the Media type and Dewey Decimal range.
Entry that row and move, checking the Decimals every meter or so, on one shelf.
When I get to roughly the right area, check all spine codes til I find the book.

My latest failure at this, was in step 2, Finding the shelf. I was looking for a periodical with code 401.9.
I found the area with most periodicals on the floor, shelves we sequentially ordered from 200-399, then form 700 onwards. Skipping the 400s section I was looking for. After quiet a while of looking, eventually found the 400s section. It turned out that because there were so few 400s in this particular library/floor it was combined with the Quartros, and was in shelf sequentially after the 400 series books.

I figure there has got to be a better way.

I realized after, when I placed the journal in the re-shelving area, that while the re-shelving area had a section for 300 series Books, 300 series quartos and 300 series periodicals. It only has a section for 400 series anything. Thus if I had have looked in the re-shelving section at the start, I would have realized something was up with the 400 series, and known to be on the lookout for them to be all together.
Thus I figure there are other productivity tricks to get the layout of a library quickly.

Ask a librarian.  They usually know the place well, and are often quite happy to help.


Awaiting AE assignment to Under Review? I have submitted a paper to a very reputed publication of electrical engineering via ScholarOne.The status of my paper changed from "Awaiting AE assignment" to "Under Review" directly. Does it mean that is under the review of editorial office? Could it change from Awaiting AE assignment to Under Review directly without AE being assigned ?

It probably just happened quickly. This is peer review - it's not a well oiled machine. Take pride in knowing you passed the first benchmark and keep your fingers crossed R1 and R2 are kind. R3 is always a wildcard.  :)


Why do academics work only nine months of the year? I'm wondering how best to respond to queries from non-academics along the lines of "Why should you be paid during the summer holidays?" This is the sort of question I hear a lot in this economic climate here in Ireland, though I strongly suspect that one encounters similar questions and opinions elsewhere.

There is a subtext that public money is scarce, that people in "real" jobs work themselves to the bone and pay high taxes, while some people get to spend a significant proportion of the year on a sun lounger at the tax payer's expense. I like to think that we academics do earn our crust, but as somebody paid public money I think it's a reasonable question, and one I would like to answer better.

There are a couple of obvious responses.

It's nothing like nine months, especially when you factor in exam marking and processing, dealing with appeals, Autumn repeat exams, lecture preparation for the following year etc.
Did I forget to mention research? That's a full-time job in itself! And there are secondary activities such as applying for grants, judging grant applications, and supervising (post-)graduate students.

However these points don't apply to all academics. For example, I work in an Institute of Technology, possibly akin to a liberal arts college in the US, where there are typically 18 teaching hours per week in term time, but research is a bonus activity, and we have 10 weeks' summer holidays. So the core point seems to be that it's near-universal practice to have a teaching break during the summer months (exactly when this break is, and its length vary of course). But why is this? Are there good reasons that might satisfy somebody who is not already steeped in the academic life?

It's tempting to say that teaching is particularly intense, and this period of estivation is needed to avoid burnout. But is this true of teachers and academics more than, say, junior hospital doctors or care workers?

Presumably this question is tied to the question of why school teachers have summer holidays: I realise that this latter question may be off-topic for this site, but to the extent that answers to it have a bearing on my question, I would like to hear them.

Finally I am aware that not all academics are paid during the summer months. Many have temporary contracts that don't span the summer vacation. I hope that this situation remains the (in my opinion, disgraceful) exception rather than the rule.

EDIT: Thanks to Oswald Veblen and Dave Clarke for pointing out the general practice in US academia of being paid for only 9/12 of the year. In Ireland, and I think in much of Europe, academics are usually paid for 12 months. So some of the motivation for this question ("Why are we paying you academics during the summer?") may not apply in the US, although the basic question still stands ("Why don't academics typically have to teach during the summer?" or, in the more provocative (and inaccurate) terms that this is sometimes put: "Why don't academics work during the summer?")

The following applies to a previous version of the question: "Why do academics get paid to work only nine months of the year?".  The question of whether academics do work work in the summer, compared to whether they are paid to work over the summer, is more difficult.  Most faculty in the U.S. have 9-month contracts, but in my experience most faculty nevertheless work on their research and teaching during the summer.

In the United States, it is very common - nearly universal, in fact - for a standard academic contract to span 9 or 10 months. There are several reasons for this:

It allows the university to pay less. The standard rule of thumb is that a 9 month contract pays 9/12 of what the corresponding annual contract would pay. Many (most?) faculty have their 9 months of pay split up into 12 months of paychecks -- but this is an accounting fiction, not a sign that they are paid for 12 months of work. If few students are around over the summer, there is less reason for universities to pay salary to their faculty for that time - having a break in the contract balances the university income and expenses.
It allows faculty to be paid more. This is the flip side of paying 9/12 of an annual salary: the faculty member can, in principle, take another job during the summer.

Many grants, for example, are able to pay "summer salary", which is really just extra income. But these grants do not allow the faculty member to take salary from the university at the same time they take salary from the grant. The "9 month contract" resolves this: the faculty member can state they are actually only paid for 9 months of university work, so the grant can pay 2 or 3 months of extra salary during the summer.
Similarly, some universities pay extra to faculty who teach during the summer - that would not be possible if the summer was treated as part of the basic contract.
A smaller number of faculty use the summer for consulting work, or other jobs genuinely different from their university position.

Faculty like to travel over the summer. During the academic year, it is hard to leave for personal reasons, because of class. By claiming that the summer is "off contract", academics can travel however they like during that period of time, without having to justify their time.  So having the contract pause during the summer makes the job more attractive to job candidates, allowing the university to attract some people who might otherwise take higher-paying jobs elsewhere.

The reason I just cited are all purely economic - they can be justified solely in terms of saving money for the school, increasing pay for the faculty member, or attracting better candidates. There is also "tradition" as a reason for the summer break, as is also the case at lower levels of education.

However, the "9 month contract" is fictitious in a few ways:

Most faculty still have access to their office, library, email, and other university resources even when they are technically not "on contract" over the summer.
Research faculty usually continue to work on research during the summer, and travel to conferences (which may even be reimbursed by the university, even though the faculty member is technically not on contract!). This often happens even when the faculty don't have grants or other summer funding.
Many faculty use some of their summer time to prepare for their classes, even though they are not being paid to teach over the summer.
There are other activities during the summer: committee meetings, advising, etc. Some faculty participate in these, for various reasons, even when they are off contract.


Is impracticality of Short Classes Tested Or It Is Just A Common Belief? While knowing that students lose their focus on lecture after twenty minutes, due to the inefficiency of moving between classes every twenty minutes, universities timetable lectures for an hour up to even three hours. Nevertheless, e-learning has made it more practical.

This has been completely explained in the following two publications:

Kinchin, I. M. (2016). Visualizing powerful knowledge to develop the expert student: A knowledge structures perspective on teaching and learning at university. Springer:

  Many curriculum structures within universities have long historical origins and are bound up with issues such as internal politics and research funding as much as they are to do with any underpinning pedagogical claims. However, that is not to say that they cannot evolve and outgrow some of the more dated and restrictive practices that have helped to shape them. For example, that universities still tend to timetable lectures for about an hour even though we ‘know’ that students will typically only concentrate for about twenty minutes of that hour is a practical outcome of the logistical impracticality of moving in and out of classes every twenty minutes.

O'Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95.

I was wondering if there is any experimental evidence that having breaks every 20 minutes in classes is not practical, or it is just a common belief and no one has ever tried it?

UPDATE:

This thread answers many concerns mentioned in the comments.

The closest thing I know of to taking a break every 20 minutes that is based on any research is the Pomodoro technique developed by Francesco Cirillo. The purpose of using this technique was to break any task into intervals of normally 25 minutes. A timer is set and after the 25 minutes, you would take a short 3-5 minute break. The idea was that the mind can only focus for so long before it needs at least a brief rest.

Taking a short 3-4 minute break every 25 minutes during a lecture seems reasonable. However, it requires the teacher to be aware of principles found in cognitive science or to use common sense as they see their students struggle to stay focused and awake.


What to write in journal cover letter when research was conducted several years ago I am in the process of submitting a paper to a peer reviewed journal. The paper reports a study that was conducted 7 years ago. In the cover letter to editors that I have prepared, I point out that the topic remains timely, and I provide relevant references to illustrate this (which have also been used to update the paper). I feel that this information is sufficient at this time of initial submission, and that if the editors ask the reason for the delay in submitting the article, I can address it then. Any thoughts regarding this? Any suggestions for anything else to mention in the cover letter (aside from what normally goes in cover letters)?

Delays in publishing results are normal for several reasons. Seven years might be a long time, but as long as your results are still relevant and writing a new publication on them has not become obsolete, it is irrelevant when they were generated. So do not mention it in the cover letter at all.


How to deal with abusive professor? I am a fresh medical graduate. I worked with a professor who harassed me sexually. Unfortunately, I was afraid to talk and also a little bit confused because I was an international visiting student at that time. I did a great job in his lab before he did that. He wrote for me a great letter of recommendation at that time. After he started to be unprofessional, I decided to leave his lab.

Since then, I was surprised that he published the preliminary results of the research as conference abstracts without putting my name as a co-author. However, he stated that I am an author in the recommendation letter, formulated the primary draft and helped in the lab experiments, data collection, and statistical analysis as well. I sent him an email to ask him about the papers’ progress but he did not reply.

My question is: Now I want to apply for a research fellowship and I am going to use his letter of recommendation. But he wrote my last name as my father's name, not the family name that I usually use in my applications. I do not feel comfortable to send him an email. I do not know if it will be a problem if there is a difference between my last name in the application  and what he wrote. I also feel so bad when I found him published the papers in an international conference without mentioning my name and feel worse for not reporting him, deleting the message, and moving on to another lab.

I am sorry for your experience. Regarding the naming issue, I think that it is alright and no one will comment about it. You do not have to email that person again.

Regarding the publication, You should not be silent. It is an authorship dispute. If he published them in a peer-reviewed journal. Email the editor in chief all the documents, the LOR that indicate your role. You do not have to be silent if he stole your work. He is abuser and thief and that it should not be acceptable in academia. Stay safe and strong. You are not wrong. He is the jerk.


studying research methodology I am an undergraduate student pursuing a degree in Agricultural business. One of the course I will do is Research Methodology. What is academic research methodology course and what should I expect?

It's quite a broad title for a module but I expect it'll give you skills you might need to conduct research.  For example, how to conduct reliable surveys, interview people, they'll probably teach some statistics and how to analyse results and show you some tools to do so.  It could also teach you about writing articles and publishing in academia.


Why do so many pure math PhD students in the USA drop out or leave academia, compared to applied mathematics PhDs in the USA? I notice that many pure math PhD students, doing things like algebraic geometry or representation theory, drop out and enter industry and become software developers. The ones who finish their pure math PhDs also drop out and do things such as blogging, tutoring, etc. These students are pretty "top of the heap" too, attending the top pure math PhD programs like at UC Berkeley and UCLA.

Then I notice that many applied math PhD students typically finish, and also get post-doc offers. These PhD students are typically doing numerical methods for the solutions of partial differential equations.

Why does this happen? Do pure math PhD tracks often lead students to dead ends? Is it too hard, even for the brightest PhD candidates at the best programs?

In numerical PDEs, it seems that just a little progress leads to a PhD degree, e.g. solving numerically a PDE in one space dimension. (I know firsthand of someone getting their applied math PhD from an Ivy League program for solving a PDE in 1D.)

I have friends in both pure math and applied math PhD programs and have noticed this trend for many years now.

Only my personal experience, but I hope it will help you a little bit:

I am almost in the exact situation you describe in your question. I finished my PhD in Algebra (coding theory, lot's of linear algebra and representation theory) and am now working as a software developer. As a fun fact, this wasn't always planned. When I started my PhD, I was still dreaming about getting a PostDoc and ending up as a tenured prof at a prestigious university.

For me, personally, there were three reasons to take this step:

The PhD was quite hard and taxing on my mental health. Having a rather theoretic topic, you sit at your desk all day and try to come up with an idea. There is often no way to track progress for a long time, as you either have a clever idea or you don't, you can't set up a step by step plan to see if you are doing ok for such things. There is also always the fear that you simply won't have the right idea before your time/funding runs out. Due to that reason, I decided already some time before finishing it that I will run from academia without looking back as soon as I am done.
Closely related to the first reason, I wanted to do something more applied. I found a job where I can use my skills to really help people/the climate/... (our company develops AI solutions for agriculture, allowing farmers to better use resources and minimizing the need for pesticides).
I still plan to become a professor, one day. But after that experience during the PhD, I'm aiming for a position that is more focused on teaching and applied research (e.g. with industrial partners). For this, at least here in Germany, you need some years of industry experience.


Can I payoff student-loan debts working as a professor after getting a Ph.D. in mathematics? I have been recently accepted into graduate school for my PhD in Mathematics. I feel very prepared and excited. However, my route is somewhat untraditional as I am "going back." That is, I am walking away from a well paying job. (I should mention that I am unmarried with no children.) I still have a lot of debt from undergrad. And, I am about to accumulate more (although an assistantship will help defray some costs). Obtaining my PhD and teaching at a college is my dream. As such, I am taking the plunge-no matter the cost.   Working with the assumption that I will be about $100,000 in debt when I graduate, is it feasible to "live" even if I secure a tenure-track position? For instance, can one "request" to teach intersession and summer sessions for extra income (as a professor)?

Since nobody else has offered a direct answer to the title question...

  Should I take on debt in order to get a Ph.D. in mathematics?

Absolutely not.

If a PhD program isn't willing to waive your tuition and offer you a stipend (in the form of an assistantship or fellowship), they don't really want you.  Go somewhere else.  If they decide not to give you more funding after a semester or two, you're done.  Go somewhere else.


Should I be honest with postdoc candidate about awful lab working environment? I work as a postdoc in a lab that is extremely mismanaged.  The head of the lab micromanages all the staff, often claims successful work as his own, and rejects new ideas that are not from him.  All the employees (both scientists and technicians) are miserable, and some of the team has become destructive, creating regular conflicts between team members that the lab head refuses to resolve.
The head of the lab is hiring a new postdoc, and I, as the only other postdoc, will meet with the candidate as part of the final interview step.  I am already planning to leave, but haven't told anybody yet.
My question is:

If asked by the candidate, should I be honest about the working environment?
If not asked by the candidate, should I tell the candidate anyway?

I feel it is dishonest to let someone enter a destructive work environment without them being prepared.

UPDATE: I had no chance to speak to the candidate alone; the lab manager stuck by the candidate's side the whole time.  Interestingly, the candidate later declined the offer, so perhaps they were astute enough to recognise the environment for what it was.  Thanks to everyone for the help and advice!

The general rule in these situations is that being honest is okay (though consider that it can be risky if word of your honesty makes it back to the boss), but it's important to stick to facts and to your opinions about your own situation/experience.
"The team is destructive" is not something you should say, nor is "the lab is mismanaged". Those are your opinions about other people: stay away. What you can say is "I feel like I've had trouble getting credit for my work", "I wish I had more freedom to choose the direction of my work", etc. Even better is to use specific factual information (note: opinions are not facts), like "I've only been able to get one first-author publication in the past three years."
That said, take care of yourself, too. If you need a recommendation for a future job, it might be necessary to bite your tongue a bit. It's good to want to warn a candidate off gently, but consider that once you are gone someone is going to get that position, and it's even possible that the person who does will have a different experience than you did.
Also related: https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/137037/can-i-tell-a-prospective-employee-that-everyone-in-the-team-is-leaving (not an identical situation but I think the advice there still applies).


Graduate school applicant visiting a department he has applied to - advantageous? I've applied to several graduate schools in the US for a physics PhD. As I currently have some free time, I'm willing to travel around and visit graduate schools that I've applied to. My current research advisor (who is also one of my letter writers) can possibly establish contact between me and some of the people I have expressed interest in at different schools. My question is that whether in your opinion this is something that can actually boost my chances of getting admitted (provided a meeting with a person of interest goes well). Could pursuing this plan be advantageous?

It may not give you an advantage at being admitted, but it could help in other ways.  I visited my first-choice program (also in physics) around Thanksgiving of my senior year, and scheduled meetings with two PIs I wanted to work with.  The first stood me up, but the second took several hours to meet with me and show me the lab, and at the end of the visit he told me "If you get in and want to start early, let me know and I could probably give you an RA for the summer".  This ended up being a big help -- the visit made clear who would be better to work with, and also helped me get started with research shortly after graduating.


Phd in the computer science - mathematics interface Currently I am Bachelor student in Psychology. My plan is to do a Master in Artificial-intelligence. And then I wish to do research on the interface in Computer Science/Artificial-intelligence and Mathematics. Is is possible to do a Phd in the Computer Science/Artificial-intelligence - Mathematics interface?

You can certainly do a PhD in mathematics and apply it to AI. You should also look at CS PhDs in addition to mathematics ones, as the boundary between the fields is pretty nebulous and which department will have the faculty you wish to work with will vary by the university. You should in particular look for university with a strong program in Combinatorics, Algorithms, and Topology (especially if you want to go into object recognition/computer vision).


Is a second career in statistics and science realistic? Accountant inquires Short version: If I am 26 now and have a bachelors in accounting, is it realistic to have a shot at masters or doctorate level (bio)statistics by mid to late 30s? Assuming I prepare now.

Long version: I am a math and science lover. I read about both as a hobby and am learning Python and enjoy it too recently. Upon reading some papers in the Journal of Biometrics & Biostatistics I thought I found a field interested in the same things as I - critically examining the methodology of how studies are performed (I'm aware there's more to this area however).

I'm also pragmatic though, which is why I never went with science in college. Right now my plan is to continue in accounting, get my CPA, and be financially independent in ~10 years. Throughout this time I want to set myself up as best I can for a second career in statistics/science, by taking courses or pursuing a part time masters degree if possible.

Why not pursue this now? I value financial independence. It is a risk I can't take to go back to school now and have more debt when I'm already set up to have a good career as is. If the option exists to explore statistics later in life in a relatively risk-free way then the choice is clear, no?

Am I wrong to think there is any hope of exploring stats by mid-30s? The biggest issue i foresee is having to relocate for school or a job. But perhaps after some number of years away I could return to my area and I'd be fine with that.

Can anyone advise if years from now (age 30-32 for example) pursuing a part-time masters in applied statistics is wise or optimal in light of my ideals?
Is there any hope of getting into a biostatistics doctorate program if I am in my late 30s but have completed a masters in statistics along with great GRE scores and research experience/publications?
Is it realistic to reach out to professors/researchers while I am unaffiliated with a university to do volunteer work in order to gain research experience?

Not too long ago I faced the same issues as you. I wanted to go from economics to software engineering, particularly machine learning. I'm in a department with a decent emphasis on statistics, I know several future PhD statisticians, I have a general idea what those groups look for.

1—You don't want a masters in applied statistics (MAS). You want an MS in statistics. Huge difference. A graduate student in my department got an MS in stats from a top-ranked stats school that also offers an MAS. He said what he teaches in undergrad math stats is above what the MAS students learn in their first semester. If you write a thesis for your MAS, it will probably be a data analysis paper, not a minor contribution to the field like you would for an MS. The MAS degrees aim for people who don't know much about stats, and they mostly emphasize how to do things like statistical programming over original contributions to the statistics field. You get an MAS to go work in industry for a PhD, not to go on for a PhD.

2-I hope and suspect that your age won't count much against you. My department regularly admits people in the their mid-to-late thirties, as well as 22-year-olds. But we focus on applied mathematics and like to industry work. Again, you should get an MS instead of an MAS.

3-It can't hurt, but may raise eyebrows. Don't count on getting in with a biostats researcher, however. There are some security issues, and grants sometimes restrict who can access data for a variety of reasons.

My unsolicited advice: start to bail on accounting now. Start a second bachelor's degree in mathematics or statistics. That gives you a better shot at graduate school and a foot in the door for a stats graduate program. When you get into an MS in stats, go. Don't do it part time, go full blast, finish and get into a PhD program. It's a good time to get into statistics. When you finish, hunt for consulting gigs or go a route like machine learning, and you'll more than make up the lost accounting salary. What you'll never make up is the time.


Do positions exist in philosophical research? For example, in the same fashion that medical professionals might do research on cancer, does there exist comparable positions in philosophy where one "researches," say, Free Will Determinism?

Yes, for example Oxford's philosophy faculty includes professors of

ancient greek philosophy
philosophy of mind
political philosophy
philosophy of language
practical ethics
philosophy of physics
philosophy of mathematics
medieval philosophy
metaphysics
logic


How to write about an area I'm going to study in undergrad research? I'm a undergraduate student in mathematics and I'm applying for a scientific-initiation (or maybe undergraduate-research) scholarship in which I'll study a certain topic in mathematics (so I'll not really do any research, despite the name of the program).

To enroll in the program, I have to submit an eight-page project describing what I'm going to do, with a schedule for the duration of the program, methodologies, and references. Formally, the project text must contain a summary, introduction, objectives, methods (or methodology), a schedule of activities, and references.

For the methodology/methods, I'll just say what I'll do: read the theory in the main reference text, maybe rephrase some definitions or results and make some additional remarks, do the exercises, maybe construct some new examples/counterexamples. I think it's a bit too direct but I'm not very concerned with this part. The same applies to the references.

My problem is: I don't have any knowledge of the subject (beyond the very basic) I'm going to study (and don't have time to further study it until the deliver of this document), so I don't know what to say in most of this document sections. I'll just pick a book on the subject and study it. In the summary, I quite already said that, and I don't really know what to write in the introduction and objectives.

I'm a bit concerned of talking about this to my advisor, because we already talked and it seemed clear that I should write the document all by myself. Maybe it's just me not being able to write down some very simple things of what I'm going to do.

In most of these situations, a large part of the "exercise" is for you to grapple with the writing of that document yourself, thinking about the various aspects.

It is to be expected, or even hoped, that you feel you are unable to do this, due to lack of information, and lack of experience.

Then, talk to your advisor for hints and advice, and show them what you have written, _in_your_own_voice_... as the starting point for further progress.

That is, there should be several/many iteration cycles in creating the document, and, yes, you certainly do need your advisor's help... but in refining and redirecting your own thoughts and preferences.

Good that you recognize that you don't really know what to do, having had no experience at this, but a large part of the experience is to try to do a thing you've not done before... and partly fail, get help, fail less, get more help, fail less, rinse-lather-repeat. :)


Is it a good thing as a teacher to declare things like "Good! Things are becoming clearer already." Is it fine for a teacher who makes a topic look easy by saying things like:

"Good!"

or

"Easy!"

or

"Everything becomes perfectly clear now!"

Things I can think of in favor of doing this is that it might reduce students' concerns and will create an environment where nothing is too complicated.
On the other hand, I'm afraid it can also create an environment that if for some students the topic is not clear, they will feel worse now as the teacher said that "it's supposed to be easy" and they might even be afraid to ask to not show that they couldn't understand something that supposed to be "easy".

I started my academic career as a high school teacher.  As part of earning the credential to teach high school, I had to go through a semester-long "internship" as a student teacher---I taught in a classroom under the close supervision of a veteran instructor.  One of the first bits of feedback I got was that I had a tendency to say that a problem was "easy" or "clear".  In my own head, it was in the context of a universe of possible problems, e.g. "This problem is easy as compared to this other problem on a similar topic," or "Let's start with an easy example before moving onto harder examples." My supervisor encouraged me to avoid this kind of language, because

no problem is easy and nothing is clear, and
telling a student that a problem is easy destroys morale when they can't figure it out.

No problem is easy
There is a great Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal comic which describes a view of how ideas come about in mathematics, and how we disseminate those ideas.  Essentially, modern mathematics is the distillation of several thousand years of thought.  The ideas and results were hard-won, yet we somehow expect students to master them in very little time.
I imagine that this observation is true across disciplines.  For example, I can't imagine trying to give a one-hour lecture summarizing Lewis Henry Morgan and the modern study of kinship, nor can I imagine how clear the ideas would be to students after such a lecture.
Ultimately, I think that this is a form of the curse of knowledge: as instructors, we might think that the ideas are easy because we are so familiar with them, or perhaps because we never had difficulty with them ourselves, but that doesn't mean that they are actually easy.  We have to figure out how to put ourselves back into the shoes of a novice, and remember how difficult the ideas were in the first place.
The impact on morale
Because mathematics is so often stigmatized[1], I think that mathematicians are (or, at least, should be) particularly sensitive to things which are likely to further drive people away or cause them to shut down.  However, I think that all instructors across all fields should be aware of how their style impacts morale, so this isn't really a math-specific observation.
If you tell a student that something is "easy" or "clear" and that student is still confused, you are implicitly suggesting that the student has failed to grasp an obvious concept.  This tells the student that if they admit to their confusion, they are admitting to being inferior, and that they might become an object of ridicule.  The student understands the failure to be theirs, and theirs alone, rather than a failure on the part of the instructor, or a blameless failure in the process of communication.  Such a student is not going to ask a question, is not going to seek clarification, and is likely to withdraw from the topic.
As such, I think that it is imperative that we avoid saying things that trivialize the work that we and our students have to do.  It is bad form to tell a student that a concept is clear, or that a problem is easy.
What might we do?
In the question, it is suggested that an instructor who makes a topic look easy might note how easy things have become.  I think that the reality is quite different:  the teachers who make things look easy are those who are most sensitive to how difficult things really are.  They lean into that difficulty, and explain clearly to students where the problems lie.  It is then up to students to come out the other end and say to themselves "Wow!  I thought that idea was hard, but the professor really made it easy to understand!"
I don't think that there is a one-size-fits-all solution to this, but there are a few things that I do in my own practice which, I think, help:

Ask Questions:  I don't assert that ideas are clear; I ask if they are clear:  "Is this clear now?", "Do you all understand?", "Do any of you have any clarifying questions you'd like to ask?", "Can we move on, or would you like to work through another example?", and so on.  Indeed, I often ask "Is this clear?" in a situation when I know that it should still be quite unclear to students.  Done often and early enough, this gives students permission to admit that things are confusing.

Provide Context:  To the extent possible, I like to give students some historical context for the development of ideas.  For example, we might spend as little as a week defining the derivative of a function.  This short period of time belies the enormous intellectual achievement it represents:  the ancient Greeks were the first to spot a problem (Zeno's paradoxes), Newton and Leibniz (both of whom "stood on the shoulders of giants") first put the ideas together, Euler (and Fourier and Cauchy) introduced the modern notion of "function", and late 19th/early 20th century mathematicians (Hilbert, among others) nailed down the formalism.  If the derivative looks easy, it is only because it took such a long time to refine and distill the ideas.  It is actually a remarkably hard concept.

Employ Appropriate Comparatives:  It is, I think, entirely reasonable to assert that one example is less difficult than another.  Logically, this is the same as asserting that one example is easier than another.  However, when one says that a problem is "less difficult" it could still be hard, whereas if one asserts that a problem is "easier" then a student might only hear the "easy".  I don't start with "easy" or "simple" examples; I start with "less difficult" or "illuminating" examples.

[1]  Speaking from the perspective of an American, it seems that no one has a problem with a person saying "I'm just not any good at math!" or "I'm not a math person!"  Fear and loathing of mathematics is considered appropriate, and mathematicians are seen either as god-like geniuses, or asocial nerds (or both, I suppose).  It is considered okay for a "normal" person to be mathematically illiterate.  A seemingly equivalent admission of illiteracy ("I'm just not any good at reading!") would be shocking.


Is three citations per paragraph excessive for undergraduate research paper? I've had a teacher tell me that I needed to have 3 citations per paragraph in my paper. The paper is to be 20 pages long. Is this level of citation (over 200 individual in-text citations in the paper) too much for undergraduate work? The way that she phrased it left uncertainty whether this was for every paragraph, or only for the quoted ones, so the context of whether similar works have this level of quotation in them is the only standard I have to go by.

If you are asking whether it is a general "best practice" for a research paper at any level to have three citations per paragraph: no, it is not.  In any level research paper, you should cite as often (equivalently, as little) as necessary in order to inform the reader of relevant prior work.  If seven papers are relevant to what you are saying in a given sentence, you should cite those seven papers.  If in a paragraph you are not saying anything that makes reference to or would be aided by making reference to prior literature, then there should be no citations in the paragraph.  You never insert citations to meet numerical requirements.

However, this is an assignment for a course, so the best practice is whatever your instructor told you.

  The way that she phrased it left uncertainty whether this was for every paragraph, or only for the quoted ones, so the context of whether similar works have this level of quotation in them is the only standard I have to go by.

No, you can ask your instructor which of the above is what she wants.  I encourage you to do so.


Typical phases of student experience/motivation in academic education (e.g. PhD) I have heard and experienced anecdotally that students often go through various phases in academic education, be it undergraduate or postgraduate, starting with enthusiasm and excitement, then running into a dip, before climbing out again and feeling more motivated, although later fatigue may set in. This can occur over the course of a single year, but also over the course of a degree (see, for instance, 5 Phases of PhD Motivation Explained). There may be some connection with the stages of culture shock, and for some students traditional culture shock might be compounded with the aforementioned phases.

Have studies been carried out on the phases students seem to go through and are they as widespread, even universal, as experience would suggest? References to particular studies would be appreciated. I would also be interested in references to effective coping strategies for recovering from the first serious dip, which may otherwise derail a student's studies.

There is a brilliant book called "How to Get a PhD" by R Murray that I found really useful when I was studying. In the references to that book I found the following:

Hockey, J. (1994) New territory problems of adjusting to the first year of a social science PhD, Studies in Higher Education, 19: 177–90

You may also want to investigate studies in the Journal of Graduate Education but I cannot find any online links to its content.


Supervising a lazy BSc student I am a PhD student and  I have to supervise two BSc students in conducting their thesis. Unfortunately, I am very (very!) frustrated with one of them.
First of all, this specific student doesn't show up in our arranged Skype meetings (without prior notice). The first time we (finally!) managed to discuss his project he seemed to have no idea of what he needs to do. I asked him his ideas about possible projects and obviously, he had not bothered to devote some time to this  (please note that our first meeting took place two months after the beginning of the semester which is plenty of time to decide on a research subject). I advised him to choose a subject he likes and read a lot of papers to develop his research questions and he asked me what a research question is!
But the worst thing is that he shows no motivation to work on his project. For example, he expects ME to develop the subject as well as the research questions. I certainly don't want to tell him what to do. However, I am worried that a possible failure in his project will indicate that I am an incompetent supervisor.
What should I do with this lazy student?

Things like that happen. (Also, as mentioned in the comments, you might be wrong on the reason of their behaviour.)
Close mentoring

Assign meetings, say, weekly.
Make it very clear, you want to see some progress each meeting.
Steer the student in the right direction in each meeting.

You'd need to define their topic, the extent of work, etc. early on. No freedom, no "choose your own topic" – it's already too late for this. Pick one, make sure the student is Ok with it, say "go".
What I also tend to do after the topic definition: Elaborate on the amount of work. "If you do this, this, this, and this, it's an A", "if you do only this, it's an F, I need at least that and this additionally to let you pass." Notice, that "having written the actual thesis at least okay'isch" is one of those things they need to pass. Do not forget to mention it!


Professor only teaches what is already in textbook. Should I quit going to the lectures? I've become quite upset with how lectures for my courses are conducted.

Everyday, I attend lectures where the teacher simply writes definitions and theorems on the board straight from one of our textbooks (or another professor's published lecture notes). They then prove a handful of the theorems, or part of them, and leave more than half as an exercise. They do little to motivate the material or provide insight based on their professional experiences, and are often scribbling material onto the board as fast as possible to cover some predetermined amount. And sometimes the professor writes proofs straight from their notes and, when questioned, has a hard time explaining the gaps between steps (as they are simply regurgitating and not really even attentive to what they are explaining).

Ultimately, I feel like these lectures are a waste of my time. To be blunt, I can read a book and I can do exercises. I don't need someone to paraphrase a book for me and then tell me to fill in the rest myself. Moreover, since I cannot afford to live on/near campus, I have to commute an hour each way to sit through such lectures, which hardly seems validated.

I would like to attend lectures where the professor engages the students. Often, my professors are so rushed to scribble things on the board that they take few questions and relegate them to exercises (yes, I had a professor answer a simple question about his proof by assigning it as an exercise). If an instructor wants to cover some predetermined amount of material, I would prefer they assign this as reading beforehand and then take questions on that material in class. It'd also be nice if they presented us with hard problems in class and then we all worked through them together (with students presenting them, everyone critiquing, etc.).

Should I approach my professors about my feelings? How should I go about this?

To be honest, I am becoming quite bored (and frustrated) and starting to skip lectures in favor of office hours (which are far more engaging), reading the book on my own, and working extra problems. I do not like that I am not enjoying my educational experience (since I love to learn math!).

Or should I quit going to lectures and move on to doing what I am tending towards now, anyways?

This is a common frustration faced by college students, especially in lecture-oriented STEM majors. Unfortunately, the truth is that the lectures may be a waste of time and there is little you can do to change that. If you can cover the material more efficiently on your own time (especially since you're commuting), you shouldn't necessarily feel guilty in doing so. You can see similar sentiments expressed on ratemyprofessor where students often question the value of lectures and simply go to the library as opposed to lecture.

Yes you're paying for the lecture, but if it doesn't help/contribute to your understanding, there is no point in going. I knew students who went every time out of habit, but it was an absolute waste of time.

I've had physics professors who wrote starting problems on the board and then the solution only to say that if we were at his level, we should 'see' the dozen steps in between. Needless to say, lectures were fairly empty after that. He was very well versed in the material and many students would come to office hours, it's just that he couldn't lecture.

Depending on the age/tenure of the professor, they may be receptive to making the lectures more engaging, or they may "brush" you off. Simply express your interest in the subject to the professor and ask them to make the lecture more engaging/be better prepared. Depending on the college/class, the professor may be unable to accommodate you because your peers may not be at your level. Be aware that some professors cannot lecture effectively, or have had unwanted courses foisted upon them. No matter your school ranking or major, you will encounter lousy enthusiasm-killing professors whom you'll have to endure. For many professors, your best shot for a more engaging experience would be to visit them during office hours.

In a certain sense, to quote Mark Twain, "Don't let schooling interfere with your education." You won't have this professor forever, though you may unfortunately have them or those like them again. Don't let them dampen your passion for the subject.


Moving to a different PhD program in the United States I have been admitted to a Math PhD program in US. The school is ranked in the top 60-80 range. I started school this August. I'm, however, considering the possibility of re-applying to a different program, based on the following reasons:

My undergraduate background is in physics, economics and mathematics. I'm a late comer to the subject (mathematics); therefore, my application wasn't as competitive as it could have been if I had studied the subject for the full four years. This was reflected in the number of acceptances/rejections that I received.
I would like to move to a department that focuses on inter-disciplinary research. Unfortunately, such options aren't available at my current department.
I may have an issue picking an adviser in the future. I will skip the details over here.
My job prospects would be quite bleak in academia (Math) if I choose to stay over here.

Based on a combination of academic and non-academic reasons, I believe I would like to take another shot at applying to different schools. I’d appreciate if you could put this issue in perspective by commenting on:

Whether this is a possibility in the system in place in the US? Are such issues frowned upon?
How does generally view such issues? What’s the overall perception of academics in math departments?
What would be the best way to tackle this issue? For example, what would be the best time to discuss this issue with faculty? I don’t want to antagonize anyone, but, at the same time, I’d like to discuss my aforementioned case with someone in the future so I can consider the possibility of re-applying.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Most programs will not fault you for wanting to change disciplines. If you can obtain the necessary application materials (letters of recommendation, specifically), changing programs will likely not be a massive issue. Be clear in your statements of purpose that you are interested in changing disciplines. If you are open as to why you are changing programs, I do not see application committees being overly turned off by such a decision. (I personally would not be at least. If a candidate is a good fit, I will pursue him or her). Explain the situation much like you have in your question. Emphasize that you feel that you could be a more successful researcher in a research program that is more inter-disciplinary. (Your background is likely to be more well-versed for an inter-disciplinary program anyway it sounds like).

Do not obscure the fact that you are looking to start a new program. You have nothing to hide as far as I can tell. (This will obviously be contingent on potential complications you may or may not have fully disclosed).

One comment I will briefly add deals with the "grass is always greener" aspect of graduate studies (and life). Make sure that changing programs will actually be a better situation than remaining with your current program. I would have a contingency plan in place for the event that you apply to new programs and are accepted into none of them. (Or maybe your plan can be to apply to one or two schools you know you will get into). There is the old adage "A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush." Make sure that if you put down the bird you have in your hand that the one in the bush is actually going to be a bigger, better bird.

Because you provide no details about why choosing an advisor will be a problem, I am not going to be able to give any advice in that regard.

As for career prospects, an inter-disciplinary PhD in math can be a blessing and a curse. My personal anecdotal experience has been that academia prefers more of a focused "single discipline" PhD (although this is changing to a certain extent) and industry prefers inter-disciplinary studies.

As for what you need to tell your department right now, I would figure out first how you are going to get your letters of recommendation. If you feel that you have three people who will write you letters (and then maybe one backup), I would then speak to your graduate coordinator about terminating any support you have. Make sure that you close out any financial considerations that must take place. This will go a long way in ensuring you do not burn bridges when you leave.

Some students invariably will leave a graduate program from time to time. Any admissions committee knows this. Declaring your intentions sooner rather than later will make your current program significantly more willing (and able) to help you find the best fit for your future studies. I would not be too concerned overall with trying to apply to other programs as long as you are open with your current program.


How to approach other professors in a department when the potential advisor is unsure of his funding situation? I am a M.Sc. graduated in Computer Science and I am going to continue my graduate studies abroad. There is one professor who I am in contact for a few months and now he states that he is willing to hire me as PhD student if he receives good news of the grant proposals that he submitted to funding organizations. However, there is another professor in that department that I think we have a considerable overlap in our interests and backgrounds too. I mentioned the name of those professors in my Application Form in order. So now, how can I let the second professor knows (e.g. by email) that I am serious about joining her lab if the first professor could not provide funding for me. I should mention that In this department, there is just a formality admission committee and professors (independently) hire students if they can support their students through sources of funds.

The simplest solution seems to be the best - just be honest with both. Everybody knows that funding can be very difficult, and no one would blame you for having more than one horse in the race. It is, in fact, expected of a good student to seek out options. But we can consider some options.

Logically there are four options. You discuss with both, you discuss with neither, you discuss only with your first priority (called A) or you discuss only with your second priority (called B).

Discuss with neither: Nothing good will come out of this - they cannot read minds, and don't know your intentions if you don't speak up.

Discuss only with A: If A's funding falls through, this risks becoming awkward with B. You don't, in fact, know if B for example has other plans if you don't discuss it.

Discuss only with B: If A's funding falls through and you get a place at B's team, this may be awkward as you still have to be in the same department as A.

Now ask yourself - are there any downsides from discussing with both? I cannot think of any.


How can I cope with withdrawal symptoms from addiction while pursuing my PhD? I am currently in the early stages of recovering from an addiction. I am finding it very hard to concentrate on my work due to withdrawal symptoms. How can I cope with this situation with a minimal effect on my work?

Let me say first that we battled my son's addictions to opiates and heroin for over 10 years, so while I have little technical knowledge of addiction and withdrawal, I have a lot of first hand experience.  He went through rehab 3 times before it took, so I've nursed him through horrible withdrawal 3 times.  I say this so that I won't sound so ignorant in the next paragraph.  I know that each drug has its own peculiarities.

On March 3rd this year, I celebrated 30 years since my last cigarette.  I quit smoking just a few months before my Ph.D. qualifying exams.  So I was in the throes of withdrawal during the crucial study time.  (My joke is that I started raising hamsters, so I could kill something once a day.)  My main way of coping was to walk.  Study for a while and then walk.  Then Study.  Then walk.  I also took up yo-yo, so I had something for my hands to do when I got fidgety.  Tommy Smothers had just resurrected the fad and I got quite good.

The good news is that the physical withdrawal is relatively short.  So each week you should notice that things are a bit better.  Now is the time to develop good habits.  I wouldn't push hard, but I'd push medium.  Force yourself to do just a bit more than is comfortable, so that you learn that it's possible to concentrate, at least a bit, even with withdrawal distractions.

As someone said in the comments, seeking medical help might be useful.  Unless things have changed, the medicos first attempt is to give you Prozac or something similar to calm you down a bit.  This didn't work for my son, but everyone responds differently.

Hang in there.  As John Belushi said, "When things get tough, the tough get things."

Edit:  Another trick is to clear off the top of a 4-drawer filing cabinet and use that for your work surface.  When I just couldn't "sit down and study", then I stood up to study.


Update frequency of BASE open-access repository? How often does the BASE (Bielefeld Academic Search Engine) recrawl the considered open-access repositories?

Usually, all sources are updated twice a month. Records that are marked as "updated" in the OAI-PMH interface of the source, will be re-harvested and re-indexed.

Private communication from BASE team