Where to place tables/figures in APA style dissertation In following APA style, I put my tables and figures at the end of the paper, after the references. For example, here they explicitly say to put them at the end.

One of my committee members told me that this was incorrect and that she "didn't even bother looking" at my tables and figures. In retrospect, I didn't include a list of them in the table of contents. But as far as I can tell, the placement is still correct: I've seen people insert tables and figures in-text in theses, but this is seemingly not what you're supposed to do according to the APA manual. I've tried to see if different rules apply somehow to a dissertation and haven't found anything official. There are also no guidelines specific to tables and figures at my university.

Am I wrong here? If so, please refer me to some concrete source I can use for the future! And if not, how am I supposed to submit it without correcting my committee member?

Thanks for the responses. Just to clarify, I did end up checking back with the department office again to probe in case I missed something, and there were no other guidelines other than the generic ones I initially used.

Perhaps some elements of the formatting for theses are fairly common and thus what my committee member was expecting, but there was nothing from the department or the college that spoke to such things. The guidelines are actually really loose and only define how to structure the page margins, numbering, and to not include running heads. Everything else just defers to respective writing styles.

Honestly while I understand the expectation there, I was kind of annoyed to be accused of being careless when I just followed the institutional guidelines. I suppose at the end of the day it was a kind of departmental deficiency. I will keep it in mind though for the future, thanks.


Which region should I apply for with a BSc in my case? US, Europe or Canada? I am an undergraduate student looking forward to applying for a Master or preferably a direct Ph.D. program for Fall 2019. My undergraduate degree is in physics and I want to study data science or applied mathematics or a master in statistical physics (In order to change to data science for a Ph.D.).

I will be recognized as an international student in North America and Europe and I have scored 7.0 in the IELTS exam and my GPA is 3.6 out of 4 and I have publications.

I most certainly need a fully funded scholarship/fellowship to cover my tuition fee and living expenses and that's the top priority for me.

(I found the answer here helpful)

A) My first question is which region is, in general, better for my application request?

Given the fact, I should also take the GRE test (Which is very expensive for me in my country) for the US and Canada but they offer direct Ph.D. programs.

B) My second question is what I have noticed while emailing the professors.

US professors which have replied to my email positively have stated that they take new direct Ph.D. students in research groups but I must first be admitted to the university. Is there a way I make sure if I am admitted I will receive this funding?

Can US professors affect the results of the admission process in any way? Like by directly accepting a student? if so how can I ask for it without being rude?
What about EU or Canada?

I can't answer your first question, but can give you a bit of background that might help you figure out the US.

First, is that the US doesn't have a national educational system. Some States have policies that cover many (not all) universities within that State. Other places and the other universities have their own policies, with only some oversight. So, your second question depends on the university. Some professors can influence the decision, especially if they have funded labs. Some can but won't. Some can't. But contacting the professors is generally a good thing to do as you get a bit of visibility and maybe some information about continuing.

Second, is that if you get an offer of acceptance that doesn't include funding, you can either turn it down or try to negotiate for that funding. Nothing is very certain unless you are invited to join a funded lab. But in general, nothing is assured until you actually have everything in place.

It is a shame I must give this advice, but this isn't the most opportune time for someone from Iran to be coming to the US. It was much better in the past, and I hope it will be better in the future, but I assume you read the news. Your other options may be better politically, though, among actual academics in the US you are likely to be welcomed. Good Luck.


Is it common to buy a gift for a supervisor when he invited me to a dinner? I am an international student. I have just started my master degree in Canada and I have been invited to a group dinner by my supervisor.
This situation and culture are quite new to me; I have not had this experience before. How should I act? Should I buy a gift or something?
 And if so, what sort of gift seems appropriate?

No, there is no reason for buying a gift. The most you might do is send a follow-up email thanking your supervisor for the dinner.

Having lunch/dinner with colleagues isn't uncommon, and they usually aren't all that formal unless there is a special occasion (e.g., it is banquet organized by the department/university).


"In the event of failure, the candidate will be asked to withdraw from the Graduate Program.", How is it different from being fired? This is from a document explaining the procedure for the comprehensive exam for entering the Ph.D. candidacy at my school. It mentions that the potential candidate should withdraw from the Ph.D. program if they do not pass the comprehensive exam. My question is: What would be the consequences if the potential candidate simply refuses to withdraw? They would be fired, right? Is there any benefit in withdrawing from the program compared to just doing your research and waiting to be fired? Or, it is just the usage of polite language and beating around the bush in this document?
For reference, this is about a university in Canada.

When you withdraw from the program, you can tell people later (in a job interview, social situation etc) that you “decided to withdraw from the program”.

If you are fired you will have the option of either lying (with possible bad consequences if the lie is found out) or telling people “I was fired”.

Which of those sounds better?


Can the US general schedule (GS) scale be mapped to academic rank? There are a number of US government jobs that are in essentially academic research labs that are unaffiliated with a university (e.g., the NIH and the national laboratories). The salary for some of these jobs are based on the General Schedule (GS) salary scale. Is it possible to roughly map a GS grade to an academic rank? For example, GS-11 requires a Masters degree and GS-12 requires a PhD so presumably step one as a GS-12 would be a new post-doc, but how do GS-13, GS-14, and GS-15 fit into the mix? Is it fair to say a GS-13 is like an assistant professor, GS-14 is like an associate, and GS-15 is like a full professor?

I knew I had read up on this before. Don't remember for what, but it was definitely for Academia.

From the U.S. Code § 5104 - Basis for grading positions

I would say that GS-15 would be like department head, GS-14 would be tenured, GS-13 would be non-tenured, GS-12 associate, and GS-9 through -11 to be some varying group of PhDs and grad students.

GS-13

  (A) to perform, under administrative direction, with wide latitude for the exercise of independent judgment, work of unusual difficulty and responsibility along special technical, supervisory, or administrative lines, requiring extended specialized, supervisory, or administrative training and experience which has demonstrated leadership and marked attainments;

  (B) to serve as assistant head of a major organization involving work of comparable level within a bureau;

  (C) to perform, under administrative direction, with wide latitude for the exercise of independent judgment, work of unusual difficulty and responsibility requiring extended professional, scientific, or technical training and experience which has demonstrated leadership and marked attainments in professional, scientific, or technical research, practice, or administration; or

  (D) to perform other work of equal importance, difficulty, and responsibility, and requiring comparable qualifications.

GS-14

  (A) to perform, under general administrative direction, with wide latitude for the exercise of independent judgment, work of exceptional difficulty and responsibility along special technical, supervisory, or administrative lines which has demonstrated leadership and unusual attainments;

  (B) to serve as head of a major organization within a bureau involving work of comparable level;

  (C) to plan and direct or to plan and execute major professional, scientific, technical, administrative, fiscal, or other specialized programs, requiring extended training and experience which has demonstrated leadership and unusual attainments in professional, scientific, or technical research, practice, or administration, or in administrative, fiscal, or other specialized activities; or

  (D) to perform consulting or other professional, scientific, technical, administrative, fiscal, or other specialized work of equal importance, difficulty, and responsibility, and requiring comparable qualifications.

GS-15

  (A) to perform, under general administrative direction, with very wide latitude for the exercise of independent judgment, work of outstanding difficulty and responsibility along special technical, supervisory, or administrative lines which has demonstrated leadership and exceptional attainments;

  (B) to serve as head of a major organization within a bureau involving work of comparable level;

  (C) to plan and direct or to plan and execute specialized programs of marked difficulty, responsibility, and national significance, along professional, scientific, technical, administrative, fiscal, or other lines, requiring extended training and experience which has demonstrated leadership and unusual attainments in professional, scientific, or technical research, practice, or administration, or in administrative, fiscal, or other specialized activities; or
  (D) to perform consulting or other professional, scientific, technical, administrative, fiscal, or other specialized work of equal importance, difficulty, and responsibility, and requiring comparable qualifications.

They're all slightly different, heading from supervisor role to department/division lead role.

This one provides a bit more granularity between each group..


Is there a dataset, database or API as large as WorldCat that allows for search by library of congress call number? Is there a raw dataset, database or API as large as WorldCat that allows for search by library of congress call number?
As far as possible I need to query all the works in the world. At least every book or monograph, or title that has been given an LOC call number. As for journals, congresses, journal articles, fresh research etc., I can exclude them. I don't need 100% everything, but something as large Worldcat. Hence, a single university library, as large as it may be, may not be sufficient.
I need to input some call number eg. Q179, and get all the titles under that call number. Is there such a thing? Preferably free also, but if really no choice, I am ok with subscription needed or need to purchase

WorldCat has two different interfaces. One allows you to search by LC Classification and one does not.
The first interface is the public one you get from https://www.worldcat.org/ :

This interface's Advanced Search does not have an option to search LC Classification or call numbers:

The second interface, OCLC FirstSearch, is available through subscription via your local academic or public library. You will need to access it from your academic institution or public library and log in with your institutional credentials or your library card:

This interface's Expert Search has an option to search the Library of Congress Call No.:

Type Q179 into the "Search for" box, select Library of Congress Call No. from the "Indexed in" dropdown, and click Search.
Results:


how could I mention sequence of figures in a research paper? I want to say that:

Figure 1, 2, 3 and 4 illustrate ....

how could I mention them?
 is the above sentence correct?
 or I should say figure 1 to figure 4

The exact format should be determined by the publication in which you publish your work (assuming this is what you do). You should be able to write Figures 1-4 or alternatively Figures 1 to 4 (although the former is what I am used to seeing). If the format uses abbreviated forms then Figs 1-4 would be the format. There is no need to repeat the word figure before both numbers in a sequence.


Negotiating Part-Time Lecturer in Germany I am interviewing for a part-time (50%) program-lead/lecturer position at a university in Germany. The position is to set up and lecture on a new master's degree program. I will be finding more out at the interview, but I suspect that very little groundwork has been laid yet and the job of this position for the next year will be to create the program basically from scratch and recruit a cohort of students and teach at least one class on it when it starts in 2020.

I like the idea of the position, but I think that it is probably not really a 50% time position (i.e. it will take more than 20 hours a week to do this job). I have already asked the professor that listed the position about the chances of it increasing to 100% time, which he said would only happen if there was external funding but he also noted that I would have to negotiate my step on the pay scale with HR directly. This implies to me that any negotiations about the position will be with HR.

Anyone familiar with German academic postings, what is the culture around negotiating positions? Obviously I've applied to the job, but I also know that I think this is a job that will need more than 20 hours a week to do. I would prefer to negotiate to at least 66% time, but alternatively I would accept the position so long as I was placed at step 3 or 4 on the scale (which I've read is quite hard to get done).

Does anyone have any thoughts on how HR will respond to asking to increase the part-time position from 50% to 66%?

Given that the position as you describe in the comments "offers the possibility to enroll in [their] PhD program or to complete a habilitation", this should be interpreted as a typical qualification position in the German academic system. The concept of these positions is that you are an employee of the university, with some tasks in teaching, administration, and/or research, but you get time to work on your next qualification in an academic career. There is a dedicated federal law (informal name "Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz", officially "Gesetz über befristete Arbeitsverträge in der Wissenschaft") that governs these positions.

In some fields (yes, usually the less well funded ones), it is quite common that only the "tasks" part is funded, but you have to do the "qualification" part unpaid, especially when working towards a PhD. Nowadays there is indeed a recommendation to fund all such positions for least at 65%, but given budget constraints etc. you can not always count on that. Nevertheless, with this type of position, the university needs to make sure that you have sufficient time to work on your qualification, so in principle the setup should be such that you need not more than the ~ 20 h / week to do the administrative / teaching part. Depending on the culture of the research team you're joining, you may still be expected to spend most or all of the "qualification time" there, so things may get a bit hard to keep apart.

The HR department will not negotiate with you about the part-time ratio nor about the salary group (such as E13 or E14) for this position. That is decided by the person that is filling the position, taking their budgetary constraints into account.

What the HR department will indeed do is determine the salary level (step 1, 2, 3, ...) that you are rated at. However, step 2 typically already requires at least some years of experience in a very similar position, and step 3 or 4 is indeed next to impossible, as you already figured out.

My recommendation would be to only take this type of position if you are more interested in the qualification part than in the teaching / administrative part. In the specific case you describe here it worries me a bit that the qualification part seems to be hardly described in the posting, which may indicate that the university "abuses" a qualification position to get some core teaching / administrative tasks done cheaply. At the interview, definitely ask about the research part, i.e., what topics you could work on, or come with some ideas of your own, and if they don't seem interested in that it's a big warning sign.

If this is for doing a PhD and you're in principle qualified to do that in Germany, then it should not be too difficult to find a position where the funded part is a small teaching support role or even working on a funded research project that can be connected to your PhD topic. Any of these would be much more preferable for doing a PhD than the type of position you describe here.


Would it be beneficial for me to transfer to a university with a PhD program instead of continuing to study for a MS? Here in the southeastern US (if not elsewhere), it is common for students to be admitted to PhD programs in physics after completing a bachelor's, in other words an MS is not generally required for admission. I finished my undergraduate degree last semester, in the fall, and transferred into the master's program of the same university. My current university does not actually offer a PhD program, and I wouldn't have been able to get admission to either of the PhD programs in the area in the midterm, as they only admit new PhD candidates in the Fall.

My question is, would it be a good idea to attempt to transfer to another university in the Fall of this year so I can start studying for my PhD in earnest, or might I as well finish my master's where I am and then transfer in order to start work fresh on my PhD? Is there any good reason to transfer, or to stay where I am?

Note that I transferred most of the coursework I needed to graduate to the uni I currently attend; this my first semester as a graduate is my third semester attending the university overall.

I can only speak from my experience. To note, I am a recently graduated PhD from a top school in an engineering field. I served on an application committee as a student member. Two main issues come to mind:
1) How will your decision impact your possible acceptance into a PhD program, and
2) How will your decision influence your finances (course fees, possibility of courses taken that will not count towards your degree.)

The application process for PhD programs starting fall 2016 have closed, to the best of my knowledge. I do not know the likelihood of transferring within a Masters program - even then, you would still need to submit a PhD program application at the same school when it is next open, though you would be better set assuming you have an advisor and research ongoing.

Even with a Masters at the same school, same department, classwork does not necessarily count towards your PhD requirements.  Be sure to check if it does.

If you decide to finish your Masters at your current school, your future PhD application will be viewed a little differently from a straight from undergrad application. As someone who has completed their masters and who has dedicated time specifically to research, you will be expected to have at least one publication in a refereed top conference/journal. An undergraduate should have evidence in their work/project history that they are capable of doing research, but it is not critical they have a publication.  This may vary depending upon the school and department, but keep it in mind.

There are sometimes Master degrees that follow one of two plans (coursework Masters or project/research Masters). A coursework Masters is at a significant disadvantage compared to other Masters when doing PhD applications.

I don't have complete knowledge of your situation, or goals, of course, but if I was in your situation, I would try to do the following: pick and contact a couple schools to check out the possibility of a transfer within the Masters program for this term. If yes, establish contact with a couple of professors about research in their lab. With a masters at the school you plan to apply to for PhD, you can immediately start your research, develop connections, have a better chance of getting accepted into that PhD program, and are more likely to have coursework count towards your PhD requirements.  If the transfer is not possible, I would complete the Masters at the current school while emphasizing research, pushing for a paper which is good evidence that capable of doing solid work.


What to do when your student is convinced that he will be the next Einstein? As an adviser, I have found it to be a detrimental motive for a student to focus solely on surpassing Einstein in achievement, for many reasons. One student in particular has busied himself with the deconstruction of relativity and strives to break it down and replace it with a much better system. Not only that, he's attempting to construct a theory of quantum gravity and the refutation of string theory, among many other ridiculous sounding tasks.

The student told me earlier that "Einstein's physics will soon come to an end." when I asked him about his work on his thesis.  Then when I saw his thesis, it was complete gibberish, wrong in many aspects. I tried to tell him this but he simply wouldn't listen and told me "You do not understand anything."

He then went to looking for a different adviser but failed, since nobody wanted to work with a man who wants to "surpass" Einstein. When he was rejected by everybody, he came back to me and we were on equal terms again. But now, he's trying to write another thesis. And he told me AGAIN that "It'll be something that will break string theory."

Every student that does physics today at least has a feeling, however slight it may be, to be the next Einstein, to have a revolutionary impact on science, but it's quite saddening that only 1 out of 900,000 people would actually do so. And for this student of mine, I know for sure that he'll soon fall into a well and never get out of it again.

This situation can be likened to a very similar situation in mathematics, as if your proof of a famous conjecture turns out to be wrong, say good-bye to your reputation forever.

I must mention that I do not want to drive him away completely from this. If the student indeed finds a "real" problem in fundamental physics, then let him work further on it. But this must not be the only thing that he should work on, which he is doing with the most robust motivation.

A big problem is that the student has a highly peculiar personality and is introverted; if you tell him something, he has a distaste for authority and considers himself to be the "smartest" and superior than all of everybody he knows, including me. He says that "People in physics today lack imagination" and things of this sort.

I am rather confused. What should I do? Should I try to leave him, or should I tell him in some way to quit doing this and focus on something more plausible and if he doesn't do this then I should do something else?

Let the standard processes of education and research take their course. This student will probably not survive them to receive the degree, and that is as it should be. Tough love: warn, then let the system do its thing.

The central issue I see is that this student is clinging tenaciously to a goal of disruptive fame rather than a goal of advancing research. This happens; it's a difficult thing to screen out at the application stage (where unreasonable ambition is not entirely uncommon, and not usually a dealbreaker). You can suggest that this is an inappropriate goal, and it sounds as though you have -- but you can't force the student to hear, much less change.

I would be inclined to keep my interactions with this student as concrete and immediate-goal-oriented as possible. Have an agenda for every meeting, and pull the student back to it when a megalomanic rant is imminent. Deflect, e.g. "Yes, but when will you have {thing with imminent due date} done?" or "Interesting. Write that up into a conference abstract and submit it to {conference}."

You are well within your rights to "fire" the student as your advisee, I would think. I don't know how that works where you are (or whether it's even possible), but to some extent your students become part of your professional reputation, and this one will not reflect well on you.


Why do universities announce interviewees for positions as lates as possible? My (R1) university is hiring a number of upper administration positions. We keep getting these emails about the dates of the interview, but the names aren't released until 24 h beforehand.

My previous (large) department did something similar for our chair search, although I think the names were released more than 24 h earlier.

Why is so much secrecy necessary?

The people who are interviewing for these positions have existing, usually high level, positions at other universities, and care greatly about not having their current employer know that they are looking for other opportunities, to the extent that this can be helped. So the interviewing institutions do the best they can to keep the shortlist candidates’ identity hidden for as long as practically possible.

Thus, balancing out this need for secrecy with other practical considerations leads to the practice you are describing.


How to approach professors for funding after acceptance into PhD program? I have been accepted into a PhD program in the US for Mechanical Engineering, but the graduate school did not give me funding for the first year. Being an international student, I do not have opportunity of funding through government fellowships, etc. So, I am planning to contact professors for opportunities in their groups.

What should I mention in the email? I am trying to understand proper way to approach professors for funding after admit. Also, what other funding sources you will suggest?

First note that what has happened to you is a failure on the part of the academic community to ensure appropriate employment conditions for junior researchers. A PhD candidate is a junior researcher - someone who will do research work, albeit of a limited scope, and with initial meandering, and with some supervision - who should be paid.

This perception will also guide you regarding what to do about funding. If you ask Professors for a handout - because you're a nice guy with high grades - you'll probably not get it. You will essentially be asking to be "posted" in their group as an employee, in which case they will (hopefully) be inclined to pay you a salary already.

For every lab you're considering:

Check, if you can do so easily and outright, whether the lab has paid/funded open positions. If you know that it doesn't - it's not relevant. (That is, since you didn't say you know what you want to do research-wise; otherwise most of my advice is irrelevant.)
Make sure the research work there actually interests you. Otherwise you'll sort of be scamming them for your salary - which is quite legitimate considering the situation the university has put you in, but is psychologically difficult for all concerned. This means, in particular,
Go visit the lab, physically. Try to arrange meetings with grad students and/or postdocs in the lab, to hear about what they're working on. This is common practice for new grad students and usually encouraged. During that visit (and not just then),
Try to figure out how your experience can be relevant to what they're doing - or to something they're not doing, but would contribute to their research objectives. It can be either in advancing their research proper, or in building things, or using some software you're proficient in, or writing code, or using materials or processes you've had experience in etc.
Now write your email, asking to meet with the PI to apply for the open position. Or, if you can schedule such a meeting directly when visiting the lab, based on some 'hook' of a suggestion from somebody there - that's even better. Base your pitch on your experience and conclusions from the previous phases.

Note these phases may not happen in this order, or in any order (i.e. these may overlap). Also, you probably want to parallelize this for different labs rather than go one-by-one.


How to find the list of relevant IEEE journals to publish a paper in? If one has research findings in a topic X, and wishes to publish it in one of the many IEEE journals, which is the best way to list the journals that includes X within its scope?

Note that the solution to X might use one or more of frameworks of [A, B ..], where 'A' can covered in the scope of journal J1 and 'B' can be within the scope of journal J2 and so on.

The obvious method might be checking up on the keywords in IEEEXplore and look for journals corresponding to previously published papers that come up. But is there any other way?

IEEE.org currently has a Publication Recommender tool where you input the keywords, key phrases, title, abstract etc. of your article, or the actual document of the article (in pdf, doc, docx or tex format). You can narrow the search to periodicals and/or conferences, or the date you want to publish before. I tried it with the two articles I've actually finished, and received a few good recommendations with high relevance scores for both.


How should I proceed when a (famous) professor says I'm not good enough for research? I am a PhD student in a Computer Science department, doing research of a mathematical nature. Some of my research problems drifted from my advisor's area of expertise, so I reached out to a researcher from my department about it (who is a world expert in this field). This professor is well-known with many achievements in this field.
The first meetings went well, I learnt a lot, got valuable feedback and I was so happy I had the opportunity to talk to this guy. However, after a few meetings he started with "let's have a meta-talk about you". Then, he brutally attacked me: he said I am not good enough for research, that I can get better but it would never be good enough for research career, that "people are born with the ability to know if their proofs are correct" and since I made some gross mistakes in what I sent, it is clear I "don't have it" and basically I shouldn’t  expect to get as good as people with a research career.
Since then, he mentions it in every talk we have. It can be in "minor" comments (e.g. "you have to be realistic and understand you can't really do it", "if you do it alone it will be difficult for you", "it is like chess, and you just don't have it") or in bigger conversations.
As you may understand, I felt horrible after the first time (and I still do, after each of these meetings). I really appreciate him and his opinion, so I took it really bad.
How can I know if he is right? How should I proceed? His words really made me think that maybe he is right.
RE the exact words used: I actually recorded the meetings, so my quotes are accurate.

I am sorry that it happened to you. This is not a pleasant experience, and frankly it's a shame that toxic professors and supervisors are still common in academia.
Academic research is broad and multi-dimensional. Some people excel in writing proofs, others design and set up wonderful experiments, collect useful data and find beautiful dependencies within. Some people propose fantastic theorems, which take hundred years to prove, others prove or disprove them after hundred years. As a community, we do research in a variety of exciting ways, which mutually support each other.
No single researcher is equally excellent in doing all these things. We have our strong areas and our blind spots. But saying that someone is not fit for research based on a couple of shortcomings in their proof is completely unfair, unjustified, ridiculous and unkind. This is opposite what a University professor should do, in my opinion. A good supervisor would encourage a student to try different things to identify where their strength and passion are. A toxic person would identify a single error and draw far-reaching conclusions from it to undermine student's confidence and make them feel bad about themselves. This is an extremely short-sighted and unprofessional behaviour.
Please try to disregard this person's opinion. Find someone else to collaborate with. Academia is large and although toxic and self-important people are still common, there is also a plenty of kind and supportive and truly generous colleagues around. Don't hesitate to share your experience with others to prevent someone else from having the same negative experience as you just had.


How to acknowledge a more general result? The main result of my paper X (in mathematics) turns out to be a special case of another paper Y.  How should I acknowledge their priority without making my paper look worthless?

This is the situation: in terms of the main theoretical result...

X is a special case of Y
X was posted on arXiv after Y
X was presented at a conference before Y even started (there is no conference proceedings though)
I was not aware of Y until I put X on arXiv.

Cite it as usual. You can note that the paper is an extension of your work. You can, if you feel the need, give the date of the conference, etc. It may be that Y was aware of X from the conference, or it may just be parallel work.

In any case, your work isn't worthless. Just a symptom, perhaps, of a subfield with a lot of current activity.

But you should also look at how you and they achieved the respective results. It may be that your, more specialized, paper has proof techniques that are valuable in themselves. There is more to mathematics than the results.


How do I express my disapproval of a marking boycott without damaging relationship with academics? So as people have probably seen by now, the UK is stuck in a marking boycott, which has started to directly affect myself as a final year student.

I have not personally been affected too much yet, but have had one module's continuous assessment removed with no suggestion of replacement. There are no current plans regarding the future of the boycott by either the teachers or the administration, and it is unclear what the ultimate result and outcome will be at this time, which is very concerning for me.

I want to express my disapproval regarding the implementation of the strike as it puts students in a difficult and non-productive situation. For example, students have been told "Examination of dissertations and theses at postgraduate level, as well as vivas, are included in the action." I don't want to damage the relationships I have with my lecturers as I plan on staying in academia, but seeing these actions is making me question my desire to stay in academia.

So what is the most effective way to complain about this?

Before you can understand how to express your disapproval, you need to understand a little bit about how the UCU (the Union organizing the strike) and universities work.

  I have not personally been affected too much yet, but have had one module's continuous assessment removed with no suggestion of replacement.

It is not the responsibility of those on strike to come up with the alternative. It is the responsibility of the University who is collecting your fees to deliver what it has promised.

  The union in question have poorly planned this boycott and there are currently no plans to remove it. We have had no communication about who is striking and what their alternative plans are if this continues and I am very concerned about this.

The marking boycott has been in the works for months now. The universities and union initially had extended discussions, but were not able to reach a resolution. The union then suggested if an agreement could not be reached, that they would recommend a marking boycott. After additional talks failed to reach a resolution, the union brought asked its members to vote on a marking boycott. After the marking boycott was approved by the union members, a final round of discussions were held. After those discussions failed to reach a resolution the marking boycott was initiated. The union is not allowed to contact students. It is the university's responsibility to contact students and tell them what is happening and what the alternative plans are. Issues about lack of communication and alternative plans should be addressed to the University.

  I want to express my disapproval with their methods as I disagree entirely with the boycott as I believe using students as pawns is never acceptable. For example they have been told "Examination of dissertations and theses at postgraduate level, as well as vivas, are included in the action." which is much too far. I don't want to damage the relationships I have with my lecturers as I plan on staying in academia, but seeing these actions is making me question my desire to stay in academia.

This is something that should be directed at the union. The union chose what they are boycotting. The union could have used a research boycott, a recruiting boycott, or a teaching boycott, but the union chose to focus on current students.

Your student union may be able to help you voice your concerns to both the university and the union. It is possible that your student union is backing either the union or university and will not pass on criticism to either. If you want to contact someone directly, the UCU is suggesting students contact the vice chancellor's office at their university. To contact the UCU you could use anyone on the UCU contacts page.


Can I upload a modified version of a code from a journal paper to Github? I am new to Github and I want to upload some scripts that I developed during my research. One of the scripts requires the use of a small external program (not mine) whose source code is included as supplemental material in a journal paper. Can I upload the program and/or the source code of that program?

The journal is Computers & Geosciences.

The answer to your question depends entirely on the license of the "small external program (not yours)".  Where did it come from?  Find its source and read the terms of the license.

If it's an open source license or a free software license, usually you are permitted to redistribute it so long as you preserve attribution and license terms in the code header.  If it's a different type of license, then it will depend entirely on the content of the license, which acts like a contract between the author and yourself.

UPDATE w/ JOURNAL SPECIFIC DETAILS:

The Journal of Computers & Geosciences is published by Elsevier who has an open access publishing option for authors.  If the paper in question was published as open access, and its chosen license was CC-BY, then that gives you permission to reuse the work (including the attached source-code) so long as you provide attribution.  If the article in question wasn't published as open access, then you'll have to contact the authors or locate another source for the code that has clear licensing terms.


Age and Graduate school I am 33. I live in the US. I am a neither a US citizen, nor a green card holder. I have worked in various jobs as a research assistant (physics, biology, economics) usually involving programming, mathematics or statistics.  As a newly minted undergraduate, I didn't really have much confidence in myself and I completely ruled out graduate school as pointless.  I didn't think of myself as smart enough.  I drifted into working in labs, because those are some of the easiest ones for which one can get a work permit in the US as a non-American.

Having worked in academia for a while now, I've had a chance to leap into various fields and help build solutions to complex problems.  I think I have literally gone as far as I can go researching in academia with no higher degree.  I work at one of the top universities in the world.  (If you looked at US News rankings or the Academic Ranking of World Universities, it's in the top 5.)

Lately, I've been thinking about applying for graduate school.  I do have a few papers in various fields.  I'm thinking of a PhD in either pure mathematics, applied mathematics, statistics or computer science.

I see two big minuses to applying to graduate school:

Most people applying are more than a decade younger than I am.  (Alas, more than a few gray hairs have made an appearance in recent years.)
Perhaps my achievements would look good for someone younger, but partially my achievements are the result of a long career rather than any special brilliance. So, I wonder how my record will be perceived.  I did take GRE and I scored 800 quantitative, 800 verbal and a 5 on the essay.  (I would most likely have to do a GRE subject test depending on what field I ultimately decided.)

Please advise on how accomplished, but older candidates, are viewed in the graduate school application process.

Anecdotal, but: I was 31 when I started my PhD, and it wasn't an obstacle at all. There were more than 80 applicants for two places. I have the impression that what matters a lot (at least in neuroscience, at least at my institute) is how much training the supervisor would have to invest in you. I've seen many times that the applicant who already did some similar research gets the position, even though there might have been someone else who is in principle just as good. Previous research experience carries a lot of weight.

From what you write, it seems to me that you would have a very good chance in getting into a program - publications and good GRE scores are both a big plus. Recommendation letters are also important. I would be surprised if your age would be an obstacle. But beware that it might be an obstacle for some sources of funding! I don't know if it is the case in the US, but I'd guess that's the only potential problem with your age.

...And now we wait for someone on the other side of the application process to give their answer :)


Engineering degree structure in the United States I often see in the US that many engineering programs are listed as a BSc or an MSc for Master's.

In my country (New Zealand) one can obtain a BSc in three years in a science field, or, if wanting to pursue engineering, a bachelor of engineering (BE) can be attained, most often with an honours component (BE(Hons)) in four years.

The honours component includes a year long research project with thesis in the final year as well as additional non-research related coursework.

To put it simply, my question is:

In the US, what is the duration of a BSc in an engineering field?
Does this include an honours component such as the one I have mentioned?
If not, is there a significant emphasis on research?
If yes, is this something all students complete, or is it optional?
Is this honours/research component very important to the overall degree?

My confusion arises due to the name of 'BSc' and also due to no honours being mentioned i.e. it is not 'BSc(Hons)'.

Most ABET-accredited programs in the US offer a 4-year Bachelors of Science in XYZ Engineering (sounds like the equivalent of a BE from your home country).  Most science programs (i.e., Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Sociology, really any type of science, hard or soft) are 4-year programs as well.
Many programs have an optional honors thesis that students can pursue if they are interested - it's rarely, to my knowledge, required.
US engineering programs don't typically emphasize research - though this depends on the school - but most emphasize a capstone project during one's third or fourth year.  This can range from working with an actual client (like my undergrad did) to working on a project that the professors running the project determine.
Generally speaking - all students complete the capstone, research/honors is optional.
Practical experience is what's most important - that comes from the capstone project, laboratory exercises, and above all internships/co-ops/REUs.


How to cope with lab noise? I have searched a lot and I am surprised that this topic hasn't been discussed yet. I am an M.Sc. Student in Computer Science. Our lab is actually a dry lab in which we need to do a lot of reading of heavy maths on a daily basis.

The problem is that some people (mostly senior students such as PhD candidates) sometimes speak loudly to discuss their new papers with lab mates, etc., which is totally a must-do activity but disrupts my mind and obviously some others that are not involved in their discussion.

I have tried many ways such as music, white noise, natural sound, etc., but all of them had drawbacks that forced me to abandon them.
I even think of studying in the library sometimes, but I think it is not a good idea because it may make me isolated and also it may cause people to think that I am not working as expected. I also don't like the idea of speaking with the Prof. about this, because: first, the prof himself doesn't pay attention to speak low in the lab and I think this would be strange to him and second, I am so new and it may harm me.

What I want to know is: is this situation actually normal? And if not, how can I cope with that?

Is this situation actually normal?

Yup, pretty normal. It's what is called "office life".

I am almost tempted to vote to close this as a boat programming question, as it is really no different to any other "we-are-in-a-shared-office-but-my-office-mates-annoy-me" situation in any job. Anyway, I think this is common enough in academia that it may make sense to answer here.

Essentially, there are really only three ways to fix this:

Change the office layout. Either get smaller offices (very unlikely to be possible), or re-arrange the PhD student seating so that the quiet workers share offices as well as the enthusiastic discussers. Of course, if you have one big lab for all students, this solution is probably a no-starter (not common here in Europe, but I have learned that this is common in the US).
Home office. Probably the easiest, most immediate, and most common solution to the problem of the annoying other students is to spend more time working from home or another suitable location, especially if some high-concentration tasks are in the queue. Of course this requires a modicum of trust that PhD students that are not in the lab are actually still working, and not sleeping or using their XBox. Given your concern that you may appear as "not working enough" when you are not in the lab, this may indeed be a problem.
Noise cancellation. When we had this problem in our lab, the easiest fix was to buy a set of high-quality noise cancellation headphones from Bose. The ones we bought are massive enough that even just wearing them alone without any music already blocks out a lot of the regular room acoustics, and they are high-quality enough that you can wear them for hours without pain. Students that want to work now wear their noise cancellation gear, which incidentally also is a good "Do not disturb unless important" sign for other people that just want to chat.

I should mention that "talk to the other students and make them stop" isn't really a practical and permanent solution. There are just too many people with too many differing characters for too many hours a day in a typical PhD student office - if somebody is the chatty type, she or he will chat.

Btw., I feel for you. My productivity when I am alone in my office is twice of what it is when we are two persons, which is again twice of what it is when we are three. I was never in an office with more than three persons, but I presume I wouldn't even need to bother coming in. This Dilbert comic strip is representing my feelings regarding the current trend of "open floor plan offices" pretty well.


Publishing work in areas you're no longer interested in If one obtains results in one area of a field (say during an MSc thesis) before deciding that one is not interested in making a career in that area, should one take the time (as a PhD student) to get make those results publishable, or is it better to focus on the new area?

It depends.

Some questions might help guide you to an answer:

how important is the work you've done ? If it's not yet publishable does this mean it's not complete yet ?
Since you're not in the area, do you even know if the topic/solutions are still relevant ?
Are you proud of this work, to the point where you'd be annoyed if someone else came up with the same ideas and published them ?
How much effort will it take to make the work publishable, and how does this interfere with current work that you're doing ? I.e are you in the initial stages of a Ph.D and can spend time on this, or are you deep into your own research where the context switching might prove distracting ?


How do you cite from a presentation or poster at a conference? For example, a presentation whose PDF is listed at http://www.astro.ex.ac.uk/exoclimes/2012/pdf/talks/Day02_Ferreira.pdf?

And what if the presentation doesn't have a publicly available URL? How would the citation style differ from that of a poster?

The specifics of the citation would depend on the citation style you are using. I am most familiar with Chicago style. To cite the presentation you've linked to in Chicago style, I would put:

David Ferreira, et al., "Climate of an Earth-like Aquaplanet: the high-obliquity case and the tidally-locked case" (presentation, Exoclimes 2012, Aspen, CO, January 16–20, 2012), accessed June 8, 2012, http://www.astro.ex.ac.uk/exoclimes/2012/pdf/talks/Day02_Ferreira.pdf.

Following these guidelines: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/717/08/

For APA style, you would only cite a presentation in a reference list if there is a tangible remnant ("recoverable data") of the presentation (e.g., slides posted on a website). The citation would look like:

Ferreira, D., Marshall, J., O'Gorman, P., Seager, S. & Lau, H. (January 2012). Climate of an Earth-Like Aquaplanet: the high-obliquity case and the tidally-locked case. Paper presented at Exoclimes 2012, Aspen, Co.

For more examples in APA citation, look here: http://citationonline.net/CitationHelp/csg04-manuscripts-apa.htm#53


How do good students in medical school distinguish themselves? I'm an undergrad in biology, long story short, I was looking a professor's CV (not in medicine) and he had indicated his GPA in his grad school (apparently he had the highest in his program).  But what about medical school? I read somewhere that courses in med school are pass/fail and not graded.  Not sure if that's true but if it is, how do good students distinguish themselves?

Secondly, same question in terms of getting into top specialties as indication of how good of a student someone is.  On a medical school site I saw what seems to be labeled as "competitiveness" of various programs, with dermatology and plastic surgery being highly competitive and family practice and psychiatry being the least.  I assumed this means that only most successful students get into these programs, and so this can be used to indicate how good someone is.  But apparently not so.  I'm not sure exactly how this works, but it seems med students, though they take the same exam (USMLE), they self-select into various specialties.

So how can you tell how good a student is in medical school if there is no GPA and if getting into a specialty also don't indicate that?

Gone are the days when course marks are the only metric against which medical students are assessed. This is one of the reasons for the institution of pass/fail modules of instruction. This issue is difficult for medical students to understand, given that entry into medical school is contingent on tough criteria involving grade-based metrics. All these questions you've asked are tied to this old way of thinking.

  how do good students distinguish themselves?

Medical students distinguish themselves in ways other than course marks. They show compassion towards patients. They show creativity in their approach to problem solving. They demonstrate the ability to communicate effectively. They work well with their peers. They lead and follow, as is appropriate to achieve the best outcome for the patient.

It's not all about the marks. It's all about the patient.

  same question in terms of getting into top specialties as indication of how good of a student someone is

I believe that you're looking at the question ass backwards. In logic terms, your applying the fallacy called confirming the consequent.

Competitive people get into dermatology.
Sally got into dermatology.
Therefore, Sally is competitive.

I suggest that you refrain from judging the "competitiveness" of a doctor on the basis of his or her specialty.

The choice of specialty has been long studied and the motivation to pursue a particular medical specialty is based on a number of factors, not the least of which is personal preference. I can think of no one in my professional life as a medical doctor -- professors, peers, students -- who've pursued a clinical specialty simply because it was the most competitive thing to get into.

The "competitive" label of some specialties is a function of supply of training posts against demand for the profession. There are relatively few positions available for dermatology compared to the need of the population. I promise you, if dermatology places were to triple overnight, the "competitive" label would be lost. The same is true at the other end. There are many places for family medicine, some not able to be filled.

  So how can you tell how good a student is in medical school if there is no GPA and if getting into a specialty also don't indicate that?

There is no single metric. Rather, I suggest that you understand the mechanics against which you will be assessed. These will differ as you progress through your medical training. At each stage, the everyone resets to zero, any you start from scratch. There is no carry over of grades. Let me give you an example. In the program I head, we receive 400 applications for the 12 training places we possess. Once we select our trainees, everyone is treated the same. Effectively, the utility of your GPA, your medical school award for perfect attendance, your three letters of recommendation -- all of these have served their purpose and we chuck them out. We don't care whether you were top of your class or bottom of your class. You're now in our class and our rules apply. Do you know who has the hardest time figuring this out? Well, it's the people who are fixated about class and status.

Anyway, good luck to you.


How to acknowledge a retired professor? I want to acknowledge a retired professor. How do I specify his name? With just Prof. or something particular?

I usually see acknowledgements in papers with just the full name of the person, regardless of their degrees or academic status.  No "Prof." or other honorific would be used at all.  "We would like to thank Jane Doe for helpful advice regarding our data analysis."


PhD thesis defense - is there a separate defense session with one's graduate committee? I was watching a math PhD thesis defense on YouTube and it seems that after about an hour of the talk, a committee member tells the audience to leave except for the graduate committee and the PhD candidate.

What typically happens next?  Is there a separate defense session with the graduate committee?

For reference: United States

That varies from place to place, even in the US. Your advisor will give you the best advice. But yes, a private session with your committee is pretty common. They want to assure themselves that you are "seasoned" and have both the required depth and breadth to be awarded the degree.

Again, your advisor will tell you what to expect, but it is possible to get questions that are unrelated to your thesis, or even to your specific subfield. In mathematics, members of a committee often have different specialties and may want to know what you can say about their own field as they may have only a sketchy knowledge of yours and of your thesis.

Don't, in general, expect it to be just a presentation. The public part needs to be a bit less technical in tone, since many of those present are looking for an overview. That isn't enough, of course. You need to say what you did and the key ideas that got you there.


Can I submit a non-research "article" on ArXiv? Can a generic article be published on arXiv? For example, can I publish an article on "Introduction to Linear Algebra," or does it have to be an innovative research paper or preprint?

If not, are there any journals (e.g., open access) that accept "articles" as papers?

See Is it possible to upload expository papers to arXiv? .

I have seen linear algebra notes on the arXiv, and also notes on other undergraduate-ish subjects (including some pretty good ones, e.g., http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.6946 and http://arxiv.org/abs/0805.0585 ). I absolutely don't mind them, and I don't think others do (although I would suggest using github for course notes due to the possibility of frequent corrections and updates). Expository papers for nonstandard material definitely fit well on the arXiv, and there are several; e.g., almost every chapter of the Tamari Memorial Festschrift has been posted on the arXiv.


What is a junior researcher in academia Can we call someone a junior researcher if he or she has obtained their Ph.D recently and also has research stay abroad?

I would classify a "junior" researcher as pretty much anyone who does not yet have a permanent position. (The question of whether a tenure-track faculty member is a "junior" researcher might be open, but anything "below" that is not, at least in my mind.)

So yes, someone who has had a research stay abroad and has recently received a PhD is still very much a "junior" researcher.


What exactly is a research paper? I have heard a lot about people doing research and writing papers about it, but I’m not sure in which cases the papers would be called a research paper.

Here are a few hypothetical example cases I could think of:

A found a technique to increase clock speed of microprocessors
B did research on life on a historical person by visiting people and places related to him. She/He found new information and She/he was first to successfully join the bits of information about that persons life.
C researched about a writer. She/He did not find anything new, She/he just collected various information from different sources and put it together.
D used sources like internet and books to show how technology X is very essential for doing Y. Although this may be obvious to some, no one has written about it before.

Assuming each of them writes about their work, who would write a research paper? When is something called a research paper?

My Internet research so far was not successful, as I did not understand the concept of a research paper and everyone said something different.

A research paper is a paper that contributes some new knowledge to your field. That is, if you do some work (research) that adds to the body of knowledge in your field, and you write up the methods and results of your research in a paper, this can be called a research paper.

So in your example cases:

If A's technique is an important bit of knowledge that will move the field forward, then a paper describing it is a research paper. If it's a straightforward application of things that are already known, or a hack that's not going to move the field forward, it's probably not going to become a research paper.
D's work would not be considered research, if it's obvious to those in the field.
I don't know enough about standards in history to judge what's considered a contribution to the field, so I can't comment on B or C.


How do I negotiate an offer for Ph.D. funding? I've received an offer for admission next year. I would very much like to accept the offer, but I'm not sure the 50% TA position will be enough to cover the costs of commuting and an apartment near the university.

During the interviews last weekend, one of my likely advisors stressed the point that when an offer was made (they didn't come out and tell me then, but were very clear that my chances were good) it would be negotiable, but he didn't elaborate and I didn't feel comfortable asking what he meant.

How should I broach the subject of receiving more funding without coming across as ungrateful, and is there any way to know what kinds of additional aid the university might have available?

As long as you are polite and don't come with a list of unreasonable demands, you don't have to worry about seeming ungrateful.

  How should I broach the subject of receiving more funding without coming across as ungrateful

Try this:

"When we spoke last weekend, I got the impression that the level of funding could be negotiable. Is that still the case? I appreciate the 50% TA position very much, but I'm concerned that it won't cover my living costs."

  Is there any way to know what kinds of additional aid the university might have available

Ask them:

"Are there any other kinds of aid (besides the TA position) that I could be considered for?"


Asking to see other reviews I recently reviewed a paper for a math journals. I recommended to reject the paper but my decision was overridden because of two other positive reviews. Is it a common practice to ask to see the other reviews ?

I am curious about what the other reviewers thought of the paper. I am not going to fight about the paper acceptance or anything, I am just being curious.

I'm writing this in my role as an editor: if I had assigned a younger colleague as a reviewer, and said colleague asked me for the other reviews because they want to learn what others see in a paper, I would usually be happy to forward them to her. Everyone wins if we help younger researchers find their bearings what is or is not expected in a review.

That said, there must be an understanding that the other reviews I forward will remain confidential and will not be distributed further. I imagine if you write to the editor who had assigned the paper to you, ask for the other reviews and explain why you'd like to see them, and promise confidentiality, then you may be able to get them.


Plagiarism of a co-author? I am PhD student. My PhD advisor wrote a research paper literally copy pasting several paragraphs from a already published paper, which was written by me as main author and he is just second author. Copy-pasted paragraphs where without any citation to this paper written by me.

QUESTION:
1) Is the accuse of plagiarism still standing, when the main author of a paper copy-pastes from a paper where he/she was only second author?

2) What is your opinion about addressing the issue directly to the funding scheme which has financed the project and of course the scientific output?

3) Furthermore he copy-pasted a full methodology from a un-published document written by me, of course without citing. Unfortunatly this document has no specified authorship although through email traffic I can proof that I am the main developer of this document. Do you consider that also plagiarism?

thanks for answer provided.
Alfred

Re-using text from a previous paper on which one was an author is known as self plagiarism. Opinions vary on the gravity of this sin, but it is pretty clearly not best practice. In my opinion, re-use should be allowed for descriptions of methods or presentations of proofs, provided that they are adequately flagged as such with citation to the original paper. "Following our previous analysis (Smith et al 2013), our methods are as follows..." If no citation is provided, this seems to me to be a transgression.

Authorship order is not relevant. Self-plagiarizing from a second author paper is no better or worse than doing so from a first author paper. Overall, you seem to have a misunderstanding of how collaboration works. Once two people collaborate on a paper, the output belongs to them jointly. One author does not have greater ownership over a particular paragraph what for having written the initial text of that paragraph.

I would hope you would directly discuss this with the PI before going to a funding body.

Depending on the circumstances, using your text may or may not be plagiarism. If I am paying an RA to work on a paper but she does not rise to the level of authorship, I see no obvious reason why I cannot ask the RA to help draft portions of the text. Similarly, PIs routinely ask graduate students and postdocs to help prepare grant proposals on which the PI is the sole author. I've never heard this considered to be plagiarism.


How to make a presentation that includes math symbols? For many years, I've used Latex to create my presentations, because I need to include mathematical formulae and symbols. However, it's sometimes quite cumbersome to use, and it's much harder to do "visual" effects (I'm not talking about animations, but for instance about arrows emphasizing a particular word, or connecting two words together, etc) compared to, say powerpoint.

I'm now trying to keep the maths to a minimum in my presentation (that was actually a really good advice given by a good speaker I talked to), but I still need them a bit, so my question is: what good (combined?) solution exist to create nice presentation that involve mathematical symbols?

I've found that the secret is (1) good tools to create equations, plus (2) liberal use of arrows and text, plus (3) animations linking the two.

I've found the following two programs to be indispensable for writing talks:

LateXiT for the Mac
KLaTeXFormula for a number of OSs, similar to latexit but less functional

The goal is to make the math (1) visually distinctive, so that the reader can easily tell when you're discussing an equation, and (2) easy to interpret. Remember, in a paper, you have text such as  "...where n is the number of..." after the equation is shown. This typically isn't done in research talks, and even worse, once you're off the slide, the reader has to simply remember what the equation was; they can't flip back a page.

My technique (you can see it in action in this presentation) is to put equations in a unique font (I use Times New Roman, with bolding and italics), and using the above tools to typeset equations in latex and insert them as images as necessary. As you introduce each equation, explain all the variables using text and arrows. Every variable should be explained... yes, this is slow, but learning is slow. If you're going to re-use the same equation multiple times, put it in the top-right corner of the slide - with arrows and text sometimes included - so that (1) they remember what you're talking about, and (2) so you can refer back to those equations.


How do I know if I am a competitive applicant for a top/second-tier grad school? I am contemplating on applying grad school, both MS and PhD, in Computational Social Science, such as Computational Analytics and Public Policy at University of Chicago.

But I am not sure what kind of applicant I am. How competitive or desirable I am as an applicant for a grad school. I am worried if I target wrong schools, too high or too low. Of course, I know that ranking is not everything, but at the same time, I don't want to make any mistake, such as failing to evaluate myself.

I think my profile is quite unique and interesting, but not sure if it would attract attention of admission committees. I have been always passionate about working for abused children. But how? Firstly, I was interested in Corporate Social Responsibility, then in Child Psychology, in Social Work, and now in approaching social issues by using computational methods—Computational Social Science.

I did my bachelors in Business Administration(GPA 3.4/4.0) in Korea and partially in France, and did my master of social work(GPA3.9/4.0, full-tuition scholarship) in Australia. All are highly ranked schools.

My GRE score is V:151, Q: 170, AWA: 4.5. I have a range of research experiences in psychology, Social Work, and Information Technology(total 6 labs, from 3months to 1 year). I will have 1-2 papers published by the time of submitting my application. The research will be about improving the lives of international students in my department. I have earned bursary($2,000) for this pilot project, which will be implemented in our department from next year.

I dropped out of middle school in Korea and went to the US by myself when I was 15. I wanted to see the bigger world. Then I came back to Korea and taught myself to get into a Uni. After completing my BA. I worked two years as a Sales Channel manager at Samsung Electronics managing $6 million per year. But I soon realised that doing CSR in Korea is too unrealistic. Then, I quit and gave all my savings to my parents (you know, there is high expectation on children by their parents in Asian culture), and went to Canada to find a way to work for children. After participating in several studies in Toronto, I decided to study social work and went to Australia to do MSW.

I also have a long list of volunteer work, mostly working for children and their family. And I have been making my living working in restaurants since I quit my lucrative Sales manager position at Samsung.

I wonder if my profile would make sense to grad program admission committee, and would like to know how I can make it more attractive. I have been thinking about paying some money ($300/h) to do a consultation for admission. Do you think it is worth it? I want to know how competitive applicant I am.

There is one thing that comes across clearly to me based only upon what you've written. I believe you are a very hard worker and you are willing to take risks. These two characteristics are very attractive to many people.

I think you need to concentrate on writing a succinct (but complete) résumé that showcases all of your accomplishments and evidence of positive character traits. To answer your main question, I already have a clear sense that you are definitely competitive. Your GPAs have shown an increase over time and you have a unique history. This means you also have a unique perspective on life.

If you spend money on anything, you'd probably get the most bang for your buck if you had a professional write your résumé. Then, you could make edits to that to suit your own personality. Get that done quickly and then start applying to lots of schools. Don't spend any more time worrying about whether or not you're competitive. You are. Stop worrying about making mistakes. This isn't life or death, it's simply grad school. Just make sure that spending money on grad school will actually amortize in a reasonable amount of time. I think it will definitely do so for you based on the avenue you are interested in pursuing.


How strong of an obligation does an advisor have to attend his/her Ph.D. students' graduation? I will be graduating my first Ph.D. student this summer. My student is quite strong and has done good work, and I am quite proud of him!

I do face one conundrum. He has expressed the hope that I would be there for his Ph.D. hooding and graduation ceremony. It seems like an utterly natural, totally reasonable thing to ask for. I was tenatively planning on being out of the country at the time, so I need to decide whether to cancel my plans to attend his graduation.

On the one hand, missing my student's graduation seems like the equivalent of missing your best friend's wedding. Or perhaps worse, missing your child's wedding, or your own. On the other, this seems to be very common. My own Ph.D. advisor was out of town for my graduation and I asked another professor on my committee to escort me in his place.

Is there any kind of consensus?

Obligation? Unless through your institution's academic responsibilities there is a requirement to attend, then none.

However, if you equate it to being on par with missing your own child's wedding, then I think you've answered your own question.

You only get one 'first Ph.D. student'.


Should academics be concerned about professorwatchlist.org There is a relatively new website: http://professorwatchlist.org/ whose mission:

is to expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.
Help us identify, and expose more professors who have demonstrated liberal bias in the classroom.

What are the likely consequences for a US academic that is exposed as having a liberal bias in the classroom?

If that website is really about what it says it's about, then I don't think there's anything to worry about. Academics should be open to criticism, especially if they are vocal about their political opinions. Academic freedom means the government should not interfere with what professors teach, not that they should be shielded from criticism. There certainly is political bias among university professors and it's not unhealthy per se to question that via independent media.

Off course, this website is very partial and lumps together extremists, people under FBI scrutiny or who were convicted with people with simply non-conservative opinions, and people whose research actually contradicts some of the American conservative positions. That last bit is probably the only worrisome aspect.

I suspect readers of that website are really looking for a confirmation of opinions they already have. I don't think it's going to have a lot of traffic from random people (apart from the one you're generating with that link). That is also true of blogs and website from the other side of the political spectrum.

If such websites challenge facts because they conflict with their political opinions, then there is a threat and it's our job to fight it with science, not with political activism.


Intellectual theft by a former colleague, how to respond? I was recently given a green light by my former supervisor to conduct an analysis on individual patient data from their recently published trial for a stats class assignment (Msc). The idea was we could flip the assignment into a research letter/full manuscript if the results are interesting. I didn't describe the full analysis since I knew it would be enough to just give them the overall jist.
I later called my former colleague, the clinical trial coordinator, to describe the data I needed, the analysis I was going to do (more detailed), and discuss data security since it was a group project. I mentioned if my members could not have access to the data, I could do the analysis myself since I had already signed confidentially etc in the past. The coordinator then told me the question/hypothesis I was asking was something s/he wanted to see done but did not have the statistical expertise to do. I want to emphasize here that the coordinator does not have a methodology background and was not familiar with the analyses/methods that I described but just thought what I wanted to do is like what they had imagined.
However, a few hours later, I receive an email from my former supervisor that is clearly written by the coordinator saying that on further consideration, the analysis I was going to do probably belongs in a secondary paper that '[they] want to do'. Complete 180 and phrased 'we' exclusive since I am no longer part of the team. Now, its common for my old supervisor to delegate decision making / email writing to his staff as s/he is a busy clinician so there isn't any uncertainty around the email. They have also offered me an alternative data set for my class but I cant help but feel robbed.
What do I do?

While I sympathize with your situation, I believe that you are vastly overestimating the severity of the wrong-doing by the coordinator and your former supervisor, labeling the question with tags such as plagiarism, and calling it intellectual theft in the title. It is hardly either.
As I understand the situation, neither you nor your former supervisor has any ownership over the data. They belong to another group, and when prompted, they said that they would rather do the study themselves. From your description it seems like the study was a rather obvious one, so there is really little intellectual ownership as far as the method goes. The coordinator was even nice, and offered you another data set.
These things happen all the time, and you have not sunk too many resources into the project yet. Cut your minimal losses, write back with a "thanks for the alternative data set", and if you feel like it, you can even add that the coordinator may pass your contact information, in case the group is looking for a collaborator with your expertise.


Research on pedagogical benefit of lab reports at the graduate level? In science and engineering classes involving a "practical" lab, students are often required to write some kind of "lab report," typically describing the procedure and results of the lab experiment.

Is there any research on the pedagogical benefit of having students at the graduate level write lab reports?

(I've seen some on K-12 education and a little bit about undergraduate education, but couldn't find anything relevant to graduate students.)

I am especially interested in research that describes how students learn by writing lab reports, and what parts of this exercise benefit them most. For example, what is the benefit of having students write a full lab report vs. just reporting their results? I read this paper which asserts (tangentially) that "very little is learned by rephrasing the written procedure," and I am wondering if anybody has formally studied this.

This is a reference-request question: I am looking for a citation+brief summary of a research study, not personal opinions.

There is research to graduate student's teaching skill:

Graduate Students’ Teaching Experiences Improve Their Methodological
Research Skills (link)

And research to lab reports, evaluating the reports and how reports are viewed:

Using the Science Writing Heuristic in the General Chemistry Laboratory To Improve Students' Academic Performance (link)
Development of a ‘universal’ rubric for assessing undergraduates’ scientific reasoning skills using scientific writing (link)
“As You're Writing, You Have these Epiphanies” - What College Students Say about Writing and Learning in their Majors (link)
The Laboratory Report: A Pedagogical Tool in College Science Courses (link)
Writing-To-Teach: A New Pedagogical Approach To Elicit Explanative Writing from Undergraduate Chemistry Students (link)

If a paper you found is interesting, use Google Scholar to search for that title and click 'Cited by' to see other papers that refer that paper. Then you might find more interesting papers. For example, for papers that cite item 3 probably use this rubric or relate to the use of lab reports: (link).

I'm not in this area of research, so it's hard for me to find the right papers and I'm not 100% sure what you look for. Some of the links above require university access to read the full paper.


How much will dropping out of a Master's program hurt job prospects? I am extremely dissatisfied with the Master's program I just began and plan on dropping out ASAP. I currently have no interest in finding another graduate program and instead wish to pursue a job outside of academia. As I see it my two choices are to either stick it out for the rest of the semester and just try to maintain C's, or to simply walk away from it and accept the F's because the drop deadline has passed.

The main question I have is how much more damaging is the option of just walking away mid-semester?

I realize that certain employers will view the situation differently, but I am just seeking opinions here. I have no idea of what industry I would want to work in or how that might affect your answers. Or if anyone has advised students in similar situations, I would greatly appreciate similar advice.

As for my records before this program, I got my BS in applied math and graduated with honors. I am hoping that I can bank on this earlier performance and explain the reasoning behind dropping out to potential employers.

I would stick it out and get the best grades I can.  I would try to monitor my stress level and do things I enjoy as well.  The important thing is to finish things in a clean way and not let yourself get to the point where you drop everything and leave.

The job market is extremely competitive these days.  A master's degree can have a big effect on what pay you receive and how far you can go in certain industries.  You might not feel like a master's degree is worth it now, but you might want to go back to school for a different degree or even to complete the same degree.  It's hard to predict what the situation will be for you in 5 years or 10 years.  Bad grades now can restrict your possibilities for years to come.  Who knows? You might be thinking about getting an MBA in a prestigious program in 10 years and find yourself stuck having to explain some bad grades from years before.

Your first one or two years of work, people might ask about your GPA as well, and leaving the graduate school off might be tricky as it might leave gaps in your employment.  Although, I have seen it work to just not put what year you got your undergraduate degree.


Applying for job at same university as PhD application I have a question for a situation, but I'll try to keep it brief. Couldn't find any similar questions, but I'm not sure how to phrase the search either.

I graduated with my MS in Jan. 2014, just around a year ago. At the time, I was trying to relocate to a different city for personal reasons. One of the places I applied for a job was a University in the city I wanted to live in, call it 'City X'. I did NOT get that job, but it came down to me and another candidate so I was close. I ended up taking a position in the same place as the MS program, thinking I would work for a year (or so) and then try to relocate after finding another opportunity in city X.

Now, I have been thinking of obtaining my PhD and the same University in City X above offers it, so I applied about two months ago. I would LOVE to go to this school and get a PhD with this University. Based on past years, I expect the admission decision should come out in the next few weeks. I only applied to this school, given my relocation needs. I feel as though it is a coin flip whether I am admitted (longer odds than I would like personally).

Here's the dilemma though. Another research-related position (job) opened with the same University. This job would be great too! I should also mention that the person looking for the new hire might also be sitting on the Admissions Committee. My question is this: will applying for this job hurt my chances at being admitted to the PhD program (or vice-versa)? I don't want to risk ticking someone off and not getting either position. Is this an actual risk or am I being paranoid? I just want to keep my options open.

Given both offers, I would take the position in the PhD program, as it is a long-term goal of mine. Part of me thinks that I should wait for the decision from the PhD and then apply to the job. The job was just posted today, so I could get results from the Admissions Committee before the job search is over...theoretically. The other part of me thinks I should just apply and see what happens.

First of all, apply for both. It is the best for you to be open to all the options.

However, if both applications goes through, I would recommend to choose the job; simply because you probably will get paid better on the top of learning about the research without the clock ticking. Also, you become a staff and not a student; and you will be treated more professionally.

You can always switch to the Ph.D. after working for sometime, knowing exactly what you want to work on; based on your research-based work experience.


How many first-author papers should I publish during postdoc to get a tenure-track faculty position? I'm currently a 2nd year postdoc in mechanical engineering field working on bio-related applications. I have ~9 first-author papers during my Ph. D., but have not been able to publish a first-author paper during postdoc.
For anyone in a similar situation (postdoc in mech. working on bio stuff), what is the reasonable number of 1st author papers to apply for TT? If I have several non first-author papers, would that still "count" as my research output when getting reviewed by the search committee?

I think quality of the work is more important than number or papers.  Even more important than first-author status.

Of course non-first-author papers count; for exapmle, get the actual first author to write one of your recommendation letters, to describe your contribution to the research.


Do people write research papers differently nowadays? Revised.  I was thinking about the way I write research papers, it involves a lot of revising to even get a "first draft," and subsequently I do a lot of revising also.  Presumably this is fairly common nowadays, as computers have made revising papers easy.

However, in days of yore, before TeX/word processing, these revisions were not so easy, so I wonder:

Has TeX/word processing qualitatively changed the way we write papers?  Specifically: (i) did people do significantly less revising (or make fewer passes) before computers?  (ii) did people have different approaches to writing first drafts?

My understanding is that, in the past, faculty typically had assistants/secretaries to type up hand-written notes, and sometimes special symbols/figures would be drawn in by hand (by faculty? or assistant?).  Then I presume the faculty would go through and edit by hand, and necessary parts would be retyped.  Possibly there would be another pass of this, but I can't imagine that many more revised typings were made.  Did this mean less revising was done?

If so, did this force people to plan out their first drafts at the handwritten stages differently than now?  At least for me, I usually have a basic outline in mind and then just start writing and go back to revise earlier parts while writing later parts (apart from the intro, which is sometimes written last).  However, I guess this style is not so practical when writing by hand?

(Originally, my question was if word processing has changed the quality of papers, but that was deemed too opinion-based.  Hopefully, this is something people can answer semi-objectively from their first or second hand experience.)

Making an answer out of some amplified comments, which I deleted...:

Prior to slightly-modern typewriters such as IBM's "Selectric" and some proto-computerized typewriters, mostly too expensive for individuals to buy, staff typists did not "add value" much (except for faculty who could not type), because they could not literally type special characters, which then had to be drawn in by hand by the author, by reference to the original hand-written thing. The typist would leave approximately the right amount of space to draw the characters. As you can imagine, making a boo-boo drawing characters onto an already-typed page was both all-too-easy and very annoying. In principle, one could make photocopies, but (let's say early 1970s) photocopies were much more expensive than now, and were typically much, much worse quality than a directly-typed page. (One could also type onto "mimeo masters", and draw characters on them, but this was incredibly messy, smelly, crazy. Mimeos were the closest thing to "private publication", but one could only make 30 or so copies before the "master" wore out...) The "white-out" of the time was not very good, either: it would often fall off the page.

For submission for publication, the hand-drawn Greek letters were typically to be underlined or circled in red, Fraktur with green, stuff like that.

Yes, the revise-and-retype cycle was burdensome. In effect, errors could easily be introduced by typists, and new/different errors the next time, after the author proof-read.

Since there was usually only a handful of typists per department, even the people with some seniority would have to wait a week or two or three for re-typing, adding another delay. But most people were reconciled to these delays, especially since learning to (genuinely!) "type" was not so typical in those days! That is, in high school in the U.S., people studying "business/secretarial" stuff, not planning to go to college, would learn touch-typing and shorthand. People "going to college" often did not learn to type at all, and possibly did not possess typewriters at all. For such people, there was no real choice but to give hand-written manuscripts to typists, even if the whole process was slow and crazy-making.

With the advent of the Selectric and such, and especially proto-word-processors that could treat non-Roman characters and do corrections and remember things, typists did add value, even for those who could type, because they'd have those machines, which were too expensive for typical individuals to afford. Serge Lang was an exception: prior to 1977 he had his own Selectric, and was an excellent typist (unsurprisingly). The hitch in using those things was "changing the balls", because not all characters could be available at one time. So this slowed things down quite a lot. The usual trick was to leave spaces for exotic characters, and go back and fill in by ball-swapping... which lent itself to the same annoying boo-boos as with hand-drawing characters into blank spots on a page. And not all characters were available... And any diagrams would still have to be drawn by hand.

With the advent of widely-available desktop computing either provided by math depts, or, eventually, cheap enough for individuals, again staff typists no longer added much value except for those who couldn't really typ, and the possibility of revising-without-completely-retyping changed everything. I note that pre-word-processing, seniority determined access to and priority with the limited staff typists, and wait-times for typing or retyping could be weeks. And as recently as 2005 I observed a senior colleague giving dictation to one of the few staff who could take shorthand, to type up a letter, and the person giving the dictation would make the now-almost-forgotten editorial marks on the typed copy, send it back for retyping. There was/is "status" in giving dictation or having typing done by others?

Formatting was not really possible either, except at publishers' houses. Sure, one could hand-draw, but they'd re-typeset everything, so any visual effects an author came up with were a waste of time. Perhaps the ugliness of mathematics manuscripts in those days (as in early SLN's) reinforced the quasi-Platonic mythology about the mathematics itself, since it sure didn't look so beautiful when clumsily drawn in by hand on the page!

The several years of the availability of desktop computers but without anything resembling TeX (mid 1980s) allowed much time to be wasted typing things up in file formats that were obsolete by the next year, etc. That was irritating. The desktop computers of the time had tiny memory, were literally slow, were unstable, and the daisy-wheel printers took a couple minutes to print a single page. And jammed. And...

Some faculty seemed not to mind demanding endless revisions from typing staff, but to me this was awkward, and just doing it myself was easier, since I had learned how to type. A significant number of the grad students at Princeton did type their own theses in the 1970s, but many did not. But the quality expected was really very low, so that lack of what nowadays would be minimum-allowed-quality was ignored.

All that effort expended to create even a crude document did distract from the content, yes. Cutting-and-pasting and moving things around and search-and-replace were really infeasible, not at all worth the trouble unless there'd be a major disaster otherwise. Just getting a reasonably correct thing onto the page was already a considerable accomplishment. Whatever had been more-or-less correctly typed so far was "frozen".

Thinking about it, it seems to me that there was much less self-critiquing done in those times, because it was so difficult to create an easily-readable document, typed or handwritten. That is, it was simply harder to subject one's own writing to careful scrutiny, because the typical copy would be (perhaps semi-legibly) handwritten, many cross-outs, pieces of paper taped on, white-out, ... In particular, the "notes" were much less an incarnation of mathematical ideas, I think, since they were inevitably a crappy version thereof. In contrast, nowadays it is possible to have "notes" that other human beings could read, etc. :)

Even before today's set-up, some people (including me) did try to skip the hand-writing step to the extent possible, exactly because hastily handwritten text was almost automatically not-really-readable by anyone else, and because typing prose could be much faster than hand-writing it, even with old typewriters.

A large difference seems to me to be in computations. "Long ago", of course all computations were first handwritten, and errors and revisions were a horrible mess. In contrast, nowadays one can typeset the first attempt to make it legible if not correct, and iteratively correct it, rather than repeatedly starting over, etc. This possibility, of iterative computation via typesetting, was absent in the dim past.

Also, getting other peoples' opinions was of course crazily slower: time-lag for typing-up, and then actual physical mail, further impeded by "campus mail" at both ends... in contrast to emailing a PDF. In fact, international mail ("air mail") often failed entirely... :)

So... "yes". :)