Would an online masters degree help me to become a professor? This question seems to indicate the answer is no but I don't know enough to see whether being accepted into a PhD program equals getting a teaching job. I attended a private four-year school at which the professors did minimal (if any) research and spent a lot of time personally assisting students outside of class. Because I've never attended a large, state school, I don't know if this is what it's like but I've heard it isn't.

I am much more interested in what I described (teaching and helping students) than in having large, impersonal classes and conducting research.

Would an online masters degree increase my chances of getting a job teaching computer science (the subject of my four-year degree) in the manner described above?

No.

In the US, permanent university-level teaching positions in computer science, even at small four-year colleges, require a Ph.D.  As I explained in my earlier answer, an online master's degree will not help you get into a PhD program.

For some non-tenure-track positions, a master's degree with a thesis may be enough, but a terminal/professional/course-based master's degree won't be; whether that terminal master's program is online or on-campus is essentially irrelevant.

In short, if you want a permanent teaching position, you need formal research experience.


Is it normal for my masters advisor to ask me not to share code from my masters work with my PhD advisor, and not to continue with the same topic? I have couple questions for you guys and I hope to find some answers here.

Scenario:

I finished my master's degree with a thesis at school A.  During my master's program at school A, I was a research assistant for my thesis adviser (Let's call him Professor A).
Now, I am applying to school B for PhD (because PhD isn't offered at school A) and I am hoping to work with Professor B who has a same research interest as Professor A.

Professor A has requested that:

I do not share any codes with Professor B.
Choose a research topic that is different from my master's thesis for the conflict of interest.

Questions:

My questions are:

Is this understandable and typical situation for many students? What do you do about this?
Do I need to completely change the trajectory of my PhD research topic from Master's and start a new topic in the same research area?

Edit:
We are in the US.
Codes were collaborated. And already received my masters.

II don't know anything about the law in your country, but I think that the request of Professor A has a weak justification:

As lang as you wrote the code in the course of your master
program, your advisor has no right. The algorithms should be considered as public domain (unless you've
signed an NDA). It is different, if (parts of) the code are done by
others.
Being a master student does not constitue an employment relation. There is simply no base for any restriction to your further academic career.

Beside of this, I consider the behaviour of Prof. A (given you've presented all facts) as a bad academic style. Knowledge exchange, a.o. by exchange of people is a well established academic method. To answer your direct questions:

While conflicting loyalty may be a typical problem, I've never heard that a colleague of mine issued such request. Your course of actions depends (of course) on practical issues, too: Is there any danger that Prof. A prevent you from getting the master degree? If so, explain the situation to Prof. B and try to reach an agreement that you "officially" apply after you get your degree.
As I explain above: IMHO no. I would be a waste academic
resources, i.e. your knowledge and abilities. (Beside of this, it is
always a good advice to at least widen your area of expertise as
well as include at least few topics that are totally new for you: It
make you a better researcher)


How can a masters student compensate for lack of solid foundation in basic math and CS fundamentals? I am a graduate student in Computer Science (in the U.S). I did my undergraduate study in India.

My fundamentals in Math and CS importantly are shaky. I often feel insecure in class where my peers seem to understand in depth about fundamentals that I have been taught differently (now I think about it -- mediocre standard at best).

I have been working my way through math using Khan academy. For CS I study them as and when needed. But I still feel a major gap in my approach and would like to get some suggestions on this.

That you realize this is good, but the appropriate approach depends on lots of individual factors.  The people who are likely to be able to give you the best advice are your professors/advisor.  They probably know best where you are at and what is most important for you to succeed in their program.  Also, informing them that you are aware of your deficiencies and are trying to make up for them should improve their opinions of you, and also make them more willing to help you succeed in the program.

That said, here are some things that can help: start tutoring or TAing for lower level math/CS classes (I first really understood eigenvectors when I was tutoring other students in linear algebra), going through texts on your own (exercises are the most important!), taking/sitting in on undergrad classes (some of our grad students with weak backgrounds do this), typing up your own notes on this fundamental material, finding people (students or faculty) you can ask specific questions.

Also: read up on the impostor syndrome (on wiki-p and here, say).  You may have it.


How to say "I'm not interested" in a polite way? I'm a PhD student, sending cold emails to potential PIs for postdoc positions these days.
I sent an email to this one PI that I've been interested in and asked him about the possibility of joining his lab as a postdoc, elaborating potential projects I would like to study in his lab.
He replied to my email saying that his lab is taking a different direction recently which hasn't been reflected on his lab website yet and asked if I'd be interested in this new line of research.
However, I'm not really interested in this new research. My interest in working with him was based on his past work. He wanted me to let him know whether I'm interested in this new direction. It was nice that he replied to my email and informed me of his new interest. Honestly, I don't feel like I would excel in this line of research (because I don't know much about it). Also, it doesn't sound fascinating to me. I tried to read papers about it (to get a better sense of what exactly it is), but they were so boring, and I couldn't even finish reading any of them.
The situation is a bit weird because I'm the one who first sent an unsolicited email and he hasn't offered me a job yet. So, it's kind of my rejection when there is no actual offers made in reality. I just don't think working with him would be a good fit (not only from my side but also from his side). There must be someone else who better understands and is passionate about the topic than I do. In this case, how can I say "I'm not interested in doing your new research" in a polite way in an email?
Any suggestions would be appreciated!

Simply saying that you are more interested in the earlier research direction ('topic A') than the current one, should be fine. Thank him for getting back to you, but you don't need to say more.
No need, of course, to say you think that the new topic (B) is boring. But "Thanks" is all you need to express.
One thing that might happen is that you get a reply containing some lobbying for you to join. You should listen, but have no obligation to accept any offer, of course. The person might be a valuable contact in the future, even if you are in a different area.


How do professors spend their NSF grants? If a professor receives $200,000 as the PI (not co-PI) from the NSF, how many PhD students can he/she take as Research Assistant (with yearly salary of $18,000)? I am asking about the most usual cases. How much money does he/she need to handover to the department? How does this budget usually work? Does the professor also need to pay the tuition of the funded PhD students? Or does the department pay it? Very interested to know.

Ficticious but reasonably realistic example; YMMV, sometimes significantly:

Fall/Spring:

Stipend: $9,000/semester
Tuition: $7,000/semester @ 50% off
Health insurance: $1,000/semester
F&A overhead: $5,400/semester @ 60%

Summer:

Stipend: $9,000
Tuition: $0
Health insurance: $1,000
F&A overhead: $5,400 @ 60%

Total: $60,200 per student*year. In the example above F&A overhead is 60% of stipend only, with no overhead on tuition or health insurance. Tuition is 50% off because it's an overhead-bearing grant.

So your $200,000 would be 1 student over 3 years plus some leftover for PI Summer salary, travel, misc. expenses, etc.


How to handle not having my PhD advisor as a reference? I received my PhD in 2009 and my adviser will not provide a good recommendation for me. This is mostly because we have fundamentally different approaches to science, and in retrospect I see that I could have avoided a breakdown in our relationship if I had been more deferential.

At this point, I leave his name off of my list of references, but I suspect that a diligent potential employer might call him anyway. I would be willing to discuss any concerns that were brought up in such a call - indeed I think that doing so will help me to find a good fit in a new position - but I do not know if I should, or how to state this fact in my job applications.

I am currently finishing my post doc, and one recommendation has been to take another post-doc so that I at least have two supportive references from postdoc advisers - and that the additional publications will place less weight on recommendations. Still, others have told me that not having a good reference from my adviser is a kiss of death.

How can I most effectively handle this situation?

I've personally seen a few careers survive this exact problem (caveat: I don't necessarily see the ones that don't), but it isn't easy.

The best way to surmount this problem is to be referred into a job in an industry/government/NGO lab - and have someone within the organization pulling for you. If you're doing an academic post-doc right now, that's fine, but you need to start connecting to people who work in the kinds of places you want to work. If you do another post-doc, do one for a company or a government lab. If you've got someone who can pull you into the fold at a company or lab, you've got no issue at all.

Here's my advice if you are sending out cold-call applications:

The issue won't come up in the application stage (don't mention anything negative about your experience in your cover letter, or your application will get trashed). The trick will be how to handle yourself during the interview stage.

You say here:

  "in retrospect I see that I could have avoided a breakdown in our
  relationship if I had been more deferential."

You're going to need a much better story than that. Because you are going to have to explain it at some point (probably when someone asks why you haven't listed your old PI as a reference), and that line will throw up red flags about your ability to handle being managed. You'll have to be prepared to talk about it in some detail, but focus everything on what you learned from it. How do you handle conflict better now? Have recent examples ready of your excellent interpersonal skills.

Avoid talking about this problem for more than a few minutes in an interview, but don't hide the fact that you've have this issue in the past. Employers will call your references, and chances are good that it will come up. Even if one of your references mentions it with you in the best possible light, if it's the first time the employer has heard of it they will feel like you've withheld information. While companies will generally not call someone you haven't listed as a reference, they will get in touch with everyone they know who may have also worked for your old boss, gotten a degree from your old department, collaborated with your old group. This may be an issue if your field of study is small. If you've changed your research focus somewhat since then, this is less likely to happen.

You can overcome this, but BE PREPARED. And once you get your first non-postdoc job, it'll all be downhill from there.


Progress to Ph.D. delayed due to COVID-19: How to convince advisor to let me finish degree without taking an extra year? I’m doing my Ph.D. research in cognitive development using in-person experiments with children, which has stopped indefinitely due to COVID-19. I passed my preliminary exam last month, so I only need to propose and defend my dissertation.

I want to propose this spring/summer and defend by fall 2021 so I can stay in this city and get an industry job, but my advisor keeps pushing me to take a 6th year so I can publish and be more competitive for academia, despite me telling her many times that I want to leave academia. Now that in-person studies have stopped, my advisor is basically forcing me to take a 6th year and wants to push my dissertation proposal to this fall (which would give me unsatisfactory progress, thus possibly eliminating my funding). I asked about proposing a partially online experiment so I could gather data this summer, but she refuses to let me do any online data collection for my dissertation. I really don’t want to take a 6th year of a low stipend when I could be financially stable with an industry job, and I don’t want to possibly spend next year unfunded.

Is there any way I can negotiate with her so I can finish this degree sooner rather than later?

Very sorry to hear about your situation. I know of others, like yourself, who've had their research stalled as a result of the COVID-19 situation. I must say, I was taken aback shocked to hear about such inflexibility on part of your supervisor:

I asked about proposing a partially online experiment so I could gather data this summer, but she refuses to let me do any online data collection for my dissertation.

If you haven't yet already, then you should really have a heart to heart with your supervisor and explain to them how you're feeling. Try and see if it is, in fact, the case that they are fixed on this issue. Should collecting data online be a feasible means for you to collect data for dissertation and defend by the fall, it would be very unreasonable on your supervisor's part to not allow you to do this. So if your supervisor is firm on this position, I'd recommend consulting with your department's ombudsman or even head. It is definitely not fair that you should be held back if that is not a necessary outcome, and merely reflects your supervisor's research motivations.


Do people actually scoop others? I was wondering if there are real faculty members who go to conferences or read the abstracts (if it's being published) and scoop others?

If not why some professors are so paranoid? IMHO A real entrepreneur would love to share his ideas and maybe someone else would do it instead of him. Consider Elon Musk for example who shares his ideas on Twitter. I would argue that Einstein wouldn't care if someone else had created general relativity.

At least in chemistry the information you get at conferences is usually (nearly) done work. The presenter has at least a very big head start so it's nearly impossible to take an idea there and do it yourself even faster.

A bigger problem are grant proposals. Here most of the time no or only little work on this topic has been done so it's actually possible to scoop others and in addition as a reviewer you can prevent the proposal from going through. We had that happen before where a reviewer wrote absolutely wrong and nonsense statements to get the proposal killed, most likely to copy that idea since he works on the same topic.


Short-Term Research Programs for International Students I will finish my MS soon and I will apply for fall 2016-PhD. I am wondering is there any short-term research assistance program ( 6-9 months) especially in Australia or European countries? If there are, how can I find them?(I don't mean summer schools which are mostly for undergrads)
I should mention that I am from Iran, and I have studied in the best university here but most of the international programs support students from limited countries, so finding a short-term program which admits people from all over the world has been really hard for me.

For Australia: Endeavour Research Fellowships offer a 4-6 month research trip to Australia for most countries, including Iran (Endeavour).

For Europe: As mentioned in the comments, the DAAD offers a number of different scholarships for research trips to Germany. The Iran DAAD page is here and the pages for other countries can be easily found by searching.

For the USA: The Fulbright offers an exchange program for students to spend an academic year in the USA, but it isn't available for students from Iran (Fulbright).

Note that all these are for currently enrolled graduate students - if you are trying to fund research when you are in between a MS and a PhD then unfortunately I'm not sure how much luck you'll have.


Is a 3 year Ph.D. too short for MA/MSc graduate? Or put simply, 3-year vs. 5-year PhD?

Many programmes in UK (and EU) take up 3 years, as opposed to a minimum of 4-5 years in North America. For a masters degree holder, with a goal to stay in academia, is a 3-year Ph.D. too short to prepare one for postdocs and academic roles? Or would the extra year(s) in a 5-year programme be a repetition of the masters?

Is the short duration enough in preparing an academic and his/her career? While the additional year(s) in a longer programme costly and dispensable? This question is informed by the many discussions here and elsewhere lamenting the competitiveness and difficulty of staying in academia, especially in the UK. I am asking from a UK/EU point of view (more specifically, social science), as I am not sure if this (potentially unwarranted) concern is generalizable in other countries and disciplines.

The thing about a PhD is that you should end up in roughly the same place. The length is therefore determined by where you come in. US PhDs tend to be longer than UK ones primarily because in the UK we specialise much earlier, so there is less left to do to reach PhD standard in your field.

In deciding what is best for you, the key factor will be you. How much do you still need to learn to complete your apprenticeship as an academic? That covers many aspects: knowledge for your research, research skills, how to write papers and give talks, personal management, career management, teaching, student supervision, probably some I've forgotten. If you have suitable funding, your PhD is a good time to learn these things while you have relatively little in the way of responsibilities. Also, at least in maths, your research record is generally considered relative to when you finish your PhD, not when you start.

My understanding is that the extra time in a US PhD is taken up completing taught modules/passing exams, not extra time on research. I would investigate whether having already done a masters would mean you could skip some/all of that and so shorten the total time.

Of course there are other factors to consider, finances and family often being the biggest ones. Also consider where you will be happy living, and who you want to work with. I was advised that the right supervisor is the most important thing in choosing a PhD. Personally I like to add that choice of supervisor should include preferred working patterns and personality, not just research topic, because you need to work closely with that person for a sustained period of time.


Green card or student visa (J1) for a post-doc in the US? I'm a non-US citizen, considering a post-doc in the states. I'm eligible for a 'green card' through marriage (my wife is a US citizen). I'm deliberating whether I should apply for permanent residency right now or go through the standard path of a student visa (e.g. J1) once I find a post-doc position.

I understand that not being a 'US person' somewhat limits the funding options of prospective advisors. Does searching for a post-doc as a permanent resident holder indeed opens up more opportunities?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of holding a green card instead of a student visa, both prior and during the post-doc?

Get your green card as soon as possible, do not waste your time with J1 visa. As Patricia said, you have to go back to your country where the visa was issued and you can't come back to USA for period of time (there is 2 years rule) stated on your visa. It is very restricted visa. Talk to an immigrant attorney and find the quickest way to get the green card.


Not independent enough for a PhD? I am a second year mathematics PhD student (Austria) in computational geometry, although I have obtained my Master's in algebra. However, I have the impression that I must have done my stuff severely wrong since I started my PhD.

I haven't published anything so far, or developed to an extend that deservers being published. I have certainly learned less than in any semester of my studies. I waste a lot of time because I either have no idea what to work, or, if I occasionally find something I could try, I have no ideas how to work on that problem. This is particularly surprising to me because I had been used to working very efficiently during my studies, not to wasting tome, to knowing what I do, which material I want to understand, whom to talk to if I struggle etc.

My supervisor (halftime of is tenure track, no gradudated PhD student until now) doesn't care very much. His style of "guidance" has been very hands-off from the very first day; according to him, doing a PhD is about becoming an independent researcher, so I should not expect anyone telling me what to work on, which attempts to try, or anyone explaining me particular mathematical topics. Probably, this is due to his background being in geometry. He has accepted me as his student because I am supposed to work on algebraic problems arising from his fields of interest. I wasn't aware that this means that I am supposed to cover knowledge he does not have.

Questions.

How do I succeed in a PhD without relying on anyone else to ask for explanations/problems/advice…?
How do I find promising problems, acquire the relevent knowledge and eventually solve them on my own?
How can I spot and learn relevant things in self-study as fast as I did when taking lectures during my studies?
How do I get rid of my imaginary need for exchange with experienced researchers fellow students?

There are two sides to this; I believe that indeed you should have more supervision than you have, and that your supervisor doesn't give you remotely as much help as you deserve and should have a right to receive. On the other hand you may be right about not yet being independent enough and that there's some skill set that you need to learn.

There is a huge variety of supervision styles and supervisor behaviour and your supervisor is certainly far on the "hands off and rely on student's independence" side of things. There are supervisors who support their students much more, however your supervisor is by far not alone with his interpretation of his role. Unfortunately, for many PhD students this will not work (you are absolutely not alone with this problem).

"According to him, doing a PhD is about becoming an independent researcher" - that's fair enough, but surely it's not about being an independent researcher already, which he apparently expects you to be! A good responsible PhD supervisor should lead their students into such a position rather than assuming that the students get there on their own!

Not sure to what extent you already tried to get more help out of your supervisor. Surely "independence" also means that if your supervisor tells you "leave me alone and find your own problem" you shouldn't necessarily just say "Yes, supervisor!" Being "independent" as a researcher doesn't mean not to talk to anyone, not to admit where you are struggling, and not to ask anyone for help!

Maybe you can "milk" your supervisor better by telling him that and in what way you are struggling, and to ask him to talk more with you about the research he is doing and how a problem could be found for you that he is actually interested in and that may help his work somehow. Try to get out of him as much as you can, and if that means not accepting his initial idea about supervision, so be it. Also try to connect things that you already know to what he says. What do you like in mathematics, in algebra or elsewhere? What kind of problem do you like to work on (for a moment ignoring whether that would fulfill requirements for a PhD)? Can you somehow make a connection between this and what your supervisor is interested in? (You can also ask him whether he sees a connection.) There are by the way textbooks that have exercises that in fact are research problems in disguise, so looking at textbook exercises in the area might help.

Once you have a problem, obviously the first step is to look for literature and to find out how other people solved similar problems, and whatever you can find is connected.

In case you don't manage to get more out of your supervisor, I agree with another posting that you should contact somebody else in the department. Isn't there a person such as a PhD tutor to which PhD students can go with issues? Somebody more senior you trust? Student representatives? Ultimately the department should make sure you get enough supervision, and there should also be some point to go to for students who have problems.

The side of your own attitude is somewhat difficult to assess. Let's say I'm somewhat surprised that it only dawns on you 1+ year into your PhD programme that you have no idea what to work on. Would it be like this even in algebra or the area of math you are most familiar with/like most? Have you done a Masters project or something like that? How was it? Have you ever worked on a problem, even a set exercise or something, that made you wonder about whether something more can be done there than you were asked for, or where you even had an idea what else to ask or what else to do connected to the problem? You surely need some proper curiosity and drive for doing a math PhD. The problem of matching your interests with the supervisor better can in all likelihood be solved, as can the problem of generating suitable problems "between" your interest and the supervisor's. If your supervisor is not the best person for helping you in that respect, talk to others. However, if you don't have a genuine interest for research and some curiosity and drive, your position isn't that good.

I think in your position, without supervisor help, I'd have grabbed a sufficiently sophisticated textbook about something somewhat related to computational geometry and something that seems interesting to me, and would've started to work through the book, trying to understand more or less everything, do some exercises, with particular awareness for any hint what could be a direction for my own research.

Last remark about "waste of time" - it's an experience, and many PhD stories involve being stuck and feeling that it's not going forward for quite some time. If you manage to dig yourself out of such a hole, you will feel the success and with hindsight will probably think that this phase was a valuable part of the experience. Don't forget that as long as you're studying just the stuff others tell you about and solve the exercises they have solved already, you may learn, but you don't push science forward. If after three years you have spent half the time in a hole trying to find your way out, and half the time doing something that is really your own project, this is quite a bit more productive than learning stuff that was spoonfed to you and passing exams on it, be it with flying colours. Many PhD projects, particularly in math, don't lead to published papers in the first two years. When I got my PhD after 3 1/2 years or so, I only had a paper on some earlier work from my Masters project; it took almost a year more to get something from my PhD out - this was the old days when there was less pressure to publish though, but really still it can pay out to take time to try to get into things in some depth rather than going for anything that could be publishable on the quick.


How do traveller academics get reimbursed for accommodation shared with families? I will travel to a conference at which I will present my work. My funder usually reimburses me for fees of conference registration, travel, and accommodation.

However, since my wife and kids will accompany me, I will book separate travel tickets for them, and a family room, which is usually more expensive than a single one.

I will ask the funder whether/how they would reimburse me for the accommodation.

I guess many other academics around the world travel for work with their partners, friends, or families, and I am wondering how they usually/ideally get fair reimbursement for accommodation shared with other non-funded travellers.

Usually, you will explain the specifics of your travel and provide some documentation about

the actual expenses for travelling with your family
the expenses you would have had, had you travelled alone

You should then be able to make a case for getting reimbursed for the (lower) expenses listed in item #2, even though all your bills show the (higher) expenses from item #1.

If there was anything that cost the same, or even less, for the whole family compared to what you would have paid alone, make sure to provide good proof of the hypothetical 1-person-price and you might even get reimbursed some of what was used by the entire family :)


What's the meaning of Visiting Researcher / Ass. Professor? I want to know how actually (and on the basis of what) visiting researcher (for PhD students) or visiting Ass. Professor (for lecturers) opportunities are offered worldwide (especially for USA/Canada) ?
Thanks !

For the European countries I've seen the answer would be similar:
Visiting researcher is not really a type of (funded) position, but a status. PhD students might do a research visit as part of their doctoral studies while still being paid by their home institution, sometimes supported by a travel grant to cover travel and housing costs. There are also post-doc grants providing 1- or 2-year funding that are implemented by having the involved institution host the postdoc as a visiting researcher. Finally, a professor on a sabbatical might visit another institution for a couple of months and in the course of that take on the visiting researcher status.
Fixed-term lecturer or teacher positions are created by the department as a regular type of position  (the term "visiting assistant professor" is usually not used). They usually have to be publicly announced and advertised, although the effort for advertisement is usually smaller than for a tenure-track or tenured position.


In a PhD dissertation, can one copy the structure of the acknowledgment section from their own or from someone else's prior work? In the acknowledge of a thesis, we thank all the people who helped our research. E.g.

"First of all I thank xxx, for xxx throughout my Ph.D. period."

For my master thesis's acknowledge, I tried very hard to rephrase the sentences to avoid repeating others' similar ones.

This time, I need to write my PhD thesis's acknowledge. I have download around 10 copies of other's acknowledges. I find it really difficult to work out a sentence structure that is different from all of them.

I mean the peoples we thank are different, but the reasons or the phrases representing how we should thank them are similar among all thesis.

I just wonder if I can stop struggling with rephrasing the sentence structure, and copy & mix the sentences from my and others' acknowledges and just replace the people's names?

Is this an acceptable behaviors? Is this plagiarism or self-plagiarism?

I just think there are so many theses with acknowledges. You probably would never be able to work out an unique sentence structure. You will be similar to others anyway. So why not just copy, mix and change names?

First, throw away everyone else's acknowledgements sections. Ignore them.

Second, think of all the people to whom you feel grateful, and write down your thanks in whatever way feels natural to you.

It really is that easy. There's only so many ways to say something, so if it sounds similar to someone else's, so what? As long as they are your own heartfelt words, no one will notice or care.


How to handle conflicts with inventorship on a patent with my supervisors from the university and the company? I am working on a research project funded by a company. So, I have two supervisors - one at the university and the other at the company.

The company likes the work I did and is encouraging me to disclose the invention at the university's technology transfer office. I made the mistake of filling up the technology transfer form with the names of both supervisors and sending it to them for comments. This is what one would usually do with publications.

However, I learnt only later that inventorship in a patent is completely different from authorship in a research article. I also understand that incorrectly naming an inventor on the form can invalidate the patent.

None of my supervisors made any intellectual contributions that led to the invention. I am also able to prove this as I have documents/slides about topics discussed during meetings.

How do I deal with this situation as both my supervisors expect their names to be on the patent? I must also mention that my university supervisor is extremely unprofessional. I have had problems with him in the past with publications. He could damage my career if I offend him. On the other hand I'd hate to share credit for something which I came up totally on my own when he was actually putting me under a great deal of pressure to work on one of his ideas that was not relevant to the problem at hand.

I suggest discussing the matter with the technology transfer office and asking them how to proceed.

They have expertise in patent applications, and should be able to advise you. If you can say "The technology transfer office says..." it may reduce pressure on you when talking to the supervisors.

At the best, the advisors know better than to expect to be on a patent without an intellectual contribution to the invention, and would have assumed you had only listed them to get their input on the application.


Do I have an "anti-research" personality? I am a second year Ph.D. student in a North American university who is mostly working on applied mathematics with a supervisor/advisor/PI. I have been troubled by a pattern of my own behaviour that seems to go against the seemingly correct way to succeed in research and I wonder if I have some sort of an "anti-research" personality.

Here are the problems:

I study whatever is interesting and cool (within a reasonable range of my discipline) and this causes me to lack a solid focus. It seems to me that people who wind up obtaining a PhD learn to abandon so-called academic freedom early on and drill into a tiny research area. For example, while other people's research could be about different types of seahorses, my research would be about seahorses, pipe fish, shrimps...you get the picture.
Since I work in applied math, therefore I often demand more proof of applicability, where my supervisor is totally happy with toy models. He thinks it is completely sufficient for publishing a paper while I think it is fake applied research. This seems to generate some conflict between us and usually I am the one who gives in at the end and do some simulation on these toy models to make him happy - I never care about these problems. Most other people in my field only simulate toy models as well, not really "real-world" applicable in any sense, but hey, it is sure pumping out a lot of papers.
I never collaborate or ask for help from my peers no matter how stuck I become. I often see my colleagues collaborate with each other in the office. A part of me is jealous that they are taking advantage of each other's knowledge, another part of me almost thinks that this is like cheating. I feel that my thesis and my ideas wouldn't be mine if it was interfered or influenced this way. It wouldn't feel authentic
I move on to a completely new topic immediately after I finish my old one. Usually the way I see how other people work is that they try to do something tangentially similar to what they have done before, i.e., blue-tailed seahorses, then yellow-tailed seahorses. I jump to studying pipe fish immediately after I warp up my research on seahorses. I think my advisor must dislike me immensely for starting from scratch after every project.
If a problem seems to have an easy or existing approach that solves it, I find the problem less attractive to the point that I get physically sick from reading about other people's approach. However, a lot of times in research I find that other people would simply adapt other people's method for their own problem and then publish a paper that way. I try to solve it in my own way every time and most of the times it gets to a point where my supervisor intervenes and tell me to do whatever other people are doing. Again, I give in at the end.
I don't even try to follow my advisor's vision of my project. My advisor seems to have his own vision and ulterior goals that are not completely aligned with mine. I think a good PhD student should just listen to him like a father-figure and do whatever I am told. But I don't agree or sometimes don't even care about his specific vision. For example, why should I do a research on the dorsal fin of a seahorse (for your "dorsal fin grant") when I can study pipe fish instead? I understand that he is the one who is funding me, but I also care deeply about my own academic freedom.

Given these habits, am I doomed to fail my PhD? Do I have an anti-research personality?

Having a broad set of interests and knowledge is fine, and can lead to some 'outside of the box' solutions. Yes, you will find periods where anything else is more interesting than your PhD work, irrespective of how interesting your PhD work actually is. You'll find that as you come closer to the end of your PhD, your concentration on the problem at hand will sharpen, and while a PhD deadline isn't quite as good at sharpening a mind as an impending duel, you probably will find your ability to concentrate improve as the ending comes into sight.

Furthermore, don't assume what you're researching your PhD on is what you'll be doing for the rest of your life. Having a wide set of skills and a shallow knowledge of many things will often help you out when you (most likely) realise you don't have the desire to become an academic, and need to search for a different job (which, let's face it, given your background means probably going in to Data Science)
I don't know too much about the culture of applied math to make an informed comment on this, but in general, finding a good real-world application of a concept, and carrying it out, is difficult. It can involve a lot of time mucking around with real world datasets, which are often messy. You have an obligation to show that your results and methods are useful, but to what degree is up to taste, and I don't think is an issue with any kind of 'anti-research' personality.
This sort of thinking is by far your most serious problem. If asking fellow students for help and collaborating is cheating, then so is using Stackexchange or reading from a textbook. Modern civilisation rests on the ability to record our thoughts so every human doesn't have to derive all the rules from scratch. There is nothing dishonourable about asking for help. If someone gives you helpful ideas, thank them in your thesis. Even if they do clever novel work on your problem, you still have to at the very least understand it and synthesize it into your own work.

There is a certain kind of person who is reluctant to ask questions. I would count myself as one. If you feel uncomfortable doing do, I recommend working on that skill until you do feel more comfortable. Stackexchange is the perfect place for that -  even if it isn't a question about anything to do with your research.
This behaviour is fine. One can get a certain fatigue when working on certain projects for a while.
& 6.  It does really seem like you have a need to derive and understand everything from its foundations. In real life, this is rarely necessary.

I did a PhD in organic chemistry. After that, I decided I didn't like chemistry anymore and went on to be a Data Scientist. At first, I would spend a lot of time trying to mathematically understand the techniques I was using, and I wouldn't feel comfortable using them if I didn't understand the underlying linear algebra. Then I slowly got more comfortable using techniques whose underlying mechanics I don't understand. We by and large don't understand the inner workings of a car or computer. We do know, roughly, its outputs when given certain inputs. The inner workings are a problem already solved by someone else.

As you grow older and read more, you'll be continuously struck by the sheer quantity of stuff out there that people have figured out. The sheer amount of knowledge that goes into, say, building an aeroplane or a computer game or a treatment plan for a specific disease or a skyscraper or a hadron collider. Letting go of the need of having to understand all aspects of a certain thing is an important skill. Practice triage with the information you receive and the problems you encounter. Trust in the expertise of others who have come before you. Know when to expend your brainpower, and know when to conserve it.

So in summary, apart from issue 3, I don't think you have any significant "anti-research' personality issues.


Does it make sense to let a colleague know about his repeated misspelling? I have been working on a project with a collaborator for several years. I have never met my collaborator in person but we've been a part of weekly calls and sent hundreds of emails together so I feel like at this point I know this person fairly well.
In what seems like hundreds (at least 10's) I have noticed my collaborator always misspells "a lot" as "alot". This person is my senior (he's a graduate student, I'm a pre-doc) and I am wondering if I should let him know in a polite way that he is making a common misspelling. It does not particularly bug me or anything, and I am not a particularly fantastic speller myself, but I just want to help him out in case he doesn't know already. Does it make sense to bring this up with him as a colleague or is this not my place?

Let it go, while the typo is limited to emails. Emails are frequently written hastily and certain typos can be common or made on purpose to type less, or even for fun (I do sometimes this in my language, to mimic certain dialectal expressions).
If, instead, the typo appears in, for instance, a paper or other public document you're jointly writing, then correct it as you would correct any other typo in the paper.


Access to scientific articles that cite mine after leaving academia I used to work in academia. I was lucky enough to publish important papers in peer reviewed journals that now regularly get cited by other papers in peer reviewed journals. I have left academia to work in the private sector, so every time I get a notification that my work has been cited elsewhere in a non open access journal, I can't even see how it was used. I should be able to ensure my work isn't mis-quoted or wrongly interpreted, but I can't without paying extensive fees for each and every article...

Is sci-hub my only non-option because I refuse to use illegal means?

You can write an e-mail to the authors and ask for a copy of their published paper. Almost everyone will be happy to send you one.

Before doing that, check if the paper is already published on their webpage, or if they have submitted it to a preprint server. Use of preprint servers and embargo periods vary among the various disciplines --- in some fields you are more likely to find it online earlier, in others it's almost impossible.


Any suggestions for a rapid publish journal in material science? I am looking for a rapid publish journal in material science, environmental science or electrochemical science, open access journals are OK.

This is so weired that my defense committee requires me 3~4 papers to pass the oral defense. Though I've already had one medium and one high impact factor papers.

There's no requirements for the journal. I have 2 low quality papers, I thought I could work with others to improve their quality for better publication after I graduate, followed my supervisors' advice .

However, I need to graduate ASAP since my scholarship had already been ended.

Just looking for a rapid and easy journal in material science, environmental science or electrochemical science to publish my paper ASAP, no specific requirement is needed, I can pay that money.

Thanks.

It seems if there literally is no requirement about the journal then you can create your own journal and publish those papers yourself.


White supremacists marching at the University of Virginia – does this reflect the university’s attitude? White supremacist groups have been marching down in Charlottesville, Virginia, at the University of Virginia (article).

Does this also in some ways reflect on the university itself for allowing the march to happen (see the disturbing photos in the linked NY Times article) and for all the subsequent violence to occur?

The march, and even more so the violence, were strongly condemned by UVA. Here are some statements from the President of the university to that effect.

The mayor of Charlottesville condemned the march in even stronger terms, calling it “a cowardly parade of hatred, bigotry, racism, and intolerance.” Note that the protestors came from out of town; they chose Charlottesville because it was in the process of removing and renaming monuments to the city's white supremacist past.

The US has a very strong tradition of free speech; generally speaking, if some people want to march, it is difficult or impossible to stop them, even if you oppose the cause for which they stand.

In my opinion the violence reflects badly on the US as a whole, but not on Charlottesville or UVA in particular. Whether or not things get worse, no one can say. I certainly hope not.


How to get covered in non-academic media Scientists and other academics often embark on studies or make research findings of interest to a wider audience of laypeople.  Sometimes this work gets covered in media devoted to pop science or pop culture (Popular Science, Quirks and Quarks, etc.), and sometimes even in general-purpose news magazines and newspapers like TIME and The New York Times.

If your peer-reviewed research has produced something likely to be of interest to the general public, what are the best ways of bringing this to the attention of non-academic media outlets?  I imagine networking could play a big role here (that is, once you've been covered in the media once, you could contact the same journalist with news about related research by yourself or your colleagues).  But what if you have no prior contacts?  Do newspaper editorial desks welcome tips for science/humanities research stories the same way they do for general news events?  Is it a faux pas to write an enquiry directly to a magazine journalist who has previously covered research in a related area?  If a press release is the way to go, exactly how and where should it be posted or submitted?

I suspect the PR or Marketing department of your university would be very keen to help you place a story and advise you on writing for the media.

In every University I have worked in, this has been important, and media training was part of the staff development program. I was sent on a BBC media training course, for example, and can now operate a remote radio or TV studio, learn how to be an interviewee or interviewer and record students and staff for media inserts.

Tabloid writing was a skill I also picked up which is so different from academic writing. Learning to write in a style that the bulk media might pick up and use is not a natural skill for the everyday academic.

So go and ask. Might be fun.


Which committee decides the speakers in a conference: SOC or LOC? Conferences ask for abstracts for those authors wishing to contribute talks or posters. I wonder which conference committee decides on who gets a talk or poster based on the submitted abstracts; is it the Scientific Organising Committee or the Local Organising Committee?

I would expect this to be done by the scientific organizing committee (if there is not a more formal peer review process).  It is a scientific task, after all, and requires some level of scientific judgment of the quality of the submission.

Agree with TheWanderer that the "local organizing committee" is typically responsible for purely logistical issues, and does not make decisions about what is included in the program.


Reasonable to exclude a specific professor from a thesis defense for personal reasons? When I started my Master's program, my supervisor was Professor X. However, I had to leave their group after a few months, partly because we didn't get along, but also because the research topic wasn't a good fit.
Presently, my supervisor is Professor Y (who is awesome, and with whom I performed research work that really interested me). Now, I am getting ready to defend my thesis and need to select professors for the defense committee.
It so happens that my current thesis research deals tangentially with Professor X's research focus from about 5 years ago (and by the way, there aren't many professors whose research directly relates to my thesis). Under normal circumstances, Professor X would have been a decent choice for my defense committee.
Here is where I need a gut-check: I personally do not want Professor X on my defense committee. It is unlikely that they would try to sabotage my defense, but I have always found it distressing to be in Professor X's presence. Yes, I could grin and bear it, but I would simply rather not do that. Is it reasonable to request that Professor X be excluded?

This is something to talk over with your advisor. It is a reasonable request, but it might not be possible to go along with it. But if your advisor knows the whole story they can advise you on how to proceed, or even, if necessary, assure that the other person isn't included.
But, assuming that your advisor is present at the defense, perhaps one of the examiners, then they can intervene if there is anything improper going on.
If the advisor isn't present, it is a bigger problem, and you need to work harder to achieve the other person's attendance. Sadly, there may not be any options, given the field and the available people.
But, you need an advocate in setting it up and preferably at the defense as well.


Postdoc supervisor's impact when applying for a follow-up job I'm currently a postdoc and I'm planning to apply for faculty positions soon. However, I'm pretty sure that my current supervisor wants me to stay on for another year. When applying for a job, I'm usually required to state 3 referees. Am I expected to state my current supervisor as one of the referees? Is it going to weaken my application if he's not among the 3? Due to the mentioned conflict of interest, I would rather state other people I've been working with...

If you need to list references, you will almost certainly be expected to list your current boss—in this case, your advisor—as a potential reference. At the very least, if you do not, there is a non-insignificant chance that at some point in the interview process you'll be asked at will ask why he wasn't listed. You should have as good of an answer as possible ready.

Note that stating "I'm ready to move on, but he wanted me to stay on" may raise flags for a potential employer, as they could wonder whether this reflects a lack of loyalty on your part.


How to communicate with reviewer who has waived his anonymity? (Within the standard review process) I received review comments on a paper, one of the reviewers, say A, waived his anonymity in the review submitted to the journal (I know A personally). Now, A made some suggestions (essentially about some way of using software developed by students of A) which do not work (suggested feature does not exist). Should I

write an email to A directly asking about clarifications on how to use the software as he suggested, at the risk of the handling editor feeling like I went behind his back
write this email, but include the handling editor as CC:, at the risk of A feeling like I would "belittle" him "in front of" the editor, or
mention in the response that the feature was not implemented in the suggested software, citing documentation / error messages

No matter what, I would suggest keeping all formal communications and responses within the journal system, even though the reviewer has waived anonymity.  That way, you keep a clear record both for yourself and the editor but also for the other anonymous reviewers (if the journal shares reviews between reviewers as many do) and for any other journal staff who might later need to audit the interaction.

Now, given that the reviewer has revealed themselves, you may or may not find it appropriate to communicate informally about concerns that you may have.  If the journal has approved the waver of anonymity (e.g., by the identity being revealed in the review that you were sent), then it's definitely OK. If it's come through a side-channel, however, then some might consider it fine (e.g., "anonymity is just to protect reviewers") and some might consider it unethical (e.g., "talking to your friend gives an unfair advantage").


Who should recommend applicants for administrative positions? In a related question, Who should write a recommendation letter?, I came to the conclusion that letters of recommendation should be written by academics in the same field who knows the applicant's work, though, they may not know the applicant in person.

I wonder who should be named as references when applying for a senior administrative job such as dean, vice president, provost, president? In this case, the search committee should be interested in the applicant's skills for administrative tasks, rather than achievements in his or her academic discipline.

For example, a dean is applying for a provost position. Shouldn't the references be persons who have been directly involved in the applicant's role as dean in his current position?

The key when soliciting recommendation letters is to find persons who can provide insights into your credentials applicable for the job you are looking for. From this perspective the view you shared that letters "should be written by academics in the same field who knows the applicant's works" is only a special case.

When applying for a high level administrative job you need to find people at as high a level as possible. These should know your background, experience etc. but also be aware of the demands of the job for which you apply (this can be seen either in general or specific terms). There is thus no limit to whom you ask for letters but they will definitely not be as limited as for a regular academic position. Clearly anyone who has seen your capability to lead and administrate, for example, large projects, a department or research group will be appropriate. I can also add that you will most likely mostly look for letters from people in positions at similar or higher level than you (within academia, not necessarily so if you ask for letters from other professionals). But, the key is still to solicit support for the key aspects of the job to which you apply.


What is the nature of the "assistant professor" position in India? In this recent academia.SE question, the questioner mentions that as an undergraduate they did research with an assistant professor.  That faculty member had a master's degree (only) at the time and has since moved on to be a PhD student at another institution.

To my American eyes, it seems strange to have the positions of "graduate student" and "faculty member" intertwined like this.  In a comment, the questioner wrote

  Just to shed some more light on this, I come from India and here it is part of official policy to allow people with graduate degrees to rise to posts as high as assistant professor. I am not sure why this difference in academic practice has not come to the notice of admissions committees in the US in spite of the fact that thousands of Indian students have gone there over the years.

Well, I am the chair of a graduate admissions committee, and indeed this difference in academic practice had not come to my notice until now.  I would like to understand it better -- in particular:

1) What does this position entail?
2) Which Indian institutions and departments are (still) hiring assistant professors with masters degrees?
3) Can a master's degree assistant professor retain that position indefinitely?  Do they?
4) What percentage of higher-rank Indian professors did an assistant professorship between a master's and a PhD degree?

[Here follows more information about why I am asking the question and context about how what I know so far makes it sound different from the US.  It is not necessary to read this part or address it in an answer.]

In the United States there are so many PhDs looking for academic jobs that the days when someone without a PhD can teach advanced undergraduates at a research university or nationally ranked liberal arts college are almost completely past (more precisely: there are still some such people, but they were hired a long time ago).  However there are other institutions of higher learning in which faculty can teach with master's degrees, and I have known some cases.  (I suspect that the window for this is shrinking as well, as we continue to produce many more PhDs desiring academic positions than the market can bear.)

But I don't know of any American institution of higher learning in which a faculty member with a master's degree can be an assistant professor but have no higher rank.  Moreover, the type of institution which has tenure track faculty with master's degrees is quite different from the type of institution in which (i) faculty do research with their undergraduates and (ii) send students to graduate school.  (I tried to choose language to minimize the elitism / academic caste-ism in that last assertion, but that minimum is unfortunately positive, since American academia is elitist...)

Indian universities are not very homogeneous, but it may be helpful to divide them into two categories:

(1) National institutes/universities:The top-tier universities with highly competitive admissions and recruitment processes. A commonly stated figure is that 1% of applicants make it to these institutes, though I think it may now be closer to 10%, with more institutes opening in recent years. In this category, an Assistant Professor must hold a PhD and have 3 years post-doctoral experience.

(2) Other universities: One requires a Master degree and must qualify a national-level entrance exam to become Assistant Professor. Yes, one may continue in this post without a doctorate, though in practice this is rare. Full professors (and perhaps associate professors too- not sure on this) require PhD.

The second category might appear strange from a US perspective. It may help to recognize that these universities tend to place pedagogy over research. This is an outcome of having a large population and limited employment prospects without a college degree.


How to cite files on a CD-ROM? I would like to cite one of the descriptions present on the DIEHARD test battery, which is located on a CD-ROM here. Specifically, I would like to cite the craps test. If I could have the citation in the form of a BibTeX entry, I would be very glad. Thanks.

I find the easiest way to cite scientific software is to search it on Google Scholar and see if anyone else has cited it. In this case, searching for "DIEHARD: a battery of tests of randomness" yields one result that's been cited in 614 papers. Clicking the cite button and picking BibTex gives the following:

@article{marsaglia1997diehard,
  title={The Diehard random number testsuite},
  author={Marsaglia, George},
  journal={http://stat.fsu.edu/pub/diehard},
  year={1997}
}

You may want to throw a \url{} around the address, but otherwise that should work for you. Just mention the specific test in your paper when you cite it.


postdoc with professor that I had email exchanging for PhD 3 years before I exchanged email with a professor for Ph.D program. He sent me several links including the process of his university for PhD and some useful links, in the meanwhile I also contacted to another professor in another country. I selected the second option to continue my PhD. Now I completed my PhD. Is it ethical to send email and ask the first professor for postdoc position?

Yes, of course. Your earlier decision doesn't reflect at all on either of you as you had a variety of criteria for choosing. You don't need to defend that decision in any way. The prof in question was interested in you at one time and may still be interested.

The professors needs may have changed, of course. But if you apply you an even remind him/her of your earlier exchange, providing thanks for the earlier guidance. Of course, make sure that you have some knowledge of the potential position and the work of the professor and how you can contribute to it effectively.

There is no ethical issue and while there might be cultural issues in a few places, one hopes that those are minor in the modern world.


First publication – author list better alone or with supervisor? Some context: applied/pure mathematics. My supervisor is known and respected in their field. We are writing a paper together, however for various reasons, by the time of submission, I will probably have written 80-100% of it myself. In this case, my supervisor wishes not to be listed as an author, specifically because they don't wish to claim credit for work that isn't theirs. (i.e. the quality of the work is not in question)

Question: as a first publication, would it have greater impact if I were to list my supervisor as an author regardless?

My thinking is that a publication whose only author is a no-name (me) will likely not be read, whereas my supervisor's name might attract readers who are familiar with his/her work. On the other hand, while it might suffer from lower impact to omit my supervisor's name from the author list, including my supervisor's name does detract credit from the work I have done, and I have to consider how it looks when applying to graduate and PhD positions.

Unless there are more people despising your supervisor than respecting them, adding him to the publication will inevitably increase its visibility by some amount, even though this should not be the case in an ideal world. There is a positive chance that somebody will only read your paper because they know the author. How large this effect is depends on your particular subfields culture and the popularity of your supervisor. Moreover, note that your supervisor can also advertise your work to their peers irrespective of authorship and this effect may be more relevant to the impact than authorship.

That being said, for your imminent career, it is mostly irrelevant how many people actually read your paper, but only how relevant or good the paper is considered by those who decide upon your applications. However, those people will also know that you worked with your current supervisor and will also likely have a recommendation letter from them praising your work in the paper. So adding your supervisor as an author shouldn’t matter in this respect. On the contrary: It’s certainly more impressive that you single-authored a paper.

Now, for your later academic career, you have to weigh between the two effects, but since you will hopefully have written several papers then (otherwise you will probably not have a later academic career) and securing a good PhD position may help for this, my bets are on opting for being a single author.

A sidenote: Going from your description, I assume that it is borderline whether your supervisor qualifies for authorship and thus ethical considerations of authorship are inconclusive.


Are some typos permissible if submitting a manuscript for potential publication? As the title states are some typos expected if submitting a manuscript for potential publication? I recently submitted an article to a journal and after re-reading it just now (2 weeks later) realized there are 5-6 minor typos. A few typos are misplaced commas, but some are grammatical errors.

For example: "Based results..." which should read "Based on results..."

The article is currently under peer review. Will these small typos be detrimental to my chances of publication?

This stuff happens, and everyone knows it. If this is on a single page, then it looks unprofessional. If it's 5 or 6 throughout the entire manuscript, then this is reasonable and to be expected. Keep track of these and make the changes as part of your revision once the paper comes back from the reviewers. In your reply to the reviewers, just mention "During revision, I have also taken the liberty to fix a small number of typos and grammar errors that had unfortunately made their way into the original manuscript".


How to Deal with Boisterous Officemates? I'm currently a grad student in a moderately large department. I share an office with a few other grad students, and I get along with all of them fairly well. However, one of my officemates is rather loud and unfiltered with what he says in and around the department. The office walls are very thin, they are movable partitions, and the professor next to us clearly dislikes the noise and behavior. I'm very concerned with how this may be affecting my reputation around the department. I like my officemate, but the immature behavior is very noticeable.

How should I deal with this situation? I can't really ask for a new office, but I don't want to be associated with the poor behavior. I've talked to him about it, but I don't want to constantly remind him to be quiet or conscientious of other people. I am at a loss with this situation. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

If your only concern is for your reputation, I think any such concern is entirely unwarranted, and your best course of action is to do nothing and simply not worry about it. You are in no way becoming "associated" with the other student's poor behavior by occupying the same office as him, which you have been assigned by the department. The student's behavior will not reflect well on him, but unless you and him are identical twins or just happen to have extremely similar voices, which I find difficult to believe, as long as you do not emulate his behavior or egg him on in some conspicuous way, I don't see any chance that anyone will think you have a role in the way he behaves.

If the student's behavior bothers you for reasons unrelated to protecting your reputation, or if you are unwilling to accept the advice in my first paragraph, some options you may want to consider are:

Remind him again that his behavior bothers you, perhaps pointing out that you noticed that the professor in the office next door is unhappy with the noise and are concerned that his loudness may hurt his reputation.
Send an email to the department chair pointing out the student's loudness, and ask to be assigned to a different office and/or for the chair to do something to make the student improve his behavior.
Send an anonymous email if you prefer that it not become known that it was you who made the complaint.
Talk to your other officemates to try to get their assistance in getting the loud student to change his behavior. (Peer pressure can be a powerful inducement agent.)
This is a defeatist option that I would not recommend, but if all else fails you can stop coming to the office (or at least minimize your presence there as much as possible) and find some other place to do your work.


Should teachers be entertainers? I keep coming across general wisdom of the type, "A teacher has to be a clown". This attitude is gaining traction, e.g. as in this TED talk.

This leaves me quite baffled. Thinking back to my own teachers, the ones I admire most and feel I learnt the most from were all serious and single-mindedly focused. Maybe it is for that reason that I have become a similar teacher, though not by a conscious decision on my part. My students find me a tough teacher but I receive emails several semesters later thanking me.

I have discussed this with colleagues around me and while they agree with me, they argue that the current iPhone generation has so many resources available to them, working hard to grab their attention should also be the teacher's task. Afterall, the argument goes, they may just receive better instruction online through a world leader in the subject.

I am just wondering what others feel about this.

Teachers and professors don't need to be clowns. However, they do need to engage their students.

The old mode of a teacher standing at the front of the lecture hall talking "at" students for an hour or ninety minutes at a time is a cultural relic, rather than necessarily the best way to educate students, as learning in a lecture is usually at best passive.

There are many ways to get around this problem—including engaging in class discussions, demonstrations, group learning, and, yes, sometimes humor can be used to make the point. But just as teaching should not be a stale recitation of facts, neither is it open mic night at your local comedy club. Learning is serious business, but it doesn't have to be boring, either.


Why do some fields care so much more about citation styles? On this website, there are 120 questions tagged citation-style, and probably many more without the tag (a search for APA returns 244 results).

I work in applied mathematics, and among my colleagues the general approach to citation styles varies between "it doesn't matter as long as it's consistent" and "I use Bibtex and that's it; frankly I don't even know how this style is called".

Why is citation style considered important in other fields and receives so much interest? What is it that I am missing?

The purpose of a citation style is to provide the reader with references in a standard and legible way. Using a certain style within a research field makes reading and skimming through citations within the field's publications more efficient.

Uniform citation style within a unit of certain field makes the unit's publications look uniform and adds to the quality of the publication, just as good grammar and otherwise good appearance does.

Arguably, a big fuss is when students are learning the correct ways of citation.


Is it appropriate for a student to have their phone face down on the table when in class? I was wondering if it is appropriate to have my phone out on my desk face down during class. I have done this for some time and have never been told to put it away.

On the one hand, putting it out shows the teacher, Here is my phone, I'm not using it.

On the other hand, putting it out might imply, I am waiting for something more important than your class.

Is it generally inappropriate or acceptable to have my phone out during class?

This ultimately ends up as a very situational issue, depending on culture, professor, individual, and past experience. I generally wouldn't consider it automatically a bad thing - and I tend to do it myself.

The main issue is not so much the phone, as how you use it and interact with it in the context of a class. I had a professor who explicitly asked for no electronic devices to be out in class, so in that case obviously they were clear that they didn't like to have phones out, so you'd generally want to abide by that. I, on the other hand, made a point of pulling out my phone quite visibly when a due date or assignment was announced to put it in my digital calendar, or if someone asked a question the professor was unsure of, or if the professor said something I doubted the correctness of I'd squint and tilt my head, and then Google it on my phone to confirm or clarify (and would offer to share what I found if something interesting resulted).

In theory, I blatantly violated the rule, and this would be considered something you shouldn't do. On the other hand, I am A) older, and less likely to be accused of being hooked on Facebook, B) someone who had already established themselves as a good student, and C) I made a point to make it clear I was using my electronic device in a pro-social, pro-education, productive way, which added to the class in a positive manner. The result was the professor actually changed their policy to be explicit about not wanting devices to be used as a distraction or unrelated to class, instead of a blanket ban.

If you use any device in way that makes it clear you are not paying attention, engaging with the class, or generally are not respectful of the time and work being done by people you are present with, that is going to be correctly interpreted as rude and disrespectful. I don't particularly recommend having it out just to have it out, though - if you aren't going to use it in some way, just put it away because it's a waste of work space. But if you are indeed going to use it in class in an appropriate, productive way - and make sure it isn't going to make noise, even by vibrating on the table - there is nothing wrong with having the phone on the desk in most modern classroom environments. If the professor explicitly has a no device policy, then you can politely defer to it any put it away unless you want to make a point in some way.


Ethics of publishing received peer reviews What are the ethics of publishing (on the web, etc.) peer reviews received for a paper? Does your answer change if the paper was accepted or rejected?

I am specifically interested in the  "one-shot" case typical of computing science conferences, without rebuttals, where there is no or limited dialogue between an author and the reviewers.

This is quite distinct from Can I publish the reviews I write? as here I am talking about reviews I have received, not those I have written - the reviews' authors retain their anonymity, and presumably the paper would be included alongside those reviews.

Vijay's response below includes a summary of much of the other responses and my comments on those.

In the journals where I have been invloved as editor, author or reviewer (except in ones where the review process is open on the web), the implicit understanding has been that the communication is closed between the author-editor-reviewer. I have not seen any explicit rules stated by these journals to control against any such public dissemination but I have not looked for it either. I think that, particularly in cases where it is not explicitly stated that reviews are public, posting reviews without consent from the reviewer would be similar to publisihing someone private letters wihout consent. It is not illegal but ethically very distasteful. I do not think it matters whether or not the review was anonymous. Whether the paper was accepted or not would not matter either. I would consider posting without consent just as bad under all circumstances.


apply for faculty while working in industry For a department focused more on industrial interactions, will going to work in industry for a while before applying for a faculty position in that department be recommended/helpful?

I would think that you should consider a somewhat different question. What is the best path for me, now, to obtain a faculty position later? You probably have several options and each of them takes some time to implement. Which is the best path if the goal is to become a productive faculty member?

The two main pathways would, perhaps, be more education and some time in industry. Either can probably be good, but I would suggest that further/deeper education is probably going to be more valued than industry experience, with one exception.

If you were to find a unique, cutting-edge, industry position that puts you in contact with top-level research and development in an area that is seen as vital at the time, then that would be a nice thing to brag about on your CV. But working as a drudge in some mid-level outfit won't really help you advance in academia. These top-level positions are pretty rare, and may not be open to you with your current background.

Note that the top-level industry experience I'm mentioning is the sort of thing that you can bring back to the university to build a research program an/or give important advantages to students.

I think it is easier to find a way to stand out in the educational realm if that is where you want to be eventually, than it is to go and then transition back with the same level of excellence. But that is more opinion than fact, of course.


How to write a very good curriculum vitae for a summer school application? I have just graduated with a bachelor degree in Mathematics and Physics. I joined a master's program in mathematics and I have just finished my master courses with a 3.8/4 CGPA. I don't have publications yet, however, I went to a summer school in 2019 and wrote a report.

How should I write a very good and professional cv?

I divided my cv into 7 sections:

Education
Conferences (I listed all the academic conferences that I attended)
Other academic activities (I listed the summer school and the name of the project I joined)
Languages
Programming and computer skills
Work Experience ( I listed that I worked as a math TA  the last semester)
Interests and Personality

Is this good enough? Do you have any tips or remarks?

I was hesitated a bit to add the last section, also I included my college photo in the cv so is this professional?
Also, I was thinking about asking a professor who knows me to review my cv but at the same time, I don't want to seem unprofessional or dependent. Do students normally do that?

Thanks

There are few tips I can give, I am in no sense an expert on CV preperation. I just recently prepared a few. Most important thing to remember is the reviewer most likely is going to or has already reviewed more than a 100 applications and CVs. You are playing the game of attention grabbing. Reviewers will skim over papers and most likely won't go in detail of each application. Your first aim is to catch their attention and direct this very limited attention to the most important aspects of your application. If you can manage that, your application is much more likely to be read in some detail. Here are few tips.

Keep it tidy and readable. not to many titles, colors or even fonts. It should be designed minimalistically.
Use LaTeX to prepare it. It helps explain your proficeny in LaTeX. It is also is easier to update and maintain.
Make each bit of information concise, highlighting important points but also further information should be accessable easily. I personally like hyperlinks but in most cases date, name of the program and name of the institution would be enough.
Don't let less important stuff to grab attention. Assume someone will only glace over it. You need your best achievements to be "the hook". If their eye catches more important deeds like a summer project then they will read it in detail. My personal preference is to put more relevant bits of information up top, add few lines of details to make a quasi-block of information that is likely to catch attention. I also prefer to "underexplain" some less relevant aspects so that the important bits are seen first. Let me try and illustrate what I mean.

This would be the important bit.

whereas this would be the less important bit.

Don't let the unimportant or less important stuff to take up space. Keep in mind, you always want to highlight your most important achievements. If you spend the same amount of space for your hobies or coding skills the reader might get disfocused or plain bored. If you wish you can put a Github link or name an achievement or two relating to your hobbies but they really should not overtake the readers attention.


How should I display scientific and non-scientific functions at the university on my email signature? I am an Associate Professor at a British University who also has a function as Coordinator for a research team.

Should my signature and business card be:

  Assoc. Prof. Dr. T. Koznin (? Assoc. Prof. T. Kozin, PhD)

  Cöordinator, A Research Team

  University of Pleasure

Or:

  Dr. T. Koznin

  Associate Prof., Faculty of Cheesecake

  Cöordinator, A Research Team

  University of Pleasure

I wonder:

Is it strange or redundant to have "Assoc. Prof." before Dr.?

Normally, someone from administration will have guidelines on the writing and layout of official university stationary, which normally includes business cards. You should check with your departmental clerical staff about these rules and procedures; you may not have freedom in this area, and end up with a print order that must be destroyed. There are often policies on email signature on official addresses also. You need to appreciate the magnitude of the bureaucracy that steers the leviathan of a UK university.

That said, you are confusing your hired position with your titles. They are different. A professor, of any kind (Emeritus, Full, etc) normally just uses the title of Professor. The nature of your appointment Associate Professor for a research group is not part of your nominal titles. It also depends on whether your name is used in a context where full academic attributions are also used. Pre-nominal titles do not compound in the UK as they do in the Germanic style, (except in certain circumstances), however we do tend to list all qualifications, not just postgraduate ones.

Simple style:

  Prof. T. Koznin
  Associate Professor of Hard Maths
  University of Blogshire

Fully Qualified:

  Prof. T. Koznin, BSc, MSc, PhD
  Associate Professor of Hard Maths
  University of Blogshire

An example of extreme compounding titles:

  Eur Ing Prof Sir J Cholmondley-Warner BSc PhD MRCP MRSE CBE
  Emeritus Professor of Fine Whining
  Faculty of Laggards
  University of Midshires

I just gave the last one to illustrate how complicated the rules of formal correct academic titling can be here (and I did not choose an academic Peer - that was even too complicated for me).

Footnote for UK academics: Some institutions have taken to using the title Associate Professor for Grade 9 posts which at other institutions are graded as Senior Lecturer or Reader. They feel it enhances their ability to attract research staff from abroad who do not understand our grading system in order improve their REF. Its a way of attracting contributors without paying the Grade 10 professorial scale.


Changing University in First year of Phd I just completed my senior year. I have been accepted to a grad school (say University X).

CASE A: I am quite familiar with the fact that one shouldn't change grad schools during a PhD. It is highly frowned upon and regarded skeptically. However my case is somewhat different.

I want to reapply for some PhD programs next year (fall). But, at the same time, I don't want to lose the only PhD seat I've got. So, I was thinking about whether I can go to University X this fall and apply for next fall (applications start this year's August).

If I get accepted, I would simply move to the other university. I obviously won't need any recommendation from professors of University X. It would be as though I had simply applied as an undergrad who waited one more year.

But my worry is, will this be considered as Case A? I am worried because if it is, then I may end up screwing up my relationship with the entire academia. When applying, I would be in the 1st semester of a PhD, which is not really a big deal. I wouldn't have any advisor at that point and would simply be taking a few classes.

Any suggestions?

One key point: you don't mention anywhere in your question why you want to transfer.  Because you say "some PhD programs", I gather you don't have a specific other program in mind, and I can only assume that you don't have some compelling personal reason to do so (e.g. living in a certain city so as to care for a family member) but rather are simply trying to trade up.

Most students who enroll at programs which are not the top ones in their field would like to (or should like to!) move to better ones if they could, but because transferring programs is a fair amount of inconvenience for everyone, the threshold for doing so is rather high.  If you want to get into a better PhD program in year N+1 than you did in year N, then it would be reasonable to have a better application.

Trying to improve your application while newly enrolled in a PhD program is a bad idea.  First of all, as everyone else has said, of course you must disclose the fact that you are currently enrolled in a PhD program if you are applying to a different one.  The idea that you think otherwise is a bit alarming, not because this is such an evil thing to do but it shows how far away you are from understanding academic culture.  Do you think that no one will find out that you are currently in a PhD program?!?  Think again: likely all of your recommendation letters will mention this, for instance.

Moreover, the first semester of being a PhD student is a tough time to build your application: no one at your new program knows you very well (or at all), you haven't done anything much, and more than likely you are just absorbing the culture shock of a new environment and are not in a position to show superiority (and in fact most first year PhD students are fairly inept compared to other PhD students in the program: I know I was).  This phenomenon comes up when first year PhD students try to reapply for certain graduate fellowships (like an NSF fellowship) that they were also eligible for as a graduating undergraduate: they have to get a mix of recommendation letters from faculty at their old university who probably have nothing new or better to say about them than the previous time around and from faculty at their new university who have trouble saying more than "Mr. X is a student in our PhD program -- isn't he?  I'm pretty sure."

My advice is to do one of the following things.

Ask the university who accepted you whether you can defer for a year.  It is much better to ask this question up front than for them to find out later from someone else that you are trying to trade up.  It is a fairly good bet that you will be able to do it: I would much rather enroll a student a year later if in that intervening year they figured out that they really want to come.
Enroll in a non-PhD program either there or somewhere else: a non-degree program or a master's program.  In the American system, getting a non-terminal master's degree is essentially the culturally accepted version of the kind of academic laundering that you seek to do.  This is probably two years rather than just one year, and if you play your cards right you can actually improve your application and profile in that time.


The editor cannot find a referee to my paper after one year I submitted a manuscript to a journal one year ago. The journal is well known and has already published papers on the same subject including one of my previous papers. The paper I submitted went under review after two weeks. After eight months, I contacted the journal to inquire about the status of my manuscript, I got no response. I contacted the journal again after two months, and the managing editor informed me that the handling editor is trying to secure a referee for my paper. I sent another email three months later, the managing editor said that the handling editor is still trying to secure a referee for my paper. I asked them if I could suggest some referees and they agreed.
My question is: what should I do after this long waiting period?

As you pointed out you have several options:

Do nothing and wait for the editor to find a referee.
Withdraw and submit elsewhere.
Send the editor a list of people who might be able to review your paper.

Nobody, including the editor, can predict what will happen if you do any of these things. Doing nothing and waiting is probably the least likely to result in a good outcome quickly, because the editor's already shown they are not able to find reviewers quickly (although there's always the chance a reviewer's time frees up and they can review). Withdrawing and submitting elsewhere would mean starting over, and there's no guarantee the editor of the new journal will be able to find reviewers either. The third option is effectively a better (for you) version of the first option, but it's still not ideal, because you can't guarantee the reviewers you suggest will agree to review either. You can only tell who might be interested in your paper.
Because there's no ideal option, you will have to make your own decision. How badly do you want to publish in this journal? If the answer is "very", do #3. Otherwise consider (but not necessarily take) #2.


Appropriate "title" to list on application for professors writing LOR? In filling out my very first grad school application I've come across the Letters of Recommendation page. It says to list the "Title" of the recommender. Do I use Professor here? Or Dr.? I am stumped. Both of my recommenders are professors and that is how I refer to them, but I am just not sure which one I should be putting here since they have Doctorate degrees. I don’t want to make a mistake... I found this question which was sort of related, but also confused me even more. If the professor has a title like X-Y Professor of Z or Professor of X and Y, do I use that full title? Or should I just write "Professor" or "Professor of [subject]"?

"Professor" is in some respects a more "advanced" title because many people who have doctorates are not professors. You may have writers who have a doctorate, but do not hold a professorship.

I would put "Professor," but in most places, it does not matter at all. (I've read that Germany for example is a stickler for titles, though.)

It would not be typical to include "Professor of [X]."


What are the general rules for faculty attendance? Other than attending classes and meetings, faculty differ in their daily attendance. Some faculty may show up only during days they have classes, others are in their offices daily from 8-5, others arrive around noon and stay late. Are their any rules or it is up to each department or faculty?

It varies very widely depending on individual faculty, departmental, and institutional culture, norms, and rules.

For example, many faculty at my institution live in a city two hours away and only come to campus twice a week for classes and meetings. Faculty performance at my school is measured by lines on the CV, so one can argue that not going to school is a more productive use of time if you have a home office.

Meanwhile, while in Japan, I noted that some faculty had to punch timecards that showed their daily attendance. There, faculty performance seemed to be measured by the appearance if diligence rather than actual productivity.

On the extreme other end, adjunct faculty in the USA may not even have an office (or library privileges) to even have office hours.


paper acceptance probability in case of long peer review time for the 1st decision I have submitted a paper in a physics background journal about eight months ago. However, I have not received any status updated of the paper yet. I sent email several times to the Editor, but I have not received any reply. Five months ago, one of the journal staffs informed that they are waiting for the referees' comments. Does long 1st decision time indicate higher probability of acceptance ?

It is difficult to say so. Usually it means that the journal is having many papers to handle, referees are not responding in a timely manner or cannot find referees that are familiar with the subject of paper. Of course, I am putting aside the possibility that the journal may have a bad review process as it is usually uncommon for well-known and prestigious journals.

As a matter of fact, I had a paper that I had submitted with a prestigious journal. It took one year to have a first decision and the decision was rejection. In this case, the journal editor told me that the review process took a long time because they had difficulty with finding referees that were familiar with the particular subject of my paper.

This question is also somehow related to yours: Editor rejected my paper stating that reviewers had refused to review it long after submission...?


Would it be a good idea to ask professor about academic standing relative to other students? I'd like to know my academic standing relative to other students. This information would help me with:

allocating my time and effort between classes
deciding whether to take a follow up course offered by this professor.

How should I proceed? Is this a routine question? Or should I explain why I need it? (The two reasons I cited above don't sound like something I'd like to mention to him.)

Edit:

Many professors at my university post detailed histograms of, say, midterm results, so I don't think my request would violate any laws.
The only reason I'd like to get this sort of information is because everyone's grade heavily depends on their standing relative to other students, see Grading on a curve.

"How am I doing so far?" is perfectly reasonable and acceptable. "What can I do better?" is fine too. "Based on my performance so far, do you think you'd write me a good recommendation?" is okay; that's a legitimate concern. "What's your impression of me as a student?" is needy and annoying, but not outright wrong -- I've gotten this question before and answered it.

"How am I doing relative to everybody else?" is out-of-bounds. For one thing, in some legal jurisdictions the prof can't say much without risking breakage of student-privacy-related law. (Revealing another student's grade, for example, is a no-no in FERPAland.) For another, law or no law, you are the only student whose progress is your business. For a third, "tell me I'm the bestest ever!" is needy to the point of creepiness.

Sometimes this is unfortunate, e.g. the situation of someone in an intro CS course who is from an underrepresented group in technology, is catching flak from other students, and doesn't have an accomplishment-meter calibrated enough to ignore their nonsense. Still. Look to your own work; leave that of others alone.