What is the difference between CV and Resume? I'm applying to some schools in US for my PhD studies. In the application form there are two different places for uploading CV and Resume.

What is the difference between them?

Resume is shorter.

Resume provides a summary of your education, previous employment, skills, and accomplishments.

CV  includes all the above in more details plus publications, presentations, detailed teaching experience, etc.


Want to do mathematical physics - if first choice dept not a good fit, can I switch? I am writing on behalf of someone else.  But the question will be easier to pose if I put myself in his shoes and speak in the first person.

I will soon graduate with a Bachelor's in economics and mathematics in a Third World country.  I have, however, also studied physics. I actually have more physics than mathematics courses on my transcript.  I want to study for a PhD in mathematical physics in the U.S. I would need support (e.g. TAship).

Where I live, subject GREs are only offered once a year, and one is not permitted to take two different ones on the same day.  It is too far and expensive for me to travel to another country to take a second subject GRE.

Suppose, for the purpose of this question:

I decide to take the Physics GRE, and apply to physics departments
I get admission to a physics department, and a TAship
I take a combination of both math and physics courses and do well
After several semesters I realize I'd rather that my home department were math, instead of physics

  How hard would it be to apply to switch over to a math department (either in the same university, or a different one), assuming I had taken sufficient math courses, and done very well in them?

Note: The similar question is somewhat helpful, but I would like to see a specific focus on the math/physics interface; also, please consider the specific option of pausing at completion of a masters, with a switch of department at that point.

It seems like "you" should do a lot more research into existing graduate programs, since you haven't mentioned maybe the most obvious thing you should do: apply to an applied math Ph.D. program.  You should look carefully at what different programs expect, since "applied math" is a slippery concept; however, as such, applied math programs don't have an uniform an expectation of student background as pure math or physics programs.  Interdisciplinary programs are hot at the moment, but unlike a usual math or physics degree, what's on offer will vary dramatically from university to university.  In my new hometown of Waterloo alone, there are (I think usually funded)

Masters in Applied Math (https://uwaterloo.ca/applied-mathematics/graduate-students/applying),
Perimeter Scholars International (https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/training/about-psi), and
a special stream in the Institute for Quantum Computing (https://uwaterloo.ca/institute-for-quantum-computing/programs/graduate-studies).

That's a bit out of the norm, but there are many other programs out there.


About awaiting assignment status of manuscript I submitted a short paper to a math journal more that one month ago. The status is still "awaiting assignment" and I checked the online system which shows that even no editor has been assigned to my paper. I sent two emails about updating the status of the paper to editor and Editor-in-Chief several days ago and I got no reply from them. What can I do now? May I withdraw that?

You can certainly withdraw the paper. But note that this is a busy time for academics, some of whom are the editors and certainly the reviewers. It might be good to wait, especially if the journal is somewhere that you really want to publish.

The one month is more problematic than the few days without email, I think. But that might be explained if your paper is a bit esoteric in any way and it may be unclear which editor to assign the paper to.

But withdrawal is a possibility. I'd recommend it only if you have an alternate plan that is better than patience.


Is using "iff" appropriate? Is the word "iff", meaning "if and only if", recognized outside of logic?
In particular, is it appropriate for a physics text?  Or is this kind of abbreviation frowned upon?

The abbreviation iff is generally understood in several fields outside logic, and in my experience it is well understood by physicists, but the golden rule is to define every abbreviation at its first use and/or provide a list of abbreviations. In this way, even those not familiar with an abbreviation will be able to understand the text.
However, in general, abbreviations may make a text less readable and therefore should be used judiciously. Thus, ask yourself if you will have to use the expression if and only if so frequently to warrant an abbreviation, sparing you just a bunch of characters, and think whether to limit its use to e.g. theorem statements.


What's the deal with grade inflation? A while back, there was a question on here about plagiarism. One statement in particular struck me:

  The foundation of academia is production and dissemination of knowledge [...] Likewise, since it is such a foundational and corrosive problem, an institution can be badly damaged by tolerating it or by gaining a reputation for tolerating it

It struck me because, having been a teaching assistant in graduate school has made me develop a type of Holden Caulfield-esque outlook on academia. I understand that certain societal problems are extremely complex and multi-layered but, I've seen a lot of things that have made me uneasy. These things are: grade inflation, revision of courses so that they will have a higher success rate, teachers not giving grades for the entire semester for coursework and so on. Therefore I ask; is reputation really so important to a school that things such as this are really necessary to improve the statistics in the school's favour?

In my university, there are students who, no matter how hard a course is, will thrive and those are usually the ones who tend to become good researchers. So by permitting the aforementioned practices are we "softening" our researchers?

Here's the thing: I like my students. (I'm talking here about the ones in the major that I teach: the ones I see in my intimate upper-division seminars.) I've watched them learn and grow, struggle and overcome, and generally develop into capable if young professionals.

And they are about to leave the nest. They are going to take their transcripts out into the wider world and compete with other students from other institutions.

But I teach at a small and unheralded place. How are employer going to judge these friends of mine? Unless the employer knows something about my department (most don't but we have a couple of local firm who come to us looking for our best) they're going to have to rely on grades and other "objective" measures to select the ones to be interviewed.

I'm pretty confident that my students can wow them once they get a foot in the door, but they have to get into that office. If the students from that school down the road have systematically higher grades then my people might be at a disadvantage. That's a problem for me, because I want to take care of my people.

So it's a kind of tragedy of the commons: it's in most people's best interests if grades are a honest measure of something, but it's in everyone's personal interests to cheat just a little, and it is very much in everyone's personal interests not to be the only one not cheating.

Note that I say "might be at a disadvantage" because hiring managers may develop a feel for the difference between a 3.5 at my school and one from that place down the road. If they hire enough people in my field. But most of them don't. That's why we have such success locally: these firms see our people as interns and they get a chance to become familiar with the quality of students we produce and with the faculty.

There are other limits, too. If you send some total nincompoop out the door with a strong GPA and a glowing letter of recommendation the employer who hires them is likely to develop a negative opinion of your institution. That puts a very really pressure on the cheating to hold it down to a small degree. At least if your reputation isn't so secure that you don't fear the damage done by a few bozos.


Is it okay to defer accepting a PhD scholarship to see if I get accepted into foreign Universities? If I apply for a PhD scholarship at my current university, where I'm completing my honours, they'll notify me within 6 weeks of the deadline November 1st.

However, other universities I'd like to apply to overseas won't tell me until as late as March next year.

Is it acceptable to defer acceptance until I get a rejection from my preferred university? I really don't want to come across as ungrateful for the opportunity.

There are some variations between countries, but generally when you are awarded a scholarship tied to a PhD program the scholarship is automatically given to you as soon as you enroll. So you cannot defer accepting a scholarship. So you should figure out how the scholarship is paired with the admission process, if you have to enroll within a certain time of having received the scholarship that that's your deadline. You could also enroll and then drop out but in some cases you might have to repay part of the scholarship back, although unusual this could happen. Keep in mind that there's also the ethical side of things, if you don't accept the scholarship can go to someone else, and by dropping out after the program has begun you take an opportunity off someone else.


How much of a role tuition revenue plays in underwriting research? I knew that TA positions in American schools are usually borne out of tuition revenue. Tuition revenue (that is, the cash that comes from the sometimes exorbitant undergraduate tuition) is usually unrestricted so one would wonder whether tuition money is directly used in order to fund research.

But other than start-up research funds, what other research expenditures are borne out of tuition money, if any? Would a university use tuition revenue to make up for a shortfall in research grants?

Much of my answer here, holds in this case. It's basically impossible to tell. If a new professor gets a lighter teaching load in their first year, is that "underwriting research" even if the professor's nominal work distribution is 1/3rd teaching, 1/3rd research, and 1/3rd service/admin?

Professors are paid to teach and research and serve internal university goals. How much they do each of those day to day is hard to tell. Now, that being said, if a professor fails to bring in grants to cover their summer months, I doubt many universities would indefinitely provide for them out of general funds.


Presenting collaborative work in progress I am collaborating with multiple people on a project. I just found out that one of my collaborators is presenting the work (which is still in progress) on a major conference in my field. I feel like this should have been discussed first (and I would have also liked to be the one to present). Is it usual that this is done without discussion? Is it just the first one that organizes a talk that gets to give it? (We also were still somewhat secretive about discussion the ongoing project since we believe they will be quite a breakthrough so it comes as an additional surprise.) I guess I should have started the discussion on how we will present our work earlier.

Generally speaking, people should check with their collaborators before presenting joint work, including work in progress that may be controversial.  An exception might be an individual invitation for work that has been published and presented previously.
Certain fields, like particle physics, often have very large collaborations, and they usually implement very formal procedures for deciding who gets to represent the collaboration at what conference, and what official material can be presented.
If you don't have a formal mechanism in place, you're right it's probably good to chat with your colleagues in advance to set the ground rules.


Is a copied acknowledgements section considered plagiarism? A friend of mine has told me that his Master student (Chemistry) defended his thesis sometimes ago and everything went alright and he graduated.
He recently realized that in the acknowledgements part the student has copied practically (word by word, line by line) the acknowledgements of another thesis available on the Internet by replacing the name of my colleague with the name of the supervisor of that thesis. He added that he was hurt by the fact that the student has not tried to say his 'thank you' words by his own words.

My first question is that can this be considered as a plagiarism?

My second question is that is it necessary to inform the student about this possible (if any) misconduct?

He recently realized that in the acknowledgements part the student has copied practically (word by word, line by line) the acknowledgements of another thesis available on the Internet by replacing the name of my colleague with the name of the supervisor of that thesis.

I'm slightly confused: I assume that in order to discover this, the advisor must have run the entire thesis through some plagiarism-detection software.  But the question indicates that this took place after the student's graduation.  I don't understand that: two reasonable times to run your student's thesis through plagiarism detection software are (i) at some point before you sign off on it and (ii) never.  Would one really do this after the fact out of idle curiosity, or did the advisor have some other reason to suspect that plagiarism took place?

Is line-by-line copying of someone else's acknowledgments a form of plagiarism?
Well, plagiarism has a sufficiently precise definition that I don't see how the answer can be "no".  The better question is whether this is viewed as unacceptable enough to do anything about.

I think that part of that question depends upon the writing quality and originality of the purloined acknowledgments.  As @Andreas Blass points out, if you've seen 10 different thesis acknowledgments, you've seen 1000 more: such acknowledgements are formally part of the thesis but they are not part of the academic / intellectual content of the thesis.  So they are not vetted in any way, and there is no expectation of intellectual originality.  There is more than one way to phrase "Thanks so much to my parents, my friends and my thesis advisor", but the number of standard ways to phrase that is so much smaller than the number of theses that the pigeonhole principle applies to show that many people are writing the same sentences in their acknowledgments.  If the purloined acknowledgments contained many clever and original turns of phrase, then it looks worse: the fact that what you stole has nothing to do with the intellectual content of the thesis cannot excuse the fact that you are taking credit for someone else's distinctive writing.  That's a really icky thing to do in acknowledgments to your own thesis.

Unless the purloined acknowledgments contained several paragraphs of poetry or something similarly egregious, I would not consider a formal plagiarism inquiry.  This runs the risk of getting the degree rescinded, which to me is clearly too harsh.  But there is a real problem here:

  He added that he was hurt by the fact that the student has not tried to say his 'thank you' words by his own words.

Ça y est.  The student's former advisor has discovered that the student has cut corners and compromised some academic integrity just to get out of thanking him in his own words.  What a slap in the face!  I think that if something like this happened to me, I would have to bring it up with the student (though it would be painfully awkward) just because I would feel like I have to be honest with them about the change in my opinion of them resulting from this discovery.  Without some kind of sincere apology / explanation of this, the future of this professional relationship is at risk.  The student, alas, may need to be informed that he should look elsewhere for future recommendation letters and so forth.

Added: A lot of people seem to be suggesting that parts of this answer are an overreaction.  I tried to make clear that I don't find the premise of the question completely plausible or understandable, but after discussing that I did what I think is the appropriate thing on Q&A sites like this one: I assumed the premise, in some form which made sense to me.  Yes, if the "word-by-word, line-by-line" copied acknowledgments constitute five lines thanking the student's family, friends and advisor, I see no problem at all -- and I  don't see it as a reason to run the text of the acknowledgment through an internet search.  Nor would such a search turn up a unique antecedent; it would turn up hundreds or thousands of cognate passages, as Andreas Blass pointed out. Thus to assume the premise I had to assume that the purloined text was much more substantial and distinctive. To be more specific, imagine the text was:

  I feel greatly honored to be able to add, in some small way, to a subject founded
  by so many [Field Xers] whose work I so deeply admire; among them are
  [My Advisor], [Person A], [Person B] and of course [Person Whose Name Appears in the Thesis Title], the richness of whose ideas seems undilutable by time.

  I thank [Professor C] and [Professor D] for suggestions directly relevant to the material appearing in this thesis. I thank [Fellow Student E] for helping me – quite a while ago now – with some results of [Somewhat Technical Theory] that appear in the appendix.

  I thank [Postdoc F] for helping me calculate a fistful of [Something] (I regret that none of these calculations appear in this thesis)
  and for generally being so free with his technical and [Field X-ical] insights.
  I am grateful to [Recent PhD G] for making his own as yet unpublished thesis
  work available to me.

  The graduate students in the [University Y Department of X] have been without
  exception intelligent and friendly, and it has been a pleasure to learn from them and with them over the years.

  Thanks to [Old Girlfriend H] for providing comfort in the sad days of [a few years ago]. Her kindness will never be forgotten.

  I am indebted to my thesis advisor [My Advisor] for more things than I can list
  here, but most recently for a careful reading of an early, ugly draft of a certain lengthy [Field X-ical] document.

  My father would have been proud of this thesis beyond all moderation. My
  mother has long made and continues to make me proud of her strength in the
  face of all the challenges life has to offer. I thank them both with all of my
  heart.

Imagine that the advisor read this the first time around and was happy to be thanked along with so many other people who made a difference in the student's life.  Then later, for whatever reason, he does an internet search on or including this text and discovers that it is lifted word-by-word, line-by-line from this 2003 PhD thesis.  The specificity of the stolen text would be downright creepy.  Is it really an overreaction if the advisor is upset by this??


Are there situations where taking an honorarium for trying a textbook on a class is acceptable behavior? A publisher for an e-textbook is offering me an honorarium if I try it with a class. My  own ethical take on this is that I would not entertain this regardless of the size of the honorarium (which I don't know).  I certainly wouldn't do this without full disclosure to the students who I'm forcing to buy the book.  I also don't see this as a particularly good text for my course.

While my own position is sort of steadfast, it's something that I haven't seen before in academic publishing, so I'll ask "Are there situations where taking an honorarium for trying a textbook on a class is acceptable behavior?"

I think if you'd not seriously consider the text without the honorarium, that clinches a "don't do it". That is, external monetary motivations should not be allowed to color your professional judgement. And, given that the appearance of impropriety is itself a potential problem, even if the text is plausible, better to be able to later claim objectivity by not taking an honorarium/bribe...


Poster Presentations: Is it acceptable to present an update to a currently ongoing project as a poster at a conference? The project has been going on for about 5 years, but we have made large strides in the past year. We already presented the project last year at the same conference, but would it be acceptable to present the major updates at this year's same conference?

Thank you all.

Along with the commenter, I agree that it will depend on the field and the conference.

However, in all likelihood there is a way to make it work, if you are just super interested in doing the trip. Consider to position the presentation clearly in the title and to carefully construct your abstract.  You want to clearly show the connection to the earlier work, but that things have changed also.  Use your judgment on how to do that.  "Progress" is likely too weak, but "Breakthrough" too gushy. In other words sell the talk (without being too blatant but still...don't hide your light under a bushel.)

Probably, there are also some pitfalls to avoid.  Although I think the downside risk is not so huge.  But try to avoid losing a follow-on publication if that is something you care about.

Of course, you need to understand the conference if they decide not to have you.  Even if you got a breakthrough or unexpected results, they have a reasonable argument that the audience has at least seen the scope of the research problem and initial approach already.  Depending on their own supply/demand for participants will impact if they want to have you again.

Personally I would opt more to go somewhere new and get some new people to see your work (from your own interests, not out of altruism).  It is also nice to use travel to see new cities. (I'm sure some will scold me for having boondoggle as even a small fractional component of academic travel, but researchers are not Biblical cows with bound mouths...getting an occasional fun trip to go along with hard work in the lab is not unreasonable.  Life is short.)


Are review articles the result of original observations? I am about to submit a PhD thesis by published work. The university guidelines states that "the content of the papers should be the result of original observations". I would like to include a review article I wrote last year.

This review article does not report novel experimental data, but as a regular review article, it reports "observations" of the current state of research.

Is this view correct? Can I include it in my thesis?

I think that review articles can of course be original work, provided that they offer something like an analysis of the current literature. A mere list of positions and the people who take them isn't going to count as a contribution to the literature. However, showing people that certain pieces of literature form families that have resemblences to one another, or that a certain piece has been cited a lot, although people have overlooked another important, but unknown piece that calls its thesis into question, etc. . .  those are all important, and indeed original contributions.

I'm guessing that your article probably is analytical in this way, otherwise it wouldn't have been accepted for publication in the first place. I'd say that if it is a high-quality article, published somewhere respectable, then go on and include it in the thesis. Although obviously the usual caveats ("Check with your advisor!") apply.


How are copyright transfers for a journal article done? Almost a year back, I have submitted a manuscript for a Journal as a research article, and after almost 11 months and after undergoing two rounds of peer review and referee suggested revisions, I finally got an acceptance letter. After getting acceptance, I thought I would receive a letter to sign a copyright agreement and asking my permission to transfer the rights for publication, but to my surprise I did not get any such letter. I then read the copyright document on the Journal's website (under instructions for authors segment, one is supposed to read even before submitting a manuscript) and found that as per the document the copyrights laws are automatically transferred once the manuscript gets accepted, and come into force from the day of getting the acceptance letter. Is this quite a common thing with Journals. The Journal is although not a top journal but fairly reasonable and from a fairly known publisher and I am sure its not a fake or predatory. There are no charges for authors whats so ever.

Question : Can the copyrights be transferred without the author explicitly signing (electronically or otherwise) any document to that effect?

There are very few kinds of contracts that require a full written form and a signature (depends on the legal system, but I think in most places real estate is the common exception). It's just easier to prove the existence of a written contract than an oral agreement if things go to court.

But in this case there seems to be no need. You said yourself, that the terms in the instructions you are supposed to read before submitting, so you can hardly argue to have missed them. You also cannot really argue that the terms are unreasonable or unexpected, since a copyright transfer of some form is to be expected when publishing.

Legally what happened is that the publisher offers a contract that involves transfer of copyright in case of acceptance and you agreed to that contract by submitting.


PhDs in the arts - what exactly do they do? I met someone who was doing a PhD in dance.  What exactly do those people do?  Do they do research in dance?  Conduct experiments in dance?  Prove theorems about dance?  Do they become dance professors when they graduate?

Do they mostly focus on the history of dance, and compare different styles of dancing?

In short: yes, and a whole lot more.

A PhD in the arts usually most closely resembles other PhDs in the humanities, like English or History, but often have a more experiential/practical component as well. Depending on the program and field of study, it might be somewhat of a mash-up of psychology, anthropology, physiology, literature, history, political science...whatever relates to one's area of research and study!

I'll give a concrete, real-world example: in the Psychology department of my present university there are faculty and students (undergraduates and those preparing for masters/PhD studies) conducting cross-departmental research with the Theatre & Dance department on the "Psychology of Dance". In one experimental study they looked at inter-rater reliability of those who are not particularly trained or experienced in interpretive dance, and then showed them specially created dance performance videos. They were looking to see if interpretive dance really is a genuine form of communication: can the artists/performers communicate specific emotions consistently to the audience such as anger, fear, affection, companionship, etc? Or is it all just people assigning arbitrary meanings, like people giving serious meaning to a randomly generated drawing? Their results so far indicate that especially for some emotions, there is a very strong inter-rater reliability: even those who have never studied/seen interpretive dance before can identify certain emotions, activities, representations, etc - and as usual they work on writing up and publishing such results, giving talks, etc.

As another example, at NYU they have a Performance Studies program and they have a lot of detail on their website about the kind of things student's are doing. These include things like studying different styles of dance, dance in other cultures, documenting and studying modern performance art, and so forth.

As with most PhDs, the purpose of them is research and instruction, but what one does with it varies. Some will be instructors, professors, researchers, owners of studios, contributors in community organizations, lecturers, writers, performance artists...some will go into 'industry' as choreographers, directors, producers, and so on. It's a far cry from Underwater Basket Weaving!

One thing I'll note from personal observation: many, many people working in the arts choose not to go by the title "Doctor" or even "Professor". This seemed odd to me, but it's a culture thing - they just don't do it. So, many people who have a PhD in the arts, especially in music and dance, don't advertise their education in any way - so you've probably known more people with a PhD in the arts than you realize!


What is a "very good higher education degree" when applying for a German PhD? I plan to do a PhD in Germany. I have read some material that said that:

  "The most important formal qualification for being able to do a
  doctorate in Germany is a very good higher education degree that is
  recognised in Germany"

"What is" or maybe should I ask "How much is" very good higher degree?

Basically, you need to have a master's degree. If that master's degree comes from:

A German university
A university in any member country of the Bologna Process
A few other countries considered "equivalent" but not participating in the Bologna Process, such as the US, Canada, Australia, and Japan

then it is almost always automatically accepted. On the other hand, if your degree is from another source (such as India, China, Iran, Africa, etc.), or is from a German Fachhochschule, then the degree must be certified by the university as being at the same level as a German master's degree before you can be admitted. Also, after your admission, you may be required to take some additional courses to establish your candidacy (although this is usually on the order of two to three courses during your first two years).


Graduate Fellowship: Who to ask recommendations from I am a first-semester master's student in my field of study and I have a question about applying for funding/fellowship opportunities.

I need two recommendation letters from professors for a fellowship that I am interested in right now, which is a foreign language-related one.
I only took the general courses that are needed to satify the mandatory course requirements for my major.
I lacked enthusiasm in most of my courses that I took this semester, which led me to be not too close with my professors.

Should I ask professors who taught me for a semester for a recommendation letter? ALso, is it okay to ask a professor that will teach me next semester?

My spring semester begins on January 17th, and the fellowship application deadline is February 1st.

Recommendations are only helpful when they come from people that know you well. In particular, your letter writers should be able to give an informed opinion on how you meet whatever selection criteria are relevant for the fellowship, for example they should be able to comment on your academic achievements and potential. Teachers with whom you have not interacted yet, but will only do so in the near future, will not be able to do that, and will likely decline to write a letter of recommendation.

Of course you certainly would not want a bad letter. I would therefore to suggest to specifically ask your letter writers if they will be able to write a strong letter of recommendation. If they think they won't be able to do that, they will hopefully tell you to ask someone else, instead of writing a bad letter.


Discussing Related Work: Use of the phrase 'the authors' I just got feedback on my thesis. When discussing related work, I tend to often use the phrase the authors do this and that.
For instance:

In [1] a system is described which approaches problem x by doing y. The authors perform a scalability evaluation showing that their approach outperforms z.

Obviously, my advisor does not like it when I use the authors, because he underlined each occurence.
My question hence is: How can I prevent the use of the authors in the above example?
I talked to my advisor and he said that I should just mention the authors by their names. But I think this is not feasible in my case, because I already talked several paragraphs about the specific related work paper and it would be weird to suddenly start mentioning their names in the third paragraph of discussing it.
It would look like this:

First paragraph about related work.
Second paragraph about same related work.
NameA et al. perform a scalability evaluation showing that their approach outperforms z.

EDIT:
somewhat related: Referring to previous work “by the authors”

It sounds like you have a sensible reason why you shouldn't just replace the phrase "the authors" with the names, without making any other edits.  Introducing the names abruptly would read strangely if it happens several paragraphs into the discussion, since it wouldn't be clear who these people are.

You can solve this problem by introducing the names earlier.  Instead of opening with "In [1] a system is described...", you could use "Jones and Smith [1] developed a system..." or another variant.

There are several advantages to this:

It provides more context for readers.  In particular, it's easier to recognize the names Jones and Smith than a reference like [1], so readers who have heard of this work before can catch on more quickly without having to flip to the references.
It is more generous in offering credit to the authors.  Too much use of the passive voice and phrases like "the authors" could even look like you are going out of your way to avoid naming them.  (I don't think most people would be upset about that, but it could be an issue if the authors are particularly touchy.  I've occasionally known people who were irritated by how they were cited in situations that seemed innocuous to me.)

You may have to edit a bit more to make this work, but it shouldn't require big changes.

One general principle here is that when you have to edit something in a paper, you shouldn't restrict yourself to making only local changes.  Sometimes you can't really fix it without further changes or rearrangement.


Mistakenly passing a student I miscalculated the mark of one of my students and mistakenly notified him that he passed the class. However, I noticed my mistake after some hours and fixed it, thereby resulting in him failing the class. Obviously, the student is very upset now. Should I have left the mistake and pretend I hadn't noticed it?

On the few occasions where I've accidentally mis-reported a grade, mercifully the computational error was not great, and it was within my authority to change the pass-fail line (or other relevant line) by a small-but-sufficient amount to make my initial report "become correct". Of course, I correspondingly "improved" other peoples' grades to match. That is, if we are talking about a small adjustment, I feel that the initial grade announcement should be "made true" by changing the grade line.

My rationale for this is that precise gradelines are pretty meaningless, so a small change (in favor of students) is completely harmless, and thus avoids the very-bad fallout from recanting on a grade.

If some bizarre, large computational mistake occurs, so that one has reported an "A" instead of "F", it's probably not feasible to make the better grade "true". Whatever your local policies allow/require, do be sure to manifest the same "adjustment" (and only upward, by my thinking...) for every student in the course. Large errors, and/or large changes, should probably be discussed with other people in your department so that they'll  not be "surprised" at any further fallout.


Should I take threats from a former professor seriously? Some Context:

A member of my MA thesis committee, for whom I was also a GA (graduate assistant), threatened me several times while I was still in my masters program (last year). For example, she threatened to fire me from my GA position with them-- which, in fact, she cannot do (only the department head can remove a GA from their position). When she realized she had no power to fire me, she threatened not to write me letters of rec for doctoral programs. She tried to pressure me into promoting her from reader to thesis chair on my thesis committee. I was very afraid of her at the time because she was my work supervisor, my professor (I was taking a class with her at the time), and a reader on my thesis committee.

I was afraid she would diminish my reputation in the department, give me a bad grade in her class, delay my graduation by holding up the thesis process, and not write me any letters of recommendation or worse, write me a bad letter of recommendation for a doctoral program. I did not stand up for myself or for others to whom she was abusive until I graduated last summer; I saw her retaliate against other students (primarily through grades and intradepartmental reputation) and I felt sure she could carry out some of her threats toward me. She bragged to me and other students that she successfully reduced the scholarly reputation of an academic at another institution whom she said was 'inauthentic.' Shortly before graduating, I did leave a record with the Ombuds of her treatment of me.

Now: I asked her to write a letter of rec for one of my PhD apps because I was afraid she'd be insulted if I didn't ask her for a single one (this is probably ridiculous, I know). I was accepted to that program and have decided to go there. However, this professor continues to be hostile toward me. In a recent email, she told me she had "just spoken to" the graduate adviser of the program I will attend in the fall, and implied that she speaks to this adviser regularly as if they are friends (somehow I think she's lying). Because of a pattern of behavior, I recognized that she still wants me to be afraid of her. I am loathe to admit that it's working, I think primarily out of ignorance of how academic/institutional relationships truly function (tempted to play the First Gen card here).

Question: Are such inter-institutional threats actionable, i.e. how likely is it that faculty at one institution can influence faculty at another institution in order to negatively affect the reputation of a student?

Please note: The question is not, "Is this professor a bad person?" or anything to that effect.

If this question is too individualized, I will take it down. I feel like I can't be the only one who has experienced/is experiencing a situation like this. I would appreciate generalizable advice (e.g. across disciplines, types of academic relationships), especially from academics who have gone through similar situations.

This sounds terrible, and like you said, I definitely think asking her to write a letter of rec was a mistake.  However, regardless of whether she tried to sabotage you or not, you've been admitted!  Congratulations.

Now is the time to sever all contact with her and move on.

You left a record with your previous university about your issues with her, and if she was going to create problems at your new school I really think it would have come before you were admitted, especially since she was a letter writer.  Whatever she did or did not say, they gave you a big vote of confidence in offering you a place.  Time to focus on the next stage.

Good luck!


Can I pursue a PhD while working as an Instructor/Lecturer? So, I'm applying for jobs as an instructor/lecturer.  They explicitly only require a master's degree, which I have, in addition to some valuable industry experience.  It's plausible that I could get one of these jobs.

If I get one of the jobs, I would be hoping to potentially stay in academia for longer, so logically it would help me to have the PhD I currently lack.  Ideally, I'd like to pursue my PhD part-time while working as an instructor.  My thought is that this would give me the opportunity to eventually get a professor position, later in my career, once I complete the PhD.

My questions:

Is this something that universities are okay with their instructors doing?
Or is it not okay for someone to be teaching undergrads while simultaneously doing graduate research?
If I wanted to do this, would it be more appropriate to pursue the PhD at the same institution as or a different institution from the one that I'd be working at?

Some additional helpful info:

All of the schools that I'm applying at have part-time PhD programs, so I have no reason to believe that the part-time study schedule is an issue.
I'm not in the U.S., so the specific rules of American academia don't necessarily apply.  For example, here, we rarely have grad students teach classes.

Most universities are fine with having PhD students working as instructors/lecturer/teaching assistant at the same time, and it's actually quite common. I have personally been teaching at undergrads level while doing my PhD, and most of my friend who did a PhD were in the same situation.

However, it depends on the amount of hours you are spending a week with teaching: if it's taking all of your time, you might not be able to do research in good conditions, and it might be hard to find a professor that would agree to supervise you if you're not available to work on your PhD. Basically, if you combine a part-time teaching/part-time PhD, that should be fine, but if you combine a full-time teaching with a part-time PhD, that might not reasonable.

Concerning where you should apply for the PhD, in general, you can do it in a different university than the one where you're teaching. However, in some cases, it might be more interesting to do it at the same place because you might not have to pay the tuition fees.


Become not interested in my research topic after two years of my PhD? I am supposed to finish my PhD in four years. But after two years of working on a topic, I become not interested in the topic any more. I found out that the topic is boring. What should I do? Should I continue forcing myself to work on the topic, or should I change to something more interesting? I do not want to extend my PhD since my funding only allows me to pursue the degree for four years.

EDIT:
The research topic is quite old, and I think it does not have too much potential in future development. There are already many methods to solve the problem I am working on, and doing a PhD is not using the existing methods, but inventing new ones; this is rather difficult and depressing.

This is a conversation you need to have with your supervisor. If they are any good at supervising, they can help with strategies to either reignite your interest in your topic or salvage what you have done and apply it to something else. If you dislike your topic now, writing it up will be even worse and you may not be able to produce something passable. This is exactly what PhD supervisors are for.


Career prospects for Math Finance researcher I'm currently starting the first year of Mathematics Ph.D. program with intention to specialize in Mathematical Finance. I have noticed during the application process that this area is rarely represented on Mathematics departments in general -- although few universities have faculty working in it (e.g., Columbia, Michigan, Pitt, CMU), most do not or at least move this area to another departments, i.g. Statistics or Operations Research.
Possible explanation of this may be that there are many Math Finance Master's programs that are tailored for industry, so this field may be seen as very applied in general. However, I'm mostly interested in academic career.

Will specialization in math finance provide less career opportunities in mathematical academia, then some contemporary mainstream areas like algebraic geometry or representation theory? If yes, will I be at significant disadvantage with Ph.D. in Mathematics while applying to other departments (Applied Mathematics, Statistics, Operations Research, Finance)? In general, do researchers working on narrow cross-disciplinary topics have less opportunities in their main field than their pure counterparts?

If it matters, I mostly interested in North America region (U.S. and Canada).

There's no question that mathematical finance has a smaller market for academics than, say algebraic geometry.  (However, if you can pitch yourself as being more broadly interested in, for example, stochastic processes, that's almost as big a market.)

Small markets are subject to more variance on both the supply and demand sides.  You could apply for jobs in a year when no one is actually interested in hiring in mathematical finance.

On the other hand, if comparisons could actually be made across fields, the best person in mathematical finance one year could be equivalent to anywhere from the best to the 10th best person in algebraic geometry that year.  If someone is really looking to hire in mathematical finance, that person will probably be hired.  In algebraic geometry, while the best algebraic geometer on the tenure-track job market in a given year is almost sure to be hired somewhere, the 10th best should be looking at other options, and even the 5th best should be quite worried.


Long Interview for Visiting Assistant Professorship I'm having my second interview for a VAP position so I'm looking to see what the Deans might ask and what I might ask them. The position is in photojournalism and I'm teaching my first class at present at another university, while still working in the field. What questions do Deans focus on and want to hear from the candidate about. I know each field is different, just trying to get a general feel. Thanks!

Deans will want to talk big picture, because they are paid to think big picture. You could ask them to talk about new initiatives or how the college has been adapting to the social and economic changes of 2020. They will probably have some softball questions for you.


Can people in western countries do graduation and post graduation in two completely different fields? It might be possible here in India too, I haven't researched on it, but in one movie I have seen the guy is studying mathematics in MIT but his future plan was to study medicine at Harvard. I kept wondering how could he do that.

Here at India at 11th class we have to usually choose either Mathematics or Biology and then our eligibility changes accordingly.

Some universities require students to have similar bachelors degree, some other do not require similar degree and do not have specific policy on this; while others need a related or so near bachelors field. For instance, for a masters in engineering degrees; one with bachelors in applied mathematics or physics will also be able to study masters of an engineering field.

Answers to your question varies in fields and countries, and different education systems. My general advice to you would be to see the minimum requirements of the university you want to apply for to see whether their admissions office have any regulations on having related bachelors degree to the masters or not. If they are not providing you information on this, I recommend you to contact them by email and ask your questions.


Redefining variables used in many equations in a publication When using the same variables in many equations, should I redefine each time the variables and their meanings or is there other ways to avoid redundancy?

E.g.

c = a + b
where a is...

z = a / b
where a is...

It will maybe depend on the journal, but thanks for any general idea or opinion.

I think of this as a matter of "breadcrumbs."  If a reader is constantly wondering what "a" is and having to look back to try to find its definition, that is a problem.  On the other hand, if I put so much redundant definition in that the math gets hidden by uninteresting boilerplate prose, that's also a problem.

My preference is thus to take a two-pronged approach:

Create a table of symbols that collects all of the definitions in one easy-to-find location, and
Match every equation with a prose summary of its meaning.

For example, if I were presenting Newton's laws, then I might say:

  "The force exerted by an object is proportional to mass and acceleration: F = ma."

and in the table of definitions "F" and "m" and "a" would all have their formal definitions.  In this way, I remind the reader about the definitions without repeating them, yet at the same time have a simple reference point at which all definitions may be readily found.


For how long is research considered valid for publication? Does a research/study have an 'expiry date' that prohibits it from being published in a journal after it has been completed?

Research does not have an "expiry date", but what it does have is competition. Journals want to produce cutting edge research, new information that will help others in the field.

If you do some research but don't publish it, then find 20 years later that no one else has done it and your information is still something other researchers would want to know then you can easily publish it. Delaying publication is only a risk in that other people may work on the same topic or have the same idea you had, and publish it before you.

One interesting example is Brian May, guitarist in the band Queen. He was studying for a PhD when the band took off and quit his studies in 1974 to become internationally famous. In 2007 he re-enrolled at university, completed and submitted his PhD on the work he started 30 years before. Luckily for him, his field was a small one and no one else had decided to work on the topic he had studied in the intervening years, so his work was still new, interesting and relevant.


Transitioning from PhD in biomedical engineering to software dev (have 5-6 software experience working for a team during PhD)? My PhD is in biomedical engineering (MEMS and electronics). I also have taken some CS classes in the last 5 years (and during undergrad in electrical engineering). I was also in the software team for a robotics club at university for the past 5 years. How do I market myself for SW jobs in industry?

I have been in both industry and academia, both as a software developer and lecturer, and here two points that might help you:

You Diplomas: You non-software related diplomas, does not hold you back on finding good software development jobs. It is how much you know about software development. In fact, you have a good story on saying that you are chasing what you like.
Choose Your Side: Ok, so you been involved with robotics, so probably you enjoy logic and reasoning more than shapes and colors. Therefore I would suggest to look into back-end development sort of things (e.g., Python, Java development), rather than front-end design and implementation.
Your CV: In you cv include any software development experience, even if it is by using an obscure software or programming language. Also, do not hide your academic past, simply explain that is what you did enjoy then and now you enjoy doing software development.


Dealing with a friend who always leans on me I study Mathematics and Computer Science. I have a classmate who  excessively depends on me when it comes to coursework . He wants me to explain definitions, proofs, share code, check his proofs and bugs in programs. It seems to me he does not pull enough efforts when he doesn't get things in the first try and approaches for help.

I have tried to advice by saying "you should work on this for more time" as most of his questions are trivial. I think that he finds it easier to get help from somebody rather than reading again or spending more time. I also think that I am spoiling him by helping. This is also ruining me as this eats up my time.

What is a good solution to my problem? How can I convince him to put more effort from his part? I tried to avoid him especially when exams get near, but he ends up finding me.

He's a postgraduate, and so are you. A postgraduate degree is self-guided study. And while there's scope for group working and collective problem solving, hand-holding him is actually making his situation worse, not better.

In other words, by doing his work for him, you are hindering him. If he truly is a friend, then it's time for you to stop hindering him.

Explain to him that you have been preventing him becoming a fully-fledged researcher, and apologise for that; remind him that the purpose of the degree is to build research skills, self-discipline, and independent thought, and that when he asks you to do work for him, you're both complicit in preventing him from achieving these goals. And so it's got to stop, for his sake, and for your sake in not being complicit with what's going on.


What are the benefits of a poster award? What are the benefits of poster awards? Is being awarded at a conference really useful for one's career (e.g. when applying for a PhD or a job) or is it just scene? In other words: Can I say that having such award on my resumé is better than just nothing?

In my field the thinking is

It draws attention to posters from conference participators.
It provides encouragements to individuals (students) to make an extra effort
It encourages discussion about "good poster design"

The selection criteria is always focusing on good communication of good science, never one or the other.  Since such awards are given only to students and there ids usually also a similar student presentation award both selected by a set of valued senior scientists, the award should be and is seen as a merit.


Blurry digital signatures in letter of recommendation on letterhead My referee has issued me a letter of recommendation on letterhead in hard copy form , but with very blurry digital signatures. The letter has the university stamp on it. There is contact number and address of the university's old campus, but with current university website mentioned on it. Moreover, the referee's email and phone number are not mentioned in the letter.

I am applying for a highly competitive scholarship. The referee has sent the letter in email to my abroad university supervisor. Now I need to apply using online application by uploading a scanned copy of the letter. In this scenario do you think that there is a chance of losing the opportunity because of the blurry signature, and lack of email and phone number of the referee?

The answer mainly depends on the pipeline of the scheme you are applying to. Without knowing their exact rules and regulations, it is not possible to answer your question exactly.

Having said that, if I received a LOR with signs of digital manipulation / forgery (such as blur signature), my first step would be to contact the referee directly. First, I would try to locate them online and use email / telephone from their official university page. Failing that, I would try email / number from the LOR. If it is absent, I would consider dropping the case, unless the rest of the evidence shows completely outstanding candidate.

Unfortunately, it is not uncommon to see forgery, lies and other dishonest ways of gaining advantage in academic applications. After all, Universities are reluctant or incapable to assign any penalty for this, encouraging such dishonest behaviour.  The duty of checking the paperwork falls down on academics appointed as "admission tutors" or "scholarship administrators", who usually do not have tools and time to perform rigorous checks. In case of doubt, they may decide to drop the application or at least de-prioritise it.

tl;dr: if your LOR looks forged, it may negatively impact your application.


GPA vs Undergrad prestige and difficulty Consider the following scenario:

Bob goes to a top-tier university for his undergraduate degree. This university is known for its extra challenging curriculum and Bob also challenges himself while attending. Bob is able to learn the material, but due to the extra rigor of the college, Bob graduates with a 2.5 GPA (B/C Student).

John goes to a different university for the exact same undergraduate degree as Bob. His university has a significantly easier curriculum and as a result, John is able to graduate with a 3.5 GPA (A/B Student).

Other than going to a different undergraduate university and their GPA, Bob and John are identical. Both are now applying to the same grad school and the same program at that school. Which is a better graduate school candidate?

Note: I know this question is similiar to How are GPAs from different universities evaluated for admissions to MS programs in the USA?, but I am looking for an answer that is narrower. In my case, I would like to know how two candidates would be judged if there only differences was undergraduate GPA and undergraduate university. In all other aspects of the application process, these two hypothetical candidates are identical.

Admissions don't come down to a single number or any single factor. Knowing no more it is impossible to say which of these two is a better candidate.

While it is true that some universities are considered "better" than others, it is an ephemeral thing. Some marvelous teachers work at some quite "modest" places. Moreover, the universities that have a really great reputation, often do so because they are able to offer more learning support to undergraduates, though that isn't always the case. They can often attract top faculty, of course, for financial reasons, but that doesn't necessarily translate to better undergraduate learning. Certainly not for every student.

Someone with a low GP from a top university, might have been somewhat disconnected from the learning process and had little contact with those top professors. Someone from a lower ranked place might have that higher GPA because he/she worked closely with the faculty and has a much better grasp overall. This, too isn't necessarily true, but it can happen.

Another factor, of course, is that not all of the "top" students go to the "top" schools. Money plays too big a part of who gets to go to, say, Harvard. Some people just go to a local State University of modest reputation due to family or other reasons. But they can get an excellent education there, and have done.

And don't assume that John had an easier path or that his university had a "significantly easier curriculum". There is no basis for saying that. Some graduates of highly ranked places are also quite weak in skills.

However, I suspect that there is a general feeling among academics that a student who has done well locally (high GPA) has taken advantage of the offerings and is well prepared, while one who has not done so well in the local environment may not be as well qualified to continue. But that "general feeling" needs additional evidence, so isn't considered definitive.

Admissions is a game of balancing. Many factors are looked at, grade point and college reputation among them. But those alone won't tell a useful story about a candidate.


How can I efficiently update a literature review (that got outdated due to being rejected three times)? Two years ago a colleague and I conducted a full-text analysis-based systematic literature review regarding a specific topic in information systems. We’ve done it in the time span of three months. After that, we wrote a paper and submitted it to an information systems conference. Unfortunately, it was rejected. The blind review was comprehensive and we get really good advice for improving the paper. However, sequentially, at two other conferences, the blind reviews were positive, but due to the high competitiveness (<30% acceptance rate) the paper has also been rejected. We’ve included the responses from the reviewers into a new version of the paper.

Now, two years later, the literature review is out of date. A large set of relevant papers (>50) have been published since we conducted the review. However, we do not have enough time resources to update our full-text analysis. We have collected the new papers in our own literature review database. But to read each paper and to do a full-text coding is impossible, due to other projects that take place at our chair.

Now, I’m thinking about putting the review results into the wastebin, because I do not see any opportunity to get my results published. Needless to say, that this is very unsatisfying to me. I think, a justification that the literature review has been done in 2015 in the paper, will not be accepted by future reviewers.

So my question is:

Are there strategies to update the results of a full-text analysis without conducting a completely new analysis? For example, is there some kind of methodology which combines full-text analysis of older sources with a delta analysis or something else? Are there methods the reduce the time efforts?

I recommend that you find another co-author who is willing and able to spend the time that you cannot. An good candidate may be a supervisee (PhD student, postdoc) who needs to get more familiar with the topic anyway. A fresh view may also help to address possible problems with the paper.


Is it ok to give your Old Assignments to others? My friend wants an old assignment which I have done few semesters ago. I want to know whether it's ok to give the assignment to him and whether it's going to be a problem for me in the future. (I have already done that subject, but still following the degree) Please let me know.

There is no single right answer here. The answer depends from university to university, and even from faculty member to faculty member. For example, one professor in my department believes everything should be sharable, while another believes that it's wrong to share old materials.

So you'll need to see what the policy of the instructor teaching your friend's class is.


Hiring Process in Norway for Postdocs Many months ago I applied for a postdoc position in a university in Norway. About one month ago I got a letter from the university with an evaluation of all candidates. In this evaluation, I was deemed qualified for the position and classified fourth.

I thought that the game was lost, since only one position was announced. But last week I contacted one of the committee members to ask for more information and he said that the other three candidates had already found jobs elsewhere, either in the industry, or some other postdoc position, and that very likely I would get the position if I'm still interested.

I can believe this is the case, since this is one of the slowest hiring processes I have ever been involved, and surely the other applicants already had time to get other offers.

They explained me that even if they know informally that the other candidates are not anymore interested in the job, by law they are obliged to send a formal offer to the first classified, and if they refuse, they will send an offer to the second and so on. My question is:

Assuming none of the candidates accepts the job, how long will the
process still take until I'm offered the position?
How long is the minimum waiting time for the answer of each candidate?

ps: Please, I would like to have an answer from somebody experienced with the Norwegian hiring system. In Norway postdoc positions are considered government jobs and therefore are subject to a very strict (and peculiar) hiring process.

I see that the question is old, and hopefully, you have already started in your position. However, I will try to answer anyway for the benefit of others.

I was previously employed at a Norwegian university as a PhD student. The slowness you describe is sadly very familiar.

When I received offers for PhD positions (~5 years ago), I did get formal letters like you describe, but in some cases more informal contact forms were used to speed up the process. The deadline for me to respond to these formal offers was two weeks. As have been mentioned in the comments there may be some administrative overhead in between the candidates. I do not know for sure, but having observed how slow administrative units can move at Norwegian universities, I wouldn't be surprised if the overhead is substantial.

The best way to speed the process up is to find someone at the university that is interested in someone -- you -- starting in the position as soon as possible. Typically, this will be the professor you will be working for. This professor can then push the administration to work faster and contact the people ahead of you on the ranking list to kindly ask them to withdraw their applications, seeing as they already have accepted another position anyway. As there is no need to send formal offers to people who have withdrawn their applications, this last part can speed up the process tremendously. If you can't get a professor involved in your case, trying someone in the university administration can also be effective (but it is my impression that it is harder to get the administration involved).


Costs of having a US-based PhD supervisor doing a PhD in Germany? A little background first, as this is maybe not familiar to people outside Germany: In Germany there are universities that can not award PhDs. So called "Hochschulen/Fachhochschulen". This means they have to cooperate with a university that can award PhDs at which the student is then enrolled as PhD student and also has an official PhD supervisor. But the work (and in practice most of the supervision) is done at the "Hochschule". Also notice that in Germany getting a PhD is normally "thesis only", so no course work. Also in this setting the student already has a Masters, which is a requirement in Germany for starting a PhD.

If someone wants to partner with universities in the US to get a PhD, will the student have to pay regular fees / tuition even if it is "thesis only"?

Or do you even need to be officially enrolled at the US university if you have a professor there who agrees the supervise you?

Even when cooperating with a German university, the candidate will be subject to any terms or requirements given by the "Promotionsordnung" of the university. (It is true that many of those do not require any additional coursework, but there are formal criteria to meet nonetheless).

Therefore I assume that, also in your envisioned scenario, the student would have to meet any formal requirements that the US university usually imposes on their PhD candidates. This may include not only paying for, but actually taking the coursework for example. The fact that the German "Hochschule" may be satisfied with "thesis only" work will not be relevant then if the US university is the one awarding their degree.


Does leaving a lab disqualify me from being a coauthor? Are there any standard rules by referring to which you can claim authorship? Or do the rules differ from lab to lab and depend on the PI?

I have worked for almost two years in lab X on some project. After that I joined lab Y. After that the PI from lab X drafted a manuscript (based, in part, on my work) and submitted it for publication. When I inquired about my major role in that paper, they told me that "since you have left this lab, you cannot claim authorship"... Does this happen in every lab?

What is the ethically right approach in such situation?

Edited

I was involved in data analysis along with the first author of the manuscript. I agree that manuscript drafting and writing is major task for claiming an authorship.. But I was not even invited for it..

If you would have qualified as an author otherwise, the act of leaving a lab should not disqualify you. However, make sure you would have qualified as an author under normal circumstances before confronting someone about it. Most journals and universities have their own authorship policies. You could use these policies as a starting point to talk your lab mates about being included as an authors on this paper.

For example, the IEEE authorship policy: https://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/authors/author_ethics.html

You can look up your own university's authorship policy.

However, be aware that most policies place a much greater emphasis on writing/drafting, and higher level design or analysis work than they do on low-level activities. Just working on a project for two years is not necessarily enough to qualify you for authorship on any paper related to that project. The kind of work you performed and it's relation to the published paper is what is really crucial here.

For example, simple data gathering is usually not enough to qualify one for authorship under most policies. Spending time doing tool-building or building an experiment that you did not design are also activities that probably don't qualify you for authorship on their own. Designing an experiment included in a paper does qualify for authorship. Spending time with the other authors comparing and contrasting competing explanations of data might qualify for authorship, depending on your overall role and contribution in the project.

In my experience I have seen people not have authorship when they spent a significant amount of time testing and validating an experimental setup that they did not design. In this case they were more of a paid technician than a researcher, even though they were working with research equipment and contributing to a research project.

I contrast, I know a guy who did get authorship for simply coming up with a really good idea and doing zero work. He was a graduating PhD student and had a great research idea that the others in his lab implemented and evaluated. Even though he did zero work on the project or paper his colleagues thought that the single original idea was enough of an intellectual contribution to grant authorship.


Is it acceptable to publish student names with the label 'stupid question', on a publicly-visible website? While I was browsing faculty websites, I came across this  page (new link: http://www.pdmi.ras.ru/~iaroslav/teaching.php?screen_check=done&Width=360&Height=640).  Near the bottom there is a section called Top 6 Most Stupid Questions & Remarks That I'he Heard from my Students where one can find a question and the first name (followed by one letter) of the student who asked it!

Just in case the page is eventually taken down here it is on archive.org

No. This is completely unacceptable. Sometimes faculty rant on social media and email lists where they do not think students will see the comments. Even this is frowned upon if the student could realize it is them being made fun of. It is completely inappropriate to make fun of students on a public website with students names.


After 3 years... Should I stay at a PhD position that I think is holding back my thesis? I was supposed to do my thesis in a research department of a company in the field of computational science (developing new computational methods that they could use to design and engineer nanostructures). In parallel I registered as a PhD student in computational physics (my undergrad studies) at a University nearby.

In practice I have spent 3 years developing software for them, with no contributions of my own, just taking already published research and making software out of it. I only have 2 co-author papers, on another field and a topic that I can't really use for my thesis.

I am unable to publish by myself in this field, as experiments are usually required and I have little experimental support from my boss (he disregards any of my ideas, and just wants me to pursue those things that would benefit the research of someone else, work that for me does not answer a "scientific question"). I'm also hating right now my job, the first year I could learn some things, but now is just coding to make the "user experience" better.

I have also tried to get involved in other experiments, but my ideas are taken and carried out by someone else (even if I insist a lot on doing them). I have also proposed small projects, but usually anything is disregarded by my boss with the pretext that it would take "too much time" (for example, I offered to do a small complementary data analysis for an experiment in 3 days, he said no, it was too much time, it was months ago and they haven't finished the data analysis yet). He has also had me studying for some months different techniques difficult to master and later told me to drop it as it wouldn't fit our project requirements (FE, MD, QM/MM...)

I know it is mainly my fault for not having been more aware that this was happening (it started more clearly after the 1st year), I spoke with my boss a number of times but that didn't change anything. I doubt he read my thesis proposal. He always answers that the software will be published in very high impact factor journals (he has little to none high impact factor publications so far) and therefore I would be able to get a thesis with it since no one will question a paper published in one of the top journals (the contribution is purely the software as all methods were already developed). I don't believe this, for me it sounds like bullshit (that it will publish this well, and that in this case it wouldn't be question as not answering a scientific question, which is the requirement for a thesis in my field).

On top of this the environment at my group is quite bad for me. One colleague is not even speaking to me and no one is coming from my field, so I'm professionally isolated.

Due to this I finally reacted and started collaborating a few months back with a group in a university here. They have let me on a project and I'm learning a lot and having fun. My boss obviously doesn't like it and has tried to push me away (including a 3h meeting). In few months my contract runs out and I will probably get an extension offer from my boss for half a year more, if I take it I'm pretty sure this collaboration would have to be entirely in my free time (I work full-time on my "thesis" position).

So far it feels that my job, which should be doing my thesis, is actually holding back my thesis and that they are using me as a low-cost programmer. But it is the only financing I've got. Also, by now is impossible to carry on the thesis proposal I submitted, although if I manage to get some papers out from the collaboration, I can manage to save it.

So what should I do? Give it up entirely and look for another PhD? Give it up and forget about the PhD (maybe I'm not made for this)? Try to finish on my own and look for a part-time job meanwhile or tell my collaborators? Accept the extension and continue knowing how things are and trying to somehow get some papers published so I can leave with a thesis? I feel that I already made too many mistakes in handling this, and one more could put a definite end on my research career.

Thank you if you read this.

The situation you are in is unsustainable. If you let it happen they will continue to abuse you forever. Evaluate the various people around you and separate those that are supportive from those that are not. If it is your academic advisor that is supportive then you might have a path in your current program, but if not, you need to find a way to exit.

You don't give any evidence here that you are unsuitable for continued study, but you need to take a more proactive stance to realize your goals.

Not every place is like what you are experiencing, nor is every boss or advisor an exploiter of students.

But take stock of your options and don't be shy about moving on.


Over reliant on supervisors? I'm at the stage of my project whereby I need to perform some task that I have 0% background on originally. Hence I need to read papers and books to understand what I need to do.

So after burying myself in manuscripts, I got horribly confused and decided to email my supervisor some questions to help me understand. He has done the analysis before and is quite well versed in it.

Can this be seen as a bad thing? meaning I'm not independent? In the meantime, I'm worried that I understood wrong thing prior to start of the analysis and end up completely screwing things up and wasting time.

Email your supervisor. This is perfectly fine, it's one of the reasons you have a supervisor.

Having to perform a task that you have no background in happens all the time in PhDs - it is a brilliant way to acquire more knowledge. But it is not useful or enjoyable to get stuck in one task for too long. So you want to figure out the quickest way to learn about this analysis.

For some people, learning about something new means immediately reading lots of literature on it. For other people (such as me and, by the sound of it, you), learning about something new means asking other people how they've done that. This could be your supervisor, it could be another student, or you can start by searching examples of that analysis on the internet.

Whenever I have to do a new task, I immediately search for people who already have experience with that. If that exact problem has already been solved, then I'd very much like to know since there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. Usually, however, they can help me a little bit but cannot solve the full problem for me. Finding the rest of the solution is how I show I can work independently.


Problem of mentioning the department affiliated with PhD degrees A newbie here :)

I am currently a PhD student in a computer science program. My research interest is about quantum information science. Back then, I also got accepted into a Physics PhD program, but I decided to join my current department because the project is much more interesting.

Here is my problem: when people ask me, "Hey, so what are you doing in grad school?" , I feel quite uncomfortable to mention that I am doing a degree in "Computer Science". Don't get me wrong. I love computer science. But I prefer to be regarded as a Physics person rather than a CS person (actually, I am doing a lot of theoretical quantum physics for my thesis). My feeling is that, the name of the department/degree ALONE doesn't do me justice in telling other about my research interests and experiences.

Funny enough, my boyfriend is also suffering from the same problem. He is in the same CS department with me, but focusing on computational biology. His plan is to attend medical school after his PhD, so he usually shows a tremendous amount of angst when being asked the same question. People often joke about his decision, like "So why an IT guy like you suddenly wants to go to med school?". The poor guy has spent quite a lot of time to do wet labs, and is drafting a thesis with 50% bio and 50% CS components, so I can tell that he really hates when people calling him an "IT guy". While I understand that doing a bio-related doctoral research is a very logical transition for him to med schools, the name of the department alone is causing the confusion that he has abruptly changed his interests into medicine, rather than planned for it ahead.

My question is, what is the best way in our cases to "market" our research focus and experiences to other people? Should it be:

Ms.Catwoman, PhD in Computer Science
Ms.Catwoman, PhD in Quantum Information, or
Ms.Catwoman, PhD in Computer Science with special focus on Quantum Information?

Thanks for the answers!

My question is, what is the best way in our cases to "market" our research focus and experiences to other people?

Marketing is all about knowing your audience. And thus you may market your PhD to different audiences in different ways.

If you're talking to a person on the street, you could say "PhD in Computer Science".

If you're talking to a Computer Scientist, you could say "PhD in Quantum Information".

If you're talking to a specialist in Quantum Information, you could say "PhD in X, Y & Z" where X, Y and Z are detailed topics.

The truth of the matter is that a PhD is a PhD. Officially speaking, there's no such thing as a "PhD in ...". So for the given person in front of you, try to communicate the area of your PhD as best as you can.

And as for the "IT guy" stuff, if that's how they chose to stereotype what you are doing, then that's their problem, not yours/your boyfriends.


Can I submit an article just for the sake of useful feedback? I have made some research about a topic in Computer Science. The issue was that I am a little bit dubious if the procedure that I followed was correct. The problem gets worse because the work is not in the field of expertise of my supervisor or of my colleagues.

For that reason, I am thinking to submit it to a conference for getting valuable feedback. Would that be reasonable to do that? Maybe somebody would argue that I will only waste valuable time from the reviewers, but I don't know what else to do in this situation.

Submit your research to a workshop. Workshops are the kind of venue you are looking for: their purpose is to provide feedback on work-in-progress, with a fast review cycle and reviewers focused on a specific area of expertise.

Submitting your research to a conference may lead to valuable feedback, too, but there's a risk that submitting work-in-progress research can leave behind a poor impression to some of the reviewers. In consequence, these reviewers may be inclined to give rather terse/useless feedback.


Could I ask my supervisor to help me coding an implementation of a scientific paper's algorithm I am stuck at an implementation of a scientific paper's algorithm, could I ask help from staff to code a part with me or even my advisor to do so?
Thanks for the clarification.

I'd like to add to Buffy's answer and some of the comments: It does happen that the difficulty is in the paper rather than the one sitting before it.
I've had a situation where our Master student couldn't figure out how to get an algorithm from a paper working. Neither could I. We decided that they should go on and use a different approach.
I later on met some industry people on a conference who cited the very same paper for one of their products and talked to them about the paper. Turned out, neither had they succeeded with that algorithm...
As Buffy says, yes, do ask your supervisor. They anyways need to know of your difficulties.


In case I have to take a gap year before MS, what can I do in terms of reading and independent study to prepare for graduate school? I will be graduating with a BS in Computer Science in 2017 and have applied to a couple of graduate school to pursue MS in Biomedical Informatics/Bioinformatics. I'm interested in translational research and research in precision/personalized medicine. I am hoping to apply the computer science knowledge in developing pipelines that will facilitate the process of choosing best-fitting medicine/treatment for the patients.

I understand that admission is competitive and well aware that I have a chance of not getting into any of the school that I have applied to. (I have a 3.2 GPA in my BS, 70-75th percentile GRE, and some experience as an intern in my school's Department of Biomedical Informatics.)

My question is that in the worst case when I would have to wait until the following year to apply again (international student here), what would be the best way to prepare in the meantime in terms of reading journals and independent studies?

Try to get a lab position in your field as a tech - this will allow you to build exactly the type of experience that graduate schools will want, show your dedication and interest in the topic and give you the opportunity to build the type of relationships that lead to convincing recommendation letters.


Assigning additional reviewers? I have submitted a paper that I have written at a well-known journal and the current status is: Assigning additional reviewers. I have just submitted my paper last week. I am wondering why this is the case because from what I know, initially the associate editor assigns 2-3 reviewers and when they complete their reviews, if the editor feel that the reviews were not sufficient may assign additional reviewers. So why is my paper being assigned additional reviewers at the beginning of the review process? Thanks.

Speaking as an editor, two possibilities seem likely:

The journal website reports "additional reviewers" when more reviewers are assigned, even if the reviews are not returned yet.  Thus, it might be that 2 reviewers accepted invitations, 1 declined, and another invitation or two are outstanding, and this would still be reported as "assigning additional reviewers" because they system's not very subtle.
Some reviewers returned either very fast and contradictory or very fast and worthless reviews, and the editor is getting more to help resolve the decision.

Either way, don't fret about it: your paper is being handled, and there's nothing that you can or should do right now.


How to find exercise problems as a graduate student? I took my first graduate course as an undergrad last semester and it seemed that graduate student exams are much more open ended. Not only do they require you actually know more stuff (i.e. remember the theorem, the general approach) but they also require a lot more creativity, time management and general problem solving smarts.

But flipping open a text at the graduate level (Birkhauser, Springer-Verlag type), not only are most books filled with theorems, lemmas, proofs etc from head to toe, covering a very large array of concepts, but the much needed exercise at the end of the chapter is replaced with a list of references. Where are the exercises? And the course I took was sort of commonly taught I believe - stochastic networks.

I can see how this can be very problematic as one climb up the academic ladder. How would you ever find a text on "lower dimensional topology of autonomous robotic system", "Brain chaos in semi-aquatic faunas" or "Renal-sarcomere interaction theory" (three completely made up course).

How should graduate students approach a subject or an emerging field where there exercises scarce aside from what is introduced during the lecture or in existing literature?

First, let me reassure you that many graduate classes are similar to undergraduate classes, in that often there will be regular homeworks and plenty of exercises in the books, with undergrad style exams, just harder.  Of course, not all of them are like this--some are more like what you might think of as seminars, but this is sometimes true for undergrad classes as well.  It depends on both the level and the focus of the course.

As for how you find exercises, learning how to ask your own questions and find your own (typically terribly naive) understanding of a subject is a large part of becoming a researcher.  In graduate school, you should have an advisor who can help direct you with things and may suggest exercises or warm-up problems for you.

To give more a practical answer:

If a subject is fairly well studied, you should look for other books which may have exercises.
If there are no exercises, you can make your own by trying to come
up with your own proof, or working out things in special cases, such
as computing examples.
If it is a more recent area or specialized topic, where there are no
great texts, sometimes there may be good online notes from a course
or summer school someone has given.
Lastly, I think a great way to learn a topic is to start writing
your own notes on it, and this works well for advanced/specialized topics where exercises are hard to come by.  Trying to explain something to someone (even
yourself or a vague nonexistent reader) forces you to ask yourself
basic questions about the topic, which helps you understand both the
ideas involved and larger context.


How should I respond to someone's research "elevator pitch"? I am starting my PhD in cosmology in October of this year. I have already met some of the older PhD students and postdocs in the department where I will be studying, and I am going to be attending two summer schools before I start the PhD where I will meet more new people, from other institutions.

It seems a natural conversation opener to ask people what their research is about or what they are working on at the moment, and in response I generally get their 1-2 minute elevator pitch summarising their work.

My question is: what questions are best to ask them to keep the conversation going after they have given this spiel when I am a novice in the field?

I don't want to squander what could lead to a valuable discussion, but at the moment I can do very little except make some banal comment such as "that sounds interesting..." and let the discussion drift away from the nitty-gritty details of the field, because most of the time the things they tell me about are completely new to me (but presumably old hat to them).

I don't feel that I know my own topic well enough yet to explain it properly in return- so what could I say instead?

what questions are best to ask them to keep the conversation going after they have given this spiel when I am a novice in the field?

You're overthinking this. Pretend it's a conversation between human beings: do you have a question about what they said? Ask it. Don't you have any question or you find their research topic utterly boring? Change topic of conversation. Exactly as you would do with anyone else.

Summer schools frequently have students with different backgrounds and from different countries; you will be all in the same situation, and for most of you it will be a new place: there will certainly be things around you that can be subject of conversation.

As for your last question:

  I don't feel that I know my own topic well enough yet to explain it properly in return- so what could I say instead?

Tell the truth: That you're going to start your PhD on topic X, that you like it for reason Y, but you still don't know much about it because you just started and that you will be super-happy if you can meet someone there working on the same topic.


Does switching majors look bad for graduate admissions? Here's my situation: I've want to get into a master's or PhD level program in biomedical engineering. However, the college I go to does not offer a biomedical engineering degree. So, out of the options I was given and at a advice of my advisor, I decided to major in chemical engineering degree.
I pursued research with a professor in the chemical engineering department and was preparing to take the GRE. Once, I got to my actual Chemical engineering courses in the second semester of my sophomore year. I really ended up disliking my courses and not doing well in them (I got mostly Bs and two Cs and it's my fault). I went to my academic advisor for advice on the situation and I was told that the average GPA for the chemical engineering class was a 3.2, and that it's really hard for people to make a high enough GPA in this major to get into graduate school and the my grades are what most people make in the classes.
I don't know if this is the standard for engineering or something but it feels really discouraging to me cause it feels like I can't fix my grades and grind through to get a good enough GPA to just get into graduate school. I like my research, but I'm unable to handle the rigor and intensity of my chemical engineering engineering classes despite reaching out to my professors and my university's tutoring center. I feel like me not liking the major is also a major factor in why I am unable to pass my classes. I will be a junior this year.
Should I just stick it out with this major that I don't like at this point and work harder to keep up my grades since I will be doing BME master's anyway? I really want to get into a good masters program for biomedical engineering, but I really dislike my current major. Would changing majors hurt my graduate school admission chances?

TLDR: You should switch majors
Engineering (of any kind) is hard. If you are excited about it and love it, then putting in the work is possible.  But if you hate the classes, you are going to find it very hard to be motivated enough to do the work needed to get As.
And you do want As for grad school. One bad semester won't kill your grad school chances.  Four more bad semesters in a row will.
Either Electrical or Mechanical are both good starting points for BME (just as good as if not better than Chemical).  Pick whichever you suits you best and switch.


Equipment/Computer Budgets for CS PhD Students I plan on attending graduate school in computer science next year (fall 2020 semester).

In a computer science (or related field like software engineering) PhD program, is it standard to furnish graduate students with a "work computer", separate from a personal laptop purchased out of pocket, for conducting research?

I want to know if I'll have to shell out some cash for a beefier laptop or if computing resources are usually provided. If so, what computing resources are available (either as cash/budgeted money or as computers PhD students can use), and where does the funding usually come from?

This answer is based on my experience in France and Ireland. I would assume that it's similar at least in other European countries [please edit or comment if I'm wrong].

In computer science PhD students are usually provided with everything they need to do their work including (at least) a desktop computer, office space, and generally there is also a budget for traveling to conferences. Depending on the country they might have the status of staff member or not, but even if not the working conditions are very similar to those one would expect in a regular job (well, an academic job, don't expect too much!).

The budget related to equipment/travel is usually a part of the PhD funding which is given to the institution, as opposed to the main funding which is a grant or salary given to the PhD student. The budget for traveling/accommodation is usually the most limited part, it might even happen that there's no budget at all for this. It's a good idea to ask the supervisor about it at the beginning in order to submit papers to conferences in a sensible way: it's a shame to have a paper accepted but find oneself unable to attend the conference.

PS: in terms of computer equipment, in computer science it's also common to be provided with an access to some kind of high performance cluster.


Major fallacy in accepted manuscript I have submitted a manuscript around two months ago. The reviewers gave me generally good comments, and the editor suggested "minor revision".

Problem is, I think the main part of my manuscript have a big problem. I am currently making further readings into the subject and delving deeper into the math. All previous research suggest that I am giving an incomplete solution, resulting eventually in an inaccurate simulation.

Although I have a large mistake in the manuscript. This mistake if corrected will support my results even more (Lucky me).

I will tell the editor of course about the mistake, but I need time to correct my simulation, manuscript etc...

My questions are:

1- Can I ask the editor form more time?

2- Will the editor reject my paper because it have a major mistake?

The answers are yes and yes. But for most purposes more like yes and unlikely.

You can ask for time. It may be possible to get time or not. For a conference it is harder, of course, especially when there is some uncertainty about when it will really be finished. For a journal asking for time might cause minor disruption, but it would likely only result in getting published in a later issue of the journal.

But the editor can also ask that the paper be withdrawn and resubmitted when it is complete. That is up to them. If they thought the paper was originally good, then they are more likely to work with you.

And be sure to indicate that the paper will be improved, not just corrected.


Two PhD's in different UK universities, simultaneously, part-time: absurd idea? I have what might seem like the nicest problem in the world: I've got offered funding for both of my dream PhD's. I am stunned, incredulous, gobsmacked, but also deeply confused: both are with supervisors I would absolutely love to work with, both are topics that genuinely fascinate me. Having to choose one feels like Sophie's choice to me - as soon as I imagine choosing one I start grieving the other.
My question is, would it be madness to switch to part-time mode and pursue both? One is funded by ESRC and the other one, by AHRC; there are parallels in the subject matter but the projects and research methods are completely different, so there is no way I could unite the two (although my two prospective supervisors know and extensively quote each other). The field is humanities (cultural/visual studies in one case, same but with a good dash of social sciences in the other).
Thank you!

Andrew mostly covered why this is administratively impossible, but I think it's also worth addressing the misunderstanding of what a Ph.D. is embedded in this question.  Pete Clark said it better than I can, but Ph.D.'s are not merit badges.  More is not better.  Getting a Ph.D. on one of these topics will not stop you from working on the other.  Working with one of these advisors officially will not stop you from staying in touch with the other, and potentially collaborating in the future.  You want to have ideas about other stuff to work on once you finish your dissertation.

I don't envy having to make the choice, and you will have to close one the doors part of the way to actually finish your degree.  But you don't have to slam it all the way shut, and you never know when ideas you know thought you had set to the side will come right back to you.