How to practice alone for a presentation? I am well aware that, when it comes to preparing to give a talk at a conference, "practice makes perfect". The problem is that, realistically, it tends not to be possible to find an audience for more than one or two run-throughs, so the only remaining possibility is to practice on my own.

Unfortunately, I have always found this to be basically impossible – it's very hard for me to get over how weird it feels to be "talking to myself", and if I do try to force myself to proceed, I always find myself getting horrendously tongue-tied in ways that I don't in front of a live audience. This almost seems like the opposite problem from what many people experience, but I find that the presence of an audience gives me energy and helps to get my brain in gear. I'm curious as to whether other people have the same problem and possible techniques for practicing more effectively.

Perhaps you are practicing the wrong thing.  If in fact you have no trouble speaking smoothly when you are front of a live audience, then you don't need to practice that.  You may need to practice how you 'enter' a slide (what concept or thought you will discuss first), or how to transition to the next slide (what is the final concept or thought, and how does it connect with the next thing you want to talk about).  You may need to practice what words you say in the introduction... you don't want to make that up on the fly.

In other words, do what professional musicians do.  They rarely play an entire piece through during practice, but instead repeat the challenging sections.

With the goal of working out the words you will use in the tricky parts, practice will feel less artificial and more productive.  Don't sweat the pieces you already know.  At the end, do a dry-run with an audience to test the timing and the flow.


After a PhD in biotechnology/engineering - more opportunities in industry or a postdoc positions? Currently, my fiancee are both currently pursuing our PhD's in bioengineering and materials science and engineering, respectively, at the same university. She wants to eventually have an industrial research position and I want to do a post-doc with the intention becoming a professor. We are ~3 years away from needing to have the serious version of this conversation, but which route of the two would be the bottleneck in our eventual decision? Are there more industrial jobs available than post-doc positions? Are there any other dual-academic-career couples out there with advice for us? I hope the content of this question is appropriate for this stackexchange. Thanks so much.

I don't know much about bioengineering and materials sciences. In my area (CS) there are many more industrial positions available than academic positions.

However, industrial positions often tend be clustered in regions, and there might not be too many academic jobs in those regions (or they might be very highly competitive).

Sadly though, I suspect that basing your decisions on where you might do a postdoc is a problem, because a postdoc itself is a temporary position, and so you're really only deferring the real problem. One argument would be that if postdocs in your area take a while (say 3-4 years vs 1-2), then you might as well operate as if that were the permanent job, and then reevaluate after your time is done and you're on the academic job market.

Good luck: two-body problems are tricky, and when one partner is on the academic track it gets even trickier.


Meaning of 'high-level overview' in a Maths talk? I am a first year Maths PhD student in Singapore.
As I am going to give my first talk at a Mathematics conference soon, I look for  some tips on how to give a good talk.
While googling,  I come across Terrence Tao's blog post entitled 'talks are not the same as paper'.
In the post, he stated in third paragraph that,

  Instead, a talk should complement a paper by providing a high-level and more informal overview of the same material, especially for the more standard or routine components of the argument; this allows one to channel more of the audience’s attention onto the most interesting or important components, which can be described in more detail.

I have difficulty understanding the meaning of 'high-level'.

An illustrative example:
Let's say you have been working for a very long time on a great paper in which you finally manage to construct a widget which has some amazing properties, which have important consequences for some other area of math.

Now, most of the paper consists of the construction which is extremely deep and technical (this is, after all, why nobody else had been able to construct this widget before you).

To give a high level overview of your work, you need to talk mainly about what the widget does, rather than how it is constructed. Talk about these properties and the amazing consequences to other areas in generic terms that can be understood by everyone.

Maybe towards the end, you can talk a bit about the construction. But you should still keep it high-level, meaning that you can talk for example about the main ingredients ("we use a construction analogous to the one for constructing wadgets, but whack it with a hammer in certain places to make it fit our needs"). But leave out any actual technical details.


Is this level of publication politics normal in academia? I'm currently finishing up a master's thesis in computer science/applied mathematics and have for the last few years been sure of my goals: to pursue a PhD.

The decision to do a PhD or not should largely be a function of your research potential. There's a lot of questions of the "am I good enough for a PhD" sort, but my concerns are of the opposite flavor. I'm fairly convinced that I would make an able researcher, based on discussions with several members of faculty and my output record thus far.

Lately, I've gotten a taste of academia's backside. There's the general record padding done by a fraction of faculty: publishing/coauthoring stuff they KNOW have no novel content, blatant reciprocal out-of-context citations and stuff like that. This strategizing almost seems to spill over into the problem selection process as well - a good problem is one that has potential for publication quantity first and foremost.

Not all professors do it, so I guess I could live with it. What's worse is the attitude from what is supposed to be peers. PhD students who I've proposed ideas to pitching them as their own to their supervisors. Others acting threatened and stand-offish, leading to awkward social situations. There's much less free exchange of ideas and much more politics than I thought.

It seems like such a cynical culture at times. Most of the professors are great, but I don't know if I'd want to enter academia if this is a typical situation between peers. So my question is: is this really typical? Am I being unreasonable in expecting less politics between peers? Is it possible to work in this sort of atmosphere without becoming part of it?

When it comes to a workplace, politics is inevitable. There are always bias in opinions, bureaucratic criteria that are bendable to some, possible hierarchical influence. These are all common in almost any workplace (at least AFAIK). Academia is no different in this case. There are people who prefer quantity over quality and some others the other way around.

At times, the level at which you could be a part of this depends. You may be able to avoid in being a part of this to some extent, but you may have to witness this nonetheless.


On-campus vs Online master's degree In my country where I come from, online or part-time or even more, part-time online degrees are not comparable with on-campus full-time degrees. The difference in the value of the degree/diploma is huge, in the depth and breadth of the studied material and recognition from prospective employers.

Is it true for US education? Would a part-time student who earns his/her degree 100% online cover the same exact material than another student who is studying the same program but full-time and on-campus?

Do US employers favor on-campus graduates over online part-time graduates?

For many years on-line (a/k/a, "distance learning") degrees have been offered by regionally accredited universities In the USA. Until a decade or so ago, most of the degrees were earned by schools that specialized in distance learning. Even graduates of schools that had physical campuses and regional accreditation who studied full-time on campus were perceived as having earned their degrees through distance learning. Over the course of many decades with little or no government regulations, legitimate distance learning programs were viewed as "mail order" degrees and thus, looked down upon by brick and mortar schools as well as the business world. Schools often refused to accept transfer credits or admit holders of such degrees into their graduate programs. Employers, at least of top firms tended to reject such job applicants.

In more recent years however, many top tier universities have been offering on-line degrees adding legitimacy. American institutions of higher learning are slow to adapt new methodologies but are beginning to recognize we have already passed through the "Information Age."

So Daveel, I would say that if you earn your degree from a top tier university and your diploma does not make note that the degree is from the school's on-line division, your degree will increase its likelihood of being accepted in both the academic and business worlds. This is especially true of earned degrees in areas that are a natural match for on-line study, namely anything that has to do with computers.

Daveel, I suggest that you do an internet search on the history of distance learning. You will better understand the negative views that were held in the not so distant past. I would also highly suggest that you discuss the validity of such a degree with people in position to make such judgments. This specifically means academics people who hire professors in universities and human resource managers who are responsible for hiring in your intended field. If your degree is intended to be used for licensing purposes, contact the government agency that sets the licensing requirements. They will be the ones who can best answer your question.

Best wishes to you Daveel.


Could I list the conference that I didn't attend in the PhD application system even I got my paper accepted? I am applying for a Ph.D. position in a university. Their system required me to fill in the conferences I attended.
I published my paper on one conference although I didn't attend it personally for some reasons. My advisor went on my behalf. However, if I denied that I had attended that conference, the system doesn't even allow me to upload my paper. I think the paper is an important proof of my research ability.
What should I do? Should I just pretend I attended it. I don't even think they will really check about this thing.

In general, no. If they ask you to specify a list of attended conferences, then a conference that you didn't attend doesn't belong in your answer, even if your paper was accepted. Claiming that you attended the conference  would be incorrect and could lead to problems if someone found out.

Normally, you should be able to get credit for your accepted conference paper in another category, where you're asked for a list of your peer-reviewed articles.

However, the form could be designed in a way which neglects the existence of peer-reviewed conference papers. For example, you might be asked for a list for your journal articles only, because the form designers were unaware of fields in which journal articles are not the only kind of peer-reviewed publications. In this case, you should seek contact to the admission committee and ask how to proceed.


What is the difference between TV-L E13 and TV-L E14 positions? Is it negotiable? I am trying to wrap my head around the German research system since I have an offer for a position. I understand the TV-L concept, and that you can go up a step depending on your prior relevant experience.

I do not however understand what distinguishes the TV-L E13 from TV-L E14 positions for postdocs. What are the differences and is it something that you can negotiate with the institute (seeing as TV-L E14 is better paid)? Sounds like there should be a difference somehow.

In my case, I have a 4.5-year-long PhD and an additional 4 years of research experience. If my understanding of the documents is correct, I would land in Grade (Stufe) 3, is that correct? If not, could anyone elaborate on how the prior experience is calculated for this purpose?

EDIT: the follow-up is now moved to a separate question

The key difference between a TVL E13 and E14 position would be the job responsibilities and required qualifications. In an academic context, E13 positions are for researchers at graduate or post-graduate level working under supervision. E14 positions have a higher responsibility in the sense that these would typically include project leadership and / or supervision tasks. Typical academic roles that should be filled at the level of an E14 position would be group leaders, principal investigators of projects, research lab managers, or just someone supervising graduate or other post-graduate researchers. Nevertheless, someone working in these roles may still get only E13 due to budget reasons.

If the position you have an offer for includes tasks at E14 level, then it certainly is something that can be asked for. Whether or not it will be possible to make it E14 will mostly depend on how the position is being funded. It may be that this was specifically budgeted as an E13 position, and then it will be difficult to change that through negotiations from your side. If the position was announced specifically as E13 then it may be a high administrative hurdle to change that. However, if the funding is just a bunch of money without detailed budget plan, it may be easier to get it as an E14 position. Especially if it is only for few years, the total salary spent need not be much higher in E14 compared to E13 because you would likely start in a lower grade (Stufe).

Regarding the grade I think that indeed with more than 8 years of research experience you should definitely get Stufe 3 in E13. The number of years could even be enough for Stufe 4, but I've heard that new hires will usually get Stufe 3 at most. However, if you get an E14 position, then I guess that you can just get Stufe 1 or maybe 2, depending on whether you have some prior experience with the E14 type of tasks I mentioned above.

As a side note, there is also the possibility to start in E13 and then being promoted to E14 if job responsibilities are accordingly and the budget is available. In that case, one would get the lowest grade in E14 where the salary is still at least as high as in the most recent E13 grade one has achieved.


How can I determine whether a conference is reputable? I recently received an invitation to a conference and I'm trying to determine how reputable it is. Is there a good way to go about this?

I'm assuming you are really asking how to check whether a conference is reputable (meaning not a scam), not how to check whether a conference is actually good.

Short answer: If you don't recognize the conference or its organizers, stay away.

You should already know a relatively short list of established, reputable conferences in your research area.  If you don't, ask your advisor to give you such a list.  (If your advisor doesn't know, you need a new advisor.)

If this conference isn't on that list, it might still be reputable, but either very new or slightly outside your research area.  In that case, take a serious look at the organizing committee.  If the members of the organizing committee are well-known active researchers, the conference is probably fine.  Otherwise, it's probably a scam.

You mention that you were invited to submit to the conference.  At least in computer science, such invitations are almost unheard of; conferences are normally advertised by impersonal calls for papers.  Did the invitation come from someone you already know, at least professionally?  Does the invitation mention specific technical details of your work (more than just a paper title)?  If you answered "No" to both these questions, the conference is almost certainly a scam.


can I take parts from my thesis (different language) to be used in a paper without paraphrasing? My PhD thesis is in French, can I take parts from it, just translate them to English (without any paraphrasing) and use them in my next paper? would this cause any plagiarism issues?

Reference them as normal - plagiarism is not limited to words but ideas so proper attribution is the way to go.


Is it impolite to not to respond to professors' replying email asap? I emailed to a professor about a research question. In most cases I reply to them asap. In some scenarios I think I cannot do this asap because:

He asked me a very difficult question that takes a long time to get an answer.
I don't have any further questions for now. But I might have them in the future.
He does not show any interests on me. He's response is professional yet short (little interests). He does not ask me any questions. I don't have too much to say.

From what I read on this site, people seem to suggest that, since a professor reads thousands of emails, I should not bother to send another email unless it includes a considerable amount of new information.
However, my advisor told the contrary: to show respects, I should almost always send the last email: professors can ignore me but I cannot ignore them. For example, in case 1 I can say that "I will spend more time on this problem", in case 2&3 I can say that “Thank you for your answers. May I email you again if I have other questions later?". My advisor said something like: although everyone is equal, there is still a hidden "hierarchy" thing: lower people are expected to show more respects and do more works to maintain the relationships. I think he is trying to be honest here.
What is the standard etiquette in USA?

In the US, many professors really don’t like the idea that students tremble in fear at any interaction with them, and/or regard them as a class of semi-divine beings who need to be constantly flattered and paid homage to. Any idea that the student’s actions are motivated by ideas like

“hierarchy”

“I should not bother to send another email unless it includes a considerable amount of new information”

“I should almost always send the last email”

“professors can ignore me but I cannot ignore them”

“lower people are expected to show more respects and do more works to maintain the relationships”

“Is it impolite to not to respond to professors' replying email asap?”

etc

will be seen as upsetting and in many cases offensive to such professors.
The standard etiquette in the US is therefore to treat the professor with the same respect and professionalism that you yourself expect to be treated with (and that any professional person ought to expect to be treated with) by anyone in a professional working environment. That is, if the context of the email requires an urgent response, then you should answer with a corresponding urgency and immediacy; and if it doesn’t, then you should answer within a time frame that makes sense for that context. The fact that you are a student emailing a professor has no effect on whether the time interval to answer an email is polite or impolite.


What is the best way to motivate teaching assistants? I am head TA in a 300-student class, with 12 other TAs.  Currently I do the following things to motivate my TAs:

We have an internal Slack channel called #shoutouts where I mention TAs every time I notice them going above and beyond.
I post Piazza statistics to the Slack channel every week so that we can see who is posting the most, and then rank TAs in order of how much they posted (currently, a lot of students say that Piazza is very helpful)
I post grading statistics to the Slack channel so that people can see who grades the most (and least) submissions, and what is the average grade they give.
I have a feedback form for students to give feedback to the course staff, and I send a message to the #shoutouts channel every time a student says a TA has been especially helpful.
I tell TAs they are getting evaluated by the instructor (which I think a lot of the TAs didn't know).

However, I have been told (by someone not involved with the class) that I am "overquantifying" things.  Also, even with all of this, there are four people who I would describe as "bad TAs" (and five people who I would describe as excellent TAs, and three people who I would describe as good TAs).

What are your best ways of motivating TAs?

I think the best way to motivate a person in academia is to give them a bit of job security, some funding which enables them to follow their interests, and a great team to work with. I am not sure if you can realistically give "your(sic!) TAs" any of this.

In absence of solid motivating factors, you are trying to engage the team in some form of internal competition, which may motivate some people and completely put off others. For example, I personally would be puzzled as to why should I compete for some statistics or evaluations which look rather meaningless unless it has any effect on my promotion or chances of future employment.

Most people I worked with responded well to:

smart goals
positive example
cutting the crap (including crap meetings)

In my experience, teaching is rather a pleasant activity and there is a lot of gratification in the  process of working with students. An excessive amount of paperwork, bureaucracy and management can only spoil the fun.


What to do: PI lied to me and is keeping my grant! I've written 14 grants for my principal investigator (PI), from conception to writing the entire thing, which has resulted in over $10 million in funding for my PI.

I refused to write any more grants for him; however, he threatend to fire me if I didn't. I was fine with that, at which point my boss told me that if I wrote the 14th grant and we got it, I could take it with me.

Well, I did and we did get it.
Now he's refusing to give it to me, threatened to fire a technician/friend of mine, and has insisted that we got the grant because of his name (not the idea/grant itself). He knew his name was there from the beginning — how can he argue that at this time? This grant would have been submitted as a K99 for myself, but instead I had written another, independent grant thinking I'd have two shots to get a grant. I didn't get the K99, but the other grant should be mine.

This is/was my key to obtaining a faculty position. I also have previously filed an initial patent form indicating that the idea was conceived and developed by me. I'm on the grant as co-investigator (my boss said I cannot be listed as a Co-PI since I work in his lab) but no budget has been given in my name.

What should I do?

I believe that you need to obtain qualified and competent legal advice, not just anonymous advice from a Stack Exchange site.

However, there are some obvious things you can do:

Make sure you have meticulous records of everything you claimed, including the previous grant proposals, showing that you were the one responsible for their execution.
You really need to have some form of hard evidence that the PI promised you could keep the grant you earned.
Make sure everything you do from here on is also documented.

But this is a tough situation, and I'm not sure what your options outside of the legal system will be. You might also want to contact the grant sponsor to see what your options are.


How do academics control their own biases? As an academic, you are in the business of producing research. I know it might sound odd to call it a "business", but frankly, you get paid to do it, and most of you wouldn't do it if you didn't get paid, hence it is a business and you're selling a product (your research) to your clients (the rest of society) and you get paid a price for that product (grants and aid and donations and other types of support from governments and other institutions).
This means that there is a danger that your research output is driven by a self-serving bias. After all, the 'better' research you produce (as in, research that draws a lot of attention), the more of it you will sell and the more money you will make.
How do academics controls themselves for this bias, that may be occurring consciously or subconsciously?
One might say that peer-reviewing solves this exact problem, but I fear that all peer-reviewing accomplishes is moving the goalpost. Okay, so now the bias of the lone researcher is being controlled, but who controls the biases of the peers? After all, this bias is an industry-wide phenomenon. Your peers, the ones that review your research, have the exact same bias as you do, and are also interested in seeing your research be validated if it brings more attention to your field, a field which is obviously shared between you and your peers.
Hence the bias affects you all at the same time. Who is controlling that? Is there a 3rd party? If not, how do academics, as a group, control themselves?
Obviously, this question is more pertinent for less fact-based fields, so not for example mathematics, where if a wrong theorem is approved, it would be catastrophic and probably discovered soon enough, to the shame of all people involved. But for more experimental fields such as physics, medicine, etc., how do academics ensure that there isn't a cartel of researchers some where all (sub)consciously agreeing to promote research that advances their careers?

Everything is in the end vetted by the community and by time.
Many researchers were fooled by their biases (including Galilei or Millikan who did systematic errors in their studies) and the biases were slowly uncovered by time. This is normal. Of course, a good researcher, as Feynman says, needs to take care not to fool themselves, and good researchers work hard to do so. In the end, however, it is time and the scientific community that filters out the wheat from the chaff.
One key thing to maximize your objectivity is to avoid p-hacking. Be aware what your hypothesis is before you run the experiment. Be aware of what parameters you extract from the experiment and how to factor them into your evaluation of the theoretical vs. experimental model.
Try to have at least two maximally independent ways of getting to a critical result. Understand the assumptions that got you a result.
Taking care of these various things will minimize the probability (it will never entirely go away) that you fool yourself and increase your confidence that you have done a proper job at doing good science.


Is it a good idea to apply for PhD in Econ before finishing my Msc in Economics first? Ok so I am currently pursuing a Msc in Economics with a research distinction in Norway. I just finished my first year of studies and my grades are competitive. All A's except of a B. I have 2 more semesters to graduate meaning May 2020. Also, I have a Bachelors degree (3.42 gpa) in Finance from a well respected university in USA. Throughout my first year of Masters I took classes that revolved heavily in math topics that most universities require from students (time series analysis, multivariable calculus, econometrics, also im proficient in stata and R.)

My dream is to get accepted into a top 20 PhD program in USA and I was thinking if I should apply this upcoming fall or not. The deadline for most US university is Dec 15th 2019. I have done some research and I saw that universities require some research experience which is something that I dont have so far. I am going to acquire this experience in the final semester of my masters by presenting my thesis. Unfortunately, the application period will be closed by the time I present my thesis. So, should I wait out one year in order to present my thesis along with my application or should I apply this fall?  Are the universities aware of such circumstances? I dont want to hurt my chances of acceptance but also I really dont like having to wait out another year before starting my PhD.

Thanks!

Actually, it is the perfect time to apply for a start date of Fall 2020. Your background sounds pretty solid, but only the institutions will provide valid judgements on that. Waiting will only put off your possible acceptance by a year.

Don't worry about the current "lack" of research experience. It is pretty normal at your stage for applicants to US institutions.

Make your best case in any application. Show that you are a solid candidate with a high likelihood of success.

Note that most US doctoral programs are willing to accept candidates with only an undergraduate education. Of course at the top end of the scale the competition is fierce.


Advisor retirement while finishing doctorate on limited time constraint I am a doctorate student in mathematics, having returned to finish my Ph.D after a long absence. Four years after my initial departure, I returned after gaining maturity in the working world and rekindling a personal interest in higher-level math, and to become competitive for work nearer to home.

Since I was restarting with a long-tarnished reputation, but since my advisor was very forgiving and gracious, I was allowed to conditionally resume my degree under extremely stringent conditions, which I met - I passed tough qualifiers and I completed my coursework in a short frame of time on my own dime while maintaining full-time work.

Following completing my qual and degree program requirements, I began to focus strongly on my research in order to complete the dissertation. I recently passed my preliminary oral exam for my dissertation in May, spent the first half of the summer reviewing additional papers for my writing, and commenced writing my dissertation formally in July with hopes on a December graduation.

The trouble began anew when my advisor retired suddenly in August. Although I had been updating him on my progress and asking him for advice while writing, finding time to meet with him became problematic, as he started to become absent and increasingly difficult to reach and schedule with. However, his "hands off" approach had me still writing, and I had a substantial amount of work to review and share with him, and he agreed to meet with me yesterday.

That meeting yesterday was when disaster happened. I noticed that he had become very temperamental; he was highly critical of what little he let me present to him, and overtly stated that he was not going to waste his time and read what I had written. The solutions that I was able to present to him were dismissed out of hand without any further explanation, and his first statement was to tell me to trash everything I had written and start from scratch (even though he didn't read it or hear anything but a small portion of it).

As the (heated) four hour conversation progressed, he jumped from clear and reasonable critique to complete incoherency, which I found unusual and hard to incorporate moving forward.

When the conversation concluded, I realized that he had in mind a different dissertation problem for me to solve, one that wasn't even covered in my preliminary exam in May.

He stated that I had until the end of the weekend to clean up my writing, make it presentable, and incorporate the new problem he presented, adding three extra tasks to boot (one of which he had never required me to research before). I am to send the writing to my committee at the end of the weekend and have them evaluate its status.

I mentioned that while my work has substance and progress, it was not complete and organized (that's why I visited him in person), and that my final oral exam was supposed to be the point of my committee's evaluation, not when the writing is still in media res. Without his confidence, my committee will not grant scheduling my final oral, and will likely not take the time to read what I send until they hear the word from my advisor anyway. He didn't care.

In short, this unexpected, sudden, and strange conflict with my advisor has suddenly put my graduation in heavy jeopardy with respect to the stringent deadlines imposed by the Grad College for December graduation (due to my long absence), has put new my job at risk (since obtaining a Ph.D was part of the hiring requirements for contract renewal next year), invalidates three years of hard work to rebuild my formerly tarnished status after my long absence, wastes the tens of thousands of dollars I paid out of pocket to do this, and permanently ends my twenty-year dream of obtaining a Ph.D.

Thank you for listening and for offering whatever advice you offer. I am at the end of my rope and feel powerless, worthless, and hopeless.

The most promising strategy is to work with at least one committee member other than your advisor. The first choice may be the one that is a potential advisor, but you really need someone who is both approachable and good at academic politics.

Anyone like that is going to be very busy, and you need most of the meeting to be about them advising you and thinking of ways to improve the situation. You must strip your wall of text down to a few key points:

You are on a tight academic deadline, because credits will disappear if you do not graduate this year, and you will not be able to finish your PhD if you cannot meet the deadline.
Finishing the PhD is personally and financially important to you.
You proceeded with the research presented at your preliminary oral exam, which you thought had been approved.
You have been having trouble getting feedback from your advisor.
At your recent meeting, you had trouble communicating with him, and he seemed to be requiring a change in research line that would make completing the PhD impossible.

Two topics to not discuss: Your prior performance, and the advisor's personal issues. The professors should be dealing with the person you are now. What matters is your current difficulty with your advisor, not the reasons behind it.


How do I salvage a 1-week old research internship offer, if possible? I'm a pre-university individual.

About a week ago I cold-emailed university professors inquiring about interning at their biology research labs. A professor replied on the same day expressing possibility of an interview. He also made it clear it would be unpaid - which, after some thought, I've decided I'm fine with. Long story short, I was stupid and indecisive, and only emailed him back a week later, with an email looking along the lines of:

  Dear Associate Professor X,

  I'm really sorry for the delayed response; I’d hoped to get back to
  you sooner. I've thought about this. I very much am grateful for your
  kind willingness to consider and would be pleased to meet up with you
  to better present myself, and work something out together.

  If it's not too late, when would you be free to meet? I promise not to
  dillydally again. I am free this entire week. Just let me know a time
  that works best for you.

  Yours sincerely,

  Las Nons

It's been about 2 days since I sent this reply, and he hasn't gotten back to me. When he first replied to me, it was on the same day I had sent him my first email.

Looking at my reply, I realize I forgot to thank him (for his time and consideration) at the end of the email. Ending my email off the way I did could have made me seem entitled/presumptuous.

Dear reader, was my reply rude/presumptuous? I'm really worried I've offended him somehow. I'm thinking of waiting a day more, then sending him a follow-up email that includes an apology or something. Should I?

Is this a gone case? What could I do to salvage this?

Thank you all for any input.

The message you sent has a sufficiently professional tone that I wouldn't worry about it. While it would be better in general to thank the person for their interest it doesn't seem like a big issue here. In particular since you were a bit self deprecating in your tone.

But a couple of days is nothing in academic time. That is always true, but especially now when people may be struggling with finding creative ways to teach without having student present. Since the offer wouldn't become "live" until August you have some time to wait.


Which e-mail address should I give for a recommender in an application? For an application, I have to fill in the contact information of somebody who wrote me a recommendation letter. The person owns three e-mail accounts: permanent (on Gmail), my university’s e-mail service and another university’s e-mail service (where he is the chairman).

So, I feel a little bit confused which e-mail address would be best to give? Does it matter at all?

I know some universities that prefer email addresses that demonstrate the university affiliations of your referees, so that they know the letters will actually come from the listed referees rather than the student pretending to be the referees with a free gmail account. If the referee has multiple university affiliations, then I would recommend the one associated with the university in which you and the referee became acquainted with each other. For example, if you did an internship with a professor at university B, even though the professor holds a tenure position at university A as well, it is better to use the email address of university B in such a situation.

Of course, some professors do not use the mail account provided by the universities, and thus you should consult with your referee first to make sure that you give the email address that the referee actually checks.


Realistic time frame for GRE scores to appear in My GRE account I'm looking to take the GRE soon, and wondering what is the realistic timeline in your experience for the scores to appear in the My GRE account.

ETS states scores take 10-15 days for scores to appear. I've read on other forums that it takes considerably less time than that.

My program allows reporting of the official score, and allows ETS to submit the GRE upon admission.

Thanks

I believe, 3-4 years ago (woah...) when I took the test, it took approximately a month for the scores to appear. When you leave the test they will give you a score right there for the math and reading portions of the exam-- they state that these may change, but from what I've heard, and my own experience, they don't.

Things may have changed since I took it, however. Although, since human graders are still required for the writing portion, I doubt it.


How is Google Scholar changing academic evaluation? Google Scholar is making it very easy to track (their measure of) citation counts, h-index, etc. for individual researchers. Is this changing how academics are evaluated? Do tenure committees now bring up google scholar profiles, or do they continue to prefer other sources for citation data? Is there pressure to make your Google Scholar profile public?

Yes, promotion and hiring committees look at Google Scholar, especially in fields like computer science where Google's citation data is more comprehensive than other sources like Scopus, which misses many citations of and by conference papers.  In this respect, Google Scholar hasn't really changed the way people are evaluated, though; we've just replaced one unreliable (and expensive) source of questionable statistical data with a slightly less unreliable (and free) source for almost (but not quite) the same data.

Much more importantly, though, Google Scholar makes it easier to find electronic copies of papers, which makes it easier for committees to judge each candidate's work directly.  In this respect, Google Scholar has had a significant impact.


Can two people use the results of their publication for their theses? I've been working on a case study paper with a colleague, who is the first name on the paper. He is writing his PhD thesis and I am writing my MSc. thesis under the supervision of the same advisor.

Is it okay both of us to use the same results/findings of this paper in our theses?

Advisor told me that this is not okay and added that even if the other guy would be okay with that, he didn't accept this.

At the time that I will be defending my thesis, the paper wouldn't be published yet. The PhD guy will be defending after me in the future.

What is wrong with that? People cite other people's work and use them in their theses. Why is it  not accepted for me to use the results of the paper that I am contributing?

This depends on your country and university regulations, etc. In general you can use the results of your papers in your thesis but e.g. in my case (Europe) if I would use a paper that I only co-authored I would have to indicate what I did myself and what was done by the other author(s).

On one hand it would not be understandable to me if you could not cite a paper in your thesis (and you should be able to also indicate that you are one of the authors and that you did this and that in the paper). Citing papers in other papers/books/thesis is something you should do to clearly state where the results you are using come from (unless it is a textbook stuff).

If you are about to copy-paste parts of the paper or the whole paper then yes, this may be different and could strongly depend on your university regulations and I expect you would be at least required to clearly state what you did yourself.

On the other hand it is probably never a good idea to go against your advisor directly. Ask him/her about this, say what would you like to do with the paper, hear them out in detail what is the problem with that and propose a solution. If this is a case of regulations then there is no going against it as you would only harm yourself. If this is the case of ethics then your advisor should and hopefully will explain the situation - that is also what advisors are for, or at least should be.

I would like to give you a better answer but at this point I really miss the background and big picture to do so.


Requesting a favor from student for giving recommendation letters Can I ask/ insist a bright undergraduate student (who is having similar areas of interest) to work under me for his final year project period and try to come up with a scientific publication in favor for giving him recommendation letters for internships?

It sounds like what you want to do is to write a letter now in exchange for the promise that they will work for you later. Whether you can do this is down to your university's rules, but I would argue that it is unethical and unwise to coerce a student in this way.

My recommendation would be to accede to the request and make the offer

  Sure, I can write you a strong letter. For that matter, if you are looking for research experience, I would be happy to supervise your senior project next year. Let's chat sometime if you are interested.

If you are not willing to write the letter:

  My policy is to only write recommendation letters for students who do research with me. That said, I'd be happy to discuss hiring you as a research assistant next year.

Note, this second one still links the two, but it simply tells the student your requirements, rather than suggesting quid pro quo.


How to persuade someone to not pursue a PhD just because they failed to find a job? I have a friend who is unable to find a job in the industry. He's a fresh university graduate. He's now applying for a PhD position because he's found a supervisor. I have every reason to suspect that he wouldn't enjoy the degree because:

He's very good at memorizing text-books and past-exams, but never able to come up with a solution independently.
He doesn't enjoy reading unless it's required for exams.
He plays and socializes a lot.
He came up with this idea after failing some job interviews.

I think he just wants to go back to university because job interviews are tough.

How about introducing your friend to PhD comics. At least someone who has read those and still goes for a PhD cannot say they haven't be warned.


Where do I find full citations for articles cited by author(s) and date/year only? I am reading an advanced physics book which cites articles using only the name of author and the date of publication. Google scholar most often does not find such articles despite using Advanced Search. Where do I find the full citations in the book?

Question answered by this comment:

Most of the times books that do this have a bibliography at the end where you can locate the cited papers.


Register in IEEE A ranked conferences - Student or full registration? I am trying to follow up with the instructions to register my paper for the conference. However, the system is not allowing me to finish the process.

I just emailed the editor and he answered after a while, seems quite busy to explain. So I am assuming that if I asked him again for an explanation would take a lot of time too.

'' That error message is telling you to need to pay the full registration. In the instructions at "Fees and Registrations" appears that each student needs a full registration for its paper in order to be able to pay the student's fee. For example, if you wrote your paper with a professor, your professor should pay the full registration so you can pay student's.'' can any help what that means?

That seems clearly written to me. You aren't allowed to present a paper unless at least one of its authors has paid full registration. Maybe ethically questionable, but clear. What is your doubt? Have you read the instructions to which you were referred? Do they confirm it?

EDIT after your comment: "full registration" very likely means "IEEE member" or "non-IEEE member" (whichever applies).


How should I reference my own previous work in a talk to a general audience? I have to give a presentation to a general scientific audience (specifically, an interview talk). As part of the presentation I would like to highlight some of my previous work.

I work in mathematics, where paper authorship is always alphabetical. The standard practice in talks is to replace your own name with an initial. That is, a person with the last name Potter might present their joint work with Granger and Weasley as "the horcrux theorem, due to Granger-P.-Weasley".

Presumably this mathematical convention is not used or even known in the general scientific community.

How do people reference their own work in other fields? How do people reference their own work when talking to people in other fields? To people in a mixed group of many fields?

ETA: thanks everyone for your answers!

I’m editing to highlight a point which hasn’t been addressed yet - how does one convey that authorship in mathematics is alphabetical? (My last name begins with R so I’m almost always the last author in any paper of mine.)

I don’t want to change the order of authors in a published paper, but I also don’t want it to seem like I’ve never been a first author.

Is it okay to simply state this verbally? This seems like it could be perceived as somewhat tacky....

If the list of authors is short, just write all of them:
For example: Lagrange, Cauchy and Carnot, 1800, Journal of Mathematics
You may want to put your own name in bold.
If there are many authors, then a pretty standard way in many disciplines is to write as FirstName et al., see here: https://www.scribendi.com/advice/how_to_use_et_al.en.html
But if you are at the middle, you need to choose. Maybe something link:  AAA ... YouName et al.,
Or you can still put your name as first and the rest as et al.,


Tips for Conducting an Experiment without Stress I have been working independently on a research project for the past few months and I am almost ready to actually conduct the experiment. The experiment itself should only take two hours. However, I seem to get a lot of anxiety when thinking about carrying out the experiment (especially because I will be conducting it completely independently): what happens if I do something wrong, forget something, etc? I was wondering if anyone had any tips on conducting an experiment without too much stress. I am sure that once I started the experiment, it won't be too bad; getting started is the hard part. Thank you!

This question is only vaguely related to Academia, honestly; the tips we can give you here apply equally well to virtually any project you'll ever run.

First thing: given that you're new at this, you will probably screw up something at some point, so just internalize that. You're new, the field is new, and things go wrong when its a first time. Most likely every single person you're working with already knows this; the sooner you appreciate it yourself the better off (and less stressed) you'll be.

The best tip I can say is, if possible, do a dry run. Test all equipment, test your scripts (if you have), make sure you have an accurate and detailed checklist of what you need to do at each step, and what to do when something goes wrong at each step. Even better, do this walkthrough with whoever maintains the equipment and have them watch you for mistakes. You will make mistakes; that's cool, just acknowledge them and move on.

If you can't do a dry run then just familiarize yourself with equipment as best you can. Make sure you know what you're doing and when you're doing it. If there's something you're really nervous about—breaking a $2M machine, for example—talk to the technicians or previous students and make sure you know which parts you need to be careful around.

Long story short, recognize that newbies make mistakes. Make sure you know which mistakes you really don't want to make, and don't do those ones; you'll be fine.


Timeline to start applying for faculty positions in the US I want to start applying for faculty positions for Computer science positions in the US. Still march is good time to apply? Are there is a chance to get interviews or I am late?

Still march is good time to apply?

It's possible that Anonymous Physicist was right in the comments and that your field is such that job searches for positions that begin 1.5 years from now are happening right now. (If so, go apply!) But, let's assume that's not the case for the sake of this discussion.

The best time to apply, as I suspect you know, is fall / early winter. This is an unfortunate reality that must be acknowledged.

  Are there is a chance to get interviews or I am late?

You're indeed quite late, but there's certainly a chance. Some jobs will indeed be posted; faculty members leave unexpectedly due to illness or other opportunities, searches on the ideal hiring timeline fail, and so forth.

There will be fewer job opportunities now than there would have been had you begun hunting in the fall, and moreover, it's very possible that the jobs you find could be worse in nature (such as 1-year positions instead of tenure-track, etc.) at this time. However:

I think you should apply for jobs now.

Reason 1: If you apply for jobs now, you might not get a job. Perhaps you could even say that you probably won't get a job -- I don't know whether that is true or not. However, the following is certainly true: If you don't apply now, you definitely won't get a job.

Reason 2: Applying for jobs is a nontrivial skill, and it is likely that your first cover letters, interviews, etc. won't be the best that you are capable of. Practice now. If it doesn't work out, then you'll be more polished for when it's time to try again in the fall.

Reason 3: If you get a suboptimal job (such as a one-year visiting position) at a school you like, it is possible that there will be a tenure-track job intended to replace it, and it is possible that serving in such a position well would give you an inside track to the follow-up position. Both of these are quite far from guarantees, of course.

Reason 4: It is conceivable that you do some digging and don't find any jobs you like. In that case, you can just not apply for anything, and you're no worse off than you'd be if you hadn't looked.

However, all this is superceded by the following:

Make contingency plans for what will happen if you don't get a job right now.

In particular, figure out how you will survive for the 2020-2021 academic year if you are not hired at this time. This may require exiting academia, and such an exit may be permanent, or it may not be. But do not neglect this possibility.


Some authors can use variants of their last names in two different publications. How does one write their last name when citing both inline? When citing two articles from the same author using different initials, one should cite each article with the relevant initials, even if they are different. This is answered here.

But what about differences in the last name of the same author when referencing inline? Russian authors, for instance, must transliterate their names and there are sometimes inconsistencies in the way this is done. For example, E. Mashchenko writes his or her name E. Maschenko here (published 2015), but E. Mashchenko here (published 2013). Basic knowledge of Russian transliteration suggests that Мащенко is to be transliterated as Mashchenko, and that is indeed the spelling the author uses on Research Gate, suggesting that the Maschenko spelling is an error.

Yet, because the point of referencing is to make it easy for other researchers to find the sourced material, the literal spelling Maschenko should be preferred when citing Maschenko (2015). When citing both articles inline, which of the following would one write?

  (Mashchenko, 2013; Maschenko, 2015)

which would be correct, but misleading and strange because this is the same person.

  (Mashchenko, 2013, 2015)

which doesn’t adhere to the above standard.

Inline citations should match what appears in bibliographies, and bibliographies should match what appears in the publication record. You can augment what’s listed—for instance, you could provide the original Cyrillic rendering in the bibliography to indicate the authors are in fact the same person—but I would leave the citation uncorrected.


Tips for engineering students applying math in their research I hold an engineering undergraduate degree in EC. When I went to a good school for my post-grad, I found that research in many EC/CS departments required a lot of core math expertise which my UG lacked. It took me a whole lot of time to accustom myself and complete the courses. At the end of the coursework, I was able to thoroughly appreciate the development of the theory (in my case, real analysis, measure and probability theory).

When working on an engineering problem, I was able to understand fundamental ideas in many papers, thanks to the courses. Yet when it came to using the math for solving my own problem, I found things arduously difficult. In other words, non-intuitive math was well beyond me.

I regularly find top academic researchers in engineering fluently pulling off sophisticated mathematical results in their work. What tips could you suggest for someone with an engineering (or non-math) background requiring mathematical sophistication for their research?

My background is in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, so I cannot comment on EC/CS directly.  However, much of my work is mathematical in nature, so generally speaking I would offer the following:

Do not be intimidated those fluent mathematical results.
In my experience, for every "hit" that has an elegant result there were probably multiple "misses" that did not lead anywhere.
Balance perseverance with distance.
Even techniques that seem ideally suited to your problem will inevitably have challenges,  otherwise someone would likely have published the result already. It is important to stay positive and keep working at it.  At the same time, sometimes it helps to take a step back and work on something else for awhile and give your mind a break.  When you get some distance from your original problem, you may find an insight that helps you to overcome your roadblock.
Read widely.
I am sure you have been reading papers related to whatever problems you are working on, but oftentimes there are techniques used in tangentially related or even unrelated fields that may be adapted to work on a problem in your area.  Even if such studies do not lead to a usable result for your current work, they may lead to inspiration down the road.

Just like in your classes, learning to apply mathematical techniques to research problems takes time and practice. If it is possible, try to scale down your problem as much as you can to something very basic.  Finding a solution to the more basic problem will increase your confidence in the method.  Then you can slowly start to scale your problem back up. By attacking the problem this way, you get a number of small successes that help build your background with whatever techniques you use.  Overcoming the smaller problems can give insight into the issues you may be having with your larger problem as well.


How to respond positively to a scientist's rejection e-mail (PhD program)? I am a Molecular biology post graduate from India. I enquire about PhD vacancy to various potential principal investigators (PhD supervisors) by sending my CV and cover letter. When I receive a rejection mail like mentioned below, how do I respond to the scientist? I would like to have good rapport with the lab as I aspire to join the lab later. Or should I ask any questions?

Examples of rejection e-mail:

  Thank you for your interest in joining our lab. Unfortunately, I'm not looking for a phd student. Good luck

  I am sorry but the lab is full

I would probably not bother to reply; the negative answer that you got seems to have to do with the fact that there are no open positions. The best you can do is to keep an eye open for PhD positions being announced in the future.


Where to include the Summer School or Winter School participation in the curriculum vitae (CV)? I would like to include a Winter School I attended last year in my CV. I am not sure which heading of the CV this should be added to. Should I make a new heading called Participation and add this single Winter School there? (Along with 2 other conferences I participated in? or it is not so important to mention the conferences I attended?)
This is how I have included it so far: My CV. Do you think it makes sense? Or better if I format it in another way?
Please let me know of your kind opinion.
Thank you.

I have included a sub-section as "Non-Formal Education" under main section "Education" where I put important courses. You can put recent/important summer schools/ online courses/ conference participation under that.
I have seen some people list them in Skills and competencies as a supplement for a specific skill.
Hope that clarifies your problem...


Can I teach the same course I developed at one university at another university as well? University A hired me to teach a course. It paid the costs of preparation (3 months) and financed tranining sessions to enhance my instructing abilities.
University B now asked me to offer the same course there.
Assuming that my contract with University A is mute on this matter, is there anything to consider when one wants to hold the same course at another university? Is it generally allowed (or discredited) to use the very same contents one developed at one university at another one?

I would say it is generally allowed and that exceptions would be rare. But a policy forbidding it would need to be spelled out.
At one level, universities are in competition with others, but this isn't normally at the level of instruction. At a more important level, universities are cooperative and encourage their faculty to also be cooperative.
I've never heard of a university claiming that any given course was unique to it and therefore proprietary. I once taught in a unique program, but that was just because no one else took it up. We certainly didn't claim ownership over it.
Another issue, however, is that universities may frown on faculty teaching at two places simultaneously, no matter the course.


Am I graduate student or underpaid employee? I started graduate course in a national research institute abroad (3 years ago). I just realized now this is my third year and every year we had different projects.

Main problem is that I am not having enough time to focus in one area to publish papers.  Second problem is that I am not obtaining knowledge from the other doctors.

Should I stop pursuing PhD if I feel I am not learning as much as I expected and feeling I am doing someone else work and tasks?

The downside of academia that you are describing definitely exists.  Have been hearing this for generations now (don't get me started on the pyramid, tournament style rewards, job prospects, etc.).
All that said, it is irrelevant to you.  Do NOT cut your nose off to spite yourself.  You are too close now.  Just buckle down and finish and get the degree.  It is helpful. And you will kick yourself if you miss it.
Be a little selfish about taking care of yourself on papers, etc.  Focus, focus, focus.  Pick your spots,  but I would avoid volunteering always and also occasionally push back on collateral duties.  And push, push, push for papers.  They really are the score card...don't let anyone kid you the opposite.


Disposing of old written notes Many a times, I study some topic or research paper and make my own notes (it could be figuring out the math in paper, or something else). But after say 7-8 months, these notes just pile up on table and when I look at them I don't think I will be using them for any future work. But I also feel like I'm trashing my study, and the effort was pointless if I dispose of it. Is it okay to dispose of them? What strategy do you have about disposing of written notes?

It may help you to understand that much of the value of those notes has been the very act of writing them.  As such, you may find that you have less compunction against throwing them out.

Personally, I maintain an "aging pile" for notes, in which I keep them until they stop feeling relevant.  For some things, that's a week; for others it was a box in my closet and a decade.  You can also remove the physical clutter aspect by scanning and archiving in something with cloud storage: you'll be trading physical clutter for electronic clutter, but I at least find that electronic clutter is much easier to ignore.


How can I import my BibTeX file to my Google Scholar Library? I have a large library of articles in CiteULike, but recently it does not work very well, so I would like to move to using the Google Scholar library. I exported my CiteULike library to a BibTeX file. Is there a way to import this file to my Google Scholar library?


Prospective PhD advisor encourages me to apply and positively mentions relevant experiences. What are my success chances? I had recently e-mailed a professor asking for opportunities in his lab. He responded as follows -
Email content:

Dear [redacted]
Thanks for your interest in my lab. My lab is planning to hire multiple Ph.D. students who will start in the fall of 2021, and the application window is going to be this Winter.
It's good that you have some relevant research experiences, and I encourage you to apply to my lab at [redacted]. When you submit your application to the department, please mention my name in your personal statement. Also, please let me know when you submit the application.
Best,
[redacted]

Can I take this as a positive response? Does that mean he will take me in if I apply? How do I respond back to him?

The professor's asking to be kept informed, which is certainly a positive sign because he's interested enough to want to know what you're doing. At the very least he's not outright rejecting you.
On the other hand, there is no guarantee he will take you on until you actually receive the offer letter.
I don't think there's much more to say other than thank him, reaffirm that you will submit an application (if you are planning to do so) and say you will keep him informed when you do.


Constructing a Mathematics CV - what am I trying to portray to a graduate school admissions committee? Bit about me: I recently graduated as an undergraduate in Statistics and would like to pursue graduate school. I will be working as an actuary starting this upcoming month and will be pursuing the GRE and Mathematics GRE Subject Test this September/October.

I'm struggling to write a CV for graduate school. It is not a requirement that I know of currently (I haven't looked at the application requirements yet at the places I plan on applying yet), but I know that I will need to have one ready in case I need it in the future. I have plenty of experience writing resumes for actuarial positions, but none whatsoever for grad school CVs.

I have bolded the questions that I would like answered.

Here's what I currently have so far (in chronological order):

Top: name, contact info

Body: Education, Academic Research, Teaching Experience, Volunteer Experience (if I volunteered as a TA, should I throw this experience in teaching instead if I don't have any other volunteering experience?), Work Experience (consists of an actuarial position + an assessment position), Leadership and Committee Experience, Actuarial Exams, Languages, Computer Skills, Research Interests

Am I missing anything that should be in a mathematics CV?

Also, how much detail am I expected to put in for my experiences? For example, on my research experience, I have the advisor's name, what I did, how I pursued the research, and in some cases, what the research led up to (e.g., one of my projects was used to supplement an already-published mathematics and music text). Am I expected to talk about "excellent communication skills" or "teamwork" in any of my experiences, if applicable? (For an actuarial resume, I would NEVER right anything like this, as it sounds like I'm just trying to fill up white space.)

Lastly, I realize that this isn't the most relevant pertaining to this website specifically, but are there any online forums where I can get feedback on my CV (mathematics-specific would be extremely nice)?

First let me say that I have a lot of experience with math department admissions, all of it in a department which is separate from the statistics department.  The title question is "Constructing a mathematics CV": I'll answer that.  I would not assume that it's the same for statistics.

For a math admission -- either master's or PhD, it doesn't matter -- the CV is just about the least important part of the application that I can think of.  At many places, it is probably being asked for as much out of force of habit as anything else: in academia, CV's are ubiquitous.  However, most information that is provided on your CV is also provided elsewhere on the application: grades, coursework, research experiences, relevant personal experiences all have other outlets.  I can only remember reaching for a candidate's CV when something was missing from some other part of the application (possibly because of a clerical error on our part) and I wanted to quickly put my hands on it.  I absolutely don't care how the CV looks, how it is formatted, or anything like that.  In fact I don't care about that stuff for any level of academic job.  And in fact I myself have one of the more unimpressively formatted CVs I've ever seen, almost to the point of being unintentionally "unbusinesslike".

So I would say the key is this: whenever you're wondering whether to put something on your CV, also ask yourself: "If I do put it on my CV, how do I highlight it elsewhere in my application?"  Because your CV might not even be specifically read by some (or all) committee members.

To answer your specific questions:

  if I volunteered as a TA, should I throw this experience in teaching instead if I don't have any other volunteering experience?

You should certainly include all TA experience, volunteer or otherwise.  (Whenever you do something as a volunteer that one might reasonably think you've been paid for, it is only honorable to clarify that you were a volunteer.)  I find your concern that you don't have any other kind of volunteer experience misplaced: we're not looking for volunteer experience, and volunteer experience that is not math related is not clearly relevant at all and should probably only be included if it is truly notable or substantial.  Honestly, we're not selecting for candidates who are unusually socially conscious or unusually well-rounded, so your volunteer work would have to be successful enough to show exceptional drive and/or administrative skill.

  Am I missing anything?

No, I don't think so.  Your research experience -- if you have any -- is one of the more important things to go on a CV, and you mentioned it.  But in keeping with what I said before, it is really too important to just hide in a CV: if you had any research experience at all you should certainly mention it in your personal statement (and if you haven't had any at all, it would be a good idea to address that, at least by saying how excited you are and how much you welcome the opportunity).  If your research experiences resulted in actual product, then include the product itself: papers can be part of the application, and you can also include links to websites.

  how much detail am I expected to put in for my experiences? Am I expected to talk about "excellent communication skills" or "teamwork" in any of my experiences, if applicable?

At this point I wonder if you're confusing the CV and the personal statement.  You don't "talk about" anything in a CV: it just displays information.  There is not a single complete sentence in my (eight page: yours should probably be one or two) CV.  Information about relevant experiences should go prominently in your personal statement and you should do what you can to ensure that these experiences are also discussed in your recommendation letters (along with your coursework, these are the most important part of the application).  I have no desire to hear about excellent communication skills or teamwork from the candidate herself, no.  In fact, writing a personal statement that is literate and moderately compelling is your big chance to show your communication skills.  Openly boasting about skills is something that academia largely frowns upon.  This can get tricky when in certain contexts -- grant applications, introductions to papers -- you really need to describe your achievements, but in a way which is factual and not openly self-promotional.  In a grad school application I would strive to look competent, eager and (reasonably) humble.

  are there any online forums where I can get feedback on my CV (mathematics-specific would be extremely nice)?

You should ask your recommenders for feedback on your CV.  They are natural candidates, because (i) they're reading it anyway and (ii) they have already shown an interest in your academic career.  The right way to do this is to first give them a CV and make it really clear that you want critical comments and that you've saved plenty of time for it -- more than a month! -- and then after that you would like a recommendation letter.


Best Practice To Provide Contact Information in Paper On the first page of most papers the authors are listed, as well as their affiliation and email address. The given email address is usually hosted by the university. Now this looks professional and everything, though it is not always a good long-term solution, as researchers join other universities and their email address does no longer work (after a while). In my field (physics/cosmology) I rarely see a different solution, but I thought maybe other fields might have found a better approach. What contact information can be provided that does not get outdated?

a link to a website that then relinks to an always up-to-date email address?
a personal email address?
researchgate profile
?

Does anyone work in a field where there is a better solution widely used?
Thank you very much for your thoughts on this topic.

I think this is a good question with only unsatisfactory answers. In short, I don't think you can bank on any method to identify a person (other than maybe the equivalent to a social security number) that is permanent. Neither professional nor personal email addresses are guaranteed to work forever, nor are professional sites like ResearchGate, LinkedIN, ...
Systems such as ORCID, where each researcher is assigned a unique identifier would work, but they will still require some time to gain broad acceptance. This way the paper could cite the ORCID and the researcher can make sure the profile (including contact info) stays current. This system would also make it easier to find publications authored by an individual (especial by somebody with a common last name such as Wang, Ngyen, Garcia, Smith, ...). Of course, there is no guarantee that the ORCID system will last either.


Should I use my official legal name or the one I'm known by on my Master's dissertation? My official, legal name is A, but I'm know by most people as B. B relates to A as Bob to Robert, however this connection is only obvious in my country of origin where I am no longer based. I am known primarily as B, among my friends and colleagues. In order to build a consistent professional profile over the past several years I've been making a conscious effort to not use A at all, as I've noticed it causes some confusion. My undergraduate degree certificates have my legal name on them but I feel like in a Masters I am currently writing up I would like to proceed with "migrating" over to being a "full-time B". I am not sure though if that in itself won't generate damaging inconsistencies in my professional profile / online presence etc, with various certificates awarded under different names.

Should I use my official legal name or the one I'm known by on my Master's dissertation? What kind of problems can I expect from going either way?

You could write your name as Robert "Bob" KubaFYI, if your university policy allows for it. At least in the US, that's a standard stylization to indicate a nickname or unofficial name one goes by regularly. Classmates of mine who were international students from Eastern Asia and had traditional legal names but went by English names commonly did this.


'Awaiting recommendation' on Scholar One before any review process I submitted a manuscript to ScholarOne about 10 weeks ago. I'm aware of the typical workflow of a journal. There are two bullet points that have remained unchanged for about 8 weeks now - one saying 'awaiting reviewer scores' and the other saying 'awaiting recommendation'. From reading other posts, these don't seem to usually be said together - does it usually just say one or other? What does this mean?

The status that authors see is fully customizable, and depends on the actual workflow employed by the journal. What you are seeing generally indicates that there is at least 1 review task pending, and also a recommendation task pending. This is possible! For instance, let's say the journal assigned 3 reviewers, but only requires 2 to move on to the recommendation task. Since they are both now "pending", you could see both status's at the same time. Without specific information on the journal you are working with, I can't give you exact details on your situation. There are other possible scenario's.
Note: I am an employee of ScholarOne, but my posts and answers are strictly my own.


Is a “professional journal” a “scholary journal”? Can someone please explain to me the difference between a professional journal and a scholarly journal?

I have done some research, and from what I gather, a professional journal is a type of scholarly journal (a subset, if you will).
I lost marks in my essay for using a professional journal, and not a scholarly journal.
The database I used to find the journal (provided by the university) indicated that I was using an article filed under scholarly journal.

Can someone please shed some light on this situation, simply because I do not want to make the same mistake again. I do not care if I am wrong, I genuinely want to just find out the answer.

According to Lock Haven University:

A scholarly journal is also called an academic journal.  It is a
periodical written by academic experts in various subject areas.   A
"peer review" journal is a subset within scholarly journals in which
the articles submitted are reviewed by researchers in the same
discipline to determine if the article merits publication.  This
review process helps to ensure that only excellent and high-quality
research articles are published. All authors who publish in the
scholarly literature MUST cite sources they used in the writing of the
article, so you will find a section at the end named variously as
bibliography, sources cited, works cited, or footnotes.
A professional (sometimes called a trade) journal is a journal written
for people who work in a certain field.  Grocers, resturant owners,
doctors, librarians, teachers, nurses, and other professionals need
information to help them conduct their jobs and profession more
efficiently. Trade journals are half way between scholarly journals
and magazines: they require some background knowledge but the articles
are not scholarly in nature.  They address workplace issues, provide
tips on better work performance, and other work-related information.
The articles that are submitted are reviewed by professional editors.

So basically, a scholarly journal is most likely written by someone who works in academia and a professional journal is written by someone who works in industry. In your situation, you could argue that the library is at fault for mistakenly labeling the journal as "scholarly" or your professor didn't know it was a "scholarly" journal. It wouldn't hurt to bring it up to your professor and see what he/she says.


No publication in MS I completed my MS-by research (thesis) in US in EE (well-renowned university and advisors)  and unfortunately, I do not have any papers published.

At present, I am leading (read it as pitch idea, receive funding, setup lab, perform research) an international research collaboration in Industry. I have conceived this idea that has the potential to solve long-standing problems in this particular industry. What is that I am doing differently is application of this concept in this sector of Industry ( and of course solving the problem).

The only thing that is keeping me away from applying for P.hD. program is that I do not have a publication.

Is there a suggestion what I must do in the current research? Advisors under whom I want to work for PhD is top 5 in universities.

I don't think the lack of publications will be much of a barrier, but I also think you need more realistic goals. Top five US universities is a pretty small (minuscule) cross section of what is available. The total number of positions in any given year is small and the demand is gigantic.

Any application to a doctoral program in the US will be judged on a variety of things, including letters of recommendation, rather than on any single criterion. The admissions committee wants to be able to make a fairly solid prediction that each candidate is likely to be a success. Given your background as you state it, you can probably get admitted somewhere. But your chances at only those top five places is pretty tiny.

I suggest that you apply to a range of R1 universities, including those if you like. Maybe you get lucky but you will be more likely to find something suitable if you cast a wider net. Look at the top fifty, say, and see what they offer. some of the State University programs, for example, are larger and have more slots available, due to a large faculty. But also look for professors with working groups in and area of interest. The right advisor can make all the difference.

And, if you have the time, there is no reason you can't still publish as an independent researcher.


Going from STEM to history I am looking to leave my career in computing and go back to university to study a History MA.

The trouble is I only have a 3rd class degree in Computing from around 1990.

What would you recommend I do to get myself back in the saddle, and to make myself more attractive to MA courses?

I wouldn't expect your degree in computing from three decades ago to have much impact on your application for a postgraduate degree. You can confirm by contacting a perspective university. (I doubt university websites will be particularly useful, since they probably won't consider your situation.)


Vague paper submission guidelines - can I use double column if not specified? I'm writing a paper for an upcoming congress and there are no author guidelines except for:

"... Articles must be single-spaced, with figures and tables included... References should be double-spaced and in alphabetical order..."

Since guidelines are so vague with respect to all other aspects, should I use any LaTeX template I wish so long as the text is single-spaced and references double-spaced?

My personal preference would be to use a double column template, but since the guidelines are so vague I'm wondering if I should just submit a single column simple manuscript...

I would look at past editions of the conference proceedings to see what style they were ultimately formatted in. Double-column (like IEEE) is typically denser than a single-column, so by picking a two-column format, you may be giving yourself some extra room that other submitters won't have. But you may lose this advantage if your paper is accepted and the format was intended to be single column, since you may have to cut something like 20% out of the content if you are already pushing the limits.


Why are most cranks old men? What To Do When The Trisector Comes claims that most cranks (for lack of a better word) are old men (trisector refers to a specific type of crank):

  One obvious characteristic of trisectors is that they are old. The typical trisector heard of the trisection in his geometry class, but did not succeed with his construction until many years later, usually after retirement. "His" in the last sentence is not sexist because almost all trisectors are male. From the two female trisectors I know of, it follows by an invalid statistical calculation that we can be 95% sure that the proportion of female trisectors is less than .04. Women have too much sense to waste time on such things. Trisectors are old men.

(Can't tell if "invalid statistical calculation" is a typo in the source)

I'm looking for:

A more detailed explanation for why cranks tend to be male (more detailed than "Women have too much sense to waste time on such things"). References would be even better.
An explanation for why cranks tend to be old.

In order to assess this claim, it is important to first bear in mind that classification as a “crank” theory actually requires a reasonably high level of technical development.  For example, in the linked article on trisection of an angle, it actually takes quite a bit of skill and work even to come up with a plausible-sounding false theory of how to do it.  There are almost certainly millions of adolescents in geometry classes around the world who would think that you can trisect an angle using straightedge and compass, and are willing to give it a go.  You would probably find thousands who think they have figured out how to do it.  The reason we don't class these kids as “cranks” is not because they are any smarter than the “cranks”, but just because they lack the time and technical skill to put forward a plausible-looking method, backed up by technical argumentation.  Even if they did, you wouldn’t tend to call an adolescent a “crank”, since the expectation of knowledge is lower.

Secondly, one should consider the likely preconditions for spending a large amount of time trying to prove something that professionals in the discipline assert to be false.  This will generally occur only if: (1) the person is of the view that these authority figures are fallible, and there is some reasonable prospect of success; or (2) the person gets direct enjoyment from the challenge, regardless of its impossibility.  Therefore, a “crank” is more likely to emerge among people who are either sceptical of institutional and professional authorities, or among people who get direct enjoyment from playing with technical problems.  Having then found a “solution” that appears plausible to them, what are they supposed to do?  Keep it to themselves?

Thus, assuming that your hypothesis is true (i.e., that most “cranks” are indeed older men), I would posit that the most likely explanations are probably a combination of the following factors:

There are far more men than women in technical professions that give them the requisite skill to develop a “crank” argument (ergo more men than women);
There is strong evidence that men score lower than women on the personality trait of “agreeableness”, and they are also much more interested in things in the people–things dichotomy.  There is some psychological evidence that men are more sceptical/resistant to institutional authority.  They are therefore much more likely to satisfy the preconditions for gaining utility from working on a problem that is asserted to be impossible by professional authorities (ergo more men than women);
In order to develop a theory in sufficient technical detail to be considered a “crank”, one needs a substantial amount of technical training, e.g., in engineering, mathematics, physics, etc., and there are more men and older people with this technical training (ergo more men and more older people);
In order to develop a theory in sufficient technical detail to be considered a “crank”, one needs a substantial amount of time, such as would be available in retirement (ergo more older people);
Even under equivalent circumstances, an older person is more likely to be classified as a “crank” than a younger person, due to the fact that certain younger people (particularly children, adolescents, and young adults) are not expected to have a high level of technical knowledge, and are generally excused for making assertions that are belied by expert knowledge (ergo more older people);
The context for discussion of “cranks” often tends to be technical disciplines like mathematics, engineering, physics, etc., which are heavily dominated by men.  There are many other fields of interest dominated by women, where silly ideas are ubiquitous, but these tend not to be raised as examples of “cranks” in these kinds of technical discussions.  For example, for every male “crank” in the field of mathematics, there are probably a hundred woman who believe in crystal healing or tarot cards, or some other scientifically baseless idea in a field that is more popular with women (ergo more men than women);

Incidentally, these are exactly the same reasons why the vast majority of correct technical methods in the fields of mathematics, engineering, physics, etc., are developed by men, with a reasonable representation of older men – for every few “cranks” that put forward asserted proofs of false theories, we get an innovator who breaks new ground with a correct theory that extends existing knowledge.  In any case, these are just hypotheses, but they seem pretty plausible to me, and I am not aware of any literature that attempts to study this problem.  Personally, I find it unlikely that a gender imbalance is due to women “having too much sense”.  Both sexes can lay claim to a great many people with very little good sense, and in my observation, various women spend absurdly large amounts of time on activities that are no less ill-advised than trying to prove/disprove difficult/impossible technical theories.


How to find a journal for publishing my method without applying it to specific real data? I have developed different algorithms as PhD studies. My algorithms work fine and have some limitation as with any algorithm. My work basically is developing models that help other people in their area. While, my work is very useful for many areas, especially finance and health, I had no specific real data (e.g., finance, health, etc.) to work with. Therefore I worked with general real data sets. For each model, I used several data sets.

My study was on my behalf (so there is no third-party funded project). My supervisors were very happy with my works.
Now, after I have been awarded my PhD. degree (as a monograph), I am really upset to not have published my works.

I tried to publish but all journals I submitted to rejected my papers as I do not use challenging data that they are interested in.
How can I find a suitable journal to publish my work?
Are there journals that are not interested in a specific area of real data?

I know that Elsevier publishes MethodsX or journals that focus solely on “Materials and Methods.” Perhaps those may be a better fit.

I don’t see why a typical journal wouldn’t consider that just because of the data set. If thats the case, I would put more emphasis on the model’s strengths and implications in the field.


Why do we sign an agreement to adhere to the United States Constitution, before teaching at the college level? In some parts of the US, why do we sign an agreement to adhere to the United States Constitution, before being hired to teach college level courses?

I asked the human resources lady about what happens if I don't sign the agreement, and she said I wouldn't be hired.

I don't think signing such an agreement is necessary to work in industry; so why is it necessary for employment in academia?

I had to sign a statement like yours in Colorado as well. As far as I know, all public employees -- including faculty -- have to sign it as a condition for being hired.

My best explanation for this is that it dates back to the 1950s when fear of communist subverters was strong in the United States (read up on Senator McCarthy, for example). The pledge was then meant as a reminder to new employees that their allegiance is with the country, not their personal ideology.

I don't think anyone is going to say that you "unqualified" if you don't sign the pledge. At the same time, I think it is not illegitimate for a country to require some sort of pledge to the constitution and shared values if you will be paid by tax payer money. You may not be asked to sign a pledge to the constitution if you work in industry, but you surely will have to sign all sorts of paperwork that assigns your inventions to the company, requires you to not say negative things about the company on social media, that you do not divulge company internals to outsiders or the press. So I think there is not all that much of a difference -- both employers ask you to keep in mind what is important to that employer.


Is reusing part of an internship report self-plagiarism? My university has a very strict policy on plagiarism (I presume as do all universities).

As an assignment I must write a report of my internship, but since it is my second internship I have already written one last year. Would it count as plagiarism if I copy and pasted some text, when the content would be almost identical even if I were to rewrite it? Obviously I have to rewrite most sections of the report, but in other sections I genuinely have nothing new to say since last year.

As long as you're sure it's appropriate that you are saying the same thing as in the previous assignment (if you're supposed to be achieving something on this internship, shouldn't you be achieving something new?), cite yourself.

It might feel pompous or self-centred at first, but it is the norm in academic texts to cite your own material just as you would anyone else's. Since I imagine your previous report isn't published anywhere, if you can put the previous one online it could be helpful to include the URL so the reader can check the context of the material you're quoting or paraphrasing.

Specific citation styles vary, but they would generally look something like:

  Tully, B. 'Report on my first internship'. Unpublished, available at http://www.internet.com [accessed 1 May 2015].


Is it a good idea to apply for PhD during my second Master degree? I graduated from M.sc in Applied Social psychology in 2017 (with thesis). And after a year of a research program in Poland, I decided to get an M.Sc in Clinical psychology (2-year program with thesis, I will graduate in 2021). I have been thinking whether it is possible to apply for Ph.D this year without delaying for another year until I complete my current program.

Could you please advise whether it can be done and whether it will look appropriate in my CV if I do so.

As long as you can justify why you pursued a second master degree at first and why you want to quit (if I well understood), then you will not look bad.

I know many people who worked in the industry after their master and then turned back to academia. They could explain why they want to do a PhD and were convincing.

If you are motivated and have good reasons to do a PhD instead of finishing the second master degree, then go for it. However, remember that any employer will ask about critical decisions in your professional life. Examples include: 1) why did you leave your last job? What motivates you to pursue a PhD? What motivated you to pursue a second master? etc.


Could writing a survey of the state-of-the-art in my field compensate for my lack of publications? I am applying to graduate school for a Ph.D. program in the field of business and management. The professor I want to work with endorsed my application, but warned that getting admitted might be difficult because
the Ph.D. program is rigorous and I have no publications in the field. Would it help if I showed my basic research knowledge and skills by reviewing literature and/or writing a summary of his research projects? Would this strengthen my application for the Ph.D. program?

(I don't know anything about business school, nor much about academia outside of the US)

Three reactions:

Professors never have enough time. I seriously doubt they would be eager to read a long, unsolicited report from someone they don't know.
Further, a "review" type publication is not really research experience --  understanding a concept is different than being able to come up with and test new ideas.
On the other hand, if you do know what you're doing, a "review" of a certain field can be a nice service to the community. You could write it and submit it to a journal/conference or just post it on the arXiv. Then you would have a publication that you can list (depending on your timeline).

Assuming the goal is to get admitted, the best thing to do would be to get some research experience by working for a professor. If that's impossible, and if you really are qualified to do so, writing a "review" for publication couldn't hurt -- though it's a lot of work and will likely have only a little impact.


Research-assistant classification in C.V I was a research assistant at a university when I had a master’s degree. Now I got a Ph.D from a different university. I want to apply for a faculty position.

In which of the following CV categories can being a research assistant be considered:

Work Experience
Training Course
Qualifications and Certificates

Needless to say, I have a report letter from the head of department, where I was a research assistant.

I'm going to suggest that among your option, Work Experience is probably best. I doubt that you were given a formal "Certificate" for your work. A letter isn't the same thing. It is probably more easily evaluated as work experience in any case. The letter will stand for itself. Don't embellish it.


How should I cite the beta version of a book used for a talk? I'm using the beta version of a book that was given to us as the course material by the author (the instructor of the course), for a presentation. How should I reference it? There are older versions of it already published, does it make sense to cite those and mention that I used the beta version of the soon-to-be-published edition?

The most important thing about referencing any source of information is that your audience can find the source, either now or (if the source hasn't been published yet) in the future. Lots of referencing questions become easier if you stick to this principle.

If there are specific standards in your field – for example if you are doing this presentation as part of the assessment for a taught course – then you should stick to those standards. Many referencing guides have sections on referencing 'forthcoming' or 'in press' material. For example, the US National Library of Medicine has detailed instructions for this. Similarly, the APA Style Blog has advice on citing material that is still being prepared, that has been submitted but not accepted for publication, or that has been accepted but not yet published.

If a search for 'forthcoming material' on the website of your preferred or mandated referencing style doesn't produce any useful results and the presentation is for credit, your university library will probably be able to provide advice. If they can't help you, simply asking your instructor will also probably produce a useful answer.

If there are no particular standards for you to follow (e.g. it's a conference presentation and the organisers don't mandate a particular style), you can stick to the principle of making sure your audience can find a source by simply choosing a referencing style and sticking to it. For example, one of the examples on the NLM instructions page is:

  Posner MI, Rothbart MK. Educating the human brain. Washington: American Psychological Association. Forthcoming 2007.

As long as your audience can find the book, that's what matters most.