Can a PhD student who preps animals for study, but didn't collect data, claim co-authorship? I am a Phd student in immunology. I was the first student of my supervisor.  4 months after my arrival to the lab, another phd student started to work with us. We work with samples that we obtain from mice (bone marrow, blood, etc.). My supervisor wanted me to work in breeding, weaning, genotyping and handling (injections etc) our mice for the whole laboratory in addition to my project.

Although it was absolutely fine at the beginning, she did not want the other phd student to do any mouse work for 3.5 years. She told me that it would be considered as co-authorship. But when his paper was submitted, she excluded me even from ackowledgement. My supervisor blamed this on the student as he did not want to write my name. Then later told me it was just a help not a contribution. It is not a piece of data that i can claim in the paper. However, if this work was not done, paper would not be out. What would you advise?

I think there are two ethical issues here:

1) Authorship. By most definitions, the work you did does not qualify you for authorship, because you did not have a significant hand in drafting/designing the research or the manuscript (that doesn't mean some labs wouldn't assign authorship in this case, but that if you read the fine print for authorship requirements for journals or professional societies, animal husbandry would not be sufficient). It seems clear you did not have a role in the manuscript because you didn't even realize your name was not included in the authors list or acknowledgments until now.

It would generally be good practice for the authors to at least include in acknowledgements somebody who did as much technical support as you did, and it would also be good practice for you to be offered to contribute to the manuscript and analysis to attain authorship privileges. You should not have been offered authorship as an incentive if the PI and other student did not intend to allow you to earn it.

2) Research ethics and appropriate use of graduate students. I think this area is where you have a greater case. It sounds like you were made to do way more work on another project than should be typical for a graduate student. A technician, sure, because your primary position would be as a paid assistant in the lab, but as a student, your primary position is as a student.

I am unclear why your PI thought this other student should not learn to work with the animals when their project was so dependent on animal work - that doesn't seem to be full training, how is the student going to start an independent research career if they have not learned the basic techniques of their field?

By no means should you expect to always work solely on your own project, but, unless you are overstating your contributions, which I understand is certainly possible, it seems like you were made to go beyond the normal level of assistance. I would consider carefully the technical contributions the primary author made to the project, and weigh how your efforts compared in terms of total hours.

Have you also had time to work on your own independent project, and is that work progressing to your satisfaction? If yes, then maybe there isn't a major issue, and this is just an unfortunate situation you will learn from in the future and you certainly now have a good reason to stop doing this work for other students. If no, then you certainly need to address this with your supervisor, and if you can not reach an arrangement that is suitable to you, you may need to talk to your program or department to get further guidance.


Do postdoc salaries or other academic position's salaries differ much between US and Canada? I hear that the salaries in US are generally higher with lower taxes compared to Canada. Is this true for postdoc salaries or other academic positions? Sites such as glassdoor give roughly the same salary for postdoc which is 50000 CAD/USD. What a bout taxes, is the tax really lower in US? For an annual salary of 50000 CAD a person pay ~7600 CAD in federal taxes and for 50000 USD a person pays ~5800 USD. This does not include the state taxes. I am a second year postdoc in molecular biology with a background in physics.
My source for Canada federal tax
My source for US federal tax
Glassdoor US postdoc salary
Glassdoor Canada postdoc salary

This isn't really an answer, but rather a heads up about how a single average number won't help you decide about taking an offer in one place rather than the other.
First, and foremost, however, there are things more important about a career than your salary. If you make a lot of money but hate the job, then your life won't be very satisfying.
Next, the economies of the two countries are similar, but not identical, and the similarity and ties between the economies keeps personal income (overall) on a rough parity. Otherwise there would be a lot of pressure for academics to emigrate from one country to the other and that doesn't really happen. So salaries may be nominally higher, but so are prices of nearly everything.
Next, as the comments already made make clear, the variability between cities in the two places is probably more important than the variability between the two countries. If you have to live on the US average salary in, say, San Francisco, you will be starving, but in Lansing, MI you will be pretty well off. And whether SF or Lansing is better or worse for you depends a lot on what you like to do with your free time. Likewise Toronto.
While taxes may be nominally lower in the US, the higher taxes paid by Canadians (like Europeans) buys a lot of services that don't exist in the US. The big one is health care which is covered by taxes in some countries other than the US. And the US has been postponing infrastructure investment for so long that our roads/bridges are terrible. I don't know if that is the same in "The Great White North" though. Likewise the US spends far too little on elementary and secondary education. Low taxes in the US is why we can't have nice things here unless you are (very) rich.
Finally, the postdoc is only a way station, not a career. The salary will be "sufficient" even if not extravagant in most places. Certainly much more than what you earn as a TA. But the goal is to move through a postdoc to obtain a more permanent position. With that in mind, the salary is probably the last thing you should weigh in choosing where to postdoc. You want to go where your opportunities for moving to the next step are best.
Think about the life you lead, both the work life and everything else.


Is it "pestering" to email a professor for a recommendation after no response the first time? I talked to a professor about writing a recommendation (sometime before winter break) and he verbally agreed to it, and I sent him the official email request during winter break. He has not responded (I suspect it is because I sent the email during winter break) and out of politeness I didn't put his email down for reference requests without his consent. Is it considered pestering if I send him a follow up email now, restating my request? It has been about 3 weeks, and deadlines are in February and I wish to give at least a month's time to write the rec.

It's not pestering. Professors are busy people and he probably just forgot. One polite reminder email will not go amiss.


COVID Effect on Enrollment I've been wondering how COVID-19 will affect enrollment in US universities.  Typically, in economic recessions, which will seem to accompany COVID-19, university and college enrollment tends to go up.  Fewer people working generally means more time for going to school.  Will this pattern apply to the current situation, at least within the US?

Negative press coverage about universities will reduce enrollment.  Disruptions to high schools will reduce traditional-age enrollment.  People who are laid off from jobs will be more likely to enroll.

The main action we can take is to communicate to prospective students that we encourage them to enroll as soon as practical.  Students may believe education is not available to them.  Informing them will reduce the severity of enrollment declines.


I think my TA winked at me and have developed feelings. Should I ask her out after the semester ends? TLDR: I have feelings for my TA, think she winked at me, and would like to ask her out after the end of the semester.

So my eyes do this weird thing sometimes when I'm sleep-deprived or stressed where it can look to an observer as if I might be winking. This can sometimes lead to problems for me for obvious reasons. However, a few weeks ago in class on a day when my eyes were particularly acting up I believe I might have received a first-- an unexpected return wink. My TA, turning around from the chalkboard momentarily, smiled and gave a very clear wink towards the direction of the room where I was sitting. I had been looking her way over the course of the class since she's the instructor, so it seems quite possible to me that she thought I was winking at her.

However, this was the final day of class before we transitioned to Zoom lectures due to coronavirus, and it's been really difficult to explore my suspicion that she's interested in me through online communication alone. I feel like the odds are low that she was winking at someone else. There were only about 15-20 students in the room, around 40-50% of whom are men. The seating arrangement meant that only about 5-7 people were seated in the direction of the room I was seated in. I wasn't really sure what to make of this when it first happened, but in recent weeks I've noticed myself developing feelings. When I contacted her with a question about an assignment, she responded by inviting me to toss some ideas around over zoom "for fun." I did a few days later, and she also made a point of asking me how I'd been doing with all that's going on and whether I'd be staying in town over the summer. I notice her tone of voice changing a bit when she talks to me, as well.

I really do enjoy talking to her and feel like I would genuinely like to get to know more about her academic passions and interests. As a 24-year-old re-entry student, I feel that the age gap isn't all that intense. In fact, I think I would probably have more in common with her than I would with most undergraduates. The area her work is focused in is also one of my intended majors.

With only two more weeks of instruction, I feel pressured to act before she loses interest. I was having trouble falling asleep most of the night last night due to my mind being so preoccupied with this, so I don't think I could feel alright with doing nothing and letting this pass. My plan was to continue to ask the occasional question during and after class and maybe schedule an office hours appointment for an assignment I genuinely have questions about, wait until the semester is over, and email her 1-2 weeks into the summer asking if she might be interested in getting coffee once social distancing restrictions begin to lift. Does this sound like a reasonable idea, or could it be that all the quarantine and social isolation is just getting to my head?

As long as you wait until after the semester is over and final grades have been assigned before asking her out, you are on clear grounds ethically. Personally I find the idea no less reasonable than the idea of asking anyone else out. You are both adults. She will either be interested or not. You will never know unless you ask her.

A good friend of mine started dating his former student back when he was a TA. They waited until the semester was over. They are now happily married with two kids.

Good luck! And don’t pay attention to the downvotes. Your question may not be the most pressing one the world of academia has right now, but it’s a valid question and is important to you.


Should final exams be comprehensive? I teach in the school of sciences and engineering in the university where I work. I have asked professors several times if the final exams have to be comprehensive, and I usually get mixed answers.

So I want to ask, for a course with two midterms and a final:

If there is some criteria or organizations that require the final exams to be comprehensive (for instance, does ABET accreditation or legal statute require it?), or does it depend on the school or the professor?
What are the pros and cons of having a comprehensive final?
Will your answers to the above questions be different if the course components were 2 best out of 3 midterms plus a final, or if the course was a graduate course instead of undergrad?

All of my final exams are cumulative, for a couple reasons:

1) I've always felt odd about non-cumulative exams. It seems to send a message I'd rather not send: “It's okay to forget about what you learned earlier in the course – you won't need that any more.”

2) Often, what gets taught later in the course builds on earlier concepts. If A lays the foundation for B, and B lays the foundation for C, it can be rather challenging to test on C without testing on A and B also.

That said, I try very hard to test on higher-level concepts rather than on minutia, so a cumulative final fits my teaching style. I expect my students to be able to speak intelligently to the main themes of the course. I've told students many times: “Come to class ready to learn, and be ready to engage with the material via the in-class discussions. That's the best way to prep for the exams.”

My goal is to structure my exams so that students who have paid attention in class and learned the material through other assignments should do quite well on the test – without the need to cram or commit the material to short-term memory. “By the last week of the term, you either know this stuff, or you don't,” I tell them. Many of my exam questions are essay questions that require students to analyze a scenario, and synthesize material from different parts of the course.

That might not always work, depending on the nature of the material; some material doesn't lend itself well to such questions. This approach may not be scalable, either. (It's not uncommon for me to have six or seven pages of essay questions per exam. Most of the time, I have between 15 and 30 students per course, which keeps grading manageable. If I had 50 or 60 students, however, I might have to rethink this approach.)

As a footnote, most of my courses are 400/600-level courses. I don't know if the style I've outlined would be a good fit for freshmen and 100-level material.


What could it signify if I find most forms of abstract math (e.g. Calculus) much easier than Physics, Chemistry, and so on? I'm an undergraduate now, and am faced with a genuine lack of ability when it comes to Physics. Seeing how my peers react to lectures and catch on faster, it's clear that the issue isn't my professors, but the way my mind takes (or doesn't take) to the material. I had similar trouble with high school Chemistry, and even in college, I completed all levels of Calculus and Differential Equations as well, and didn't struggle nearly as much in those. Doing the calculations in Physics or Chemistry is easy of course, but using definitions and formulas to relate real-world concepts to each other and work on them is extremely challenging to me.
Does anyone know why this might be? Advice is also appreciated on improving upon this weakness.

I have felt more or less the same about certain topics within mathematics and to an extent about physics, biology etc, so I thought I would share my experience and thoughts. My level is different from yours but the feelings are certainly similar.
In early years of high school, I did both math and physics competitions to the National Olympiad level but I picked math because I excelled at it much more than I did at physics. Continuing with the math, I competed at IMO's; however, the topics like combinatorics came much harder to me than the other areas. I have known a number of students who are way better than I was at combinatorics but overall did not remotely reach my level because of the other areas math. Nevertheless, I always felt that those students, if tried as hard and was interested in geometry, algebra, and number theory as much as I did, would have blown me out of the water.
Now I am about to finish my PhD and still feel the same way about topics like Algebra, Topology etc. They just don't come naturally to me as do Analysis or Probability. Venturing into non-math subjects, I failed art history and botany 101, the latter of which is often considered as a free-A class. On the other hand, I have heard similar stories from my peers who are doing excellent research in Algebra - they would struggle quite a bit in an introductory analysis course, for instance.
What I am trying to get at in my ramblings is that certain things are just easier for some people and not for others. This, compounded with the lack of interest you have in certain subjects, most likely lead to the feeling of "inadequacy" that you are perhaps describing.


Including unpublished manuscript with CV? Should I attach my soon-to-be-published manuscript when submitting my CV?

I've just recently submitted my first paper to a scientific journal and want to apply for an internship at a certain institution. I'm pretty confident that my paper will be accepted but I know the review process is long. Should add it to my CV and write "under review" and attach the manuscript along with it? I feel as if them reading the manuscript will better my chances at my getting it.

As others have said, it depends on the culture of the discipline you are in.

I also think it is important where you are in your career. If you are an undergraduate, for example, with a manuscript on which you are an author, I would be impressed even without the acceptance yet. Most undergraduates in my field (biology) have not done much (or any) hands-on research so this would be a big CV booster! Since you say this is your first manuscript, I assume you are early in your career so it may help you stand out from your peers. I have seen graduate students and even professors include submitted manuscripts on CVs and personally have not found it tacky.


US statute of Higher Education System I'm taking for granted several fact about higher-education system in the US, such as:

Professors can move freely between universities, even ones outside US. They are in this regard like professional football players.
(Not every country wholeheartedly allows this.)
Lecturers can obtain tenure position. (Some countries are in the habit of "perpetually in 5-year contracts")
There is such a thing as liberal arts education.  (Not all
countries have this!)
An undergraduate student can take a major and a minor in their study. (Some countries prefer to have only majors)
...

My question: where can I find documents regarding all these higher education system rules and statute? Which part is governed by the government (state/federal), and which part is decentralized to the univ. management?

Links to such documents (US/UK/Australia/Can.) or Wikipedia pages would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

One of the key things about U.S. system of higher education is that it is, for the most part, not regulated by statute.  For all of the "rules" that you explained, there are institutions that do not follow them (except the freedom to depart, which is guaranteed not by regulation, but by the lack of regulation, which creates a free market).

In theory, anybody in the US can found an institute of higher education, at any time, for any reason.  People in fact do create all sorts of new institutions all the time: some turn out very well, and some do not.  In practice, admission to the "club" of credible institutions is regulated by accreditation organizations, such as this one.  Every institution that can meet the fairly basic requirements for accreditation can set its rules as it wishes.  Public universities are typically regulated by the state that runs them (e.g., U.C. Berkeley) or the relevant federal agency (e.g., the Naval Postgraduate School), but private institutions like Harvard have a great degree of freedom in how they organize themselves.

In short: there is no document for the rules on how the system works, because the nature of the system is that there is no system, only a market loosely managed by accreditation.


Is it ethical to get participants' consent for the inclusion of their data in the research after data collection? Suppose that there's a student who has done a subject-based study with ten participants involved. The research settings required not telling the participants that it has been a research before data collection (they participated in an online job interview, but there was no job in reality for them, so none of them got any job in fact [Attention: This was just an example. In reality, they only took an online translation test, at the time they desired.]). Can the researcher get their participants' consent for the inclusion of their data in the research after data collection? Would it be a problem for publication in journals?

As long as the study is IRB approved and the approved procedures are followed, then publication should not be a problem. It seems a little strange, but reasonable, that an IRB would aprove a protocol where minimal risk data collection was kept secret, but require informed consent prior to data analysis. I would have expected consent and debriefing to happen immediately following data collection, but again, if there is a reason to delay it, that seems fine.


I'm about to tell my advisor I want to leave my PhD. Do I mention this when scheduling a meeting or do I drop a bombshell while there in person? I meet with my PhD advisor quite irregularly so we arrange meetings on an ad-hoc basis depending on work progress, availability etc. Usually we communicate a bunch by email about the state of work.

I'm want to leave my course. I don't see how any minor changes to my work would change this decision. At this point I mostly just want to have a couple weeks of mental health break with no pressure to put time into the PhD, so I can have some brain-space to clear the remaining doubts from my head.

Should I let my advisor know that the meeting we are scheduling for later this week is about my position in the programme instead of normal project progress report?

PS. I am aware that a natural way to frame this would be to mention in an email that there I have some doubts about my work that I'd like to discuss. However that would be misleading - I'm pretty set on the idea that doing this degree is not right for me and the only doubts I have are whether this is the right decision at this time. I'm not interested in being convinced I should stay and try to "work things out" because my decision to leave is related less to problems I have with the course and more to simply having no reason why I should want to be doing it in the first place.

If you think that there is any possibility that the advisor can adjust your working arrangement enough to let you continue, then it would be better to give him/her a heads up before the meeting. That way thought can be given before the meeting and so it needn't be so ad-hoc.

But have an idea of what you would need for yourself going in to such a meeting so you have some basis for discussing options.

Leaving a degree is a big step, make sure it is the right one. And make sure that others have a chance to try to work it out with you if there is any way possible. But for that, they, themselves, need a time for reflection.

And, as per your final thoughts in the question, have an idea about what you want the alternative to be. Ending with nothing isn't a very happy outcome.

But the goal isn't to get you to change your mind. Rather it is to find a way so that the conditions are appropriate and the future is clearer.


How should one handle peers, competition and other social pressure while studying theoretical CS/Maths? I'm currently a 20 year old undergrad studying CS at a reputed institute in my city. I'm one of the very few from my batch who's interested in studying theoretical CS and mathematics (about 10 students from a batch of 200) and want to pursue research as a career.

Thing is, out of these 10 students, I'm the dumbest. I score the least in a graph theory exam, I cannot come up with creative solutions to problems in complexity theory as quick as they can (sometimes I keep on thinking for days, if not weeks, and still cannot come up with anything useful), I'm the student who the professor looks at and wonders: why are they here? To be very honest, I don't really like programming or web development. I like to spend time thinking about stuff, solving problems by hand, and learning fascinating things in logic and modern algebra. I'm weak at exams, true, but then I'm mostly clueless and disinterested in web development classes, where I can score easily but not learn something that I couldn't have learnt by watching tutorials on the Internet. I'm obviously looked down by my peers, too; and my grades are, well... not too great. In my current semester, I'm studying four theory courses (Complexity Theory, Graph Theory, Abstract Algebra and Cryptography) and one introductory CS security course. I'm going through the most difficult time of my academic curriculum so far; getting around 3-4 hours of sleep every day, with most of my day spent in attending classes and solving assignments. I'd like to drop a course from my current roster, but I'm afraid that since that'd show up in my transcript after I graduate, it might ruin my chances of getting into a respected grad school or landing a job.

I was recently diagnosed with manic depression, and while there are a few personal problems I have (premature balding, asocial lifestyle etc.) that might have caused that, some amount of the aforementioned issue might have also contributed to the cause. Anyway, I'm not asking for any consolation.

What I'm asking is: if anyone who's been through similar experiences while pursuing academia, how did you cope up? Even if you weren't like me (chances are pretty high that you weren't like me, CS theory/Math students are usually very intelligent), what do you advice? Should I stop studying theoretical CS due to my frequent failures? I mean, I don't believe in that kind of stuff, but usually if you fail too much at a certain thing, maybe that's some sort of sign or something? I don't really have a lot of friends, and no one from my family has received as much education as I have (so far), so I don't really have anyone I can ask for advice.

First, slow != dumb (your words). In fact, these are two completely different cognitive processes. WISC, a widely used IQ test, measures IQ as a composite of four scores. Two of them are working memory and processing speed, which is your general ability to quickly solve problems. Another two scores are Verbal Comprehension index and Perceptual Reasoning Index, which measure loosely your problem solving skills and pattern recognition. Many score high on one, and not the other.

Some problems are hard, and it is very difficult to learn how to solve them. But, after solving (or understanding solutions to) many, many of them, you develop the feel how to approach a new problem. If you are passionate about the field, so much so that you have enough discipline to practice and work hard day after day, the results will come.

Last, take care of yourself. And you might want to read up on imposter syndrome, https://counseling.caltech.edu/general/InfoandResources/Impostor . A very common occurrence in academia, it is a mindset where people downplay their own successes, focus only on their struggle, fail to see others' struggles. For example, just from your post: you are more educated that the rest of your family, you have been admitted to a top school, are eager to tackle some of the most difficult problems, and have a very heavy class load. These are your successes. Give yourself credit for it. Focus on the struggle: you tend to call yourself names, and over-generalize several setbacks (bad grades), while seeing others in glorified way. A more constructive would be to look for a solution for your current struggle that takes an advantage of your strengths: maybe dropping a class, if you can, to give yourself more in-depth studying time.


Does a PhD give you global mobility in the job market? I am thinking of doing a PhD in Condensed Matter Physics at the Indian Institute of Science, which is not a bad place to graduate from as far as I've heard.

The downside is I'll be a little on the older side by the time I graduate, and in India, there seems to be a starting faculty preference of 35 years. I would like to know if I'd be able to practice physics somewhere else in the world after getting a PhD in the area.

I've heard the US is pretty open in terms of hiring foreign candidates, but Europe is not. What about other English speaking countries like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc? Does a Phd open up career opportunities world-wide?

There are two aspects to this question: the hiring process within an employer's institution, and the immigration policies which allow a foreign worker to move to another country and begin employment.

I think with respect to the first question—the hiring process and preferences of an individual employer—I think that in general, employers are looking for the best-qualified candidates, regardless of their origin. There are certain obvious exceptions to this (for instance, a foreign national will have a hard time getting a position at a National Nuclear Security Administration facility in the US), but otherwise, people will want the person best-suited for the job. I think this is true both in the US and Europe.

The other step is the national immigration policies. This is where things become more complex. For instance, if you are a non-European Union citizen, then your employer will need to certify that your experiences uniquely qualify you for this position, which can delay the hiring process somewhat. Similarly, employers in the US have to wait for you to obtain an appropriate visa, which can delay your start date significantly. This makes it sometimes less advantageous to hire foreign employees. (But this is a "speed bump," rather than an insurmountable obstacle.)


When should a professor recommend a student drop out of college? I am a college professor, and sometimes I learn of a student's career goals.  I think some should drop out despite having good grades.  If they do not learn much (because they are advanced or because they do better on their own), or if a degree will not help them with their specific career goals, I think that they should drop out.  College is not cheap, and I can tell some students do not enjoy going to class or doing homework.  I am afraid if I suggest a student leaves the school without a degree, I will be fired.   When should a teacher recommend a student leave the university without a degree?
I am in the U.S.

The career goals of an undergraduate change on a regular basis. How many of us are doing exactly what we thought we would do at that point in time?
If the student is doing well, grade-wise, and is on track to graduate, in most scenarios it is much better for them to finish an undergraduate degree. It opens up more doors both initially as well as for some time afterwards. If the work is too easy, suggest harder classes.
If a professor were to suggest to one of my children that they drop out of college even though they are doing well, I would have an in person visit with them to discuss their complete abuse of power. My daughter had a professor suggest she was not suited for her major - that was inappropriate enough (and totally wrong as time has told). For better or worse, your attitude towards those students is condescending at best.


Is it difficult to get into graduate school for applied math with a computer science degree? I'm a computer science student in my third year of undergrad. I've been taking math classes on the side and will have finished most of the applied math major by the time I graduate.

I'm wondering how difficult it would be to get into graduate school for applied math with a computer science undergrad degree. I could possibly switch over to the applied math major if that would make graduate school admissions easier, but I'm wondering if it would also be fairly possible with a computer science undergrad.

There's no reason why you couldn't get into an applied math graduate program with a CS bachelor's degree.  Some parts of some applied mathematics programs are called computer science in other programs (and vice versa).  Many applied mathematics students come from engineering, physics, CS, and other undergraduate programs.


What are the best practices for teaching second-language students in classes that have moved online mid-semester due to COVID-19? I'm working on a research project for one of my university's departments that supports professional development and teaching development for our faculty and grad students. We are expanding our resources focusing on online teaching, and I have found a lot of resources dealing with best practices of online teaching.

However, I haven't found much on supporting students for whom English is a second language in an online context.

I'd be very surprised if this research doesn't exist, but I haven't been able to find it so far through EBSCO, Google, etc. Most of the results I'm finding have to do specifically for teaching developmental English classes for students learning the language, but what I'm looking for is resources on how professors in other subjects across the humanities and STEM fields can support their second-language students in this new all-online context for this semester (and potentially next year).

I'm interested in, for example, how can history or biology professors teach their online classes in a way that is easily accessible for students whose first language is not English?

Note that the same issue probably exists for languages other than English.

how can professors teach their online classes in a way that is easily accessible for students whose first language is not English?

Teaching online does not change the students' brains.  Use all the pedagogical techniques you would use in a lecture or discussion class that was not online.  They will still work.

One thing that can be easier online:  you can record your lectures.  This can be done for in-person classes, but typically online teaching software makes it easy.  Lecture recording allows English language learners to listen repeatedly, at their own pace.  Just keep in mind that some students need privacy to practice speaking.


Continuing with a postdoc with my PhD advisor, but have not got any official offer letter. Should I be worried? I am an international student who's currently in a bureaucratic mess regarding my work permit application. I will get my permit possibly in February end. I completed my PhD thesis submission in December. Now, my PhD supervisor offered me a postdoc position soon after my defense, but I cannot officially sign a contract till I get my work permit. So, I don't have any official offer letter with me at the moment.

Should I be worried that I currently have no letter indicating the appointment and how can I handle the situation better?

No, you should not be worried. It is perfectly normal for official offer letters to be delayed.  Ask your supervisor if they submitted the necessary paperwork.  Ask HR what needs to be done.


What is normal pay in U.S. for RAship in STEM field? I am a PhD student in statistics/math in the U.S. I go to a large, state run institution. I am currently hired for the summer as a research assistant for a professor.

On the department website, an RAship is listed as being a 20 hour a week job, paid at $21 per hour. This is what she and I agreed to before my starting researching with her. However, now my professor wants me to work 40 hours a week for $7.34 an hour. (She is actually going to pay me $14.68/hr, since only 20 hours are bookable for legal purposes. Well, and the fact that $7.34 is below minimum wage). I never got the $21 in writing, so that is my error.

Working 40 hours per week is in essence requisite to retain the job (since the workload she requires to keep the job necessitates such). She is offering me no dissertation credit for my work, only this pittance of a grunt wage. Outside of a weekly hour long meeting via Skype, she does not have any time to mentor or guide me. Her promise is that at some point the research I do for her will become a dissertation topic. But, as of right now, I am just reading papers she is too busy to read and then telling her what they say.

This professor is not from the U.S. and I believe is somewhat unfamiliar with U.S. practices in fair wages. (For example, she offered me $10/hr to do some other things related to her research for her. I earned more than that as an undergraduate TA for a sophomore level class). I am not asking for $15/hr for flipping burgers, just a fair compensation for the work I am doing for her. She has a large NSF grant that she might end up losing if I do not produce results for her to show them.

She justifies requiring these hours at this pay because she says that I will end up possibly, maybe, hypothetically, if the moon lands on earth, theoretically finishing a third of my dissertation.

I am aware that I need to pay my dues so to speak. Naturally, I know that I need to put in a lot of time to a PhD that is not monetarily compensated. Nevertheless, I feel a bit like I am being taken advantage of. Is this pay structure/workload normal for an RAship, or should I take it up further with her?

I only have two US experiences to offer for comparison, one from a public university and another from a private.

The public university pays it's TA/RA's ~$8000 for a 9 month stipend.  The private university pays TA/RA's $19,000 before taxes for a 9 month stipend.  Both have stipulated that the expected workload is 20 hours a week.  While the public university pays significantly less than the private university, the hours for a pure math graduate student rarely exceeded 20 hours per week (new teachers sometimes spend more prepping, but any hourly help session positions were strictly 20 hours).  Paywise, I think the rate you're being offered for a 20 hour work week is not unheard of, especially for a public university.  However, being told you actually have to work 40 hour weeks means you're working for a rate less than the legal limit.  That certainly counts as getting screwed in my book.

Personally, I would say run like hell.  I know that academia has a history of overworking/underpaying graduate students, but I would find an alternative arrangement even if it means finding another school to attend or delaying a year.  Another consideration is that working 40 hours a week makes it difficult to actually do well in your studies and it wouldn't be ridiculous to consider picking up a side job just to make ends meet (meaning you're potentially working 60+ hours a week).  If you enter this arrangement, I suspect you'll be back here asking how to deal with burn out or how to recover from a mental breakdown from stress.  If you seriously want to be successful in your program, you need to find something better.


How to cite my own code in an academic paper? I’m about to submit a research paper to the Intel STS competition. I am basically finished with everything about my paper, but I need to cite a certain algorithm that I invented in my own paper. I do not want to put it inside the paper because it’s outside the scope of what I talked about in the paper, and besides the paper is already twenty pages so I can’t fit in any more material.

Is it acceptable if I simply post the code to a website like GitHub, and cite the link in my references?

As you suggested you can create a GitHub repository for your code. There is also the possibility to create a release of your repository. Then you can get a DOI for that release using Zenodo:

Zenodo How-to

You can then put that DOI in your paper as reference and do not have the problem with changing code, because the DOI is associated with the specific release.


Source code plagiarism detection tool that checks against online content I asked this question on Stackoverflow and was directed to ask it here. The question is:

I wanted to ask about plagiarism detection tools for source code written in C++. When I searched Google the ones I found compare between documents that you already have. What I'm looking for is a tool that compares against content on the internet (i.e Github).

We use the MOSS (Measure of Software Similarity) system provided by Stanford, at here.


How to deal with people judging your 'overproductiveness'? I am in 4th year postdoc working in applied math areas in which 1-3 papers a year is considered a good publication rate. I have been publishing 10-13 papers a year for the last 4-5 years (have never gone for a 'low-quality' journal as considered in my respective areas). I would think that my hardwork would be looked upon in a good way by my colleagues. But I gradually realized that some of my peers have been seeing this publication rate in negative spirit. I keep on having to explain them how I could publish so many papers - that I work hard is not a good answer for them. I feel strange that  hardwork is being judged, e.g., the quality of my work, or that my coauthors may have worked harder than me, or that I might have found some low-hanging fruits, etc. I don't know how to deal with such a reverse peer-pressure.

Moreover, sometimes, merely answering that 'I work hard' may be taken offensively by the other person.

Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

This question may be related to Productive but not respected advisor - Should I continue with him? , though the OP also states that his advisor's citation count was 'too low' which I think is not the case here.

This question is definitely not meant to self-praising nor to demean my colleagues who are generally very nice people. I feel that this issue could come up when searching for permanent job-search and the search committees may also see the record in a wrong way adversely affecting my chances. Hence, the question.

I'm not surprised that hard work isn't considered a convincing answer.  It's not plausible that you are putting in four times as many hours as your peers.  Hardly anyone actually works a hundred hours per week, and even that would achieve a fourfold increase only if your peers are putting in just twenty-five hours.  Instead, it's possible that you are working far more efficiently than your peers, but that's a tricky answer to give.  You'll offend people if it comes across as "I'm probably just smarter than you are" or "you sure must be wasting a lot of time", and you won't look good if it comes across as "I cut corners to try to rush my work into print as quickly as I can".

One common attitude in mathematics is that publishing a lot of papers is a waste of your potential: if you have the time and energy to do that, then you should be spending it trying to write better papers, not more papers.  How strongly this is felt depends on the subfield, so I don't know whether it applies to your area.  To the extent it does, there may be no compelling explanation you can give for publishing a lot of good papers but no fantastic papers.  (If you are publishing some fantastic papers, then you don't need to worry about this.)

  Is there any better ways to explain 'overproductivity' to peers, in a non-offending way, how I publish more (and good quality) papers than the average in my field?

Probably not. Your peers might simply be envious, in which case they already feel bad about the productivity difference and there's probably nothing you can say to make them feel better about it.  (They might need to vent to a friend about how frustrated they are or talk with a mentor about how to improve, but they probably aren't looking for an earnest conversation with you about how you manage to accomplish so much more than they do.)  Or your peers might have legitimate concerns about your approach, in which case no boilerplate explanation will address the concerns and you'd be better off discussing this issue with a trusted mentor instead.  Either way, I don't think you should interpret their questions as genuine requests for information, but rather as complaints.  There's probably no simple answer that will change their minds.


Non academic career for maths graduate I'm currently getting towards the end of a PhD in applied maths. My funding runs out in September, and for personal circumstances (kids, security etc) I can't go into a post-doc yet as I don't think I'll be able to submit until January/February.

I'd like to go into industry and perhaps return to academia later. I have a BSc in maths (more applied) and my research topic has been looking at the topic of optimal transport (numerical method to solving PDE/ computational mathematics) in collaboration with an industrial partner in an application of pattern analysis. I have quite a broad knowledge of for instance: machine learning; image processing; know a few programming languages. But I don't have the formal training of a computer scientist.

My question is what is the best way to advertise yourself as someone who is trained as a mathematician rather than computer scientist? Looking at the job market, they don't advertise for people 'who like solving problems' :-) The focus is very much on machine learning, data science. I feel at a disadvantage to someone with a CS background.

Looking at the job market, they don't advertise for people 'who like solving problems'

I think you've already found the perfect way to advertise yourself! There are a lot of companies interested in people like yourself. Now, I'm not a mathematician, and I don't know the full details of your background, but it seems to me like there's plenty of problem solving going on in optimization situations. Since you say your background is in applied mathematics, there may be some overlap with econometrics, too.

And also: don't hesitate to contact companies who are searching for computer scientists if you like the vacancy. Ask them if they would be interested in interviewing someone with your skills palette, it never hurts to ask.


Does social media and mainstream presence, through interviews and publishing in the "trade press", help one's chances at tenure? One of our lab directors, on tenure track, has been active in the mainstream, e.g. doing science interviews on radio, tv, newpapers, and another researcher (post-doc, I think) has published in the "trade press" rather than in an academic journal.

Does promoting your work in the mainstream help one's career in academia?  Will a tenure / promotion committee look favorably at one's popularity in the mainstream?

I'm asking particularly about large research universities in the United States.

In fact, in the absence of a large body of work published in quality academic journals and attracting loads of grant money, the strategy you mention will probably hurt your chances for tenure in large research universities in the US and probably elsewhere.

Tenure is granted in such places by committees of peers, who are mostly grant funded researchers who also teach. But it isn't your external reputation that will be examined in the meetings of the tenure committee but the quality of your research and the number of times it is cited in scholarly journals.

The above is not a universal and there may be exceptions, but not many. Your reputation outside academia is of little value in tenure discussions. However, once you are tenured (and funded), your visibility might be considered useful when it comes to salary negotiations and some expectations put on you (teaching, committees, ...).

Visibility within the community of scholars within your field via presentation of work at scholarly conferences is a bit different, but it is backed by the research, of course.

But if you want to be tenured at any research university, do a lot of research and get it funded outside the institution. The funding helps pay for graduate students who aid in the research, of course, and pay for labs, etc.


Taking suggestions for grading rubric for multiple answers test We're being encouraged to use multiple answer tests at my school.  In case you're not familiar with the concept, each question may have multiple correct answers; students are encouraged to mark all valid answers.

There's at least one correct each for each question.  Each question has either 4 or 5 answers to select from.  It is possible that all answers are correct.

I would like to grade this so that, even when there are multiple correct answers, if the student only selected one answer and it is correct, they receive partial credit.

What I'm not sure about is how to grade problems in which:

all answers have been selected, but not all answers are correct.
some of the selected answers are correct and others are incorrect.

We've been given no guidelines beyond what I've mentioned above.  When asked about how we should grade these tests, we've been told no more than to try to award partial credit if at least one correct answer has been selected.

Does anyone out there have experience grading tests like this?  If so, how might you design a grading rubric.

One simple way to design a grading rubric for this situation is to consider the question as though it were a set of true-false questions.  So if there are 5 answer and the question is worth five points, then there is 1 point for marking each true, and 1 for not marking each false answer.

Thus, for example, consider the following question:

  Which of these are mammals? (5 points)

  Cat
  Turtle
  Lizard
  Fish
  Dog

If the student marked "Cat, Turtle", then they would receive 3 points: they lose 1 point for marking "Turtle" and 1 point for failing to mark "Dog."


How to transition into computer science I currently hold a BA in Middle Eastern History, which was a pretty good fit for my last job in the Army.  I'm getting ready to move on to the civillian world now, and computer science/programming has always been a hobby for me that I'd like to look into turning into a career.

My question is, what type of program should I look into in order to deepen my knowledge and verify my abilities?  Should I look at getting a second undergrad, or would a programming education certificate be enough to get my foot in the door for employment/grad school later on?  Are online certificates such as Kaplan/Phoenix respected enough, especially if they are in addition to a traditional degree?

I basically want to know where to set my sights, in order to get going in software development.  Getting an additional qualification seems necessary, so which kind makes the most sense for getting started?

I think it's going to depend vastly on what kind of position you want to be headed into, and how deep down the rabbit hole you wish to go.

The one thing I would say you ought to focus on is fundamentals: No matter what kind of work you end up doing, be it programming business processes or pursuing a PhD, getting your fundamentals straight will pay dividends over and over again. Courses in algorithms, software engineering, computer architecture, each will give you a different view into the work you do, no matter where you're doing it. A CS undergraduate degree would be a good choice, especially if grad studies is where you want to go after. I understand they vary in quality though, so that's something to bear in mind.


How can I digitally typeset math? I want to digitally publish a document which includes mathematical equations – including symbols for integration, summation, etc.

This isn’t possible in MS Office or Notepad, which makes things difficult. Is anyone aware of software which would let me typeset math on a computer?

LaTeX is the industry standard. Note there is also a very helpful Tex/LaTeX site here on Stack Exchange.


How to explain the reasons to change Phd. supervisor I spent a year with a Phd. supervisor. I am not happy from both aspects: relationship and academically. Is it ethical to change the supervisor? Should I explain the reasons for change in details to the prospective supervisor or just be brief? How to avoid getting the impression that the student is trouble-maker (if I explained details of problems) vs. avoid give the impression there is no real reasons for change or that the student is not serious enough (if I am brief)?

You didn't say in what situation you need to explain this, which may change the answer.

If it is merely coming up in passing in a conversation, "It was not a good fit" is a good neutral way to give the general idea and leave it up to your interlocutor whether to pursue the topic or not.

If you are specifically asked for your reasons for leaving, a condensed 2-3 sentence version should be enough in most cases. Try to avoid placing blame, it is not a trial of who is right or wrong, you or your advisor. E.g. "our research interests do not align, I would really like to go more into topic B" rather than "he keeps making me do grunt work on things I hate". If you have academic reasons you probably don't need to go into the personal reasons at all, but if you do want to bring it up at some point, frame it as something like "our personalities do not mesh well". Stay carefully factual when recounting details. (This doesn't mean downplaying the issues. Think of a way to formulate it neutrally but still exposing the crux of the issues barefacedly.)

Generally, potential other supervisors will see themselves in the role of your current supervisor, so they will imagine that you will talk about them in the same manner as you will talk about your current supervisor.


Doing research/travel between postdocs (pure mathematics, Europe) I have just finished a postdoc but will not start a new postdoc for a few months.

In the meantime, I will continue to do my research. The problem is that I registered for a conference while at my former institute and the conference will take place while I'm not officially employed at any institute. I also plan to visit collaborators during this time and will likely need a visa for at least one of the visits.

I'm hoping someone else may have been in this situation and have some advice:

What do I put as my affiliation for that and any other conference I might attend in the meantime? Will not having any affiliation affect my ability to participate in conferences or make research visits?

I was unaffiliated for a little over a year between postdocs.  I attended two conferences in that time and didn't list any affiliation.  I also made two research visits, for one of which I received some funding from my host's research grant, and being unaffiliated (or 'an independent researcher', as my host put it) was no obstacle.

This might depend somewhat on country and research area, of course.  And I didn't need a visa for either of the research visits, but I'd be quite surprised if not having an affiliation right now would be an obstacle to getting one (again a little depending on the visa-issuing country).


How to make my master thesis defending smooth with good english speech? My master thesis dissertation is approaching, but I have a few concerns. First of all, I am not native English speaker. When I practiced my presentation on my own (I recorded my speech), it was not coherent to me. I feel that the transition between each sentence might be difficult to understand. Can anyone instruct me or provide me a useful English speech that is commonly used for thesis defending?

Second of all, I have limited time to present my work, and I tried to make my presentation as possible as clear to outliers. So to make the presentation clear, I have prepared some background knowledge for my audience, but the time to introduce this background knowledge in bioinformatics is more than what I expected. What should I do? My expected audience has a background in computer science, while I finished my thesis in bioinformatics. Can anyone give me possible ideas? Is there any volunteer that can give a useful English speech for thesis defense? Thanks a lot.

Use short, simple sentences.
Write a draft script to go with your slides.
Find a friend or an editor for hire to check your draft script.
Make sure you understand each of the corrections this person provides.
Create a target listener.  Ideally, this person will be well aligned with your committee members' profiles.  Reduce the background information part of your talk as much as possible.  Include only the background information your target listener really needs to hear.
Give practice talks to friends.
Videotape one of your practice talks.  Many people gesture too much with their laser pointer or ruler, so watch out for that.
After your talk, during the Question period, make sure to repeat each and every question that is posed before you start to answer it.  This will (1) ensure you have understood the question, (2) ensure everyone in the room has heard the question, and (3) buy you thinking time.  Practice doing this.


What is the difference between dual degree, 2 Bachelors and double major? We are considering to offer double majors between my department and other departments. While looking at examples from other universities, we came across other terms such as dual degree.

On the undergraduate level what is the difference, generally speaking, between:

Double Major
Dual Degree
Two Bachelors

Moa

My understanding is that:

Double Degree often means you get two full Bachelors degrees, which may be from two different universities, in two entirely unrelated subject areas. Often these programs are designed to be completed in 5--6 years total. I have also sometimes seen it used with reference to graduate programs. For example, a double degree Masters/PhD program, though this is rarer in my experience.

Double Major means you get a single degree from one university, but with a speciality in two related subject areas. For example, you could be a Physics/Chemistry double major. Typically this means you satisfy the core requirements of both programs, possibly using the electives of one to fill in the core of the other.

Two Bachelors means you get two full Bachelors degrees. Sometimes this is used as a synonym for a Double Degree, sometimes it is differentiated by requiring that both degrees be granted by the same institution.


Getting into math ten years after a BA in English I got a BA in English at a pretty good school, spent the next 10 years in a fruitless pursuit of screenwriting with a day job in a legal department, and now that I'm sick of all that, I'd like to do something mathy. And it seems pretty clear that that's going to require going back to school.

Since this is a HUGE redirection -- a ridiculous one, really -- I assume I should get a second BA/BS before even considering a masters, right? I did well in math in school, but I left off at single variable calc. (I'm currently studying linear algebra on my own and loving it.) But what, really, are my chances for even getting into a decent second bachelor's program?? I'm thinking of taking college extension classes to get more experience and recommendation letters for that purpose. If I get some online bachelors degree (EDIT: or a post-bac), are any (reputable) masters programs even going to consider me??

You may well ask what my eventual goal is, but I'm at such a basic level that I'm not sure that that question is all that relevant. If I were to pick a goal just for the sake of aiming for something, getting a job in statistics sounds interesting, but who knows what I'd want to do after getting a second bachelors. I'd like to try my hand at research, but that sounds way too pie-in-the-sky given my background.

Thanks for any advice or feedback.

If you want to go into math, should you get a BSc?

I'd say "yes". It often is quite doable to pick up a new subject on your own if you have academic experience, but English and Mathematics are so far apart that I'd doubt there would be a lot of synergy. Mathematics has its own way of thinking, which is probably picked up best by going through an undergrad degree.

Should you go into math?

Enrolling for a degree is of course a rather strong decision. In my experience quite a few of those who start anew later in their lifes drop out rather early. Maybe taking an online course first could both be a good preparation if you go through with it, and helpful to figure out if you really want to it.

Can you get in somewhere?

I don't know about your country, but both the UK and Germany often have places reserved for mature students, which have fewer formal requirements. So in those countries, getting into a decent program would be quite doable.

A final comment

For me at least mathematics is great fun. If you believe you'd like it, and you are willing to put in the effort, give it a try.


How to share a scientific dataset with the research community Background:
I am a PhD student and am one step away from graduating. I have created a dataset in 3D microscopy vision, particularly 3D surface reconstruction from scanning electron microscope images, and the work has been already published in a highly respected journal. I would like to share the dataset with the research community to draw attention and possibly evaluate the contribution(s).

Question:
I am wondering what are the typical channels that scholars use to share datasets?

Although I think the first thing is to talk to your institute, and if they already have a platform or webpage to share data, use that one in the first place.

You also could use figshare, datahub, or zenodo to share your data.
Actually the OpenData SE site opened a datahub site for OpenData SE, see this question:
How do I share Open Data with others on this SE site?

Furthermore, Open Data commons has some good information on how to share data, and what licenses to use.
Also see:
How can I Share my Data Sets Without Worrying About Copyright Issues?


Does deferring admissions to PhD affect future (post-PhD) career path? I'm currently in my final year of undergraduate study, and will be applying to physics PhD programs (for condensed matter theory) soon. Without going into details, I am convinced that deferring my admission for a year, i.e. taking a "gap year", would be beneficial for me personally, and it is my understanding that most schools permit a one-year deferral. I would most likely work in the tech industry for this time.

I am not worried about my physics/math abilities atrophying; I plan on actively keeping up with my studies independently during this time.

Assuming I am permitted to defer for a year, are there any negative perceptions related to time off before graduate school that might affect my future academic career, after the PhD?

Will some people in the community look down on me for taking time away from academia, or is this considered a fine thing to do? Could this hinder me in the future when applying for postdocs (both the year away from academia and the fact that I am probably finishing my PhD a year later than I otherwise would)?

I am asking about the general perception of a gap year as it pertains to and affects a career path, not about how a gap year impacts a PhD application (which is addressed in this question).

In general, there is very little effect from taking a year off between undergraduate and doctoral studies, so long as you complete your graduate studies in a "normal" manner. The primary concern is how you did as a graduate student on your particular project; after you've received the PhD, the particulars of how you got there are much less important in determining your future career path. There may be some people who are prejudiced against people who deviated from what they consider a "normal" trajectory, but I wouldn't expect this to be a major fraction of potential employers. (And more to the point, you probably wouldn't want to work for such an individual anyways.)


How to prevent a coauthor from stealing the article? Please go through the following incidents to understand the problem.

Mr. A is a Ph.D. student of some institute who was working with Prof. B of another institute on a very interesting mathematical problem since last three years. Recently, they came across a significant solution to it. They wrote a research article to publish in a very good mathematics journal that accepts the online submission.

Prof. B wanted to submit it to the journal by himself. Mr. A agreed.

A few days ago, Mr. A wanted to know about the submission of their article via telephone. Prof. B informed that the article is submitted. But, Mr. A received any confirmation e-mail neither from the journal nor Prof. B forwarded the submission mail to him. Prof. B did not upload it in arXiv, which is a free preprint repository.

Mathematics journals used to take a long duration to review and publish an article. Prof. B told that submitting this article to arXiv will immediately attract community attention. Many researchers will start working in the new direction. As a result, Mr. A and Prof. B may lose their opportunity to work on that problems. Also, the article may be stolen.

Mr. A did not ask Prof. B to forward the submission confirmation mail to him. Prof. might think that Mr. A is suspecting him. It may affect the relationship. Also, Prof. is a very powerful person in the administration, who may prevent an opportunity for Mr. A to gain a job. Again from some of his friends, Mr. A came to know that Prof. had distributed related research problems to his collaborators.

As a consequence, Mr. A is thinking that Prof. has submitted this work in his own name and he has lost his credit as the first author of this article.

Now the question is: How Mr. A may save his credit and his work without hampering his relationship with Prof B?

In this age, it seems highly unlikely that there is absolutely no permanent record of their communication and collaboration: how did they collaborate in writing the paper? Did they exchange drafts via e-mail, for instance?

So, if this happens, you simply show the evidence to the editors and to the direct superiors of prof. B. End of story.


Why is Hawaii time used for conference deadlines? I saw a European conference post deadlines for paper submission in Hawaii time. Now I see requests coming from locations in Eastern Standard Time areas with Hawaii time deadline. Why is this?

It's likely the most westward time zone with universities - or at least with a noticeably amount of academic work. Hawaii is in GMT-10, and in GMT-11 there are only a few small island countries, probably without any university.

In short, if you put the deadline in Hawaii time, in nearly any place of the world you can just forget the clock and just mind the date. It is also a great way to avoid complains like "I meet the deadline but I missed the time because I didn't notice the time zone", because in any other zone the deadline would be earlier.


How bad is it to accept a competitive Fellowship, then reject it BEFORE April 15 My situation:

I applied to school A (R1 school, US News ranked, aligned research) and is nominated by POI for a competitive Fellowship. This fellowship covered tuition + stipend for a couple of years and comes from the school itself (not department). The fellowship offer is only through email, so no official signed letterhead yet. Since the Fellowship is competitive, POI urged me to accept it  "within the week"  otherwise it will go toward somebody else (one week after Fellowship decision). However, I:

Have reservation about the research group (haven't visited the place, only Skype called, their pressure for me to accept, outcome of graduates)
Still waiting on other schools, which are very promising (contacts with POI, recommended for admit) yet entirely unsure of fundings.

I know that according to the April 15 agreements, I can accept then reject the fellowship before the deadline without personal repercussion. However, I want to know:

How much am I screwing up the POI if I accept the fellowship then reject it later? I am afraid that an email confirmation then rejection would make his research lab and department looks bad to the school for losing potential spots.
With question #1 in mind, should I do it? The April 15 agreements seems to be set up for these situations, but is it selfish for me to jeopardize other people chances?

Let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’

It may be legal to accept and then reject the fellowship, but it does not make it right (in my opinion). Academia is still very much built on trust and goodwill. People who choose to scheme their way through loopholes in the regulations may benefit in a short term. But people who stand behind their word deserve ongoing respect and make for leaders of very strong academic teams.

Don't do anything to people that you wound not enjoy done to yourself. If you are having second thoughts about this option, leave it and wait for something else which may be going your way.


Why don't researchers publish failed experiments? The following might be a slight generalization for all fields but something I've noticed especially in the field of Scientific Computing:

Why don't people publish failures? I mean, if they tried some experiment and realized at the end that they tried everything and nothing worked. Why don't they publish this? Is it because such content won't get published or is it because it is shameful to have a failed experiment in a journal alongside prize-winning papers?
I spent a better part of a year working on, what now looks like, a dead problem. However, most papers that I read initially took you to the point of feeling optimistic. Now that I re-read the papers, I realize that I can say (with much confidence) that the author is hiding something. For instance, one of the authors who was comparing two systems, gave an excellent theoretical foundation but when he tried to validate the theory with experiments, there were horrible discrepancies in the experiments (which I now realize). If the theory wasn't satisfied by the experiments, why not publish that (clearly pointing out parts of the theory which worked and which didn't) and save the future researchers some time? If not in a journal, why not ArXiv or their own websites?

"Why don't people publish failures?"

Actually, they do.

Journal of Negative Results (ecology and evolutionary biology)
Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine
Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results
Journal of Interesting Negative Results (natural language processing and machine learning)
Journal of Negative Results in Environmental Science (no issues yet?)
Journal of Errology (no issues yet?)

and so on...

(You might also want to see the Negative Results section of the Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism.)


Confusion regarding manuscript status in IOP's article tracking system and ScholarOne Manuscript System I had submitted a manuscript in an IOP journal a month back. In the IOP's article tracking system, the status changed from "1st reviewer agreed to report" to "Editorial Assessment" instead of "All reviewer reports received". However, in the ScholarOne Manuscript System, the status changed from "Awaiting Referee Reports" to "Awaiting Decision". What should be the interpretation of the current status of the manuscript?

“Awaiting decision” is not incompatible with “All reviewer report received” or “Editorial Assessment”.  It means the editor, an associate editor or a handling editor will have a look and make a decision.
Remember that referees can only recommend a course of action: it is the journal through its editor or delegates that takes the decision to publish or not, usually based on the reports.
In particular if the review or reviews are inconclusive, the editor may decide to send to another reviewer.


What are some tips for crowdfunding science off websites like PetriDish? What are some perks that would increase the amount of dollars that people spend on a venture? And what level of transparency would be useful?

Petridish is a recent KickStarter-like startup for crowdfunding science.

These funding mechanisms are in their very infancy, so I don't know if there will any "tried and true" techniques for a few months, assuming the funding model proves to work at all. That being said, it will be very similar to that on Kickstarter:

Advertise in numerous channels. People can only support you if they know about you. Getting the word out is the primary goal in the beginning.
Provide an engaging, easy-to-understand description of:

What you want to research
Why you want to research it
How humanity will benefit from your having researched it
What success will look like

(Note: This last point is often ignored, but it's crucial for the lay-audience. They may expect a particular cancer research project to end with a cancer cure, whereas in reality it will end with the identification of a particular protein responsible for a particular mutation. Stating this will avoid making you as an individual and scientists as a whole from looking stupid in the eyes of the public.)

Offer a constant (strictly defined, e.g. "weekly" or "biweekly") updates to backers

Regarding useful perks, I've noticed that a few of the successful drives offered things such as:

Engrave the name of the backer or a loved on the instruments being used
Paintings of the organisms/landscape/imagery being studied
Naming a star/organism after the backer/loved one

The final topic, transparency, is more difficult. On the one hand, you will need complete transparency. On the other hand, there is such a thing as too much transparency. In brief, your updates should serve to inform the backers about your work, while simultaneously and more subtly serving two other goals as well:

Convince your backers that you're actually doing work
Maintain their confidence in your ability to do the work

tl;dr -

Make everything  - everything - about your proposed project crystal clear for the layperson
Make the prizes cutesy and attractive, but not too lavish; they're investing for science, and secondarily maybe a little gift
Your updates should, in order: (1) inform about your research, (2) convince the reader of your scienceness


Follow up email if you have not heard back after tenure track facutly interview I had an academic job interview for a tenure-track faculty position in January but have not heard anything yet (March now).  Should I send an email asking for the status of the application? Can anyone please tell me what a proper email could be?

Thanks very much for the help.

Ideally, towards the end of your visit in January the search chair would have let you know the projected timeline. Unfortunately that doesn't always happen.

In any case, I don't think it's unreasonable to drop them a quick email to ask if there are any updates. Before you do, however, be aware that you are likely to get an evasive answer or a non-answer. There are three likely reasons that you haven't heard anything:

They don't want to hire you, but they forgot to tell you.
They have offered the job to someone else, but are keeping you around as a backup in case the first person turns them down. They may be currently negotiating with the first person.
They are still interviewing candidates, and won't decide for a while.

In case 1, you'll get a definite response. In cases 2 and 3, you won't learn anything, although they might be able to give you a rough estimate of when to expect to hear from them.

NB: If you have been offered a job at another institution, but you are still interested in this position, do definitely tell them. They may be able to speed up the process on their end to give you some more information.


How to make academic life bearable under stressing circumstances? I have been teaching a humanities course at a higher education institution for about more than three years now. I am expected to get full tenure this year. Perhaps it is the only chair dedicated to my field in my country; it is certainly the only one in the subfield I teach. In other words, yes, I am the only professor who teaches that subject in the whole country, and the only professor totally dedicated to teaching and researching in the broader field of study. However, before I took the position, I was not specialized in the subfield I teach now. At the moment, my research and publications in field A are split between subfields A1 (in which I pursued research for my MA and PhD) and A2 (my new teaching position). To complicate things, I am in a multidisciplinary department in another field.

There is no available teaching position in my whole field (A) in the whole country in the foreseeable future (say, 10-15 years, unless a miracle happens). I could teach in related fields, and that is what I am doing (and plan to do in better conditions in the not-so-distant future).

The conditions under which I work might be described as both appalling and depressive. I know there are worse conditions in my country; and I know that I earn just as much as anyone else, but that is not the issue. The issue is having no perspective of future research; virtually no intellectual life; almost no contact with other faculty. There is only one room for more than 18 professors in the department; in it there are some 5 computers, 3 of which do not function. The library does not have the books I need for my basic, mandatory course -- in fact, it only has one textbook I use in class! I have to make do with articles and books from the Internet, when and if available. Grants and funding are virtually non-existent. I am in debt because of a conference in which a paper of mine was accepted. After that, I could not attend 3 international conferences because there was no funding.

So, in the end, my question is this: is there any way (attitudes, habits) to make academic life more bearable under these circumstances? Should I give up research and focus on teaching basic subjects, at the risk of fading into oblivion for not publishing?

A note:
I cannot just "run away", because, as I said before, there is no way I can find a similar job anywhere. I have been trying to busy my mind with other part-time activities, so as not to worry or stress too much, but that also leaves the feeling that my "real" job is useless, or worse: a fake.

Since you seem to have decided that you must accept the situation where you work, let me make some suggestions to make it less depressive. Some of these might not be good ones for you, so pick and choose those that appeal.

the room. One room for 18 people? They don't seriously expect you to use it. What can you use instead?  Do you meet students there, or write conference papers, or prepare coursework? Can you do those things somewhere more pleasant? Your own living room, a coffee shop, a park bench, a table in the library, a classroom that's empty more often than not? Do you have to sit in a crowded place jammed with broken things, or can you go somewhere nicer and get more done?
no funding for conferences. Good for you managing to get a paper accepted and managing to get yourself there. That's probably one more conference than many of your peers. If there is someone who goes to more conferences than you, go and ask them how they do it. They will probably be happy to show you the tricks. In the same spirit, if you can get your own computer you won't care that the department can't provide decent ones.
intellectual connection. The people in the depressing room are half of your peer set - the other half is the A1 and A2 people around the world. Find them! Follow them on Twitter, read their blogs, download their conference sessions and papers, email them with questions about something they published. Use the internet to forge ties with these people - you aren't a moonstruck teenager, you're their peer and they will be happy to hear from you. Who knows, this activity might even lead you out of your current situation some day, but more importantly it will help you grow and solve a pain point for you.
the rest of your life. It's common to push everything else aside while chasing tenure. Do you have any hobbies or habits? Even just following a sports team? Try to ramp up that side of your existence, make some friends who don't work at the university, spend some time cooking or hiking or reading the latest celebrity gossip or watching that tv show everyone watches. Do some fun stuff, whatever fun is for you. Meet some people who can bring you joy.
find a way to be more connected to the university as a whole, not just your department. Join a club or team that has profs from all faculties, or even better has faculty, staff and students from all faculties. Attend (if appropriate) religious activities that happen on campus. Go to the "our university day at X" events. Help with fundraising or political activities that will let you meet people from all over the campus. You're going to be here a long time right? Get to know the place and the people and weave it into your life.
if the tenure you're expecting comes with a raise, start working out now what the consequences of that are. Will you be able to move to a nicer place? Get specific about looking for that place now. Imagine being able to have a lovely view, or a spare bedroom you can use as an office, or quieter, safer nights. The hard work you have put in will be bringing you benefits soon, start to think about those now.

Your department would be amazing if they handed you a bright sunny office, a delightful collection of peers who you enjoy talking to, plenty of important work, a steady stream of bright students, a fully-equipped working environment and a library that's the envy of everyone in your field. But very few places are really like that. So roll up your sleeves and get yourself what you need to excel, and fill your days with work and not-work that make you happy. Your department is never going to do that for you, but you can do it for yourself.


National vs Regional vs Institutional conference I'm a PhD student currently writing a scholarship application, and there is a section in which I can include any non-refereed contributions, which includes conference presentations.  For such presentations, I am to indicate whether the conference is, in their words, "institutional, regional, provincial, national or international."

Some of the conferences I've presented at are very obviously international and national.  However, I'm having some difficulty classifying some of the smaller, graduate conferences I've spoken at.

I suppose my question is: what is an institutional conference?  At what point is a conference considered regional?  Provincial?

It seems a bit silly to just go from the title of the conference.  For example, if conference X has the name of a city in the title, it would be regional, but conference Y has the name of a province in it and is therefore provincial, even though conference X had greater attendance and was considered to be higher profile because of an established history.  As such, this is probably the wrong way to go about it.  What is the right way?

I don't know that there are any hard and fast rules for this - I see it as referring to the organization that hosts the conference. Is it a international or national organization or a regional/provincial/local branch of an international or national organization.

Institutional conference = hosted by an institution and attended mostly by people from one institution.

Regional = generally a regional division of a national organization. For example, the American Psychological Association has different regions, which hold their own conferences. See http://www.apa.org/about/apa/organizations/regionals.aspx

Provincial = similar to regional, but when the national organization is subdivided into provinces.

National conference = hosted by a national professional organization.

International = hosted by an international professional organization.

The name of the conference doesn't necessarily indicate if it is a national, regional, provincial, local, or institutional conference. For example, a national conference might be held at the same location every year, and thus might have the name of that location in its title, but it is still a national conference.

Good luck with your scholarship!


How commonly do researchers spend a long time (>10) years on soft money? In Academia, a soft money research position is one where uncertain money comes from an external source.  The employee or xyr supervisor/boss might need to secure funding every couple of years or so, in order for the position to continue.  The way out would be tenure or a government job.

An obvious soft money position is the post-doctoral fellowship, but many post-docs might not find a faculty position directly.  For example, if the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) advertises a soft money assistant researcher position, they have a defined path of promotion steps.  UCLA defines four steps of assistant researcher (2 years max), three steps of associate researcher (2 years max), and nine steps of researcher (3 years max until step IV, possibly indefinite from step V).   If coming in at step I of assistant researcher, it might, theoretically, take 4*2+3*2+4*3=26 years of positions in steps of 2 years (first 14 years) and 3 years (last 12 years), until one might be appointed indefinately, if I'm reading things correctly.  Needless to say, not ideal from an employee's point of view.

Although time-limited positions and soft money might not mean exactly the same thing, I suppose they often go hand in hand.  That raises the question: how common is it for researchers to spend a long time, say more than 10 years, in soft money positions?  It's one thing to "drop out" of Academia when finishing a PhD at 28 years, it's another thing to move from postdoc to assistant researcher to associate researcher, only to finally discover, at age 45, that you're not good enough for tenure, and lack the necessary skills and experience for a teaching position.  Oops.

In Science, Technology and Engineering (STEM) fields in the USA and Canada, how common is it for researchers to spend more than 10 years in time-limited soft-money research positions?

In the U.S., at least, long-term careers on various forms of "soft money" are a lot more common than it looks from inside the "core" academia of graduate school and tenure-track faculty positions.  In reality, the research ecosystem is very complex, with all sorts of niches that aren't necessarily apparent from the outside.  My own experience as a grad student was that I didn't even know any of these options existed until a colleague reached out and invited me into the non-traditional side of academia.

I know of many people who have had long and fulfilling careers, all the way to retirement (if they ever really retire), entirely on soft money.  Some of them have been with a single university or company for that entire time.  More often, they shift around from position to position over time, between university, government, small company, large company, consultancy, foundation, non-profit, standards organization, etc., in patterns dictated by the evolution of those organizations and how the research opportunities are shifting.  Unlike with postdocs, this often doesn't require moving, particularly near a high-tech hub: Boston and the Bay Area are obvious examples, but many large cities have research sectors that interact with the local universities in all sorts of non-obvious ways.

The distinction between "soft" and "hard" money is not always as obvious as it appears, either.  For example, there are organizations that pool soft-money risk, or have core positions that are effectively hard because they are pooled between many external grants.  Even university professors can often have the option to "soften" their positions by buying out of teaching responsibilities.

From my experience, it seems that there are three main classes of soft-money researcher, showing up in all of these environments:

Primary investigators: just like normal faculty PIs, but with a higher cost and no teaching commitments.  A PI who can establish a strong research direction and funding stream can hold a position nearly as secure as tenured faculty.
High-skill implementer: these are people who don't necessarily lead their own projects, but who work full-time for PIs in executing projects.  Engineers, analysts, programmers, lab technicians, etc.  Really good implementers are always in high demand for research, and can have a long and productive research career when teamed with the right sort of PIs.
Exploited labor: these are either implementers who haven't developed/proved their skill, people trying to become PIs who haven't made it yet, or researchers who are stuck in an exploitative environment.  This is the type of soft money that seems to be most common in certain parts of traditional academia and can be "eternal postdoc limbo" (or its fake-hard-money cousin: "adjunct faculty limbo").  Unfortunately, it can often be hard for a researcher to tell if they're in this category and whether it's a passing stage or a trap they need to break out of.

Life in these worlds can be very different than in the teaching-centric parts of academia, but an awful lot of interesting things happen in them, and it offers much more variety in career options for a graduating Ph.D. with an inclination to research than I think most people know about.


What makes a good reference letter for a junior faculty position I'm in the process of applying to junior faculty positions (e.g. Assistant Professor). This will be my first time I ever apply for an academic position.

My direct supervisor asked me to write a first draft for my own reference letter for this application. I know that this can be considered unethical but I cannot change it. I have never before written such a letter nor read one. The examples I found online are not very helpful.

What are the elements of a good reference letter?

What distinguishes an excellent reference letter from a good one?

Disclaimer: I have not served on a faculty hiring committee, so this answer is not based on first-hand experience. What is expected of a recommendation letter also greatly depends on the field, country, and whether the department is teaching-focused or research-focused and how "elite" it is.

Academic recommendation letters are quite different from non-academic reference letters.
A good academic recommendation letter should be detailed. Simply saying "spore234 was my student and they were the most smartest, and hardest working student ever" is not going to cut it. In particular, it should discuss your research, its significance, and what you contributed to each project. This is particularly important if your research is collaborative -- recommendation letters can elucidate what you contributed relative to your coauthors. It should also discuss teaching and service if applicable.

That is probably why your supervisor is asking you for a draft -- you are more familiar with your work than she/he is and can thus provide more detail. Hopefully your supervisor will heavily edit your draft (please encourage her/him to do so), but you can help provide details to include in it. Don't underestimate how little your supervisor may remember about what exactly you contributed to this or that project, or even what the project was. By drafting the letter, you are providing a reminder.

Furthermore, recommendation letters sometimes include a comparison to other students. E.g., "I have advised 10 PhD students during my career and spore234's research contributions would place her in the top two. Spore234 is comparable to my former student X, who has gone on to a successful career as a now-tenured faculty at the University of Y." This is still a subjective assessment, but it's a more precise way to express an opinion than simply spouting superlatives. (I would be hesitant to draft such a paragraph about myself, but perhaps you can let your supervisor fill in the blanks.)

Of course, a recommendation letter should also include the usual pleasantries, some detail about the recommender and how they know the subject, and some forward-looking discussion of future potential.


How does a dual degree (Computer Science/Maths) compare to a degree in a single area? I am considering applying for a degree (ideally, but not necessarily, MSc) in Computer Science and Maths, such as this one: http://www.exeter.ac.uk/undergraduate/degrees/computerscience/comscimathsmsci/#Programme-structure, or another one from a respected university. My father has shared his concerns that this may be a 'Jack of all trades and master of none' option, when compared with single subject degrees, and I wanted to find out if this is true.

Would a degree programme of this nature (CS and Maths) make me just as skilled as somebody with a degree in either Computer Science or Maths, or would I be left with a degree that leaves less competitive than somebody who has studied a single subject?

Would employers/universities (I am currently interested in academia and being able to enrol in a Ph.D programme is beneficial) respect this degree as much as a degree in one or the other?

If this is true, is this true for both MSc and BSc courses, or would the integrated Masters make me competitive against single subject students?

Your choice depends on your purpose and your competitors. You should ask yourself: who am I competing with?

If you want to pursue a Ph.D. degree, and if the subject you want to study contains a lot of math, such that a standard syllabus of a M.Sc. is insufficient, then you should go for it.

If you don't want to work in academy, then this depends on the company's choice of employers.

But remember, it is not about taking a lot of courses. As far as I experienced, professors pick their Ph.D. students by their i) research skills ii) background knowledge about the subject. And those are listed by priority.

Assume that, there are two CS students, Alice and Bob. Both are seeking a Ph.D. position in area of Game Theory.
Game Theory is closely related to Economics. But also, Multi-Agent Systems is main subject that relates Game Theory to Computer Science.

Alice chose to enroll a double-program which is a hybrid of Economics and Computer Science. Whereas Bob enrolled a standard M.Sc. Computer Science program, and took more Computer Science related courses.

They both graduated at the same time, with the highest possible graduation grades.

Scenario I

One of them wants to work at a company, and the other wants to join the research team of Professor Charlie. The result is, they are not competitors.

Scenario II

Both want to join the research team of Professor Charlie. There are two vacancies. The result is, they are not competitors (assuming that they are the only ones who want to join).

Scenario III

This time, there is only one vacancy. Now, you are Professor Charlie. Who would you pick? The right answer to this question is: what is my research team doing? Yes, it is indeed a question, but a necessary one in your situation. If professor Charlie's team is working on theories from field of Economics, then he will pick Alice. However, if his team is working on pure computer science and Multi-Agents, then he will pick Bob.

However, above all these, if there is a third student, Daniel, whose grade is not so high but published two top-conference papers and submitted one of his papers to a top journal, all in the area of Game Theory, it is most likely that Professor Charlie will pick him.

All in all,

  If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there. -- Lewis Carroll


Trailing spouse postdoc My husband has accepted a postdoc position in a city in Australia with two great institutions where I think I'll have a good shot at securing a postdoc for myself. I have some great connections to researchers there through my advisor and committee members. I'm now doing the groundwork to get my foot in the door as I've not met any of these researchers in person.

How/should I get around mentioning that I'm moving there as a trailing spouse? It will be pretty obvious, correct? Why else would I be moving there? Should I just be upfront about it?

There's no point in disguising the reason for you moving to Australia. If you give some kind of prevaricating answer to the question of why you're moving, then this will look unprofessional at best. The people with whom you're going to chat about possible postdoc positions for yourself will of course know about the academic two-body problem.

The fact that there are two institutions where you might be able to find work is in your favour. Cultivate your contacts and opportunities with both institutions, at the same time. Don't be coy about the fact you're shopping around for positions.