How to improve self-learning as a PhD student? As a doctoral student, you take some classes, but most of what you do needs material that you must gather from papers, conferences, and other sources. With limited possibilities for communication with authors and such, what's the best way to learn these necessary concepts?

For example, I read a paper (from a big name publication) presenting a novel approach to SVMs with new constraints on the objective function. The description of the optimization was vague, but I needed to use this technique for my own work and my optimization skills are limited at best. I'm sure to a reviewer with the right expertise, the description was fine though.

As a PhD student, one can only take so many courses in so many subjects. Nevertheless, some things (like optimization theory in the above example) are not exactly easily self-taught, and surely not in a few weeks.

So I ask you, what is the best strategy to fill these gaps without devoting entire courses to the subject?

Additionally, how do you do that without just learning things piecemeal? Learning something useful for a hyper-specific case is essentially worthless once circumstances change. How do you balance the need to know both these hyper-specific examples and the more general ideas while doing this gap-filling?

During my Ph.D. studies I had to do exactly that: balance my time between learning specific examples and learning where and how to find these examples without wasting too much time. In my case, I did not have that much guidance from my supervisor (he let me be pretty independent) and on top of that my topic was interdisciplinary. Due to the latter, there were gaps in my learning that I had to fill, and taking 20 ultra-specialized courses was not an option because of the time constraint (I had to finish my PhD within 4 years and also publish some papers in that time).

From my experience, a top-down approach is the most effective one. It sounds like you started reading a very specialized paper; try reading something more broad about the subject, ideally a tutorial/video/article/book chapter with emphasis on applications (since you mentioned you need to apply a method to your own work) that will give you a good overview in a shorter amount of time. Then, not only you will gain more insight as to which method is the appropriate one to use in your research and can devote more time to it, but you will also have kept in the back of your head the other ones, in case conditions change and you need to switch methods. Online courses (MOOCs) are a good source of information, as you can adjust them to your time schedule and often are not a semester long but rather a few weeks. I am sure you can find something on what you are looking for on www.edx.org and/or www.coursera.com.
Communicate with people around you. This is crucial. If you are not already in an environment where knowledgeable people are available, put in the effort to find one. Look up people and email them; most of the time professors are passionate about helping out students. I was lucky to have an office one door down from a retired professor, who had time to talk and share his expertise and advice - some insights are difficult to find in books.

Try to get creative with your learning - never is one source enough, try to diversify. It is easy to become overwhelmed by the information, so be organized, take notes, and try to be aware of what you are learning and how it fits in your purpose, with a calm mind. Take breaks when you feel overworked (trust me, this comes from experience).

From the organizational viewpoint, I think sketching out objectives every month or week, and then preparing a summary of what you learned and how it applies to your research (like a progress report) helps a lot in seeing the big picture. You don't want to get carried away too much reading about things you won't use. Of course, that's inevitable, as it is part of research - it is part of navigating in the vast realm of knowledge, sometimes you end up sidestepping.


How does one figure out how hard it would be to get tenure in a given department? Anecdotally, I've heard that it's easier to get tenure in UK/Canada than in the US.
I've also heard that some departments have a reputation for denying tenure.
Are there statistics about this? (related question: Tenure and tenure denial rates by universities)
How can a job seeker determine how difficult it will be to get tenure when weighing offers from multiple departments?
EtA:

For instance, are there polite/coy ways of asking about this?  Would students or post-docs know and be in a more honest position than the profs?  Are reputations widely known and so just asking some senior people would likely give you a good sense?
Another aspect of this question: are there regional differences, as I alluded to?

Let me mention some aspects not covered by the other question.
I think that for an individual case it is nearly impossible to make a prediction with any validity. Even if you can determine the historical record for a given department, things change. Things always change.
The decisions on tenure are based on both the needs of a given department, which evolve over time, and the actual record and performance of an individual candidate. Nothing in this is very predictable. You can do a "good" job that isn't "quite" good enough as measured by the evaluations of your peers. You might be a bit unlucky in your research production or your teaching evaluations. Or you might be especially lucky. It varies.
Worse than that is the question of changing economic and even political situations. A legislature may decide to reduce funding for a university or for a specialty just as it becomes a factor for you. Economic conditions might be especially good or bad for bringing new students into the university (or your department) at just the point at which decisions are made.
There have been situations in which a department recommends a person for tenure, but the university says no, due to decreased or even uncertain funding. After all, tenure is a long term commitment that may be difficult to make in uncertain times.
And, of course, a pandemic might hit.
While one can gather statistics about such things over time, such things are essentially meaningless as a predictive measure for an individual. You take a chance. You work hard. You hope for the best. But also, you keep flexible if you are wise and look at how your current trajectory is going with respect to the trends developing around you.
The one thing you can do is try to match the stated priorities of an institution to your own skills. If you are a better teacher than researcher, then a teaching college will almost certainly be a better "bet" than a research focused institution. But that, I assume, is obvious. But be realistic about your self evaluation.


Etiquette for contacting a corresponding author? I'm a 2nd year graduate student (biological sciences). I've been developing a new research tool, which builds upon a system developed by a different lab. However, I've had issues replicating the previous system, owing partly to a scarcity of certain details that would be useful for someone who is still new to most of the technical aspects of this type of research.

I'm debating whether I should contact the corresponding author of the source literature to ask for clarification (e.g. if they could send me specific plasmid maps). However, based upon the research history of my lab, I'm concerned that the other lab may be able to deduce what enhancements I'd like to make to their system (since they've attempted to do similar things in the past). As such, I'm not sure if they would be willing to provide such information.

I've thought about discussing with my advisor. However, I also don't want to seem like I don't have the initiative/independence to seek out what I need myself. If general protocol is for students to directly contact corresponding authors, I'm wondering what is the best way for me to phrase this inquiry.

Thanks so much!

Ask your advisor. In this context I think it's more important to show you have some forethought to realize the situation could be potentially tricky and that you know when to ask for advice, versus showing your initiative/independence. You're a second year graduate student.

There are several issues that your advisor will know more about than you regarding your relationship with this other lab, in terms of publication strategy, any personal contact they already have, avoiding your request sounding like an accusation or making you look foolish, etc. Your advisor might also know about the reputation of the other author: maybe this is someone who would be responsive to a student email, maybe it's someone who would ignore you and your advisor needs to intervene on your behalf. Your advisor can also give you recommendations on your own work and help you discover if there are other causes for your inability to replicate results so far, and save you both from some embarrassment if the problem is your own.


How successful would one be in switching fields from PhD in computational biology/neuroscience to postdoc in computer science? How successful would someone be who completed his PhD in something such as computational biology or neuroscience but wanted to pursue post-doctoral training and beyond in computer science?

I say computer science because, presumably, dissertation work in computational X involves programming and a working knowledge of data structures and algorithms.

I believe that career changes and "reinventions" are a regular part of modern careers in highly specialized fields. Very few people will be able to work in a single domain for their entire careers, and the ability to move laterally between "adjacent" fields will be a critical skill enabling one to have greater chances and opportunities for success.

Now, that said, your chances of success in any particular job hunt will depend to some extent on how "enlightened" your future boss (or hiring staff) are: some will actively seek out anyone with the appropriate skill set and enthusiasm for the work, while others will be more focused on people who have the "direct" skills they need, assuming such people will require less training to be able to carry out their work. Neither of these positions is "better"; they just happen to coexist.


Adding Presentation and data in Google Scholar I would like to ask whether it is possible to add a presentation and data in google scholar. I am asking that because during conference there were people interested in using my data and presentation, however, these data hasn't been published yet.

So, my question is: could the presentations and data be cited as published articles or not?

Google Scholar usually (not always) just crawl the contents which are organized like a research article. If it's just a presentation (e.g. powerpoint, LaTeX beamer, poster, etc.) you could upload it in F1000Research or Figshare which could give you a DOI and will be fully citable. But it does not guarantee that it will be indexed by Google Scholar. Also I like Figshare cause you could share your data with presentation/paper/pre-print under Common Creative license (it's not the only license available in the Figshare).


Does doing an undergraduate semester exchange abroad improve chances of getting into top universities? I am a math undergraduate student from India, from one of the IITs. I have an opportunity to go for a semester exchange at some Universities in Germany, France and Switzerland, for a single semester. I am interested in pursuing further studies in pure mathematics at a top university abroad. I wanted to ask how much would a semester at an excellent university help me in getting into the masters or Phd program of the same University, or for that matter even other top universities.

How much of an impact would a semester at an excellent university have on the chances of acceptance for masters and Phd programs at top universities?

Edit: Recent development and further information

I have been accepted as an exchange student at EPFL.(The question still remains)

Some background as to why I am asking the question - While the University is not taking any semester fees, the cost involved is significantly high, and would stretch my finances quite a bit. I want to evaluate what I would get out of, what would be a very significant monetary investment for me. Basically "Is it worth it?".

As JeffE says: It does not really matter whether you went somewhere and where did you go; it matters much more what have you done there. In general, having an Erasmus (or similar) semester abroad is not seen much as an advantage. Having a semester abroad accompanied by a publication with a professor there -- that's a different story, because it shows that you went there and really got some experience there.

However, if you spend the semester at a university at which you later apply for studies (which seems to be your case), you can get something from solely being there: the contacts and the knowledge of the environment. For instance: There are many PhD positions funded by various projects rather than by some general scholarships. It's mostly the project leaders who decide who gets the funding, and knowing them in person etc. can help. Still, you need to do more than just sit there at the lectures for 15 weeks.


An appropiate graph visualization? I want to include a plot in my thesis to highlight regional differences in bicycle collision outcomes. Now there are several plot visualizations I could use, and I am not sure which one could be the most appropriate. Having a "scale free" y axis better highlights the differences between each region, but it may also confuse the reader.

I am aware that there might not be an optimal solution to this, but I would appreciate to hear your thoughts.(If you have a completely other suggestion for an appropriate plot than the ones below, I would also be happy to hear those).

These are the plots I have made:

Plot 1

Plot 2

Plot 3

Plot 4

It might be good to consider a broken y-axis. See this example. In your case, you only apply it to bicycle-only and bicycle-car.


Coming from an unknown university, is it possible to publish a good research paper in a good journal? Suppose someone is pursuing PhD in mathematics from a third class university and their supervisor has little knowledge about their own field. Is it possible to publish a good research paper in good journal?

Yes, it is possible. The institution doesn't matter. The advisor doesn't matter. What matters is the content (and correctness) of the paper, along with a judgement about its "novelty". Those judgements will be made by reviewers and editors, independent of where the paper originates.
Good writing helps, of course.


How do I find a research assistant positions (life science) in USA if you're an international student and outside of USA now? Is unpaid job possible? I have a Master’s degree, and want to apply for PhD. I want to find a position during the gap year. It is also possible to do 2 years. But I am not in USA. So, How do I find a research assistant positions? Is unpaid job possible to get visa?

Research Assistant positions are almost exclusively filled by graduate (and occasionally, undergraduate) students. They are not normally available for non-students. You'll have to wait until you're enrolled - and an RA position may be part of your financial aid package.

Research Scientists and Research Staff positions are available to non-students. However, because there are so many people with work status who can fill them, employers will rarely agree to sponsor someone for a visa for them (unless there is a mitigating circumstance, like a spousal hire). You can find staff openings through the human resource (HR) portals of most major universities.

Under US law, you generally cannot take an unpaid job to circumvent visa restrictions -- this part of your question is best asked and answered in expatriates.stackexchange.com , as I have seen you have done.


How can I remain motivated while studying for comprehensive exams? At my university, the MS and PhD programs in Computer Science have comprehensive exams.  The exams retest the student on topics from designated core courses.  The exams are separate from the course and may be written by a group of instructors instead of just the instructor who taught the course.

Students are given a list of books to read.  Some of the books indicate selected chapters, others are expected to be read and understood cover to cover.  The scope of the exams is daunting and preparation for the exams is expected to be a major undertaking by the students taking months of preparation.  For full time students this is difficult.  For part time students like myself who work full-time and have family this effectively sidelines research during the preparation period.  If you do not pass the exams on your first try, it can be very demoralizing.

I was able to stay motivated by following the strategy I described in a similar question: strategy

What other strategies have people used?

The strategy that I used was to divide the work into chunks and assign them to finite periods of time.  Let's say your exam is in three months and you have two books to read and two course notes to review.  That means that you'll have 12 weeks to study.  The 12th week should be reserved for "hitting the hotspots" before your exam and general review of all the materials covered in weeks 1-11.  Then divide up material to be covered from the two books and two courses across the remaining 11 weeks.  I would suggest that you divide it into 11 weekly topics.  Assign reading to yourself.  The goal of each week worth of studying is to create your own "cliff notes" for that week's chunk of material that can be studied during week 12.

A good strategy to avoid burnout is to schedule time for no studying.  This especially important since you have family.  Make sure that you schedule your no study time during a time that they also want to interact with you.  For example, no more studying after noon on Sundays would be a good amount of time.

Since you do have family, also consider scheduling alone time for yourself where you get to do only what you want.  Doing nothing, watching tv, or checking on your stackexchange questions are okay during that time.  But make sure to limit those activities to only that time.

Good luck!


Would recommendation letters from the chemists in the industry lab I work in be helpful? A little background info,

I'm currently working as a lab technician in a drug lab which focuses on clinical chemistry and toxicology. I wish to eventually, within a few years tops, go back for my upper level degrees. I didn't have any close relationships with professors of mine as an undergrad, and as a result, I'm currently lacking possible grad school recommendations.

Would anyone recommend using recommendations from chemists, with PhD's, who work in the industry as beneficial grad school recommendations? They both serve as my employers/ bosses, and I'm 99.99% they would give high recommendations if asked. However, would these even help me on my applications?

Also, if anyone has any possible actions I could take that would help me strengthen a grad school application, that are possible with the time window mentioned above, 2-3 years, that would be very much appreciated.

Assuming you're applying for Ph.D. programs, the basic question admission committees usually need to answer is "Is X capable of becoming a good researcher?" If your supervisors, both of whom have Ph.D.'s, can answer that question successfully, then there's no reason not to use them—particularly if they know your work more closely than someone who only taught you in courses.


I'm from India, planning to do Phd in Marketing Management. Can I pursue it with my job thats 5 days a week 10 hours a day? I am currently working in the media industry having a 9 years experience. I want to do a Phd in order to get into the academics sector in the next 3-4 years maybe. I have a 5 days a week working schedule. I have researched a bit regarding the same and found out that some UGC approved universities offer part time Phds. Will that be advisable? Also, will I be able to complete it in 3 years? I cant afford to leave my job since I have a lot of financial responsibilities. Thanks in advance! Waiting in anticipation.

Anything is possibly, but a PhD is a full-time occupation, so holding a job that demands fifty hours on-top seems infeasible. Even for a part-time PhD, you'd be working a lot of hours.
(Assuming a part-time PhD plus a full-time job is equivalent to a full-time job with fifty percent more in overtime is a fallacy in my mind. As is assuming two part-time jobs are equivalent to one full-time job.)


Translation of academic papers from Japanese? I am a Japanese translator and (amateur) math autodidact.

For practice and learning, I want to start translating Japanese academic papers into English, especially those related to mathematics or statistics.

My question:

Is there demand for such papers to be translated (volunteer or otherwise)?

Any guidance on where to start or whom to contact would be much appreciated.

The American Mathematical Society's publishing arm puts out the series Translations of Mathematical Monographs. A significant portion of the series (for reasons beyond me) are translations from Japanese language originals. Getting in touch with the editors of that series may be a good place to get started.


What should I reply to professor so that he will be convinced to provide me fund for international internship? Professor replied me this:"To start with the practicalities, do you have funding to support a trip to the UK, or would you need financial support?"

If you need funding support, just say so. You don't need to go into a lot of detail about why. It is probably more important to make sure that you have convinced them to want you as a student.

"I would find it difficult to travel to UK without financial support."


How am I supposed to find 3 recommenders for grad school? So early onto my undergrad, I knew I had to find 3 professors to use for letters of recommendation, but given the schedule these professors have and how many students they have to deal with, I find it to be almost impossible to find more than 1 professor that can vouch for me, especially after that long gap between taking their class and applying for grad school during my final year. I can simply just reach out to the ones that I got an A in, but I'm not their only A student and they likely forget who I am.

Add in the factor of the professors not being able to reply to my email and you are left with stress. Can anyone help me figure this out? I feel like this is by far the most difficult aspect of the application.

Also, how can you use professors for letters of recommendations if you decide to take a break between grad and undergrad?

First, I wouldn't make the request via email, although it would be a good idea to request a meeting via email to discuss your plans. We may not be able to put a name to a face from an email, but if you make a point of visiting and reminding them of the course(s) you took with them and how you did, that would go a long way in tweaking their memories. Second, come prepared. Bring copies of your transcripts, your resume (which should include work and volunteer experience), and a clear idea about what your plans are, including with who and what you plan to study. Finally, give the prospective reference time to prepare a good letter (a month is usually the minimum) and a clear deadline for when the letter is to be submitted by.
(As a side note, I assumed your comment about professors not being able to respond to your email simply meant they hadn't gotten back to you.) Good luck!


Are PhD students allowed to use funding for a custom office setup? For example, can they use grant money to have a dual monitor setup or ergonomic office appliances (chair/keyboard) to increase productivity? Or do they just have to buy these items themselves?

As the comments already say, this is to a large extent dependent on the terms of the grant. Most grants have a lump sum (the "overhead") which they directly pay to the university to cover office supply, equipment, etc., so that they actual grant cannot be used for these items. However, there are certainly grants that are more flexible in their terms.

Generally, your best bet when it comes to productivity-increasing office supply would be your advisor. (S)he will usually have a hardware budget that he may use for things like a dual-screen setup for students or a fancy keyboard, and (s)he has a strong interest in you being productive. One should also keep in mind that even objectively overpriced single items of equipment (e.g., those vastly overpriced Apple mice) are just a small dot in the lab hardware budget, so many advisors really are quite happy to dole out for them if they think it will make the student more happy (even if they are personally not seeing the point at all).

One specific comments regarding the dual-monitor setup: most labs have an abundance of abandoned screens from previous lab members sitting in some equipment storage. If you don't insist on getting a new screen, nobody will take issue when you ask to get one of the old screen as a secondary display.


Is going to institute the same as going to grad school? A (top) professor in her field advised me to look at the Santa Fe Institute. I look at it, and wow, it is perfectly match my interests. I love to research, but I don't want to focus only in the niche of the niche of my field. I also want to explore things outside my discipline, and I want to collaborate with people from other fields.

The point is, should I go to there instead of going to grad school? As far as I know, because it isn't a grad school, so I can't receive a PhD from it. I want to research; if a PhD is a ticket for me to be a full time researcher, then I want a PhD. However, looks like that without a PhD, I can't be considered to be serious in my career path. From its About page:

  Researchers come to the Santa Fe Institute from universities, government agencies, research institutes, and private industry to collaborate across disciplines, merging ideas and principles of many fields

And Wikipedia:

  The Institute consists of a small number of resident faculty and postdoctoral researchers, a large group of external faculty whose primary appointments are at other institutions, and a number of visiting scholars.

Looks like I'm not a person who it has interest with.

But how about its researchers? Say I send an email to Researcher X, from University Y, who works for the institute (part time? full time?) to join their lab. If I get admitted, which organization am I in? X's lab as a worker, or Y school as a X's student, or something else? Is there any difference from applying to school Y and join X's lab as usual? And what does my career, in long-term, look like after that?

If you want to get a PhD you need a university to award the title. You can work with a research institute during your PhD, if the institute is somehow affiliated with a university. Ideally, you will get paid from the institute, work with researchers there but you still have to pass the required courses at the university, do the necessary publications. If all goes well, the PHD title will be awarded from the university.

To elaborate a little bit more. Research in institutes (I will speak from an EU perspective) is usually funded by "soft" money awarded from a grant or research program. The outcome of those projects is not only papers but also deliverables (i.e., written reports), online demos, even full fledged server applications and infrastructures. Thus, working in a research institute is not just producing papers (you do that as well) but also produce applications, write deliverables, prepare proposals and so-on. Conclusively, in research institutes, there are junior people working on the various projects for the more mundane "programming" tasks. Those people are more "disposable" (i.e., they work only during the duration of one project). Contrarily, there are people with a PhD that might work in this institute for years, have worked in multiple projects and have a more active role (they supervise the junior people, write proposals etc). Although many of them are not permanent employees of the institute (they are still paid from "soft" money, as well) they can collaborate with a research institute for many years.

Where do graduate students fit in all this scheme? If the institute is closely affiliated with a university, the PhD students of the university sometimes are assigned the junior roles in some projects, in order to get funding. As years go by, the PhD student (towards the end of his PHD) becomes a expert in his area (which might be close to the project's scope) and he may be assigned more senior roles.

So, if you want to do research in such a institute for a long time, you will need the PhD title, sooner or later.


How can I clear myself of emotional attachment when reading reviewer feedback? I have received feedback from reviewers on my latest conference paper (this is in Computer Science).
It was an acceptance, which is nice.

I feel I really need to consider in depth the reviewer feedback.

I have consciously noticed I have a emotional reaction.
Which is not rational, practical, or useful.

How can I clear myself from it, and handle the review on a factual basis?

Is it better to sleep on it? Perhaps it would help to strip the acceptance from it. Or maybe to rewrite it in my words as if I were reviewing the paper?

Overall I guess I should feel happy, but of course the written reviewer feedback only points at the weaknesses in the work. Which is reasonable, since they can indicate it was generally good with their accept statement. (At the end of the day, an accept is an accept, right?)

Personally, I find that the following process works well for me:

Complain together with my co-authors about the blindness and foolishness of reviewers, the sorry state of publishing, and the general existence of injustice in a world not ready for the pure angelic beauty of our work.  Remember not to take this too seriously.
Ignore everything for at least 24 hours, letting my initial emotional response settle and giving space for rationality to return.
Copy the review responses into a template for a response letter, separating each statement for its own response.  This effectively forms a checklist of work to be done (or at least to be clearly explained why it should not be done).  I do this even with conference papers where there is no response letter, because of the organizing benefit.
When revising, focus on only one statement at a time, taking it in isolation and working until the comment has been fully addressed and I can write a clear and non-emotional response explaining what has and hasn't been done and why.  Depending on the overall tone of the situation, sometimes I will start with the little things and work up to the bigger ones, and sometimes I will do in the opposite direction.

Finally, as I work, I always remind myself that every statement by every reviewer can teach me something that will improve my paper, even when I disagree with it.  Sometimes, the reviewer has valuable insight.  Other times, their apparently "crazy" or "ignorant" reactions are instead actually showing me how I have not spoken well to the community of readers, have opened myself up to misinterpretation, or have allowed my work to be viewed as part of an intellectual battle that I do not wish to participate in.

We are emotional beings, and we have emotions.  Over time, you will hopefully learn to read the curve of your emotional response so that you can ride with it and manage it rather than fighting it or amplifying it when that would be counterproductive.  The process that works best for you may vary, but one way or another I think that it is best to acknowledge emotions and then find a way to let them settle before trying to work with the criticism.


What are the benefits (if any) of disclosing a mental health diagnosis/disability? It's no secret that academics have a high rate of mental health diagnoses (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-03803-3), and that academic career paths may disproportionately attract people with serious mental health issues in the first place (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5824688/).

At the same time, many countries are beginning to recognize certain mental health diagnoses as disabilities.  I have always hid my diagnoses as much as possible-- partly because of the inconsistency of the diagnoses themselves from year to year and doctor to doctor, and partly because I had been advised by older mentors to do so.

So I wonder: are there benefits to disclosing a serious mental illness and applying for disability status?  I am thinking specifically of postdocs or professors; for students I am already aware of all the accomodations provided (at least by American and Western European universities).

I'll answer this part:

  are there benefits to disclosing a serious mental illness

If you are teaching, there are benefits to your students.  Many students have disabilities.  Students do better when they see successful people who are like them.  These role models increase students' belief in their own abilities, which is called self efficacy.  Students with higher belief in their own abilities learn more.  If you disclose your disability, it will help students with disabilities succeed academically.
For hiring and promotion purposes, some institutions consider performance relative to opportunity.  This sort of assessment is common in Australia, for example.  If your disability has reduced the opportunities available to you, then disclosure may make your achievements seem more impressive.

You did not ask about the potential disadvantages.


PhD in New Zealand and Post-doc in US I have a full-fund offer for PhD in computer science from a university in New Zealand. I know work opportunities in NZ is low after my graduation. I really like to study my PhD in the US, but since US universities need GRE scores, I cannot apply to them.

Now, I have one question. What do you think if I get my PhD from NZ and then move to US for job, such as postdoc? How much do you think I can find a postdoc after my graduation, considering a solid research record.

Another option is to postpone my application till next year, in order to be prepare for GRE exam, although it is very tough for me now. Is it worth to wait for a further year, in your opinion?

More importantly, is there anyone who have had similar condition, I.e. doing PhD in non-US universities and then moved to the US for an academic job?

Thank you

Yes of course you can move from a PhD in NZ to a postdoc in the USA if you publish good work in good conferences/journals. You could potentially study for part of your NZ PhD in the US on a scholarship such as the Fulbright. If you have a PhD offer in NZ then presumably you have some idea of what subject you'd be researching - does that field excite you? Your decision should be primarily motivated by interest in a particular field of research rather than by country (IMO).

A PhD in NZ/Australia/UK is much shorter than the US (3-4 years compared to 5-7 years in my field at least) and generally doesn't involve coursework - you'd also be adding an extra year on top of the US timeline to sit the GRE exam. One final comment: that you have a PhD offer from NZ and are considering waiting a year to sit the GRE and do a PhD in US makes me think you aren't that interested in taking the PhD offer in NZ - there are few things in life I would discourage as much as doing a PhD without a passion for the subject.


Can a person who doesn't like to talk much still become a good lecturer? Can a person who doesn't like to talk much still become a good lecturer/academician? Do you have any experience like this or know anyone like this?

Absolutely, a person who's not naturally inclined to be a speaker can become a good lecturer and scientist.  One of my best professors, actually, was a person with such inclinations.  Finding that speaking was not something that he was good at, he turned it into an object of study and began collecting heuristics about what made a good and effective talk.  By studiously applying these heuristics to his own teaching and professional communication, he could at least ensure that his talks did not fail on any identifiable dimension.

Talks need to do a lot of different things at once: holding attention, identifying key salients, speaking at different levels to different parts of the audience, providing "breadcrumbs", etc. Because of this, it often turns out that it's much less important to do any aspect brilliantly than to make sure that no aspect has been neglected. This professor might not have been a brilliant and exciting comedian, like some who are natural lecturers, but he often gave better lecturers than the naturals.  The more natural lecturers were often simply less consistent: following their enjoyment and intuition produced brilliance in some aspects and weaknesses in others, while his stolid application of heuristics ensured an across-the-board solidity of presentation.

In short: ultimately, it's not a matter of talent but of choices for how to invest in acquiring skills.


If a conflict of interest is not literally declared, is it safe to assume there is a conflict of interest? What does this imply about the findings? For the first example below, a conflict of interest (CoI) isn't literally declared, but seems to be implied in the funding section. Additionally, the majority of the studies included have a similar CoI. For the second example, again with funding there seems to be partial CoI. Is there any credence to studies funded from food industry sources not be tolerated?
Example 1
2009 Effects of soy protein and isoflavones on circulating hormone concentrations in pre- and post-menopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
forty-seven studies (11 of pre-, 35 of post- and 1 of perimenopausal women)
isoflavones – soy phytoestrogen (which mimics estrogen in the body, beneficial in combating symptoms and conditions caused by estrogen deficiency)

To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and
meta-analysis to compare the endocrine effects of different soy
products on hormonal status in women at different lifecycle stages. It
provides weak evidence that soy and isoflavones decrease FSH and LH in
premenopausal women, and a suggestion that they may increase estradiol
[estrogen steroid hormone and the major female sex hormone] in
post-menopausal women.

Results

Twenty studies declared a funding source with a commercial interest in the study results; 25 did not report industry funding; and 2 were
unclear.

Funding

This work was partially funded by the Soy Nutrition Institute, Inc., St Louis, MO, USA. M.J.M. consults for companies that manufacture
and/or sell soyfoods, soy protein and isoflavone supplements and is a
Scientific Advisory Board Member of the Soy Nutrition Institute.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2691652
Extra for 1
Letters to the Editor

These estrone levels are important because in the meta-analysis of
Hooper et al. (2009) […] evidence indicates that isoflavones will not
increase breast cancer risk in healthy women or worsen the survival of
breast cancer patients.

academic.oup.com/humupd/article/16/1/110/709455

Example 2
2010 Clinical studies show no effects of soy protein or isoflavones on reproductive hormones in men: results of a meta-analysis
36 studies

The results of this meta-analysis indicate that neither soy protein
nor isoflavones affect reproductive hormone concentrations in men
regardless of age or cancer status. Although the duration of most
trials was <6 months, soy protein and isoflavone intake greatly
exceeded typical dietary Japanese intake 2. These results suggest
that consumption of soy foods or isoflavone supplements would not
result in the adverse effects associated with lower T levels
[31][32][33].

J.H.-R while a doctoral student at the University of Minnesota
received some minor funding from the Soy Nutrition Institute for work on this manuscript. G.V. has nothing to disclose. S.J.D. has
nothing to disclose. W.R.P. has nothing to disclose. M.S.K.
occasionally consults for the Solae Company. M.J.M. regularly consults
for companies in the soy food industry.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19524224/doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.04.038
Supplement for 2
2011 Re: Clinical Studies Show No Effects of Soy Protein or Isoflavones on Reproductive Hormones in Men: Results of a Meta-Analysis
Editorial comment

The authors performed a meta-analysis of the available literature, and
conclude that soy protein or isoflavone intake had no detectable
effect on free or total testosterone, sex hormone binding globulin or
free androgen index. While the study does not include measurements of
semen or paternity, and androgenic status does not tell the whole
story of male fertility, this meta-analysis is a step in the direction
that soy products are unlikely to be harmful to male reproduction.

sci-hub.se/10.1016/S0022-5347(11)60138-9

Conflicts of interest on their own do not imply poor results is the blanket answer to this question.  It is true that in several high-profile (and most likely lower profile) research projects funded by industry that muzzling or cherry picking has happened (here is an interesting analysis of one particular industry and its issues).  Industry obviously has an interest in funding research that will give them favorable results.  However, just because industry has funded the research does not mean that it is automatically untrustworthy.
Unless there is good reason not to, we have to trust in the peer review process and acknowledge that it is our job as readers of research to interpret and contextualize studies regardless of conflicts of interest.   For instance, we should always be sure to thoroughly read and understand the methods used in the research and to determine if they are up to acceptable scientific standards.
It is similarly important to understand that a single study or suite of studies does not imply scientific truth.  For instance, if a paper shows that they were able to observe a particular thing in a particular population, that implies only that the observation is possible under certain conditions, not that it is universal.
Conflicts of interest are also sometimes unavoidable.  A drug company trying to do trials of a specific, proprietary drug must fund those trials.  That's a conflict and they obviously have an interest in favorable results, but just because that interest exists does not automatically imply that the results will be untrustworthy.
Finally, just because something is not declared does not mean that you should automatically reject it.  Of course be critical, but don't assume that just because something is unclear the authors are being evasive.  At the end of the day you can always try to send an email to the corresponding author and ask.  Worst thing that happens is you are ignored.


Post doc or Lecturer after Full-time PhD? and Can I apply for Post doc after Thesis submission or should wait until Viva-voce? I am a Full-Time research scholar in finance about to submit my thesis in a month or two.

After this is it good to go for post-doc or as a lecturer in finance?

If I apply for lecturer will colleges entertain it as I am a fresher?

And one more doubt I got is, Am I eligible to apply for Post-doc position after submitting my thesis? or should I wait until the completion of Vivo-voce and/or graduation? Because its time-consuming process to receive Vivo-voce.

Kindly give your valuable suggestions

After [submitting my thesis] is it good to go for post-doc or as a lecturer...?

I believe there's a personal aspect to consider when making this decision. In particular, do you want to work for a single institute or multiple institutes during the next 3-5 years?

  If I apply for lecturer will colleges entertain it as I am a fresher?

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean "will colleges entertain the idea of hiring a fresh graduate?", then yes.

  Am I eligible to apply for Post-doc position after submitting my thesis?

Yes for many institutions, but there might well exist some institutes that won't hire you.

  or should I wait until the completion of Vivo-voce and/or graduation?

You'll submit your thesis in "a month or two," you'll then have to wait 3-6 months for your Vivo-voce and up to a further 6-12 months for your graduation.
I suspect you cannot afford to wait for your Vivo-voce or graduation, apply now (you needn't wait until you've submitted).


Is it better to lecture with a board or a document camera? I will be teaching my first class this fall. The course will be an undergraduate engineering course, so there will be some derivations and other math.
I am trying to decide if I should present with a white board, or with a document camera & projector.
Most people in this SE can probably speculate on which is better, and for what reason.
I could present so very elaborate arguments also, one for each side. However, elaborate theories are not what I am interested in.
Has there been any published research to show that one is better for student learning than another?

Edit:
There is a question of what a document camera is. There is a wikipedia page about it.
Just to summarize what it is, when lecturing, instead of writing on a black board, you write on a normal piece of paper. A camera looks at the paper as you write, and projects it with the same sort of projector you would use for power point. Here is what they look like:
When lecturing with these, generally the professor will sit behind the desk, and talk as normal, just write everything on paper and the students can see it. It is similar to using transparencies, like my physics professors used in the 90's.
A nice comment by @Alchimista

I've personally found teacher writing on board more interesting than those projecting. Is matter of flow, which is more natural in the first case. It seems to me that projecting was invented to communicate time effectively without omissions, and resembles more a briefing than teaching. Obviously projected slide can be used in parallel, when complicated graphics plays a role. I won't draw the schematic of an eye if I can show a nice figure of it, for instance.

This agrees well with my assessment; as a student I prefer instructors who use the blackboard. However, teaching with a doc-cam is much easier to learn than writing on a black board. I would speculate that because the interaction between professor and student is stronger using a board, that it is more effective. I assume that there has been some outcome bases assessment of this by someone, and that they published at least an abstract. I posted this here because (1) I want make a choice based on something more solid than my feelings, and (2) it might help others to teach more effectively.

The issue of how technology effects communication and learning is definitely of interest, from a linguistics perspective or from an educational perspective.  Most importantly, at the chalkboard it is easy to point.  A document camera allows pointing, but it is awkward.  Tablets make pointing very hard (I learned this the hard way).

This is not at all my area, and I have not vetted the following papers.  They look interesting, and perhaps give you a start in accessing the literature.  Mostly I found studies of tablets, but did find one discussing the advantages of a document camera for some students with disabilities.

Maclaren, Peter, David Wilson, and Sergiy Klymchuk. "I see what you are doing: Student views on lecturer use of Tablet PCs in the engineering mathematics classroom." Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 33.2 (2017).
Maclaren, Peter, David I. Wilson, and Sergiy Klymchuk. "Making the point: the place of gesture and annotation in teaching STEM subjects using pen-enabled Tablet PCs." Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA 37.1 (2017): 17-36.
Williams, Jocasta, and M. F. Fardon. "Lecture recordings: extending access for students with disabilities." ALT-C. 2007.


Asking for advice: Leaving Academia after finishing Physics PhD - Hoping to start a career in Data Science right after I will finish my PhD in Applied Physics (simulations of quantum transport and light scattering in nanowires) in around 6-8 months  and I have already made the decision of leaving Academia as soon as I graduate. The main reason is that I consider that my publications record after the PhD will not be good enough to be able to compete for good positions in the post-doc world. I have also lost the motivation and my interest in the field due to the lack of satisfying and rewarding outcome (I tend to blame myself for this, but I had almost no supervision during the last year). If I stay in Academia I will most likely be jumping from post-doc to post-doc contract in mediocre/low level research groups for the next decade.

I have recently started to consider pursuing a career in Data Science: job offers seem to be abundant and the salaries are good, plus it seems that it is possible to work in many different fields once you are experienced (which is something I love since I'm interested and curious about many, many things).

I currently lack the core-set of technical skills a data scientist should have (R, Python, SQL, Statistics, etc.) and I will not have that much time left to take on-line courses until I write and defend my thesis. However I have strong experience working with other programming languages and I know that I could easily get familiar (not talking about proficiency) with everything needed in short time. After all, everything should be conceptually much easier than the theory of my PhD/MSc and I also have a good background in Statistical Mechanics.

Do you guys have any advices or experiences to share on how to make this transition? I am a bit afraid of the real world after I finish. Also, what would be the most optimal way to get a data scientist job after the PhD? I have thought of looking for an internship, but I do not know if I could just do it by taking on-line courses and doing things on my own.

Thank you very much in advance!

Edit: As it may be relevant, I am not in US but in Europe

There actually is sufficient demand for data scientists and engineers that there are specific 7-8 week long postdoctoral training programs. Such a program could be a good idea, both as a way to build skills and to show that you've actually completed a relevant project. I have no first-hand experience myself, but I know a former physics postdoc who successfully attended the (free) Insight Data Engineering program and now works as a data scientist. (They also have a program focused on data science.) Another such program is The Data Incubator, and I imagine there are more out there.


Applying for MS in USA after completing 3 years degree in India I have completed my Bachelor of Computer Applications (BCA) from India. The minimum requirement for admission into the MS in Computer Science program requires a 4 year college degree. My BCA degree was a 3 year degree and I am planning on pursuing a 1 year Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Applications (PGDCA) from Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) and would like to find out if these total 4 years satisfy as minimum requirements for admission consideration.

I suggest you to inquire such information at one or, better, more international academic credential evaluation companies, such as WES (be careful, as I've had some negative experience with them in terms of accuracy of evaluation). Nevertheless, you can check the WES' international-to-US academic credential equivalency tool.


How does a book editor's scientific reputation affect how the work of the chapter authors is evaluated? When considering to publish a paper in a research journal, the journal's reputation itself is what people usually care about, rather than the editor's expertise and scientific status (although high-standing journals usually have well-known researchers as their editors).

Does the same rule apply to handbook-style books (that cover recent research papers, with each chapter written by a different group of authors)? I have seen a couple of times that a relatively unknown person in a research area is the editor of such a book that is published by a well-known publisher, such as Wiley or Springer.

When considering to write a book chapter for books like this, how should one weigh the editor's scientific status against the publisher's reputation? For example, is it a good idea to publish a book chapter in a book published by a very well-known publisher that has an editor unknown in the research community? (Being unknown while serving as the editor of a title published by a big publisher can raise some red flags such as being a fraud, too.) How would the book editor status affect the writers and the perceived value of their work?

(To clarify, I'm asking this as an applied physics graduate student who is mainly interested in getting a Ph.D. admission and is helping to write the book chapter. This may lower the bar a little compared to an established researcher)

The expertise and reputation of the editor(s) is of prime importance, with the publisher's reputation being a distant second, at best. I answer from an applied materials science perspective, which should be close enough to applied physics; although I don't see the situation changing much across fields. One exception would be if the field is highly specialised and only a few publishers operate in it.

At the outset, l believe there is no major difference in evaluating a journal and evaluating a book. In both cases, one looks for unflinching ethical conduct, respectability and high visibility. The first is non-negotiable; any hint of predatory publishers should deter submissions immediately, whether journal or book. The presence of a reputed and respected editor is a good indicator that the publication will be handled ethically.

Second, the matter of respectability. It is not much of an extrapolation from respectable editor to respectable book. Remember, any full citation of work published in a book will carry the editor's name, so the association is long-term. Often, such books are parts of series, or are associated with legacy conferences. In these cases, the repute of the series/conference can take precedence over the individual editor's, because different books are edited by different people. In these cases, the priority would be series, editors, publisher.

Finally, visibility. For journals you have an impact factor and other merits. For book chapters, there is none such. Here a well-known publisher is good because they will typically have better distribution than a smaller publisher. You mentioned Wiley and Springer, I'd like to add Elsevier, who somehow seem to be flooding the market. Yet, books tend to generally be thematic, so a well-known editor guarantees enough publicity within the respective field. Incidental/interdisciplinary readership may be affected less by editor and more by publisher.

On the basis of these three points, it's safe to say that a big publisher is desirable, it is not decisive. Why not? Primarily because publishing is ultimately a business, and like all big businesses, all eggs aren't put in the same basket. Every big publisher will have a spectrum of publications, varying in impact, quality and degree of specialisation. You can easily see this in the publishers you mentioned. So the same publisher could put out an average book or a great book, and you'd be none the wiser without looking at the editor.

Secondly, if a book is associated with a conference/seminar series, the publisher is decided by how much financial muscle the organisers have. It's a no-brainer that better finances don't necessarily mean better quality. Again, the visibility to a general audience will be higher for a larger publisher, but in the long term, once the chapters notch up enough citations, this is likely to be offset.


Submitted to a non Scopus-indexed journal, later found that University only accept Scopus journals. How can I submit to another journal? I submitted a paper to Thomson Reuters ESCI Journal, and they are asking me to complete a registration and pay a fee of around $400 to publish the paper.

But later I found that my University gives preference to Scopus-Indexed journals. How can I cancel the previous submission (the paper has not been published), and how can I submit to another Scopus-Indexed journal?

If your paper is submitted but not accepted or published, it is still time to withdraw your submission. This is generally done by writing to the editor. I would recommend to do this as soon as possible to avoid wasting editors and reviewers time.

Now if the entire process is already over and you only have the APC to pay, it might be more difficult to withdraw but you can still try.

Once the paper is published you only option is retraction but I would not go that route just to please your institution's wishes.


Does observational data need further proof? Within fields like animal behavior, data is often collected through observation of the subjects, either in the wild or captivity.

Can a paper be published purely based on observational data, with no evidence in video or audio to support it?
If so, could one (in theory) generate an entirely fictional dataset of observations as basis for a publication? Or do other mechanisms exist to prevent this kind of fraude from happening?
Are there examples of publications, in animal behavior or other fields, being exposed for generating completely fictional datasets? If so, which?

In many experimental fields, it is possible to "generate" a plausible amount of data and get away with it (i.e. publish the data and the conclusions in a peer reviewed journal).

Experiments need to be repeated independently. Otherwise, all sorts of things happen. Real fraud is probably the lowest number. Much more important are cases in which experiments are done without enough care or statistical methods are used in a questionable way.


Accepted into university for MS in CS but rejected by professor for research I got accepted into a top 10 school for CS (Computer Science) but I was rejected by a professor with whom I wanted to work with. No feedback after resume submission, just "I found another student." If I can't find a professor that wants to work with me in something I'm interested in at a MS level, should I even attend? Or should I just try to write my own paper (sole author) and see what happens? I want the research experience for PhD applications in the future.

If you can get a TA or otherwise afford to go, you might still consider it. You are likely to take around six classes your first year. You might meet several professors that you want to work with and who want to work with you. Plenty of students come to grad school without an advisor lined up and manage to find one during their first year.

It's unlikely but not impossible that you will work by yourself to complete a publishable paper in CS. Even if your work is purely theoretical, you are likely to need guidance at the very least and other resources in general.


Is a co-advisor a good solution if my advisor is not very familiar with part of my research area? I am currently a 4th year PhD student and have no publication so far. I switched project after 1.5 years after realizing I don't want to have a PhD in that topic.

The new project is really interesting for me. I feel much more motivated and believe I have the analytical skills to solve it. The project is composed of two parts: image analysis (A) and machine learning (B). Eventhough my advisor is very knowledgable about the first part, he is not familiar with the other part, which is actually the most important cue to solve the problem.

That results in lacking of general research guidance from him. He would points me to unfruitful direction, and when I present literature's approaches he is not interested in. A metaphor is that like doing programming big project without the knowledge of data structures. Would a co-advisor be the best solution?

It sounds like there are two related issues:

convincing your advisor about the directions you want to take
finding someone to talk to about your research directions.

For the first one, I'm not sure what you mean by "he's not interested". Does that mean that your advisor doesn't want you to pursue directions even though he's not familiar with them, or that he's not giving you rousing encouragement ? If you have a direction you think might bear fruit for your problem based on your literature scan, why not try it out and show him the results ? Since you imply that your advisor is an expert in the application domain (image analysis), you should be able to demonstrate the quality of the results even if he doesn't fully understand the methods being used. Or is it that he is requiring you to follow certain directions and does not want you to follow other directions ?

For the second, a co-advisor is one possible outcome, but even a colleague in the relevant area (another professor who could be on your committee, or even a fellow student you can brainstorm with) might suffice. You didn't indicate whether your advisor is aware of his shortcomings in the techniques area (ML): if he is, then he might even be able to introduce you to the right people, thus opening doors that might be difficult for you to open yourself.

as always, talking to the advisor would help. You can approach it as "I'm looking for some extra help in topic XYZ: do you know who I could talk with ?". Of course, how you approach this precisely depends hugely on the interactions you currently have with your advisor.


How to be more interesting to prospective PhD advisors I've been in contact with a couple of professors at US universities recently, and both of them were interested in the projects that I proposed. Now, I will be applying to these universities this Fall, and I want to make sure that I make myself look interesting to these professors through our email correspondence.

What should I do, through email, to make myself standout? What questions should I ask these professors even before I apply to their respective programs? Also, would it be appropriate to ask about financial support in their labs or departments at this stage?

You probably don't need to do much if they have already expressed interest. However, if you want to do more, read a few of their papers so that you are thoroughly familiar with what interests them. That should suggest at least a question or two. I think that questions are more useful to you than statements.

You can ask about funding, but the easiest question to ask is for who you should speak to about funding if not themselves. This lets them know you need it and also lets you contact whoever is responsible.


Would denouncing cheaters from an exam make me less likely to receive penalties? I aced my undergrad studies and got the best offer I could ever dream of for grad school.

And three **** might have ruined it.

They ran into me and asked for help with "studying". Turns out it was blatant cheating and I helped them anyway. I had my doubts, but my compassion instinct took ever.

I'm looking forward pursuing an academic career, and I don't think this event was good at all. It's nowhere near loving my sleep over this issue, but I want to keep my academic integrity and cover my ass.

Now, if the punishment for cheating was just a failed exam, I would've denounced without hesitation. But in my country, you can get banned for exams and higher education for 5 years. I think it's enough to destroy someone's life. At the same time, they (the 3 ****) put mine on the line so they could pass some exam. (If they get caught and I somehow get involved, I can get banned for 5 years too. Everything I worked for 3 years, gone in an instant)

I'm about to send the email to the equivalent of the Dean, but I just can't know for sure if I'll stay safe. I know him kinda personally and have friends that are friends with him, but still, I'm scared and I fucked up.

What should I do?

Edit:

Here's a rundown of the events

I ate at school self, not my usual spot
The 3 **** ran into me. They asked me to help them with studying and I accepted. I had doubts that it was a cheating scheme but paid no mind to it.
A few hours later, they send me a photo, there were some questions and I assumed it was an exam from previous years. I asked them when was the exam and they said "now lol". Doubts that it was a cheating scheme were almost confirmed. I answered these questions and sent the answers anyway because I was pressured from holding an unwritten contract and instinctual compassion
They sent another photo, I saw the date of the exam and it was the day all of these events happened. I stopped communications.
And here we are now. I helped them cheat and I want to pursue an academic career. This is like a big stain I'd like to clean.

Talk to someone you can trust.

The rules in your place seem to be very severe. Therefore, I advice you not only to listen to people in this forum, but to consult someone who knows the rules in your country. In my other answer, I recommended ombudswomen/ombudsmen or the student union. As in your country, you can be banned from higher education for 5 years, I would advise you to talk to a lawyer. Let them advise you.

In most places, the best way would be to "confess". However, if in your place it is possible to get punished for five years for what you did (which is in my eyes no misdeed at all, as you did not know you helped cheaters) there may be more messed up rules/strange things going on. So please, for your own sake, consult a lawyer (or similar), good luck!

(And yes, of course consult the institution rules and try to find out if similar cases happend before.)


How to negotiate for clinical vs protected research time in academic job offer? I am a doctor, with specialty in psychiatry and a subspecialty in mood disorders.

I have been offered an academic position at a larger university, but the letter of offer does not specify any research time - only clinical time. I want to negotiate clinical time (number of patients to see per week), which will be my main source of income, vs protected research time (for which the Hospital/University will provide compensation). I want to be able to do research but need the department to commit to paying me for it.

It is my understanding that this will be the only time I will be in a position of power to negotiate something, but I don't know where to start. I have other 2 offers in place as well.

The clinical aspect may make this negotiation different from other junior faculty members, e.g. as in Evaluating and negotiating a start-up package.

It really depends on your professional goals.
if a purely clinical position is not an option for you, and if your research credentials (publications, etc) back up your ambition, then you should make that clear to the department and work with them on adapting the offer.

It is not just about salary, but would likely involve a start up package for your research, reserved physical space for research (lab space), possibly a joint appointment in a research department. etc.
if none of these can be part of the offer, this would mean your research activity is not supported.


Would I look good as a Ph.D. applicant if abandon one graduate program and then pass from another program? See this question.

  Submitting a transcript which indicates an incomplete study (50/120 credits completed) and 5 dropped (not failed) courses.

See this answer.

  Honestly, unless there is some compelling reason ("My father died." "I was in the hospital with a broken back.") as to why you have so many dropped and uncompleted courses, there may not be a way you can just brush away your academic record into omission. There is not a great way to spin doctor this.

If I must complete my study, do I must complete it in the same university and country I started my study in?

The university from which I obtained 50 credits, is expensive and the country which this university is situated in, in hard to get a visa. So, I was thinking to resume my study all over again but in a country where it costs less and doesn't have visa issues.

Would I look good as a Ph.D. applicant if abandon one university program and then pass from another program?

Normally, yes, but there may be possibilities with a "sister" institution running the same course or similar course with the matching courses / modules where you could then move - of course this has to be accepted by both institutions.

Moving to a completely separate institution will normally mean a new course and the parts you have completed may go towards full or partial credit for the equivalent courses or modules.

This would normally be evaluated on a case by case basis by the Dean / admissions officer or equivalent.

It is also very much dependent of which country or countries you are dealing with...


When to use professional e-mail address during PhD application When corresponding with administrators and/or academics regarding graduate school/PhD applications, are there any guidelines about which e-mail address to use (personal vs. professional)?

In the non-academic world, it should be fairly obvious that you shouldn't use the address of your current employer to look for a new job, but this doesn't necessarily translate to academic positions.

On the other hand, an address associated with a position with hard time constraints (such as an address at the university you're doing your Bachelor's/Master's at) seems like a no-brainer, because the people at your department probably hope you get a job somewhere else.

However, what about positions with "soft" time constraints, i.e.: "If we manage to find money for you by date, we might take you on"?-- On one hand, everyone knows that your future is uncertain and so constantly being on the lookout for future opportunities should be understandable if not even supported... but on the other hand, it entails you don't have "faith" that you'll get an extension at your current place... which means you either don't have faith in your own ability, the ability of the department to get funds, or the ability for anyone to get funds (e.g. in times of general cutbacks).

Lastly, irrespective of whatever stigmas (incorrectly) using one's current professional address may be, using an address at a well-respected organization does have an impact in the academic world over compared to using a personal address despite that academic quality should be based only on its own merit.

I am not aware of any guidelines on this, and doubt it will have any impact whatsoever (after all, your current position/university should be clear from your CV). However, there is another reason for using your personal email: access. If you apply for a job somewhere else, there is a good chance you will eventually lose your current professional email adress. And this type of correspondance can be useful to hold on to.


How can I politely remind my professors about a recommendation letter they promised? I am currently applying to a masters program, application is due on April 15, recommendation letters can be given until the 23.

I asked 3 professors to give me recommendation letters approximately on march 14.
One of them already submitted it, but 2 haven't.

I don't want to be excessively insistent, because A) they did tell me they were busy when I asked, and B) I made a grave personal mistake towards one of the professors a long time ago, and the simple fact that he agreed to give me a recommendation letter is, I think, enough for me to never ask him for any favors in my life time.

However the due lines are coming, and I am getting a bit anxious.

Dear Professor X,

  Just a friendly reminder that my recommendation letters to schools A, B, C are due on [dates].

  Thanks very much for writing letters for me.  Please let me know if any questions come up.

  Sincerely,

  Your Name

It's as simple as that.  No need to overthink this.

Note that it's pretty normal for professors to wait until close to the deadline to write recommendation letters, and shouldn't in itself be cause for concern.  Part of it is the natural tendency of people to put things off until they are urgent.  In the case of recommendation letters, there are also a couple of rational reasons for it.  One is that in case something significant happened to you between March 14 and now,  either good or bad (published a paper, received an award, failed a class), they'll be able to mention it in their letter.  Another is that if you had changed your mind about applying to some or all of your schools, they wouldn't have wasted the time writing and submitting an unnecessary letter.

Anyway, you don't get to be a professor without having a lot of practice in successfully meeting deadlines, one way or another.  It is unlikely that they've forgotten about your letter, but still, a reminder doesn't hurt.


Reference management tool with ability to add custom fields I am currently trying to manage around 100 references from ISI Web of Knowledge. To manage them in a useful way, I need to manage a table, one row for each reference, with 4-5 user defined structured columns (like: which climate variable they correlated with which demographic variable etc.).

So for this purpose I need to add custom fields to each reference; then display the table of selected references, and be able to sort and filter using these fields. Is there any reference manager that supports this? Unfortunately Zotero doesn't and is not going to.

PS: Of course I don't like the idea of having separate excel table besides. I would then miss the comfortable link between the table rows and the PDF and personal notes and other things which I manage through the reference manager (currently Zotero).

I'm not sure if this would be enough for you, but in Mendeley you can add multiple tags to every reference and then you can filter them using those tags (just type it in a search bar).
You can also add a note to every reference, and use those to filter your references.

In both cases, it should be something unique, so you don't get unwanted search results.


How to manage the relations between supervisor and institution? For a student, the eventual conflict resolution should be facing the supervisor. This already generates a first problem: how can a PhD student explicitly face uncomfortable situations that imply a lack of seriousness and correctness of your supervisor, since you completely depend on him in the present and for the future?

A second problem can be that the student might not trust how the supervisor suggests to overcome some issue or how to develop further the progress of the PhD (not the research itself).

Supposedly, it might be possible to bypass the supervisor by attempting to get some suggestions or information (from the institution) that clarify that the horizon of possibilities is not limited to the options given by the supervisor. Indeed, the supervisor might have designed your professional development (which you don't know and you have never agreed) by creating constraints that do not necessarily exist. Then, it can happen that the institution is forced to necessarily defend the way the supervisor operates, because differently would mean asserting that there is something wrong. Thus, is easy to expect that the institution is going to push you back to the hands of your toxic supervisor.

I'm experiencing this condition as a tennis ball that has to find a way to accommodate the supervisor and institution, without forgetting that I might even want to decide what to do, by having clear the large picture and taking my choices consciously. This is a right that both institution and supervisor have purposely neglected to provide (making me fully dependent on them).

Currently the situation (which is flipped in comparison to my initial story) is that the supervisor wants to clean up some mess he made by helping me to get to the end of the PhD (whatever it is). On the other hand, now the institution seems to be concerned about its correctness. I end up being between the hammer and the anvil and I don't know if I should expect to be defended by one of them or I should push one against the other to solve their own problems, in both cases I don't see a way out.

You don't say what country you are in, and what instutional checks and balances exist is going to dependent on that.

In the US, you will have a thesis committee that is (at least supposedly) indepedent of your supervisor, and, at least in theory, pulls rank on your supervisor when it comes to matters of your studies. In the UK there often isn't a committee, but almost all universities have a system of "second supervisors" or "academic advisors".

In both cases there will be almost always be a head of graduate school, or directory of graduate studies for the department, school or faculty, as well as a chair of the department/school/faulty. The head of studies nomianally out-ranks the supervisor, although politics can come into play here, but the chair of the department/head of school/vice-chancellor of the faculty genuinely does outrank the supervisor.

Failure to progress (i.e. not doing well enough to continue your studies) is a disciplinary matter, and would be dealt with in a quasi-judical manner according the instututions rules and regulation. You will be able to find these online.

In the UK there will be Student's Union, and perhaps even a Graduate Students Union who can represent you if you feel you have not been fairly treated by either your supervisor, your department or the university. I don't know how many US institutions have similar. In the UK you can ultimate complain to the government ombusdsman, the office for students.


How to do on-site institute evaluation as a member of the evaluation panel? Many academic institutes are routinely evaluated by an advisory board. In addition to the public performance metrics, such as publications and funding, the board usually goes on site to meet the personnel and get a better picture of the institute, its culture and its performance.

As a panel member, what information should we try to obtain in priority during the site visit? How should we evaluate what we see and hear, and how much importance should we give it?

I have been on two such panels, both for departments in my field,
one at a 'sister' university within the same system as my own, and
another at an unrelated institution in another state.

My first observation is that you need to understand who will receive,
evaluate, and perhaps act upon findings and recommendations of your
panel, and what criteria they will use. If you are not personally in substantial
agreement with stated institutional goals, you should probably decline the
opportunity to serve on the panel. You might be able to 'score a few
points' for an alternative institutional policy in the panel report, but typically
these reports are not made public and it is unlikely a lone voice will have
much effect changing goals. Also, there may be an element of unfairness
in judging a program by goals at odds with stated institutional goals.

Before your visit you will probably get a huge packet of information about
faculty achievements, student and researcher outcomes, enrollment and employment trends, and budgets.
Beware that the most important information may not be highlighted, and
look for obvious gaps in this information. Omissions and inconsistencies
can be a guide as to what questions to ask when you get to campus. Of course,
the institute, school, or department under review has a right to present
its best case, but you will do your best job if you look beyond the PR gloss.

Focus on what is actually going on, as well as historical information and
stated goals for the future. It is easy for a faculty member or researcher to claim
a passionate interest in various trendy fields, but you should look at what she/he
has actually published in the past few years and evidence of current activity.
It is easy for a department to claim increased student and staff diversity as a goal,
but you should look around to see what is actually happening. You should
have as many one-on-one meetings with faculty, staff, and students as possible.
Ideally, some of these meetings will not be pre-arranged. On your own,
have a slice of pizza at a local hangout; sometimes that can give you more
information (or clues to search for information) than prepared binders of documents and fancy receptions with carefully chosen people.


Include in-progress paper in CV - UG to Grad school I know this question has been asked before, but I didn't find it asked by a UG student.
I'm a senior undergrad student, and I want to start communicating with professors in Canada and the US in order to get a funded MSc position for fall 2021.
Being an undergrad, I haven't published any papers. However, this summer I've been working as a research assistant intern, and our project has reached an state where I've started to write the actual paper as the first author. Unfortunately, the paper is not likely to be ready for when I'll be trying to find an advisor, but I think since it is my one and only research experience, and it has reached the state of being publishable, it should be included in my CV!
So, what do you think I should do?

Add my time as an intern as a "research experience" with some explanation about the paper?

Add the paper in a separate section in my CV?

Something else?

Thanks in advance!

If a paper is sufficiently far along in the draft stage, it's common to include the paper in your CV, mentioning that it is "in prep." i.e. in preparation. However, I would caution against doing this if the draft is not very far advanced -- the "in prep" signals that the paper will be finished and submitted to a journal soon, and it will look a bit dodgy if it isn't. Similarly, although this doesn't exactly apply to your situation, one published paper on a CV is worth much more than even two or three "in prep". The supervisor of your current project will be best placed to advise you if it's ready to mention on a CV, and hopefully they will be writing you a reference letter which highlights your contributions too.


How acceptable is it to submit a paper where most of the references are written by the same group of authors? I am preparing a conference paper. I have been looking for references for a specific topic related to my research. I have not found any that were not written by current/former members or my research lab.
How common is it and how acceptable is it to submit a paper where most or all of the references were written by the same group of authors?

In other words, my adviser is an author for most/all of them with a subset of his students.

If your work is either very new or very esoteric, then I don't see that this would be unusual. However, for a more general topic there might be some issues. When I finished my dissertation the topic wasn't new, but it was very esoteric. I knew of only two universities in the world where there was interest in the problem and only about a half dozen people interested. All were either professors or students at those two institutions.

Research is very specialized and often balkanized. So, if there are, in fact, few or no other papers then the situation is determined by the facts and is therefore acceptable. Publishing may spread interest and the "problem", if any, will disappear in time.

Make sure your search was thorough, of course. It wouldn't do to be informed of a wide body of work that you missed.


Wikipedia article about PhD thesis During my PhD, I developed a new microscopy technique and soon I will submit a major paper presenting the work. I am now in the job market looking for postdocs, not necessarily in the same field where I did my PhD work.

Would it be a good idea to make a Wikipedia page on the technique I developed? Would it be perceived as a signal that I have no good science to show (I don't think so)? Thanks!

No, it would not be advisable to create a Wikipedia page solely devoted to the new technique. If you are one of the sole people responsible for the technique and its development, you run the risk of creating a conflict of interest. Even without that issue, a new technique likely has few published sources to support it, so you will have difficulty establishing notability. Without additional support from reliable sources, your new page may be deleted.

Luckily, there are numerous other options for promoting your work in laymen-friendly ways. It may be feasible (and may even provide better visibility of your work, even to prospective employers) to write a few blog entries about the approach, produce a short Youtube video about it, or even a dedicated wiki, if you see the technique undergoing changes or optimizations in the near future.


How to get a "teaching letter" when I don't want my department to know I'm looking for a job? I am currently a tenure track faculty in a college and I plan to look for a position somewhere else. A problem is that, I can not get a teaching letter from my department (in fact I would like to keep my search confidential). Teaching letters are required in my field and I am wondering what should I do in this case? Thank you for your suggestions in advance.

As noted in my response to @strongbad, I recommend against being open about job searches if you're in a T-T position. You don't have to look far to find a lot of horror stories about chairs and senior faculty making life difficult for the 'uppity' young faculty member "who thinks s/he is too good for this school." Best to keep plans close to the chest until you're at a more definitive place in a search.

So that being said...

First, if you have a trusted friend at a nearby college who is in the same or related discipline, you might ask them to do an observation and evaluation of your teaching.

Second, your college's teaching center may be able to do an evaluation but this involves you trusting them not to spill the beans.

Finally, if this is a middle or senior position (i.e. Associate or Full) you can ask in your cover letter that because you the need for discretion because you are already in a tenure-track position, that the request letters be delayed until you make the long short list. This at least buys you time and puts you in a difficult situation only if you're a serious candidate.

I've seen this done and it's not an unusual request. You can suggest that you will provide your full teaching evaluations and portfolio in lieu of a letter until you make the long-short list.


Are there application fees for PhD positions in Europe? I'm new to the applying process and I'd like to ask a simple question. Does a PhD position in European universities require an application fee?

This is completely dependent on the manner in which the PhD program is handled. If it is a purely research position that is applied for like a job, then there is typically no fee associated with it. However, if it is part of a "program" and involves coursework and other requirements, then there may be a fee associated with a formal application. You'll have to check the announcement of the position to be certain.


My advisor cited her colleague's papers in her own methodology even though she did not use those methods. Does this qualify as scientific misconduct? I'm currently working on my MSc thesis under a PhD candidate's supervision. She has very recently published a paper as first author in a well-known journal where she claims to have followed methodology used by her colleagues and co-authors (in their other papers). However, I know that this is not true and that the PhD candidate is fully aware that she's lying too. I know that she has lied because the thesis of MSc students who worked under her previously state something entirely different from what the PhD candidate has cited as source in her paper.
Question: What I don't know is if this act qualifies as scientific misconduct and/or how severe this is. If yes, then what is an act like this called?
Some of the differences between the methodology she has actually used, and the one she claims to have used are minor. The issue is that there are so many of these "minor differences" that they might end up having major influence on the results. e.g for how long samples were centrifuged, rpm of centrifuge, temperature settings of gas chromatography machine, etc.
The major (?) difference pertains to composition of nutrient broth (microbiology) which I'm confident she has never even prepared throughout the course of her PhD.
Unfortunately, it's clear to me that the PhD candidate's supervisors don't care about this since they seem to be working in tandem to increase each other's h-index. So, reporting to them won't make much of a difference. But for my own sanity, I would like to know just how big of a deal is this kind of act?

The issue here is not citation, it is correct reporting.  If a method varies from the cited version, the appropriate thing is to say something like "Method from FrozzBozz et al.[73], modified by change of RPM from 3000 to 6000, growth media from LB to M9, and phase of the moon from new to full."
But did the method actually differ?
Now, there are definitely arguments to be made about the level of detail that is necessary and appropriate in protocol reporting.  For example, the details about how a sample is shaken may or may not matter, but are often omitted because people are often simply not very systematic about this.  Likewise, layout of samples on a 96-well plate is typically not reported, even though there are sometimes locality effects. Thus, many of the things that you are concerned about might be reported by one group but not by another.
The key distinction between reportable and non-reportable method details is whether a reasonable reader might expect them to have a significant impact on outcome.  In many fields, this is more clearcut: for example, an algorithms paper reporting the number of iterations required to solve a problem would not declare the system the algorithm is run on, but one reporting the time of execution would.  In biological sciences, however, it is often quite unclear and reasonable people have very different perspectives here.  Thus, the Ph.D. candidate might not even believe that they have meaningfully changed the method at all!
My advice it to start by approaching it from this perspective, in a non-confrontational manner.  Start by just asking for help in understanding the differences in method.  If they do not explain in a way that makes sense, then it would be appropriate to escalate to the PI that ultimately supervises both of you, and ask for help in figuring out what details of method variation are appropriate to include.  No need to get into accusations of lying at this stage, and you both might end up learning new things in the process.


Exam exceptions for student with disabilities I am registered as a psychologically disabled student with my University, and (for disability reasons) have asked my professor to allow me to take the exam at a date later than the ordinarily scheduled time.  I have not received a response from my professor yet; my guess is that she is hesitant to agree to this exception for several reasons. One, is the notion that I might have some kind of advantage over the rest of the class. Second, should my professor make modifications to the exam (e.g. change problems, make it harder) for my exam, then she may argue that the other students' exams will have to be graded differently from mine, and that's unfair. Third, the exam is scheduled at the normal class time, 10:00 AM - 10:50 AM, so it can be argued that if a student attends class regularly at those times, then there is no reason why the student should need to take the exam at a different time.

My professor hasn't said any of the above (yet) and I don't read minds; this is just my best guess of what she will think of my request. University policy leaves the decision on such an exception entirely up to the professor. (No department in the University has authority to influence her decision. Not even the office of disability services can influence her decision in this case.)

From your experiences at universities, how do most professors typically respond to such exceptions? For you professors, does the exception I'm requesting appear reasonable to you? Are there any other reasons you can think of for why the professor would/should not grant me an exception for the exam?

Exceptions can always be made under certain circumstances. Interestingly in your long and detailed question, there is no trace of a reason for requesting a delay other than your general condition, which I cannot see as a reason by itself. The university/department probably has some rules or policies for such cases. There are usually ways for people with different disabilities to take an exam in parallel with the scheduled exam in a a separate room, sometimes with specific tools and help. I can for example see that hospitalization and family funeral can be clear cases for such exceptions.

So if an exception is made, what would you have to expect? To provide exactly the same exam twice seems extremely unlikely for the reasons you provide. So from the teacher perspective, making a new exam is not something to take lightly, it requires a lot of work (if done seriously). In other words, you would get a different exam designed to be of equal difficulty. From a student perspective a new exam can always appear either easier or more difficult based on what and how well you have studied but in general, the exam would not intentionally be made more difficult.


Asked to referee a paper on a topic that I think another group is working on I have been asked to serve as the (only) referee on a paper that is in my field, but is not within my specific area of expertise. As far as I can recall, this paper seems to be on a topic that is also being independently worked on by a large collaboration of established researchers in the field. The work I am reviewing seems to be OK, though not especially good. I am under the impression, though I am not sure, that the large collaboration is working on a much more detailed and thorough version of the same work, but they have not published it yet. Should this affect my review in any way?

No. Jugde the paper based on the currently publicly available knowledge. The authors are not to blame for future knowledge.


How feasible to learn undergraduate math in one year? I know that Scott Young tried this for computer science by utilizing resources on OCW.  I am more interested in mathematics (pure and applied).  I wondered how feasible to do the same thing for mathematics.
As for my background, I was in a much worse situation than Scott's.  I received no formal education (primarily for financial reasons) since I was 19.  English is not my native language. And I am 28 now and know very little mathematics (or at least according to my own standards).  All I have is interest and determination.  I worked as a computer programmer for the past years.  Although MOOC was declared failure as revolution since it is criticized to be preaching to the converted, but it does benefit people like me a lot.  I plan to apply to AMSS, a top mathematics graduate school in my country.  The only good thing about the system in my country is that the entrance of a school is only determined by the entrance exam and interview.  This means my lack of college education will have relatively little negative impact on me.  The only thing I worry about is my age.  I feel I am just too old to do anything great.  Look at those wunderkinds who always achieve great things at young ages.  However, five years ago, I audited for half a semester at Fudan university (a school famous for its mathematics program).  I didn't find the average math students there are impressive.  I was doing very well for that half semester and students there actually asked me for clarifying some concepts.  Therefore, I do believe I have an aptitude for math.  My goal is really humble and I just want to make a living by doing things I love.

I see that this question is being voted down for being interesting, so let me blacken my own reputation by addressing it.
Mathematics undergraduates do not study mathematics. They study studying, they study structuring their time, they study the work-life balance, they study manipulating their teachers, they study the opposite sex,… and in their spare time they also study mathematics.
As an adult you therefore have a considerable advantage over the children because you have studied all those other subjects and graduated in some of them. That means that unlike them, you can devote 100% of your time to mathematics.
On the other hand, there is a natural pace at which one can learn. Learning is not a conscious process but an unconscious one, and we have very little control over how fast the unconscious mind decides to process things.
Moreover, in mathematics 90% of one’s learning time is completely wasted - the remaining 10# then more than makes up for it. When you are learning from people and with people, this process adjusts itself naturally. When learning in isolation, it is not clear that it will. You do need someone to guide you. The guidance is not actual tuition (as it would be if you were an 18-year-old child) - more, it is mentoring. Your guide will tell you things like “yes, that concept is difficult” or “this book’s approach does not suit you: try that one instead”.
So think hard about who might be able to guide you. It doesn’t necessarily have to be someone senior. I don’t know enough about your situation and environment to be able to advise.
BUT I have read your question a few times and I cannot understand why you are specifically talking about one year. There may be good reasons for it - but without those reasons, it sounds unnecessarily restrictive. You will certainly be able to learn some one-semester subjects in a couple of weeks. But there will be others that will take far longer than you expect.
Overall though: the signs are good and don’t worry about being too old!