How to write a teaching statement without any classroom teaching experience? I have a friend who is applying for teaching positions in biochemistry with no teaching experience. She has a strong research background, with several publications as a grad student and post doc, but is interested in transitioning into teaching (partially to gain employment and solve a two body problem, but also out of genuine interest). The position she is applying for asks for a "Statement of teaching interest". While, I think I can give good advice for someone who has taught before, what should someone write about if they have never taught or TAed a class. She does have some background tutoring and showing faculty, grad students, and undergrads how to use various machines in the lab. But that is about it. So

(1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?

and

(2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?

(1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?

I would guess that all three quoted phrases mean the same thing.  The "teaching statement" is not as formalized a genre as the sonnet: there is a range of reasonable responses, and to my ear all three things are asking for the same range.

Of course, if one is especially interested in a specific teaching position it would be better not to guess but to inquire what they mean.  I don't see any reason to be shy about that: just ask politely.

  (2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?

Others have given some advice on this.  It is certainly possible to literally write a teaching statement without any teaching experience -- one talks about one's teaching philosophy, teaching goals, and so forth, while not mentioning the experiences that one hasn't had.  It's not like they're asking for the secret masonic handshake: anyone who has gotten a PhD has certainly experienced enough teaching to be able to write about it intelligibly (let me assume that someone who has gotten a PhD has learned to write intelligibly on academic matters!).

However, isn't there another key question here?  Namely:

  (3) What are the chances that someone who has absolutely no teaching or TAing experience whatsoever will be seriously considered for a faculty position with emphasis on teaching?

I can answer this question from the perspective of a math department at a research university: it is very likely that I would not seriously consider any such candidate.  Let me explain.  "Even" at a research university, teaching is a big part of the job -- roughly half, according to university directives -- and someone who is a truly unsatisfactory teacher is going to be an eternal liability and problem.  Well, you say, what if they are a truly outstanding researcher -- can't they learn to teach?  It doesn't really work for me.  If by "truly outstanding researcher" you mean that they've proven the Weil Conjectures, then they deserve to be at a truly top place which can afford to have faculty who literally never teach, or who only teach graduate seminars to their own brilliant students.  Any candidate like that is not going to come to my public research university, and if anything still less is she going to go to a teaching college.  If someone is simply a strong enough researcher that I would otherwise be very pleased to hire her, then her complete lack of teaching experience creates an insurmountable fairness issue when one compares her to other candidates with similar or moderately worse research profiles but who have devoted a substantial amount of time and energy over the years to teaching.  Even serious research mathematicians work hard to be competent teachers: it takes time and energy.  Sometimes people have less than stellar teaching, and it really can ding them a bit even at a "serious research university".  Someone with no teaching has to get a zero averaged in to her total grade, so to speak.

I explained how it goes for mathematics at a research university.  The OP's candidate is changed twice: from mathematics to biochemistry, and from a research university to a teaching college.  From what I've heard on this site, teaching experience is valued significantly less in the non-mathematical sciences than in mathematics.  On the other hand, I happen to know that teaching experience and credentials are valued way more highly in teaching colleges than at research universities: though I think of myself as a "serious teaching guy", when I visit a colleague at such a place I feel like I am hiding in a foxhole doing math all day compared to them.  Moreover smaller places are smaller, so the "ethos of the college" is something which is more strongly felt by all, whereas being a scientist at a research university is almost a different job from being a humanities professor at a research university.  My best guess: there is little chance that someone without any teaching experience will get any real consideration at a reputable teaching college.

So I would say to the OP: if your friend wants this job, it's not about how to write the teaching statement, it's about how she can acquire some actual teaching experience.  One semester of good evaluations in any reputable post high school academic institution would make a world of difference.  If she's not willing to acquire that, is she really that serious about a teaching career?  Compared to the other candidates, I mean?

Two final points:

I. I do not want to leave the impression that one should write a "teaching statement" that hides the fact that someone has no teaching experience.  Although this should come out elsewhere in the application -- e.g. on the CV -- in my view it would be dishonest not to at least remark on this in the statement itself.

II. Others have counseled that a teaching statement should "[l]ook at what the professionals say about teaching" and "use pedagogy literature".  This is good advice, but it can be misapplied.  Namely, you need to have real understanding and ideally mastery of anything you talk about in these job applications.  Most people know not to talk about locally ringed topoi in their research statements if they do not want to get asked what a locally ringed topos is in an interview.  However, at least in my line of work, it is something of a cliche that young people "use pedagogy literature" to the extent of absorbing some trendy buzzwords, which they then misuse.  If you talk about flipped classrooms, IBL and so forth and reveal that you don't fully understand what these terms mean, that is so much worse than not using them at all.

In fact at my research university (it is a bit different at teaching colleges, I happen to know) most of the faculty are not familiar with the pedagogy literature, and if I'm honest, some people pride themselves on the conjunction of that ignorance and their superior teaching.  I don't think pedagogical literature is BS (or not all BS, anyway; every branch of academic literature has some BS), and I do believe that if you actually learn these ideas and articulate them properly and well it will be to your credit.  But be careful.  Also be aware that the trendy technique that one committee member might like might make another one roll her eyes.  So a good teaching statement succeeds independently of its use of this kind of terminology and ideas.


Associate Editor is our faculty member, so he/she will not handle our paper, right? We submitted to peer-review journal that has several Associate Editors. One of them is a lecturer in our department. Thus, the editor will not assign our paper review to him/her. Do we understand correctly?

Yes. An editor from the same institution as the authors has a clear conflict of interest, which is to be avoided.


How to responsibly apply for more than one PhD position? My Master thesis is under review, may be it will finish in a week. I had a discussion with my thesis supervisor about a potential PhD position. He applied for a 1 year grant, with my name as student beneficiary. Together we decided to apply for some more grants once I graduate.

In the mean time, I got an interview for PhD in another much better university. If I clear the interview, this employer would contact my supervisor for reference and my supervisor might think that I am playing a double game. Did I do something unethical? How to handle this situation?

I will inform my supervisor about the interview sooner anyway. I am extremely worried about this scenario that I could not focus on preparing for the interview at all.

No reasonable person can fault you for exploring different options since

there isn't a guarantee of a job
you haven't committed to this job.

Definitely tell your advisor so that you'll be in the right frame of mind for your other interview and can excel there as well !


Does anybody receive printed copies of new journal issues nowadays? Everybody I have met in academia uses recently-published journals entirely through electronic means. They may print out articles for their own use, but they will not receive printed subscriptions.

Does anybody receive modern journals in printed form nowadays? If so, who and why?

I do.

I have print subscriptions to three major journals in my field, all through optional add-ons to society memberships.

I do so for three reasons:

It forces me to read and interact with the literature. Online tables of contents, journal RSS feeds etc. can be ignored because another staff meeting is coming up, I really should submit an abstract, etc. The arrival of a printed journal gives me an excuse once a month/quarter/every two weeks etc. to sit down and engage with my field.
I read articles I would not otherwise read. General society journals have papers in areas that are not strictly my field. Sometimes, I read these, because I know the authors, liked a particular plot while I was flipping through, or because it pings my curiousity. I rarely read PDF papers outside my field.
Journals are more durable than print-and-staple publications. They live in my bag. I read them at lunch. I read them in the bathroom. I read them at the gym. I do things to them that I wouldn't dare do to either an iPad or other electronic reader or a few flimsy pieces of copier paper.


Will taking the math GRE subject test be a plus point for admission in MS/PhD in computer science? i am undergraduate in computer science looking for admission to MS/Phd in computer science at U.S universities. I know there is no subject test for computer science anymore. In that case, will taking the math GRE subject test be a plus point to my profile?

It would be easy enough to ask any department to which you are considering applying whether they would give consideration to math subject exam GRE scores.  They shouldn't penalize you for asking (and at any rate it would be worse to send the scores without asking first).

However, I am inclined to agree with @aeismail: the fact that they formerly had GRE subject exams in CS and no longer do must say something about what at least many of the departments are looking for.

Perhaps I should mention that I was involved in making the math subject GRE exam a required part of the application to the PhD program in my department...but my department is a mathematics department.  Still, after four years of doing graduate admissions I have some experience that seems relevant: in doing admissions one really wants to "compare apples to apples" whenever possible.  For instance this meant getting everyone's understanding that after making the math subject exam a requirement we really would seriously downgrade any application that didn't include it.  The reason for this is that when the exam is optional, a lot of students take it but don't send the scores if they are not strong enough.  This is obviously unfair to the student who turns in a lower percentile score: they are being penalized for their honesty and for following the rules.  I think similar considerations apply in the other direction: presumably very few or no other applicants to CS PhD programs are submitting this score.  So if you turn in a pretty good math subject exam score, what is the committee supposed to make of it?  How do they compare it with everyone else's application?

Considerations like the above make me think it is unlikely that you will be told that your scores will be considered as part of the application.  But there is no need to take my word for it: ask them, see what they say, and if you can, come back and tell us about it.


Do I have to translate primary and secondary sources into English for a dissertation? I am writing a dissertation for my PhD in Romance Languages. I focus on Spanish literature and use primary sources all in Spanish and secondary sources in Spanish and English, but I am writing in English. Do I need to translate the Spanish quotes I use from my primary and secondary sources into English for my dissertation? I am using MLA style and I could not find a rule about this issue.

I wrote my dissertation about translation in Spanish, and I had to quote several non-Spanish speking authors (English, German, Catalan, French). I decided quoting in the original language and adding the translation in a footnote. When there was a published Spanish translation of the quote, I used it. But if not, I translate it myself.
However, it's a good idea to ask your supervisor if there is a style guide for this issues.


References on how often finances are cited as a barrier to graduate study I am looking for some pointers to research that addresses the question:

How frequently do students who have earned undergraduate degrees cite financial barriers as a major reason influencing their decision not to go on graduate study?

Anecdotally, I am personally aware of students who feel that financial considerations prevent them from pursuing graduate study (e.g., they have a family to support and they can't afford to live on a graduate student salary for so many years). I am interested in research1 that examines the prevalence of this kind of thing (subject to the usual limitations of this kind of survey research, of course).

I have come across studies on how often finances are cited as barriers facing would-be undergraduate students2, but I have not seen any equivalent research about graduate study.

1 I am not looking for answers from anecdotal evidence not supported by a study or citation. I am also not looking for answers explaining why such a study is unlikely to exist, or why it should not be trusted if it did

2 See e.g., Studies on Barriers to Higher Education in Texas, and University fees biggest barrier to wider access, research finds

Most of the research I identified describes the impact of undergraduate loan debt (as a proxy for financial burden) on pursuing graduate education. I found fewer studies discussing the direct financial burden as a deterrent, though some literature does review the impact of financial stress on graduate school completion (See Strayhorn, 2010 for further sources).

One study of undergraduates in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and math fields) examined the impact of undergraduate debt on graduate school enrollment, breaking down the analysis by racial and ethnic classification (Malcom & Dowd, 2012). They found those with greater debt than the average for other students in their racial or ethnic group were less likely to enroll in graduate school within two years of graduation. Borrowing any amount of debt reduced the likelihood of enrolling in graduate school. For most racial and ethnic groups (the exceptions being African Americans and Asians with high levels of debt), graduate school enrollment declines as the level of undergraduate debt increases.

Another study of bachelor’s degree recipients examined the likelihood they transitioned to graduate school within 1 year of completing their undergraduate degree (Millet, 2003). The study found that students with more than $5,000 of debt were less likely to apply to graduate school compared to students with no debt. However, for students who expressed intent to attend graduate school and were accepted, their degree of debt did not seem to be a barrier. Additionally, the study found that the graduate school’s financial aid offer significantly predicted enrollment, and the author suggests the financial aid may counteract the burden of undergraduate debt when students decide to pursue graduate school. This paper also has a nice literature review section within this paper, which may point you to additional studies.

One study of 19 African American nurses found that financial concerns were frequently cited as barriers to attending nursing graduate programs (Mingo, 2007). In a quantitative survey, 9 students listed financial issues as one of the their primary barriers, and 1/3 of write-in answers expressed financial concerns.

However, some studies have found neutral or even positive effects of undergraduate debt on graduate school attendance. One study of undergraduates failed to find a relationship between undergraduate debt and plans to seek advanced degrees (Monks, 2001); the literature review in this paper cites several other studies, including some using national student surveys, that came to similar conclusions (see Baum & Saunders, 1998; Schapiro, O’Malley, & Litten, 1991). Additionally, 348 senior undergraduate psychology students – found that concerns about cost did not differ between students intending to apply and those not intending to apply re: grad school.

A national survey of over 7,000 undergraduate students found that undergraduate debt affected public and private university graduates differently (Zhang, 2013). For students who received their bachelor’s from a public college, debt reduced the likelihood they would attend expensive graduate programs such as doctoral, MBA, and professional degree programs; it had no effect on master’s programs. For private college graduates, debt was actually positively associated with attending MBA or professional programs, and did not effect other graduate programs either positively or negatively.

Similarly, another study sought to determine whether the 1992 Higher Education Act amendments, which expanded federal student loans and access to those loans, impacted the relationship between debt and graduate school (Kim & Eyermann, 2006). This study compared students who had graduated before and after the amendments and found that before the amendments, students with more debt were less likely to attend graduate school. After the amendments, the study found that debt did not impact low or high income students plans to attend graduate school. Additionally, they found that post-amendment middle income students actually experienced positive relationship between accessing loans and intending to pursue graduate school. The authors suggest that for these students the increased access to loans (even though it resulted in greater debt) actually facilitated their plans to pursue advanced degrees.

In sum, most studies use undergraduate student loan debt as a proxy for financial barriers to graduate education, and results have been mixed.

Baum, S., & Saunders, D. (1998). Life After Debt: Results of the
National Student Loan Survey. Selected Text from the Final Report.
Journal of Student Financial Aid, 28(3), 7-23.
Kim, D., & Eyermann, T. S. (2006). Undergraduate borrowing and its
effects on plans to attend graduate school prior to and after the
1992 Higher Education Act amendments. Journal of Student Financial
Aid, 36(2), 5-21.
Landrum, R. E. (2010). Intent to apply to graduate school:
Perceptions of senior year psychology majors. North American Journal
of Psychology, 12(2), 243-254.
Malcom, L. E., & Dowd, A. C. (2012). The impact of undergraduate debt
on the graduate school enrollment of STEM baccalaureates. The Review
of Higher Education, 35(2), 265-305.
Millett, C. M. (2003). How undergraduate loan debt affects
application and enrollment in graduate or first professional school.
Journal of Higher Education, 74(4), 386-427.
Mingo, A. D. (2007). Barriers and facilitators affecting African
Americans continuation into graduate programs in nursing. The ABNF
Journal: Official Journal of the Association of Black Nursing Faculty
in Higher Education, Inc, 19(2), 51-63.
Monks, J. (2001). Loan burdens and educational outcomes. Economics of
Education Review, 20(6), 545-550.
Schapiro, M. O., O'Malley, M. P., & Litten, L. H. (1991). Progression
to graduate school from the “elite” colleges and universities.
Economics of Education Review, 10(3), 227-244.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2010). Money matters: The influence of financial
factors on graduate student persistence. Journal of Student Financial
Aid, 40(3), 1-23.
Zhang, L. (2013). Effects of college educational debt on graduate
school attendance and early career and lifestyle choices. Education
Economics, 21(2), 154-175.


How do project supervisors address the "freeloading" problem in group projects? I am currently leading a three person team to tackle an undergrad engineering project that involves several parts. I am responsible for data analysis using sophisticated computer algorithms, another is responsible for creating a software graphical display and another is involved in the programming of a piece of hardware.

The problem is that both of those other students are freeloading on my efforts and neither has contributed much since the project started in May of this year (that's 6 months of doing next to nothing).

In the lasts couple of months, every two weeks we would have a team meeting with our project supervisor. The team meeting involves a submission of progress since last meeting. Here's what would happen: one or two days before the meeting, a person will do something that is tangential to what he is assigned to do. For example, it could be setting up a piece of software, or trying someone else's code. Nothing is ever successful and in every single progress report I would see them putting down "investigating alternatives" or "still under research". What? You have been researching for more than half a year.

The most irritating issue for me is that they are both freeloading on my efforts. Because data analysis requires a huge amount of experiments and organization of the data, every once a while I would get them to spend less than 30 minutes with me (amidst whining and complaining and playing with cellphone) on organizing about 4 TB worth of data, while I spend the next week incessantly work on the data analysis, organization of the data, and preparing for presentation at project meetings. You've guessed it, this is exactly what they would put down on the progress report - "helped team member X to perform data organization". In addition, when they are stuck on their parts, I am often forced to take over just to meet the deadline. To be honest, I have single handedly spear-headed every single aspect of project (even though I have never done GUI or hardware programming!) because things are never delivered and there are no immediate, effective checks to keep them from not delivering their work.

MOST irritating aspect: they have put my work onto their LinkedIn profile!

The top excuse that they give is that they are busy with other courses. Since this project is over a long period of time and graded based on overall success, they do not think it is as important as their other half semester courses. They keep on telling me how they are so busy with their courses and everything is due on the next day and midterms is next week they never think that I have the exact same workload (if not more). I also don't have any financial power or control over their grades as we do not have any official reporting system put in place to get them working. Also it is impossible to kick them off of the team without shutting the project down.

I want to signal to my project supervisor that they are not performing AT ALL. This will definitely come as a surprise to him since every meeting there are enormous progress (all from my end) and the project has been an overall success. I am also kind of upset that my team members are going to chip in on a potentially big prize at the end of this year.

From your experience, what is commonly done for a supervisor to spot freeloaders in a group project and how are penalties handed down? How can I work with my supervisor now (who maybe completely unaware of the situation) to effectively put these people back to work?

From your experience, what is commonly done for a supervisor to spot freeloaders in a group project and how are penalties handed down? How can I work with my supervisor now (who maybe completely unaware of the situation) to effectively put these people back to work?

As somebody who taught many courses with a similar structure to what you described: the common approach for supervisors to handle this situation is to do nothing (at least not on their own initiative). You are likely not aware of it, but you are in the middle of learning something that will presumably be more valuable to you than the hard technical skills of the project. You are learning how to handle team work that isn't going smoothly.

There is a good chance your supervisor is already aware that things are not working out in your project (your team mates have been reporting that things are "under research" for half a year while you have been delivering results - any half-decent supervisor knows what that means). He does not step in because one of the main learning outcomes of such a project is that he expects you to learn how to handle such issues.

So far, you are not handling it well. You are clearly very annoyed by the situation, but you do not mention any clear steps to resolve the issue. You cover their asses by taking over their work, and have as far as I can tell not formally escalated the problem. Instead, you are hoping that the "higher-ups" will figure it out on their own, and step in without you having to take responsibility. This is exactly how you should also not handle this situation in the real world.

And, I should add, do not hope that this situation will not come up when you work in industry. Replace "we don't have time for this because of other courses" with "we don't have time for this because of other projects", and you will have the exact same problem in the real world. Only in industry, the stakes for failing will be higher. As usual, university gives you a comparatively low-risk environment to train working on the same kinds of problems that you will also routinely face later on.

To end this with a practical remark: stop focusing so much on what they do, and what your supervisor should do. Start thinking of your environment as a context that you can't (directly) change, at least not without effort. Your task is to figure out what you can do to work in the environment you are given. This may include taking more responsibility for managing the group, or getting into a big, potentially productive fight with your team. This may also include formally escalating the problem.


"You are paid to answer my questions!" - how to handle silly questions? How do I handle silly questions? By silly, I mean questions that are unrelated to the material of the course.

First, I am a TA. Recently, a student asked me a very silly question at the end of a lab session. I say silly because:

it was not related to the lecture,
it was asked at the end of a lecture - and the classroom was already full with the students of the next class, and
I have previously talked about this issue.

The student insisted that I answer his question many times. So, I told him: "It is already late, but let me know about your question" .. when he asked it, I told him: "You can't be serious, this is not a question!"

He got upset, and he told me: "You are paid to answer my questions!"

I got angry, but how should I handle similar situations?

"I have previously talked about this issue." -- Yes, I talked about this issue even though it is not part of the course and the lecture. I talked about it to add more applications to the course material.

I got angry, but. . how should I handle similar situations?

Got angry? No good!

You're not necessarily paid to answer his question but you are paid to help advance knowledge and learning.

Unfortunately, the tone of your answer doesn't let us know exactly how "silly" the question was (was it silly because it was personal question that had no bearing on the course? Was it silly because it was not relevant to the course material but possibly relevant to the overall subject? Was it silly because you had already covered the material in class? Was it silly because he was asking at the end of the lab session?) so unfortunately the exact way in which to respond might vary, but you might try:

If it's a matter of time and you can't answer it because you have to clear the room, tell him, "Give me a few minutes to pack up my things to get out of the classroom." Clear the room, entertain question.
If it's a matter of you having another appointment, then get him to submit the question over email or in writing or before next class.
If it's silly because it's not related to the lecture, I usually do my best to entertain these kinds of questions because it sometimes means the student is interested in other topics around the material. If my class is on object-oriented design and programming in Java, but the student asks me about "how can you use design in procedural programming languages like C?" I'd probably give some ideas on how it could apply to that situation.
If it's a personal question that you don't want to answer, you can say, "I don't feel comfortable answering that", "It's none of your business", "I can't talk about this", or similar.
If it's a stupid question because it's sooooo obvious or because you covered it before, then, sorry, it's not a silly question but is something the student needs explanations for. Get him to visit you over office hours for extra help.
If it's a matter of the student talking on and wasting time with questions, then you can ask the student politely to keep questions for after the class. If the student is trolling you with questions and is otherwise being a nuisance this option usually works as well.

Yes, it is rude for him to declare "You are paid to answer my questions!" but it's also rude to say that "Your question is silly". You are the teacher, the role model, the example, so you should be more patient with them than they are with you. Besides, if you tell them  you'll answer it later, you can simply say, "Just wait - I haven't answered your question yet."


Publishing figures in conference abstracts - will this constitute formal “publication” that will preclude our publication of this figure in journal? I have a manuscript in final stages of editing to submit it for publication, most likely to an ACS journal.  My advisor would also like me to present this research in the upcoming ACS conference.  I need to submit an abstract and they give the option of including a figure.  I'd like to include my graphical abstract if this won't preclude submitting the same graphic later as part of the manuscript.  So does a conference abstract count as "published"?

There are several questions hidden within this one. The first is whether you retain copyright after the abstract appears. If not, and if the figure is fairly substantial (in the information conveyed and in design elements) then you may need to seek permission from the copyright holder to reuse it. And you will also, then, need to cite the abstract. This is the same as if you want to use a long quote from an article, yours or that of another. Short quotes and standard figures don't usually require permission, but do require citation. However, TOC isn't clear to me. I assume it is more that "Table of Contents".
If you do hold copyright then reusing it, with citation, is fine. But the citation is required to avoid the issue of self plagiarism.
However, if the figure is to be reused on its own as a complete work, not part of another paper, then publishers would probably consider it as already published and therefor not now innovative. I doubt that is what you intend, but note that it is up to the publisher to make determinations about such things.
My best guess, with limited information, is that you will be permitted to reuse it even if you don't hold copyright. But you will need to ask and you will need to cite. One can, of course, make reference to ones own work and even quote from it, but there are limits on how much you can use in copyrighted work.


Offering admission and then no response! I have applied in a US university (let say it is A) in a natural science department for PhD admission.
One weeks  ago I emailed the  graduate director to know my status because I received admission from another university. I wrote him that, I will not accept the other university's admission offer if I'm in their consideration pool. The graduate director emailed me back that I have received the admission. He also suggested me to sign the offer letter he sent me  and to complete the admission within two weeks.

After carefully checking the email, I saw that  I didn't  get  the offer letter in the attached file. I replied him back immediately regarding the missing attachment. I replied the professor two times regarding the missing attachment  in the consequent  two days but still I haven't received any reply. The admin and the graduate director are not responding whereas 7 days have been passed.

Somehow I had a connection with a current student who is studying (PhD) in that department and I requested  him  to talk with the admin.  He discussed my matter with the  admin who writes and handles the  documents. The admin told him that, She didn't process any document for me regarding admission offer.

What should I do in this case? I have another admission offer from another university but I'm very much interested to the program I'm taking about.

EDIT: I'm an International Student

I expect by now you have had to decide - but

Often there is only one faculty member (grad advisor) responsible for day-to-day worrying about graduate admissions in a medium size department in the US. And it is only one of his/her responsibilities. The best assumptions are that email went astray or buried (make sure to check your spam filtered email also!), or he/she got distracted by other deadlines and cannot get back to it for a few days.

As you did, polite emails (not frantic or demanding) to request clarification are the way to go. Recognize that if there is a large time difference, that it will create slow motion exchanges. A distraction for the faculty member may put the response 2-3 days later. (Make it easy to find the email if it was buried after a day or two by putting your name and some concise note or something like 'grad admissions clarification question" in the subject line

Pay particular attention to the first email you received that said you were admitted but neglected to attach the form you expected. Were there several names cc'd on the email? Make sure to keep those people cc'd on your requests to keep them in the loop. It may be that they can pick up where the first person left off.

And finally, if you decide to accept another institutions offer, then after you have settled that, then send a polite letter to inform the department. It may be that you decide later to switch schools and want to try again with this department.


How much does the future career of a PhD student matter to the advisor? I am struggling with my Post-PhD career. I am still looking for positions and I getting zero response. My advisor is giving me no leads and I don't know if she's even bothered about my career prospects. She has offered me a one year postdoc position in my current lab. Apart from that, there's no further help.
I don't know if a PhD advisor even cares for their students. I feel so unsupported and lost.
Edit: The problem is I work on a modeling technique and research area that's not in her expertise. I started the entire work and now she has other PhD students working on the topic due to the multiple papers I published. I have already staying around 6 years with her. My PhD went so long due to my own faults. Now I am absolutely lost and disillusioned.

Your last sentence makes me think that the question you ask in the title may not be the question you're really interested in. If you feel lost, talk to people. Friends, family, professionals, whichever you feel most comfortable with, but get help.
How much does the future career of a PhD student matter to the advisor? The subsequent careers of the collective PhD graduates influence the attractiveness of the advisor to future PhD students. So it matters, but if the advisor has many successful PhD graduates on their resume, it is a matter of diminishing returns.
Beyond that, a good PhD advisor would feel a moral obligation to ensure their former students land somewhere nice. However, the current Covid situation makes the job market really rather difficult right now, so this is not entirely within the grasp of the advisor. Offering a postdoc is something that the advisor can control, so I can understand why this would seem like a reasonable solution to them.


How to correctly cite ASCII (Public table)? Do I need to cite it? I have included ASCII table in my paper research, but I'm not sure how can I correctly cite it. I have seen many papers not including any citation while others mention any random website that has the table.

Any help is appreciated

The ASCII standard is set out in this document, so you should cite it directly.


GitHub repository ownership as a PhD student in a lab I'm a PhD student and use GitHub to track and share code for nearly all of my research projects, most of which are largely coding-based work in the field of remote sensing.
Our lab is discussing how to best keep track of all the software related projects we do. I generally start and manage projects where I'm first author under my own GitHub account. I recently started a organization account for our lab and I have a repository in there that is basically just a README listing everyone's projects and links to them. We also have this information on our lab website.
I'm considering the pros and cons of having projects owned by the lab account, but I am leaning somewhat away from this, because most of these projects are individually maintained by students or lab technicians and it seems fairer to have them get credit on their own accounts. But we all want the lab to get credit and for people to know certain tools were developed within and supported by our lab.
Anyway, I'm just curious what other labs do and to get a feel for best practices here.

It's fairly common for labs to have GitHub organizations. There are multiple reasons for this.

First of all, it doesn't prevent the authors from getting credit. The commits will be shown as commits of the individual, not as commits of the organization.
Labs often have a scientific "brand" in terms of what they research. If the GitHub repository is completely personal, then your work does not fully contribute towards this brand. But contributing towards the joint scientific output of the groups is a major reason why you may get funding from the group's third party funding.
Perhaps most importantly, PhD students eventually leave the lab. They can continue maintaining their projects if they want to - there is no necessity to be an administrator of a GitHub organization to continue maintaining existing repositories. But what if the leaving PhD students choose not to maintain the code? If the repository is personal, then other people in the lab then cannot commit bugfixes to the repository. They could fork it, but once the repository link is in a scientific paper, the original repository is the official one. And this is problematic if the group's brand depends on the repository because it's a central part of their overall story.


Would getting started in research in something outside my specific interest hurt my ability to research in that area later? I'm a CS undergrad who wants to eventually do research in machine learning. My university has plenty of machine learning labs, but they are quite competitive. At the moment, I have a few opportunities to get started in research. One is a project in the electrical engineering department that involves optimization algorithms for Cyber Physical Systems. One is a bio lab looking for someone to work on software for analyzing signals of particular types of fish. Another is working on scientific computing for a physics lab.

I would not be opposed to getting my first shot at research in any of these places, but would getting too involved outside the CS department actually hurt my chances of getting a chance to research in Machine Learning later? Or would having some type of research experience raise my chances for these competitive labs?

I don't see any reason why doing research in one area would prevent you from doing research in another area later on. Many people do several different research projects before they figure out what it is that they want to do and, in some graduate programs, it's even a requirement to do several different "rotation" projects before officially selecting a research group and project.

So I would view any research project as worthwhile. You could find:

you really do like research and find a new area that you'd want to pursue.
you don't like the project but want to try something else.
you really don't like research.

Any of these would be a notable and valuable end result. So don't worry about getting into machine learning later on if you can't get it into it now. Doing research in something that has piqued your interest (at least temporarily) is all that really matters, especially early on in your career.


Dismissed by my committee I attended a doctoral program and was completing it in 3 to 4 years. I got a life-threatening sickness that set me back several years. When nearing my dissertation I was dismissed. I was told that I was let go because I had cancer. I never wanted to return to that school again, but not having completed my work has caused me great heartache and I am not able to pursue the career I desired. Is it at all possible to complete the degree elsewhere?

In general, I think graduate schools want students to pursue their entire PhD candidacy at a given institution. Moreover, schools may be reluctant to count work done a long time ago as part of the requirements for obtaining a degree, as it likely sets a bad precedent.

Moreover, there's the question of financing. If you're in a program where students are financed through TA's, it's a lot easier to convince a school to take a chance, rather than in the sciences. The reason for this is that funding in the sciences is often tied to specific projects—which means that you will most likely need to change topics if you pursue a PhD in such a department. This would of course set your time to degree back considerably.

That said, you may find a sympathetic department that's willing to take a chance. My best advice is try to talk to the graduate admissions officers of some of the departments you're thinking of applying to. They'll help you to figure out what are the requirements and possibilities.


Am I stuck with the topic/advisor that recommended my admission? I am doing a PhD in the USA. I already have a masters in France and a 5 year bachelor. I didn't think it was a bad idea to take courses again in the US, as I am changing of area. My acceptance was recomended by an advisor who is paying partially my  stipend (I receive 73% of my stipend from my government, who also covers muy tuition and partially the health insurance. The local University (not advisor) completes the health insurance cost). This year taking undergrad courses I haven't felt very challenged, and in a paper reading and discussion group I have found some professors with a more interesting (for me) approach to things.

Am I stuck with my advisor even if usually students pick a topic after the 1st year? How can I approach this topic with whom? The graduate advisor? My PI is also the chair of the department.

Another thing is that I know some people that do not have funding at all in this department. I wouldn't want to be stuck in this situation as the rent takes around 2/3 of my income and I have my wife living with me.

This is ultimately dependent on the policies of your department. The basic issue would be that if you switch to another advisor, the other advisor would presumably be responsible for covering the remainder of your stipend. The big question is if you are free to choose both advisor and topic, or if it's expected you'd stick with your advisor, but have freedom to choose the PhD topic.

The right point of contact is the graduate advisor, who will be well versed in the procedures of your specific department.


What to do with PhD advisor who does not revise journal manuscript Say that someone has already spent three years in PhD with an advisor who never revises their drafts for journal submission for a period longer than 8 months given imaginary excuses. However, when it comes to conference papers the advisor has time since conference drafts are short and there is a deadline. I am wondering what should the PhD student do in this situation.

You may have tried the following approach already. If not, here it goes:
You could approach your advisor by asking whether he thought the draft was missing any results or needed additional work. If he says no, then, ask whether you could set a target date for submission and to have weekly meetings to discuss various parts of your paper. Also, express your concerns and explain how important it is for your career to get credit/recognition for your work. All of this can be done politely and face-to-face.

This approach worked for me when I was a graduate student.


Can you teach at a community college with a master's degree? I'm interested in teaching a class at the community college level.  I'm not interested in it as a career, but rather because I like teaching people about computer science.  How likely is it that I would be able to teach a evening class at a local community college with a masters degree (Computer Science).

I don't have a lot of formal experience teaching (TA/tutoring).  I spent most of my time doing research in the lab, but during that time I mentored/managed/herded a number of undergrads.

Maybe being a TA would be a nice way to get my feet wet and see if it's for me.  Is that possible, now that I've already graduated?

I have a regular 9-6 job that I would have to work around.

I teach physics at a community college and have been on a number of hiring committees for full-time positions, as well as participating in a bunch of hires of part-timers. Different departments and different individuals have different priorities. Some full-timers who have a master's might actually feel threatened by a PhD applying for a part-time position. Often we get applications, for both full- and part-time positions, from people with PhD's that clearly show that the applicant has no real interest in teaching and thinks it should be easy to get a community college job as a fallback. A PhD will typically be somewhat of an advantage in applying for a part-time job, especially if the course to be taught is at a high academic level (e.g., differential equations). The bigger problem is your lack of teaching experience.

There is a lot of randomness involved, and you can maximize your chances if you're in a big urban area and apply for a lot of jobs. Sometimes a full-timer gets sick or there is some other last-minute reason to hire someone to teach a class. In these emergency situations, you basically have to be available, meet the minimum qualifications, and give a non-disastrous interview.

The fact that you want to teach in the evening is a good thing. Many full-timers don't want to teach evening classes, so often those are the hardest to find a teacher for.

I think MHH is right that this discussion is going to be more valuable if we widen it to include full-time positions. For full-time positions, the value of a PhD seems to vary greatly. At my school, for example, the math department has 3 PhD's and 27 people with masters', while the natural science division has 21 with PhD's and 11 with masters'. One department clearly considers a PhD more important than the other does. This may be partly because the math department's offerings are bottom-heavy with remedial classes. For a full-time position, there will typically be a list of minimum qualifications, which are set by law, and a list of desirable qualifications. The two biggies on the list of desirable qualifications are teaching experience and a PhD. It helps if you have both.

When we hire for a part-time position, we're hiring someone to teach a specific course. If the course is low level, then we don't care as much about whether the candidate has a PhD. When we hire a full-timer, theoretically we want someone who can teach every course their department offers, but realistically we usually have something more specific in mind. When someone with a master's is hired full-time, usually that person ends up getting slotted into teaching gen ed courses, remedial courses, or other low-level courses for the rest of their career. Many people are very happy in such a slot, e.g., I hear that many folks in math see teaching remedial math as their ideal job, and they have no interest at all in teaching calculus.


Is it okay to report classmates cheating on exams? Is it acceptable or ok to report on students cheating?  Many times during a test or an exam, I have seen students in front of me either passing notes, or otherwise collaborating whenever the professor isn't looking.

I don't want to get into trouble, and I don't know if it's "alright" to rat on fellow classmates.  Part of me thinks they deserve being caught out, by virtue of trying to cheat their way through the course. However, I feel like I would get found out by other students if they were caught cheating.

What is the right course of action here? To be clear, I would never raise an accusation in the middle of an exam; it would only lead to me being ostracized by my peers.

As an instructor, I want to know if there is an environment that allows cheating. Even if the student can't provide proof or only told me afterwards or anonymously, I can take action on future exams by better proctoring, exam versioning, and seating charts.

So telling the teacher afterward would protect individual students but improve the quality of the course overall, which is a win-win.


Publishing a work; not sure what should I do I did a research project for a class. It was a simple idea but I checked literature and no one had applied that method  to that problem before. My method uses a bit of heuristic type stuff. If no one thought of it before is it because it is a bad method or should I publish? Having the name of my instructor is a problem; must it always be on a paper? What if I am instructed not to publish? My instructor is quite busy  and has no intention to deal with the issue and does not read projects so I can't really rely on him to judge.

I want to send it to a conference as the quality of it would not be very high. Should I wait until I have improved my skills for publishing in a respected conference or try to make it published at some other place, like 1st, 2nd 3rd IEEE on foobar of foos type conferences as a starter?

First, you should ask someone famliliar with the field whether it is

really unpublished
a good idea.

Sometimes ideas are very old and might be published in books which are not available online, and therefor harder to find. Or you might have used the wrong terms for your search.

If after that you still think it is a unique and useful idea, you should try to publish it. The "useful" is important here, sometimes people are publishing new stuff which noone applied to the problem before just because it makes little sense with regards to the big picture of the discipline.

If your instructor did contribute to the paper and the research, then it should be on the paper unless he declares it is not necessary. I would ask my student to come with a paper outline first (so you could approach your instructor with a clear plan of the publication), we improve the sketch and then the studet writes the first draft which I as a supervisor try to bring it in a form which suits the standards of the respective conference or journal. Usually, this involves some feedback rounds and includes additional scientific discussion etc. .

From your OP I got the impression your instructor might not be willing to put much effort in it, but sometimes people when they see someone is willing to go an extra mile.

If you are on your own, try to read some books about scientific writing, there are lots of formal errors which can be easily avoided.

I definitely encourage you to try to publish, it is a good experience and, if successful, is great for your CV.


First-year PhD student with weak CV/Resume; how to stand out in fellowship competitions? I am a first year PhD in a large Social Sciences program at an American public institution. My CV is very weak as I am not yet published. I have research assistantship experience and teaching experience as well as a stint on a Fulbright. I'm applying to fellowships for the summer to gain more research experience.

I am working on a fellowship application and would like to stand out amongst the crowd. Other than my attributes above, I have nothing! My CV barely fills two pages. Will I be written off because I don't have much experience? I need fellowships like these in order to grow my tiny resume- but- I'm worried can't compete to get them without more.

Thank you for your help!

Everyone starts out with no publications.  Never mind starting a PhD in that condition:  I finished my PhD at a top-three program for my field without any publications, and I still got a good postdoctoral position.  How did I do this?  Because of my advisor's recommendation.  (And it was a sound recommendation: eventually I did get some publications...)

For graduate students -- and especially, early career graduate students --  recommendation letters are all-important.  Do you have a thesis advisor yet?  If so, go directly to her and tell her what fellowships you are thinking of applying for and asking whether that sounds reasonable and whether your application will be competitive.  If you do not have a thesis advisor, try out the same conversation with several faculty members in your department that know you through your coursework, research or TAing.  Emphasize that because you are young and unpublished, you think you will need strong recommendations from them to get serious consideration for summer research fellowships.  Select from among these the ones who sound most enthusiastic.

In general, faculty in your department should be very supportive of your endeavor.  On the one hand, such fellowships generally provide funding, and faculty are always very happy when graduate students can find external funding of any kind whatsoever, since internal funding is so limited and hard to come up with in these straitened economic times.  On the other hand, if you get the fellowship you will be getting funded for doing exactly what you are supposed to be doing in the summer as a graduate student: research.  So if you feel like the faculty you've spoken to are not helping you enough with this, it could be worthwhile to discuss this with someone like the graduate coordinator or department head: not in a way which casts any blame on the faculty members, but just to emphasize that you want to do this very desirable thing and you haven't yet found the right person to help you out.

Good luck.


My supervisor said they are working on my offer My proposed PhD supervisor told me the department is currently working on my offer.

Does that mean my admission is guaranteed? And what can they be doing?

Nothing is guaranteed until you have a written and signed piece of paper.

(this advice applies to all parts of life!)

Your chances are possibly really good to get it now but there can always be something unexpected (clauses one of the parties does not agree to, financial implications, something wrong in the paperwork, change of mood, etc).


How can I emphasize my interest towards PhD with no real research experience? I am 23, I have a Russian diploma in Computer Science and I am interested in getting into PhD in Computer Science in the US. But after reading this post and some google search I realized that I have some major problems in my application.

I don't have any research experience and results to show:
when I was 17 I moved in (big Russian city) to attend university there and I had to work really hard (40-60 hours per week) in night shifts to pay for myself (rent, food, books, etc). So I have got major health problems and haven't got any time (and other resources) for high-quality study. Now, a year after graduation, I still don't have enough time for this kind of project because I have to work hard towards exams. I also have to work hard to earn money for application because of the difference between dollar and ruble.
Recommendation letters from my university professors probably will not have any weight outside my country:
my university hasn't any famous projects or labs or publications even according to the standards of my own country. Of course, I remember that the most important thing about recommendation letter is that what does it tell about my professional and personal abilities. But will it make any sense since it's written by someone totally unknown for admission committee?

Also, I figured out some good points for my application:

I am very motivated and I already know what it's like to be alone in big city by myself. I already know what it's like to work hard and live on very limited amount of money. I know the difference between what I'm capable of and what I'm not.
I am good at doing an independent work. I did my diploma in digital sound processing and learned all the maths I needed during 3 months without guidance and without any background in this field (when I started I didn't even know what is a bitrate). Then I worked as a research C++ developer in one karaoke project, again in DSP field. There I learned how to work with angry bosses, how to summarise any completed work to present results to managers, how to deploy mathematical models in real project and how to do it fast and so on. This project had some business problems so I quit and started to freelance. For this purpose I had to develop a system for organizing myself and skills to set goals and to meet my own deadlines.
I have a lot of practical knowledge. I worked as a linux system administrator in a big hosting company for about a year, I can write on C++, python, php, Objective C and Java. I know how to work in team and how to communicate with different people.
For last two years I did great amount of work with myself. I quit smoking and drinking alcohol. I totally stopped to take caffeine in any doses, I lost more than 15 kilo (results of my health problems), I gained a lot of muscles and started to do some yoga. During all this time I learned a lot about neurophysiology, cognitive sciences and the basics of biology. I've got really inspired by all this knowledge and now I'm looking forward to work with neuroscience.
I have already took the TOEFL iBT test and have score of 104.
I have a GPA 4.98 from 5.0.

So my question is: how can I make my good points to overweight my problems?

This is a pretty specific question but I'm going to try and answer it broadly.

Generally speaking, applicants with no research experience are not appealing or competitive candidates to professors for graduate school. When professors want to admit a student to work with them, they want someone who is going to be able to hit the ground running somewhat - who knows the basics of how research works, who has some ideas about what interests them, and who knows how to do some basic research tasks. Furthermore, they're looking for students who aren't going to realize halfway through their first year that they hate research and decide to drop out. (Which makes me turn the question back on you: Why do you want to get a PhD, if you have no research experience?)

That said, if you have no research experience and you still want to apply for a PhD program (which I don't recommend), you'll have to demonstrate that you have acquired the knowledge and skills to succeed in a PhD program in another way. Being able to live alone isn't the way - they expect that as a basic part of being an adult.

-Recommendation letters will go a long way. Your professors don't have to be famous or personally known by your graduate program committees. They just need to know you very well, and be able to comment on your ability and potential to do research and succeed in the field.
-If you had to do research-like tasks for any classes - like a final project or capstone - you can discuss that, and what you learned and how you will translate that to research in the program. The research C++ developer position is a good example. You did research; use that experience as a basis for further explanation.
-Motivation is good, but you can't just say that you are motivated - you need to demonstrate it in an academic sense. What academic things have you done to show that you are motivated?

However, you will probably need to apply to an MS program first and get some research experience that way.


How do professors get to apply and work on industry projects? Not necessary to have a research project but any project where professor can get to apply his theory and skills and work along with working professional in the industry - and also get to leverage academia's infrastrcuture in the form of labs, software, students etc. How do professors find such projects and opportunities to interface with industry?

Reputation, personal contacts, and open calls for proposals.

Academics who publish important papers relevant to industry problems are likely to draw the attention of people in those industries who may reach out to the professor to find out more about their research. These kinds of contacts may turn into invitations to come speak, collaborate, or even a contract project to get paid to do research for the company.

Similarly, not everyone who gets a PhD goes into academia, so it's likely that a professor will have former labmates from grad school or postdocing or recent advisees who have gone into industry. These connections, if maintained, can be invaluable for finding out about the needs of industry and may lead to funded research projects.

Finally, some companies run research programs more or less just like government research programs. If you want to work with Microsoft Research or Google or Pfizer, you may simply go to their website, discover what research funding programs they are funding, and apply.

There are certainly other possibilities (incubators, university-level liaison offices, etc), but these three are among the most common.


Is having a "too good to be true" recommendation bad? I am applying to grad school and I asked one of my professors to write a letter of recommendation on my behalf. He happily agreed. He submitted a recommendation and forwarded the confirmation email to me so that I can have look.

On the recommendation form there are some questions that asks the professor to select things like top 1%, 5%, 10% in terms of writing, organization, maturity ..etc.

He chose top 1% in all of them. In another question "What is the group you are comparing thq applicant with ?" He wrote "He was at least in the top 1% compared to all students in the last 5 years".

I told this to a friend and he was surprised and suggested that the admission committee might not take his recommendation seriously. Another one of my referees showed me his recommendation and it was very similar.

My concern is how admission committees look at recommendations that seem too good to be true? The two professors really know me very well and they are the best options I got.

Saying that you gave the first proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is too good to be true.  (I.e., it is literally false, since the result was resolved 20 years ago by someone else.)  Saying that you are more talented at physics than Einstein and Feynman combined is technically possible but strains credulity to the point that it would  have a strong negative effect if not backed up by some truly remarkable facts.  However, saying that you are in the top 1% compared to all students in the last five years is obviously not too good to be true: it must be true of at least one student.  (These questions are often muddied by not being precise enough about the cohort being compared, and you should know that admissions committees interpret them with a grain of salt.)

When I was involved with PhD admissions in the UGA math department, each year I saw several applications in which the recommender gave the applicant top marks in every category.  When this happened I didn't say "Ridiculous!" but instead looked carefully at the rest of the application.  It may be that I conclude that the recommender is a bit naive and/or hasn't seen as good students as I have...but that still might mean that the student's application is quite strong.  In general top marks are good things, not red flags.

To my mind the fact that two of your recommenders showed you the letters is much more of a red flag than the top ratings.  The strongest letters of recommendation often contain confidential information that would not be suitable for the candidate to read (e.g. comparisons to other named people).  If such information doesn't appear then there is nothing inherently wrong with the practice, but nevertheless it does not inspire my confidence.

I guess if you are looking at the recommendation letters you have a chance to evaluate their suitability (which you can use in a future year; it is awkward and perhaps even ethically suspect to withdraw a recommendation letter after reading it).  At least in US graduate applications, good letters are about a lot more than the slightly silly ratings.  They also contain several paragraphs of text, usually occupying at least the better part of a page.  If someone gives you absolutely top marks and then writes little or nothing to back them up, they look quite lazy.  Though that does not specifically reflect on you, it certainly doesn't help your application either.


Part-Time PhD in the UK? How does this work? I'm from the US but I work as an engineer in the UK.  In the US, part-time engineering PhD students at high-profile universities are possible, but rare and usually limited to special cases.

In the UK, it seems nearly every school has a part-time PhD option.  How does a part-time engineering PhD at elite schools [Oxford, Imperial, Cambridge, UCL] work?
Is it possible to work full-time and obtain and obtain a part-time PhD at these elite schools?
What are your chances of being admitted to these top programs as a part-time PhD student (I'd assume there would be a bias against part time students)?

Full-time PhD student here (my office mate is part-time).

As you say, many universities will have a part-time program. It probably is possible to work full-time and do research part time, but it will be even more challenging than usual. PhDs tend to work best if you immerse yourself fully and spend your energy exclusively on research (especially if you want to have some spare time).  My friend finds it difficult to balance a 20 hour workweek and a part-time research position. I've never met anyone who has a full-time job on top of the PhD.

Re funding: AFAIK grants are typically used for full-time studentships. In my group, we have often broken down a full-time position into two part-time ones, but only for postdoctoral researchers. I guess the assumption is at a postdoc level people will be better at juggling all their commitments. My supervisor won't admit to it, but I reckon he would prefer one full-time student as opposed to two part-time ones, as the former is more likely to complete.

EDIT: I spoke to my supervisor. If your day job is related to the research and is likely to help you (as opposed to holding you back), he said he would consider it a plus.


What order should authors be on arXiv.org for equal contribution authorships? If everyone made an equal contribution in effort to write the paper, but no on the team but myself decided to post the paper on arXiv and no one opposed my decision to arXiv post, should I myself, the poster, or the corresponding author be the first author, or should the authors be listed alphabetically? At this point there's not yet any monetary or power incentive to be first or last and I don't expect there to be any in the future.

If everyone made an equal contribution, you can put that information in the footnote.
In a very famous (in the AI-related research) paper ADAM: a method for stochastic optimisation you can encounter the following line:

  ∗Equal contribution. Author ordering determined by coin flip over a Google Hangout.

I'd say randomisation is a fair way to go.
If you want to be more specific, here you can check examples for contribution statements.
There's a whole taxonomy for that: CRediT author contribution statements.
You can place these contributions e.g. just before the references section in the paper.

As Jukka already mentioned in the comment, arXiv does not matter in this case.
I think the order should always reflect the real contribution (if possible).
All in all, it's good that you care about such things - good luck with your research.


"Anomalous citation patterns" as exclusion criteria in Journal Citation Reports (aka Impact Factor) Can someone explain how these "anomalous citation patterns" are identified in JCR and what they mean exactly? They sound like the academic version of link farms that Google has to fight against.

It is referring to practices such as citation rings (e.g. this account), excessive self citations within a journal or other malpractices to boost the impact factor of a journal or a group of journals.

These three articles will give you some more background and examples:

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/420794.article
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/06/record-number-of-journals-banned-for-boosting-impact-factor-with-self-citations.html
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/06/29/citation-cartel-journals-denied-2011-impact-factor/

I don't know if the exact algorith used my Thomson-Reuters to detect “Anomalous citation patterns” has been officially published. However, they look at things like change in impact factor between years (which can lead to false-positives) and the citation networks between journals. As you note, the practice is very similar to link farming.

This quote, from another Nature article on a Brazilian citation cartel, offers some information on how Thomson-Reuters work to detect malpractices:

  Marie McVeigh, who leads Journal Citation Reports, Thomson Reuters’ annual report of journal citation patterns and impact factors, says that the firm does not assume intent in the patterns it sees. “We just analyse data, and see where the impact factor, due to this unusual concentration of citations, is not a reflection of the journal’s citation in the broader literature. Until we can algorithmically measure motive, we are just going to measure citations.” She says that because citation stacking is only a problem if it excessively distorts journal rank, only four Brazilian journals, and not all of those that Rocha-e-Silva says participated in the arrangement, have had their impact factors suspended.


Stature vs relationship for recommendation letters Im curious how important is the stature of an author of a recommendation letter (both for phd positions and fellowship applications).
A more answerable question would be what is the difference from a reader's viewpoint of (1) a letter that comes from a very new (< 1 year) non-tenure track faculty member with a very good relationship and experience with  the recomendee versus (2) a well established tenured professor with only minor interaction/experience with the recomendee (but enough to feel comfortable writing a letter).

There is more to the story. A weak letter from a "strong" person means very little. If they can't say much about you to support your candidacy, based on what they know, and just send a "form" letter, then it won't have much impact.
On the other hand, a letter from someone who knows you well can read as a much more enthusiastic endorsement.
But, it is the reader who gets to judge. If they actually "know" the writer then it is likely to have more weight, rather than the abstract reputation of the writer.


Is there a stigma in computer science toward too many postdoc positions? I am wondering if there is a stigma attached to holding too many soft-money positions when looking for a tenure-track position in the area of computer science.

In computer science, postdoc positions were uncommon, but after the Dot-com bust and a general trend toward not hiring tenure-track faculty in the early 2000s, there are now many more postdoc positions in that discipline.

Do people who hold too many postdocs (or too long of a postdoc) get disadvantaged? Do they acquire a stigma of "This person can't hold a tenure-track job" or "This person bounces around too much" or "This person can't do independent research and relies too much on soft money"?

I know of a handful of faculty members who have been hired after multiple postdocs and visiting faculty positions so it seems that it isn't a permanent roadblock, but it could be a path I might not want to go down just in case it is.

There are multiple simultaneous trends which are working against one another:

The number of PhD recipients is growing at a much faster rate than the number of available tenure-track positions.
More and more locations have been instituting term limits on the length of postdoctoral positions.
Hiring committees are not as receptive to applicants who have done too many postdoctoral positions.

This leads to a lot of challenges for many academic aspirants. Personally, my impression is that the dangers are as follows:

Remaining in any single postdoctoral position for more than about three years.
Accepting more than two postdoctoral assignments.

Once either of those thresholds have been crossed, I think it starts to hurt an applicant later in their career. The exception to this might be "research professorships" and "staff scientist" positions that are seen to be more permanent than a postdoctoral position. Even in these positions, however, there is always the challenge that it can be difficult to transition to a different position afterwards.


Generally, is it better to send recommendation letters or the referees' contacts when applying for a postdoc? I'm a PhD student and hope to get my thesis defended during the next winter or spring. Before that time, I want to apply for a postdoc. In the lab which is my main dream (though I think it is very hard to get there), there are some permanently open positions for postdocs, and candidates are encouraged to contact the Lab supervisor by e-mail, without any further specifications on their web-site. This lab is in the US. I will certainly send in this e-mail my CV and cover letter, but how would you recommend, is it better to ask my current supervisors and co-authors to give me recommendation letters, so that I could send them at once, or to give their contacts in this first e-mail to my potential new supervisor?
Thank you in advance.

The request to contact by email (without specific requirements) suggests a less formal application process.

I would send a brief email (a few sentences to a couple of paragraphs) explaining your interest in working there and why you would make a good candidate.  The lab supervisor is probably very busy, so by keeping it brief you have the best chance that it will be read.

It would also make sense to attach your CV, so they have a sense of your skills and background.

However, I wouldn't include any other materials (such as a separate cover letter or letters of recommendation) at this stage.  Wait until they express interest in continuing the conversation (and then be led by them about the next steps).

Exception: if one of your referees knows someone at the lab.

In this case, I would ask the referee if they would be willing to make an introduction for you.  This is likely to make more of an impact than you contacting the lab "cold".

Even if the person the referee knows is not the same as the contact person for the job, having the referee contact the person they know is probably the best way to go.


co-supervisor from a different university? I am from a maths/physics background currently doing a PhD in fluid mechanics within the engineering department. I am not enjoying it as much as I'd liked and have raised this with my supervisor (only just, I am not sure what the outcome will be yet), and having done a little research into possible connected directions I can take it, I feel as though one of them would involve co-supervising with someone in the mathematic department, and one, if possible, by someone who is at a different university- but was at my university for around ten years, leaving around five years ago, and seems to be the only person who has worked in this area (it seems pretty niche worldwide relative to other areas) with connections to my university. Is the latter heard of for co-supervision or is it a very long-shot? many thanks in advance

It is not unheard of, certainly, though isn't especially frequent. But whether it can happen or not is up to your advisor and the university, as well as the other person, of course.
But you need to work out details in advance to make it successful. If it is typical for advisors to be co-authors on the resulting work (some fields) then you need to come to some agreement about that. Some compensation for the other professor might be available or not. It might even be needed.
But also be prepared for the distant professor to not do very much.


2 majors with average grades or 1 major with excellent grades? Is it incentivised to pursuit two (related) majors (eg. Math and Aero- Space Engineering) or a single major (eg. Math)?

The question is asked with the premise that if one chose a single major, one would have more time and thus achieve better grades (assume top 5 or 10 percentile), whereas with a double major, one would only be able to achieve slightly above average grades, but have a broader scope and be better prepared for industry (at least that was my line of thought).

I guess that the answer is very different for someone who wants to go into academia, as opposed to someone who goes into private industry, so I would appreciate a split answer regarding the two cases.

Thank you very much in advance.

Edit: With "double major" I mean two separate (masters) degrees. At least in Germany, that means much more work load: 1,5 times is an optimistic guess. This supports the premise that grades would suffer by doing a double major.

I actually have doubts that those two majors are "related". It sounds like a statement from someone who knows only a little about either. The thought patterns and insights are very different. It isn't a question about accumulating things, but about how the things fit together.

Note that academia is about specialization - more and more the farther you go. But at the beginning it is natural (and good) to be undecided and hence flexible.

You can do well (most places) with a double major but you have to work a lot (a lot) harder. Mathematics itself is a flexible position from which to go forward, as it is applied in many fields. The most flexible field (IMO) is actually philosophy, but that is a different discussion.

I'll note that you don't have to decide early to accept one field and reject another (or others). If you develop a career you can branch out into other things that interest you. But you need to start from a solid base.

But if you want to establish a solid base for doctoral study, a single subject with great grades would seem to be the best choice, by far.

I don't know the rules in Germany for doing two MS degrees simultaneously. The thing I would suggest you be very careful about, however, is how much "double credit" you get for overlapping courses. If this is a common thing to do, then a given course may "count" in both degrees. Otherwise, you may actually be required to repeat things, or, more likely, to substitute elective courses for those you have taken in another degree. Just be sure of the rules and be wary about 25% "overlap".


grid line is necessary for CS academic paper? Is it necessary to add grid lines to a line chart in academic paper?  (I'm interested especially in computer science field.) Is there any rule, say, not necessary for time axis?

Google tells me that most part of line chart does not have grid line, but seems there is not consistent rule.

There are no such rules. I have seen a wide, wide variety of formatting styles for figures in CS conferences and journals.

The goal is portray something to the reader. What provides them that information in the easiest way possible? Too many grid lines and they get in the way, but without them it might be hard to eyeball the y-value.

I often end up making 20+ versions of each of my figures before finally settling on one that is most readable.


Is it wise to select a PhD topic before choosing an advisor? I am a student of  Pure Mathematics interested in Linear Algebra and Abstract Algebra. I was browsing the Internet for good research topics containing both a flavor of linear algebra and also having some real life applications when I came to learn about Spectral Graph Theory.

I have searched for professors who are actively involved in this field, but I have only found a few names whose topic of interest is Spectral Graph Theory. There are also a very few number of books available in this field.

Is this a good topic to work on? Is it very difficult to find an advisor in this field? Though I am able to  learn the topic on my own, I am finding it difficult to approach someone in case I am having a problem.

Also, is it wise to first decide a topic and then find an institute which has professors in this field or it should be the other way round i.e., I should select a good institute according to QS rankings first and then decide a topic accordingly?

In brief: no, in mathematics in the U.S., you do not "have to choose" a research topic prior to beginning your PhD. At the same time it is _of_course_ good to have something to be enthusiastic about, curious about, fixated upon. But that can change, and probably should change as you learn more. It is apparently the case that in the U.S., and to some degree elsewhere, in mathematics, undergrads and even M.S. students really don't get enough background to understand contemporary mathematics at all, except very superficially. Fine, that's not a moral failing... maybe just evidence that there's a lot happening in mathematics... (!?!) But, then, in that light, the enthusiasms that novices have are necessarily (by-far-typically) ill-informed... and will change if/when they learn more.

This is not to say that one should not have an opinion, or should not admit interest in things because one knows one's interest will change... but only that one should anticipate that change, rather than believe that one "has arrived" at age 22 or so, and there's nothing left to learn, and now it's just "trying to solve problems/do research". I understand the appeal of that, but, if we think about it, it's better in the long run if mathematics is not that shallow or superficial.

More specifically, spectral graph theory is a quite viable research area. "Expander graphs" are popular and google-able. Lots of people work on this, both from the "spectral side", and from the "graph theory" side.

And, perhaps counter-intuitively, the possible fact that there are not so many "books" treating a topic can in fact be a very positive sign... it's unclear. That is, if there are zillions of books on something, then chances are good that it's an older topic and has been worked over pretty hard... leaving less room for beginners to contribute.

So, sure, it's entirely reasonable to have specific and fine-grained interest... as opposed to "general" interest. Like having a specific lunch rather than a lunch-in-general. :) But be utterly open to changes in your viewpoint... as you learn more, which will be for many years. :)


My professor submitted the draft recommendation letter with university name as placeholder. Can i re-submit? My professor accidentally sent the draft version of the recommendation letter to UTD and it had a mistake of the university name as "[Enter university name]" which was supposed to be replaced with the intended university name. It was submitted into a portal. Is there any way to remedy this? I've already submitted the application and emailed them about the mishap. What are my chances to remedy this situation?

Chill.

Admission committees get this sort of thing frequently.  We understand your professor's situation (because we write lots of recommendation letters ourselves).  It is very unlikely that a committee would even bother to comment...

... and a tiny mistake on your professor's part certainly shouldn't affect your chances of admittance.


My paper was rejected, and some colleagues say this is due to the "reviewer's mindset." What does this mean? I'm pursuing my PhD (fourth year). My institute has the following rule:

At least Two SCI papers is mandatory for awarding
doctorate degree.

I tried for publishing an SCI paper recently and got rejection. Two reviewers provided comments, given below in concise manner, for rejection

Language is not good;

Proposed method is just a composition of couple of existing methods;

I am undergoing panic since I am in pre-final year of my doctorate degree.
But, I keep on asking colleagues  and other friends in my academic network how to handle the situation and I categorized their suggestions in to two categories:

Majority of the people are saying that it is totally or mostly up to the mindset of the reviewer(s). The selection of journal is wrong according to them. They are saying that I need to search for the new journal, accepting such papers, by improving the language alone. If I keep on trying like that, one day I will get acceptance.

One person is saying that since the core of the proposed method cannot be improved and the language alone can be improved. It is better to drop the idea of sending to multiple journals and need to try for totally new technique or method and developing a new paper and then sending it for review.

None of the the people giving advice has published in an SCI journal.  They are just giving me a guidance.
Is it true that reviewer's mindset play a role? Is the guidance to resubmit the same paper (with improved language) to a different journal a good idea?

Is it true that reviewer's mindset play a role?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "reviewer's mindset." The reviewer is just trying to decide whether your article is more worthy of being published than other articles that have been submitted. It is true that the process is a bit random; submitting the same paper to an equivalent journal might yield nicer reviewers who make a different decision. But this is unlikely: if a paper is rejected from one journal, it usually means that the paper either needs to be improved, or it needs to be submitted to a less selective journal (or both).

Is the guidance to resubmit the same paper (with improved language) to a different journal a good idea?

Impossible to say without reading the paper, but resubmitting the same paper to a less selective or more relevant journal could indeed change the decision. But you should also consider whether it's possible to improve the paper.

Language is not good

This is a very common problem. As a reviewer, I am shocked by the quality of the writing that established groups submit to reputable publishers. These problems range from basic English mechanics (understandable for non-native speakers, but still needs to be fixed) to basic manuscript construction problems (poor organization, haphazard presentation of background and method, ambiguous results with unclear figures, etc.)
Many students really learn how to write by iterating with their advisors 30+ times. This is a crucial skill; if your advisor is not helping you write up your results so that they are publishable, you may need to consider finding other sources for this guidance, and be prepared to completely rework the paper.

Proposed method is just a composition of couple of existing methods

If this is true, it means that your paper is not very exciting; you combined some existing methods and got some unsurprising results. There is nothing wrong with this per se, but you will indeed need to select a less selective journal; top journals will prioritize more novel approaches with more exciting results.
Another possibility is that your paper is exciting, but it's written so poorly that the interesting bit is buried and your reviewers didn't understand the key point. If this is the case, revising the paper could address this objection.

I am not getting a constructive guidance from mentor. And I am in an environment that none of the persons around me has an SCI journal till now including my mentor.

I think this is the real problem. Normally I would say that your advisor knows what to do, you just need to communicate better with them. But you say your advisor is themselves unable to publish in these journals (which is all the more confusing; how can your university expect their PhD students to achieve what their faculty cannot)? I'm afraid I do not have the solution, but I am concerned for you. Good luck.


what happens to the grant I wrote with my PI if I switch institutions I am an international master's student at a top US institution and I am graduating from my program in September. I do not have a PhD lined up yet, I am planning on applying in this fall. Towards the end of my master's studies, I came up with an idea for a project and already did the ground work (separate from the project that my PI was funding me for). However, because I am an international student, I cannot write a grant / fellowship for this project idea myself. I've pitched this idea to my PI and she is interested in applying for a grant for this project together, provided I do all the work to write the grant. I am OK with writing the grant and submitting it under my PI's name but my question is: what happens if we get the funding for this project from a federal agency (e.g., NSF) and I end up starting my PhD in a different institution next year? Does the grant money stay with the PI? If so, can that money still be used towards funding my research on the same project in a different university (in a lab where I can do similar research)?

More info upon questions below:
I am worried that I will get the grant with my PI, but won't be accepted for a PhD position in my current institution (I will be applying to a different department -BE- than the department I'm completing my master's in -EE-). The reason for this assumption is that I already applied to BE and was rejected. My PI did write me a recommendation letter but she is not in the admissions committee and she told me that she has no leverage in who is admitted to BE. I'll still apply again this year, but I may be rejected again. So, I'm just trying to see whether it is worth putting the effort in writing the grant if the only way to benefit from that grant is to be a PhD student in my current institution. I'm wondering whether some sort of agreement may be made between my current PI and the future PI in wherever I'll be admitted (still in the US) such that I can still use that grant to work towards my project? There are many labs in other US institutions with overlapping interests as my current lab, so finding a relevant place won't be hard. I'm just curious if anyone had / heard of a similar experience?

If your name does not explicitly appear in the proposal as an investigator, then the funding, if the grant is awarded, is not committed to you in any way, shape, or form. The PI could in principle take your ideas and use it to fund another student to work on your project!

Unfortunately, most universities will not let grad students serve as PI’s, with the exception of some programs that are specifically aimed at graduate students, such as the Kirschstein Fellowship at the NIH. So you are definitely running the risk of writing your idea up as a proposal and ending up with absolutely nothing to show for it.


How should a student address a professor in a letter of recommendation? I am a graduate student in Computer Science, and I recently received an email from my department requesting that I write a letter of recommendation for a professor who is being considered for a promotion. The letter requests that I address the professor's teaching abilities, as well as my experiences in regards to conducting research with the professor. It is also likely that the professor specifically listed me as a person to write a letter of recommendation.

I have a very positive relationship with this professor, and plan on writing an absolutely stellar letter on his/her behalf. However, I am unsure of how to address the professor in the letter.

This professor strongly prefers that students address him/her by his/her first name. This is part of what makes this professor so great: s/he is able to come down to a student's level, and is excellent at communicating complex topics because of it. With that in mind, I would prefer to use his/her first name in my letter as I think it communicates part of the "charm" that I want to convey in regards to his/her teaching ability. On the other hand, I don't want to come across as disrespectful to the committee who will be reading my letter, nor do I want the committee to take my letter less seriously.

My question is: can and should I address the professor by his/her first name when writing this letter of recommendation, or should I address him/her as "Professor Xyz"? It may be worth noting that most professors in my department choose to be addressed by students on a first name basis, though in their request for a letter, the professor was referred to by their proper title (Professor Xyz).

I wouldn't worry a lot about it.  The worst that can happen is that part of the letter sounds a little off, but I'm sure promotion committees see much worse in letters from students, and understand it doesn't reflect on the professionalism of the professor.

If I had to chose, though, my personal inclination would be to write "Professor X" in the letter, rather than the professor's first name.  It's much easier to go wrong in the direction of being too informal, rather than being too formal.


Writing a book: How do you use references? I'm re-writing my PhD dissertation as a book manuscript. My dissertation includes in-text citations to back up what I'm saying in almost every sentence - (Doe, 2012). My brief review of academic books on my bookshelf seems to imply that books don't do this.

I know the audience and purpose of a book is different than a manuscript, but shouldn't the level (and visibility) of academic rigor be maintained?
In a book manuscript for a university press, how do you go about integrating these citations? Should they just be transferred to footnotes that include the full bibliographic reference? Do you maintain the in-text citation?

Since it is a book, you need not cite in-text in the same way you would an academic article. Simply transitioning to endnotes (super-script 1,2,3) will make the text immediately more readable. I'm reminded of Steven Pinker's book 'The Blank Slate' that contains many hundreds of citations but the text is not cumbersome due to efficient endnote use.  In that work at least, Pinker puts the majority of 'main idea' endnotes at the end of a paragraph, reserving within-paragraph citations for very specific ideas. While this can at times lead to some ambiguity, it preserves readability.


Is it appropriate to request letters of recommendation from professors a second time? I received three letters of recommendation for applications to this spring semester, but I chose to decline admission for personal/financial reasons. I am now applying for fall admission, and I would like to ask the same professors for letters of recommendation again.

Is it appropriate to request additional letters of recommendations from professors to new universities for the second time? With no other prospects, I need their recommendations in order to be accepted. Should that desperation be included or excluded in the request?

Yes.

Writing recommendation letters is part of our job as professors.  It is perfectly ethical to request that we do our job.

Conveying desperation in your request is neither necessary nor productive.  You have nothing to be ashamed of or to apologize for.

On the other hand, anyone can (and should!) turn down your request in good conscience if they feel that they cannot write you a strong recommendation letter.  If someone says that they can't write you a strong letter, believe them and ask someone else.  You really don't want a weak letter in your file.


Is it acceptable to require a post-doc to teach a course? I am an American working on establishing an endowed, permanent post-doctoral fellowship at a university in the UK and am wondering what the usual practices are.

In my case, it would be beneficial to require the fellow to teach a course at the university, but I am wondering if that is acceptable, or whether that will drive away potential candidates that just want to do research. Will having a teaching requirement cause my fellowship to get shunned, or is it a normal thing for fellowships to include a teaching requirement?

In the UK universities, the pressure to teach is very significant. Postdocs employed on RCUK grants / fellowships are often given an "opportunity" to contribute 20% of their time to teaching. This is not a formal requirement -- they can, of course, reject the opportunity and focus on research. But focusing 100% on research would not necessarily be wise, since their next University is likely to look for candidates with some teaching experience already (unless they move to a different country / sector).

Since it is your fellowship, you can set your own rules to a certain extent. I have heard of PhD studentships with attached duties, e.g. to staff a University museum for a week, etc. It is not unusual for a fellowship / bursary / studentship to come with some strings attached, and it is may be even a good thing to help selecting "right" candidates for the fellowship.