How do you make connections to faculty outside your department? I feel like the answer to this question should be obvious, but it doesn't seem to be.

Anyway, in my second year on the tenure track, I find myself more confined to my corner of the ivory tower than I intended to be, and would like to branch out and meet other faculty in other areas.

My research (in theoretical math) is very specialized, so I don't have collaborations in mind. Also I would rather not volunteer for university-wide committees, as these look rather boring and I don't find myself inspired by the administration's pet projects.

Rather, I have in mind something intellectual and fun, that recaptures some of the enjoyment of being an undergraduate and hopefully leading to making new friends. For example, semi-public lectures on chemistry, theology, art history, virtually anything intellectual, ideally followed by discussions and debates over beer...

Obviously, the first step is to do a better job of carefully looking for opportunities at my particular university. (These have been a bit hard to suss out, but I could stand to look harder). Nevertheless I would be interested to hear success stories. What have people done to make connections outside their own field of interest?

Thank you!

I organized a beer night for tenure-track profs in our department (and this was later expanded to related departments). the basic rules were: it's once a month, anyone is welcome, and it happens even if I'm the only one at the bar :).

Do you have one person from a different department you can start this up with ? set up a mailing list and ask around to get maybe another 1-2 people involved. Start doing this regularly, and never lose a chance to mention this when talking to professors.

Word will spread. Tenure-track profs need support groups. Our beer night is very popular :).


What limits the number of PhD students in universities with and without PhD tution fee? Universities normally (as far as I know) do not limit the number of PhD students a research-active professor can have as long as he secure the funding for his PhD students. For example, if a professor have enough research fund can get 10 PhD students (instead of research associates) and pay them directly. Then, they pay their tution fees, and university/department can increase its capacty for PhD enrolment.

In fact, the university/department can increase its capacity as long as they are paying students, but I don't understand how this scheme works when PhD study is free (in some European countries).

In the latter case, the professor provide research funding for the PhD projects and their wages, but the university should invest for courseworks (pay more teachers for these unexpected students).

What limits the number of PhD students in universities without PhD tution fee?

And when there is normal tution fee, isn't there any limitation for the number of PhD students as long as there are good candidates?

EXAMPLE: A department arranges the admission of 10 PhD students (assigned appropriate professor for the courses). Now, a professor fund 10 more PhD students for himself. Now, the department head should plan new classes/courses (this needs budget). He may need more resources, which is normally approved by the Dean.

I understand that more PhD students fuels the engines of an academic unit, but the department head is not bothered with overload of PhD coursework. In other words, does the department head encourage professor to get more funded PhD students, and saying "don't worry, I will take care of coursework"?

What limits the number of PhD students in universities without PhD tution fee?

I'm not sure countries exist without a PhD tuition fee. Rather there is a scholarship system in place to cover the cost of tuition. The limiting factor here is the number of scholarships allocated by the government. So the answer is the government.

  And when there is normal tution fee, isn't there any limitation for the number of PhD students as long as there are good candidates?

This would be dependant upon the institution. There may be a hard limit imposed by the faculty. Otherwise there is a soft limit in the number of students one professor can reasonably manage.


How to find one or two good recent PhD theses (that are internationally recognized as best) in your chosen area I am finding it difficult to select a topic for my masters thesis (my advisor is unwilling to offer suggestions on the matter). I intend to do thesis in the field of internal combustion engines. To get some good ideas about finding a good topic I want to study some recent PhD theses in internal combustion engines but I don't know where to find them. Also I would like to know about modern research trends in that field.

In general, doctoral theses do not receive much recognition outside of a university, let alone on an international scale. The reason for this is that nowadays the thesis is nowhere near as widely circulated as the papers that can be extracted from the thesis.

Moreover, if you want to find out about good thesis topics, look up what's going on in the scientific literature of the area you're interested in—in this case, internal combustion engines. Find the most highly-respected journals, and see if they've published recent review articles in different areas related to your topic. That might give you a sense of where recent work has been, and provide you with a good body of reading material to work from.


Years ago, a professor agreed to write a LOR, but never sent it. Therefore, I'm not accepted in any school. What can I do? Years ago, a professor agreed to write me a recommendation letter.  So I applied to many grad schools indicating him as one of my referees.  However, I didn't find out until later that he didn't write the letter.  Thus, none of my applications were completed, and there were also substantial financial losses due to application fees. I was poor, so it was a big loss for me.

What can I do in this case?  Could I find any justice anywhere?  I just felt hopeless when a tenured professor does something unethical (not criminal conduct); there is nothing a student can do.

[added the following on June 24, 2014]

He recently became a faculty at the university where I am a student (He was at a different university before). I want to forget about what happened, but the damage was too much for me to ignore. And I feel anger whenever I think about what happened.

One remedy would be he takes me on as a PhD student, or provides funding so another professor can supervise me. However, my application was rejected.

I raised my concerns with the dean of faculty of graduate studies, and will meet one of the assistant deans soon. How should I approach this with him/her?

That sounds like a frustrating and discouraging situation.  Whether you have any recourse may depend on the system.  For U.S. universities, there's not much you can do, since applicants are generally considered responsible for monitoring whether their applications are complete and reminding letter writers.  However, these cultural issues might vary internationally.

One puzzling aspect of your question is that you describe the professor as deceiving you and acting unethically.  Without some specific evidence, I'd assume it was forgetfulness rather than deliberate sabotage.  Forgetting to submit letters is still irresponsible, but not as bad as intentionally not submitting them.

If you have compelling evidence of sabotage, it would be worth bringing to the attention of the university administration.  However, it's not clear to me what sort of evidence you might plausibly have.

If it's a matter of forgetfulness, things are murkier.  If there's a pattern of irresponsibility, then the department head might want to know.  On the other hand, a single incident would probably be ignored.

What makes this tricky is that professors get asked for recommendations in all sorts of suboptimal ways, such as a brief hallway conversation while both people are rushing to get to class.  It's easy to forget under these circumstances.  That doesn't make it right, and responsible letter writers will try hard not to overlook requests.  However, some circumstances make it more understandable than others.  If you do file a complaint with the administration, you should make the circumstances clear.  (But without evidence of dramatic or recurring irresponsibility, I'm not sure it would be worth the effort.)

Have you tried asking the professor about it?  It's too late to fix your applications, but you deserve an apology.  Furthermore, he may have forgotten about it so completely that he doesn't even realize this happened, in which case you'd be giving him a valuable warning that he needs to be more careful (and you might save future students from this problem).


Do conference attendees care about conference bags? Is there any research/study/survey that looked at whether conference attendees care about conference bags? I.e., would they be ok not receiving anything aside from their badges when they check in?

Having gone to quite a number of scientific conferences, my observation is that the degree to which attendees care about conference swag (both bags and otherwise) is inversely correlated to the number of conferences that they have attended.

Bags and other conference swag is wonderful, magical, and exciting when you haven't gone to many conferences.  It's a visible sign of scientific merit that you can even plop onto  the counter at the grocery store!  Forget bags, I've known people who have even saved their name badges as keepsakes.  For graduate students or occasional attendees, for those who go to only one or two conferences per year, these things can be very personally significant markers of acceptance and belonging.

As the saying goes, however, familiarity breeds contempt.  At this point in my career, I have a cupboard full of canvas bags.  When I go to a conference, I mostly just ignore the swag, and most of my close colleagues do as well.  But their graduate students, bright-eyed and so excited to be giving their first poster presentation ever, are likely to feel quite differently.

So, would people be OK receiving nothing but their badges? In many cases, it's just fine to give people nothing but their badges, and for more specialized meetings, that's just what they do.  But if people are paying a hefty fee to be there and there's a lot of graduate students or occasional attendees, why not give the little bit of extra to let the people who want to feel special are able to feel special?  A decent custom tote bag can cost as little as $1, so it's a remarkably small cost for the conference (far less than the leaden afternoon brownies mandated by the contract with the conference venue).  It will make some of the attendees very happy, and the people who really don't care can simply shove it in the back of their bag closet like I do.


Professor stopped replying to my e-mails about lab positions I emailed a professor about a potential lab position in the summer about two weeks ago. He replied a very nice e-mail the next morning saying that he is interested and has open positions. He asked for some information (transcript, CV). I sent those to him that same day and we exchanged a few e-mails. After that he just went ghost... I sent a follow-up e-mail after one week, still no response. Now it has been two weeks and I'm debating whether I should send him another e-mail.

Is this kind of situation normal? What's the best action in this case? I've had tons of experiences of professors not replying e-mails, but this is new to me... I definitely don't want to sound annoying by sending multiple follow-up e-mails. Any help would be appreciated!

Many professors regularly receive 2-3 such email requests every day. The likeliest reason for the professor ignoring your email is that they thought your CV wasn’t impressive enough and decided to not follow up with the hope that you’ll get the hint.

That may not be the only reason though. Could be that they’re traveling (especially if it’s summer), could be that your subsequent emails went to spam, could be that other interns were selected, could be that they forgot.

If you want to get someone’s attention I suggest avoiding mass generic emails (they’re obvious and I ignore them). Try to show interest in the work. Perhaps send your thoughts about a specific project you’d like to be a part of. You’re competing for someone’s time: try to show why you’re worth it.


Planning for physics PhD apps - Classes vs research? Question: I'm planning for PhD apps a year from now. Do I skimp on classes and further research, or do I further my studies to learn the theory that I personally want to develop?

Some background... I'm a physics masters student in the US. Technically, this is my third year in the program as my bachelor's degree was not in the sciences; I've essentially completed an undergraduate degree worth of prereqs. I'm taking grad courses now. The school is not renowned, but it has a history of physics research. (I was unable to compete with stronger schools due to my lack of prerequisite knowledge a few years back). Anyway, I'm a rather strong student (4.0) with some research. Nothing is published yet, but I'll be hopefully named on one paper in the spring. I'm looking to apply to top 40 schools in mathematical physics or applied mathematics, and professors have said I have a good shot.

My research adviser is pressuring me to take fewer classes and focus on research next semester. I'm conflicted, as other professors have suggested that this is the class to take! The course my RA suggests I drop is E&M Jackson. I want to learn this material, and I find my studies more compelling than my current research. My RA argues that if I drop the course, then I can commit more time to research, and furthermore, I have less chances to receive a poor grade that could alter my GPA. My RA goes on to suggest that schools do not care whether I have yet to take certain courses like E&M.

Research experience and track record is more important than courses you have taken.  You will very likely be required to take Jackson E&M for the PhD program.  You might be required to repeat it if you took it before, depending on the program's rules.  Keep in mind that classes you take (or research you perform) after you apply for the PhD program usually do not change your admissions decision.

In sum, I recommend postponing the E&M course.


How do grad schools view early High School graduation? I graduated from High School after only 2 years and because of that I don't have a record of extra curricular activities and I also can't get most scholarships/grants because most require doing something for 3 years.

Anyway, I'm finishing up my undergrad and am looking into pursing a graduate degree. Does graduating early from High School put my at a disadvantage because I didn't do any extracurricular activities? I was always told while in High School that you need 3 years of a language and 2 years of EC activities to get into a Grad program.

Graduate schools do not generally care about an applicant's high school record, unless the applicant has some exceptional achievement from high school. Applications to graduate school won't even require high school transcripts.

In particular, graduate schools generally do not care at all about non-academic extra-curricular activites, whether in high school or afterwards. See this question for more details.


How to navigate convincing professor to submit a letter of recommendation without falsehood My professor has submitted a letter of recommendation for me for graduate program admissions, and has listed that I did X and Y (specific activities) under him, when I was only involved in doing X. He shared the letter with me after he submitted it, that's how I know.

I emailed him saying that I only did X and gave him info on how to submit a new letter, and his response was that if the admission committee ever calls him to check, he will clarify.

I really worry about this because 1) committees seldom check, 2) it's a falsehood that I did Y under him, 3) I think he is forgetful, and may just not remember to correct himself if they ever check, and 4) if I don't convince him to change this it would be like I am complicit in the falsehood.

He's a chill, old dude, my professor, and I don't want to rub him the wrong way by saying "We would be lying, please submit a new letter".

What's a gentle, tactful way to convince him to submit a new letter of recommendation with the correct information? Or is it okay if he clarifies if they ever call him to check?

I would say that this would be a different situation if the recommendation was for a potential employer, rather than for graduate school admissions. If this were for a potential employer and you might be expected to do Y, this would be a bigger issue, in my opinion.

Although the letter does not represent your abilities 100%, calling it a lie suggests that your professor knowingly stated falsehoods about your abilities on the letter, rather than it be an oversight as you describe. Sometimes these things happen. His writing a recommendation for you is outside of his other academic duties, so you are asking him to volunteer more work on top of what he has already volunteered to do.

In my many years on graduate school admission committees, we have only contacted references of candidates in cases where there is a questionable part of the application that suggests that the candidate is not prepared for the program or would be a potential problem. If everything else in your application looks fine, this may go unnoticed. Plus, the graduate admissions may find it strange that your reference submitted a revised letter. In my opinion, I would just wait to see if this comes up. Then, you can simply state, "Yes, my professor said in my letter that I did Y under his supervision, but I really was more involved with X and can only speak about X." This is very different than if YOU stated in your application that you could do Y. Your reference making a mistake would be more forgivable than if you knowingly made the same statement (if all else is fine with your application). If your professor didn't give you a copy of the letter, you would have never known that this is an issue.


Are Nature Letters still considered primary articles? I have an article that I want to link as a primary article. I found a really interesting Nature Letter article and I was wondering if this is categorized as a primary article, since it is a "letter":

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v508/n7497/full/nature13144.html

What do you folks think?

I was not previously familiar with the distinction between "primary articles" and "secondary articles", but the distinction is explored in this very helpful link.  After comparing the paper with this document, it seems clear (even) to me that it is a "primary article": they describe results of a rather massive experiment which has not previously been published, and they contribute their own statistical analysis. I didn't see any evidence of a literature review or anything like that.

Also see how Nature describes its own Letters here: they are short reports of original research.

Forgive my naivete, but: why does it matter?


Should one list incomplete degrees on a CV? When applying for jobs after my PhD, should my CV include an incomplete degree I read towards years ago? It's a field completely unrelated to what I'm doing now. However, before my final year when I started getting sups and failures by the dozen (my reason for quitting) things actually went swimmingly. I worked with a renowned professor as an undergrad research assistant for a spell and even published a paper (on my own) during that phase of my academic journey. I didn't get a certificate out of it, but I nevertheless feel I honed some valuabe skills then (and of course I have a transcript listing the passes and failures).

I have since moved onto a completely unrelated humanities field. Should I mention the incomplete degree on my CV? If I ignore it, prospective employers might wonder what I did for three years of my life, surely? Should I list my science publication on my CV when it is irrelevant to what I'm doing now? Does quitting and switching tracks make me look flighty?

Don't omit it. Changing your mind at some point during your education or your career is nothing to be ashamed of. Just make sure to put it in a way that does not imply that you actually got the degree.

Not listing it would be an error in three ways at least:

experience even in unrelated fields is always valuable;
if you omit that stint, there will be a hole on your CV, and you will have to explain it (so you'd better mention it upfront);
you got a publication from it, so it was actually a successful experience, even if you didn't complete your degree

In fact, my advice would be to always list what you've done on your CV, even if it is not an academic activity. Even if you spent two years traveling and selling onion rings on Australian beach grill house, put it in your CV. The pros outweigh the cons (and if that experience leads a potential recruiter to turn you away, ask yourself: would you have wanted to work with someöne who has such as narrow view of life?)


Are there advantages or disadvantages for a college to give high or low GPAs? What are the incentives and disincentives for an American college to give its students high GPAs?
For example, when undergraduate students apply for jobs or graduate programs, their GPA presumably matters. I have been told that many American colleges have cut-off GPAs for their first round, so students need high GPAs to survive there. Hence giving a GPA would help colleges to place their students in graduate programs, which in turn might improve the colleges ranking.

Actually, reputation matters. If a college were to give out uniformly high grades then they would pretty soon not be trusted. And organizations that do "ranking" would be pretty savvy about such things.
It would also be pretty hard for a university to manage such a thing, since grades are given by individual professors with individual preferences to individual students with individual skills.
Some places, however, attract very able students. So, a 3.4/4 earned at one place might be better than a 3.6 earned elsewhere where there is a lower standard.
If the firm "cut-off" really happens, I assume that it is pretty low and that other factors might provide exceptions. Such a cut-off might not be disqualifying, but only result in a "sorting" of applications so that the more promising ones can be handled first.
Employers, on the other hand, are looking for skills, not grades. But they, too, want to spend the effort in hiring on promising candidates. Grades are only a part of that.


Flexibility (or lack of) at the Open University I'm thinking of doing a maths degree at the Open University. This course

"BSc (Honours) Mathematics"

The problem is, I'm expected to do the most basic of courses, starting with "Discovering Mathematics"

http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifications/details/mu123?orig=Q31

Considering I have

BSc in Electrical and Electronic Engineering
MSc in Microwaves and Optoelectronics
PhD in Medical Physics

this seems a bit of a waste of my time and money. Unfortunately I got my Ph.D in 1999, so whilst the OU permit "credit transfer", they will not count the Ph.D, or any earlier degrees.

I did their online test to see if I was ready for the next course "Essential Mathematics 1", and got every single answer correct. You have to select what your highest qualification was, and there was HNC/HND, but no choice of any sort of degree. Doing "Discovering Mathematics", which is said to be "Introduces and helps integrate key ideas from statistics, algebra, geometry and trigonometry into your everyday thinking to build your confidence in learning and using mathematics." really is a waste of my time and money.

I have telephoned, and asked about this credit transfer, and I was told there's no flexibility - the fact my last degree was more than 16 years ago, means it does not count.

I run an engineering company, doing fairly advanced maths. In fact, the reason I want to do the degree is that my maths is not good enough for some of the things I wish to do. But it is certainly much better than needed for a really basic course called "Discovering Mathematics"

Has anyone had any success in negotiating credit transfer after more than 16 years?

Results of doing their test to see if I'm ready for Essential mathematics 1 (MST124)

I don't have the commenting functionality available, so will have to put this as an answer.

To be honest, given your background, I think the whole degree will be a waste of your time. I took essential math 1 and 2 two years ago, both are very easy and highly superficial. They claim to teach advanced material but in reality only go through very few and very basic examples in each, so in the end you don't really learn anything. I got like 100% in essential math 1 and 95% in essential math 2 and learned nearly nothing. You'd be better served by buying a good calculus book and studying it.

And more directly to your question - it is possible to negotiate with them directly. I was allowed to take essential math 1&2 simultaneously because I needed that background for sth else and couldn't wait a year. You just need to email their support team and explain your circumstances.


Release application of research before publish its paper I'm doing independent research in computer sciences and i develop some program that i think i might be could write a couple paper for this.

My question is what should i do between

Publish a paper first then release its application
Release application first then publish its paper

In actually i prefer the second choice because i start developing application already and this can finish soon. May be better to release it than waiting to finish writing a paper that a little bit take time.

Any advice or concern please ans below.

Your threat model just doesn't work out in reality. By knowing your code well (because you wrote it), you have a huge advantage over everyone else in the world. It is very unlikely that someone, even an expert in Domain Specific Languages, will pick up your application, fully understand it, and be able to write an article about it before you can finish your article and get it submitted. I really wouldn't worry about it.

Besides, my experience is that people are out there talking about their open source codes well before they get their marker papers published. It's good to be able to discuss your work with colleagues and to drum up users before you finish the paper. Perhaps you will find several collaborators in the process.


Applying for a PhD with two undergrad degrees in different subjects I completed a BA in philosophy, but then my interests changed and I did a BSc in mathematics. I am currently finishing my MSc in mathematics and applying for a PhD in maths. I have the following questions:

Does the fact that my very first degree was in philosophy put me at a disadvantage in terms of applying for a PhD? Could it potentially be interpreted as a sign of indecision or inadequate motivation?
Should I refer to my philosophy degree at all in my personal statement? Does my change of academic interests call for an explanation, or is it better to leave it out?

The way I see it (but I am not in any admissions committee), the career choice that you did being 18 should have very little impact now. At that age, most people are immature.

For me, having those two degrees tells me:

You have had the persistence to finish the Philosophy degree, even knowing that that was not your cup of tea; and then pursue your real desire.
You have the flexibility to work on very different intellectual environments.
Your experience is broader than most people that start their Maths degree at 18. Also, you are in Mathematics after a concious decision, and it was revalidated when you pursued a MSc, and now applying for a PhD.

In any case, I think you should absolutely mention it, otherwise you would have a 3 years gap to explain. Having been studying is definitely better than doing nothing.


What to do when paper is under review in two journals, because first journal did not act on request to withdraw? I want your opinion on this issue.
I submitted a paper to Journal A. It had been with the editor for two months without being sent to peer review. So, I sent a withdrawal email to the editor. I waited for few days to get an email back, but I thought it is already done since I informed them. Then, I sent the paper to Journal B. It was sent to peer review after two days of submission.
Recently, I checked the online submission system of journal A, and they did not withdraw the paper, they actually sent it to peer review four days ago (three months from submission to intitiang peer review, which is too long in my field); I noticed that they have a new editor. Now, the paper is under review in two journals, which I know it is misconduct, but I assumed that the paper was withdrawn because I sent an email requesting that.
What do you think I should do?

Contact the editor for Journal A immediately, sending a copy of the withdrawal request you sent previously, and ask them to complete the withdrawal because you have submitted it elsewhere after the original withdrawal. Be polite.
I would at the same time check whether there is any way to withdraw the paper through the online submission system, and do that as well. Your email may have been missed.
It might be worth giving Journal B a heads-up, too. I don't think you've done anything wrong here except perhaps for not following up with the withdrawal when you didn't get a response, and therefore making the situation clear is best for you.


Active voice: Using "I" to show my contribution and "we" to include the audience? I've read the other questions on active vs passive voice. But my question is slightly different.
Let's say I'm writing in active voice and using "I" as I'm primarily writing a thesis-like document. When I present results, is it okay to say "we" as a way include the audience? For example, consider the following paragraph:
Option 1:
"I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, we can see that A is greater than B."
Is that acceptable? Or is it more proper to rewrite as:
Option 2:
"I used algorithm X to perform Y on data Z. [...] In Figure 1, I show that A is greater than B."
My intuition tells me option 2 is more correct; however it just sounds slightly awkward to me in certain places. Are there better/other options than the aforementioned options?

Apart from issues of singular versus plural first-person in active voice, ... it is often possible to use third-person (active), simultaneously shorten the sentence, and perhaps only refer to the objects, phenomena, and processes in play. E.g "Application of procedure X to stuff Y produced whatever-Z..." (Or "Procedure X applied to stuff Y ...")
That is, often, "unwinding" the grammar can show that there are redundant or functionless phrases, which can be dropped, and in fact clarify.
(In my field, mathematics, in English, in the U.S., there certainly is a tradition to use plural first person, but, truly, I've found that often unwinding the grammar allows shortening. And, often, unwinding allows active voice rather than passive, and shortens and simplifies.)


Can I fix error in submitted conference manuscript after submission due date I recently submitted a manuscript to a conference but I found there is a formula error. Now it is about 2 weeks after submission due data. Should I email the chair asking whether I can update? Or should I just wait?

These things vary with the conference, but it is likely that you can make the change now if you contact the program chair or other conference official. There will usually be a later date at which final versions are required for accepted papers.
But if the paper hasn't been accepted yet, then contacting them might prevent a rejection. In any case someone like the "program chair" will give you the necessary feedback.
You might help yourself a bit if you prepare an explanation of where and why a change is necessary so that if a paper is already with a reviewer then they can quickly catch up to the current version.


Right time to start applying for PhD - Germany I am a computer science student and am currently doing my Master Thesis in Germany. I am in the second month of the six month duration for the Master Thesis. I wish to pursue a PhD after Masters and I was wondering when the right time is to start applying for PhD positions. I found a few positions that start in September 2015 but I would be done with the Masters only at the end of November. Is it alright to start applying for a position from now itself or should I wait for a few months?

I'd recommend that you start applying a few months before you graduate. The process may easily take several months, and if you want a direct transition, you need to find something before you actually graduate.

In most cases, it will be possible to delay the start of a position by a few months. So by all means, if you find an interesting position that starts a bit before you expect to graduate, you should still apply. Just state the date of you expected graduation (month/year is fine) with your application.

Note that many potential employers, especially if they don't know you from earlier activities, will want to see results of academic work such as a Masters thesis (or at least a draft for it) or other academic texts. If you can't show anything in that direction, it would be good to first focus on positions where you know the professor.


When writing an email asking for PhD positions/projects I've recently finished in Masters in Neuroscience in Germany ( & bachelors in pharmacy), and I'm trying to find a PhD position in European countries like Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, etc. In most of them, I have to contact the professor I'm interested in working with myself. I've already emailed a lot of them ( app. 20, with 6 replying no positions available).

-The problem is, I'm afraid if my emails are too generic. Here's the part from my emails where I have some concerns:

"As you will see in my resume, I have steadily oriented my education and experience towards becoming an accomplished researcher of regenerative medicine/technologies for the nervous system. Being a pharmacy & neuroscience graduate gives me a unique perspective that is useful when exploring the regenerative capacity of the nervous system, whether through manipulating neurons directly, manipulating surrounding glia, or the use of stem cells."

For the rest, I clearly stated that I'm looking for a possible position in their group, what my previous accomplishments are, as well as who I am in a brief description.
Naturally, I only emailed professors whose research I like and is linked to what I want & mentioned in this paragraph. So, is it inferred that I like their research/field, or is it still to generic?

Of course I read their about their projects on their group pages, but I'm not sure if I can go as far as reading their articles, since it would take too long, they may have no positions, and I don't know how many should I contact. So I wrote it in a more general manner, and if a professor/group leader expressed interest, then I would read in a lot more detail about their work (their articles & reviews). But is this truly the only way for them to consider someone?

-Another point is how many emails. One acquaintance mentioned that he had to send upwards of 300 emails to find a position. I simply can't believe he can send that many emails, without them being a single copy, but with each professor's name. I think it would be in the range of 20-50 emails, but that's pure conjecture on my part. I need to know from your experience, since if they're not so many, then I can read more about the professor's work in detail.

Quite simply, if your email to me does not explain why you want to do a PhD in my group, I am probably not going to respond to your "cold" email, unless your CV is so outstanding (several papers, good grades, working with people I already know, etc.) that I can't help but take a closer look.

So you need to make sure that your email not only expresses your research interests, but also explains why your profile makes a good fit for the group to which you're applying.

Also note that if you're sending a "cold" email and the professor isn't in the process of advertising a position, you still may not get a response.


Why is B or B− the minimum passing grade for most graduate courses in US? I was recently told that in many schools in the US (maybe other countries too), the minimum grade for a graduate course is B or B−. Meaning that B is considered as a passing score. I would like to know whether this is true. Why should it be the case? Does this mean that grading in graduate school is easier?

In some sense grading may be "easier", but it's also just that the effective grading range is compressed, and that grades per se matter less than in undergraduate classes.

In many graduate programs, getting a grade lower than B (or even A-) is considered a warning that you need to seriously knuckle down and start doing better.  To take a random example, UIUC has a campuswide minimum GPA of 2.75 (B-), but most departments set higher minimums (as high as 3.25, or B+) Here's a relevant quote from an old grad school blog post:

  My first semester in grad school, my M.A. advisor laid it out for to me: "If you get a B in a grad school class, you should ask the professor whether you should consider dropping out of the program. If you get a C, don't bother asking."

What this means is that the range of grades in grad school is effectively compressed, going from A to C instead of A to F.  Getting a C in a grad school class is, in many cases, practically equivalent to getting an F in an undergraduate class.  This grade inflation probably has historical roots in a sort of academic politeness in which it became considered more and more insulting or embarrassing to give someone low grades.

However, it's not as significant as it may seem, because grades are typically much less important in grad school than in undergrad.  In grad school (especially PhD programs) you are working much more closely with faculty and they monitor your progress at a much finer grain.  It's not just about getting a good grade, but about conducting research, making progress on your degree milestones (e.g., writing an MA thesis or PhD dissertation), and so forth.

In grad school, your class grades are meant to be not just an evaluation of your performance in that class, but a signal as to whether you are developing the skills necessary to succeed in the program as a whole.  It would be unusual (probably unthinkable) for a grad program to suddenly give someone the boot simply because their GPA dropped too low; rather, a series of low grades will lead to increasing concern from the faculty, with meetings, emails, etc., gradually escalating from "Is everything ok?" to "You need to start working harder" to "Get your act together or else".

I've known grad students who received multiple grades in the B range, and this is what happened to them; they were subjected to increasing pressure from the faculty, with increasingly more explicit suggestions that they could be kicked out of the program if they didn't improve their performance.

That said, it is true that in some cases grading in grad school can be "easier" than in undergrad.  My personal experience has been that in some cases faculty members are willing to be somewhat more flexible on grades as related to the actual course content, as long as they are satisfied that you got what you personally needed from the class.  For instance, if you are specializing in Topic X and you take a requred class in Topic Y intended to broaden your background, the professor may give you an A even if your paper in the class is only adequate, if the professor understands that that is not your specialization and you don't need to fully master it in order to succeed.  The flip side of this is that if you take a class in Topic X (your specialty), the professor may hold you to a far more exacting standard, knowing that you really must be on top of that material.


I have been asked about a rumor of a collegue, what should I do? A colleague of mine (C1) from other University (U1) has asked me, by email, if another colleague (C2) from my University (U2) is moving from U2 to U1.

Should I tell to C2 about that rumor?
Or should I answer to C1 that I have no clue?

Of course, I do not have any idea of C2's plans but I have a closer relationship with him.

If someone asks you in person: I would recommend you to say to your colleague that you have no clue about what he is talking about, immediately - even if you know your supervisor's plan.

If someone asks you by email:
In this case it is easier. Just ignore it.

Some supervisors share a lot of things with their students and I think that is better to assume everything as private.

Since this rumour could have some professional consequence to your supervisor, I would alert him about that too.


Is it worth enrolling in a Ph.D. program without employment? As I understand, European universities offer two types of Ph.D. programs:

Ph.D. without employment
Ph.D. with employment

As far as I understand, North American universities do not work in that way.

Is it worth enrolling in a Ph.D. program without employment (#1) careerwise if someone wants a job in academia in future?

Europe is not a country but a continent. The links you gave are from the university of Vienna, and the example of employed PhD students refers to a special program from the University of Vienna, so that is not even Austria-wide.

Enrolling in a PhD program without employment can mean many things, for example it could mean you get no financial support what so ever, i.e. you are self-funded (but even there is variability depending on how much tuition you pay). Being in a PhD program without employment could also mean you receive a stipend instead of wage (which has consequences for your eligibility for social security, pension, health insurgence, etc. This varies to a huge extend from country to country).

In general a PhD degree is a PhD degree regardless of how it was funded. It may be that some programs are more prestigious than others, but that is country specific: It may be that in some countries particular stipends are very prestigious, while in other countries employment is so rare, that getting it is considered prestigious.

I would be weary of self-funded PhD programs, but otherwise stipends and employment contracts are both fine.


What is the correct way to cite the theorems which grew out of your personal discussions with someone else? Sometimes it happens to me that I have a discussion with someone and he presents part of his unpublished works to me that help improving parts of my research.

Sometimes I use them in a paper in the way that after informing the person, I cite the results in my papers often by attaching that person’s name to his theorems and bringing them as unpublished notes or personal communication at the references. But I’m not sure whether the way that I cite such results is really correct or not.

In this case, if you wish to include a content originated from your peer in your manuscript, you ought to first get his consent. Since you may not be able to cite this in the References section as you cannot cite conversations, you may attribute the originator in the Acknowledgments section regarding this fact.


Letter of recommendation for relative who has done relevant work for me My nephew, a recent graduate, is applying for a fellowship at CERN, and he is providing the usual letters of reference. He has in the past done some work for me (I work in the same field he is studying), and I know him quite well, professionally speaking.

If, in addition to the other letters of reference, were I to write one for him as well (explicitly noting our relationship, being relatives), would that most likely hurt or help?

I strongly advise you against writing it.

In this answer by ff524 you can read a few reasons on why your letter may be considered strongly biased. But let me add one more point, a cultural one (you never know the background of the selection committee members).

Even though you can be objective and honest in assessing your nephew's skills, and even though your letter would be just an additional one, you have to think that in some countries (e.g. Italy and Spain, but I'm sure these are not the only ones) the academic world has faced for a long time accusations of nepotism and corruption. Therefore, by many people who have grown up in such kind of culture, your letter would be probably considered as yet another case of potential nepotism.

I might be overly pessimistic, but do you really want to risk this?

Let me add a remark in view of HEITZ's comment below: When applying for a position, follow the instructions. That is, if the call requires, say, 3 letters of recommendation, your nephew should send 3 letters, not 2, not 4. Why? Because anything that is not compliant with the instructions will likely annoy a selection committee who has to assess many applicants, because they will have to decide how to handle unwanted special cases.


Emailing a professor for points on an exam when you want a recommendation from the professor I recently took an exam in my master's program where I missed just enough points to change my grade from A+ to A (in my country, these show up differently on a transcript). I intend on applying to some extremely competitive PhD programs (otherwise I would not be concerned with this grade difference), and given my undergraduate background, this is a course where I am probably expected to get an A+. Furthermore, I am essentially depending on a letter of recommendation from the professor of this course.

After having already looked at the exam with my professor, and hearing him explain the grade justification, I believe I did not yet make a well thought-out argument as to why I should have been given certain points.

My question

Should I bother emailing this professor with my legitimate argument, or simply let it go? I will probably get a rec letter from him either way and while I want an A+ and genuinely think my work on the exam deserved it, I don't want to annoy my professor and make his opinion of me depreciate.

Edit: In this scenario, I feel that an error was made on the part of the test-writer where a question could've been reasonably interpreted in two distinct ways. I was told that because I was the only person to make this particular interpretation, that it was an unreasonable interpretation. I don't agree with this logic.

Let it go.

You discussed this before, he made his arguments and it is unlikely that he will change his mind. It isn't only up to you to make a good argument for the points, but the professor himself will have judged the points again when you discussed them and will now be convinced that the points are fair.

Begging even more for the points will probably not get you any more points, but may annoy the professor, e.g, because you already discussed it and you are still not satisfied after he told you the final outcome. He has neither the time to discuss this again and again, nor he will consider that he was wrong the first two times (the first assignment, then your previous discussion).


Will taking a temporary staff position between post-docs end my academic (tenure track aspirations) career I recently was given a job offer for a ([edit] research support/IT support) staff position at a university in a city I have been trying to relocate to for family reasons but I am concerned that if I take the position any chance I have of getting a tenure track position will be over. My background is in computational physics and I have a successful post-doctoral appointment currently (multiple first author manuscripts in some high impact journals within the short time, 1 year, I have worked), but the location is not-ideal for personal reasons.

My question is: if I take this job will it look poorly on tenure track applications? If it helps the position is fixed-term and much better pay than my current post-doc. I have always been told in graduate school that if you get off the tenure path, you can't get back on.

EDIT: I should note that the IT position is listed as a Research position, where I will be providing research support for the supercomputing center by leading/developing workshops, presenting work at HPC conferences, and still writing manuscripts (just in more of a CS/IT domain instead of physics) and the position is only for about 4.5 Months. Didn't know if that would change anyone's responses, but thought I should clarify that it is not help-desk/sys. admin work.

I would think it's not advisable to take this position unless you already have a research position lined up for a local university in the near future (under a year at least). At least in my field, getting tenure anywhere at all is hard. Unless you are particularly in demand (which seems unlikely from your described position so far), if you want tenure you have to put that above location (even to some extent country, not just city), and then apply at every opportunity to move to something where you want, in the hope that one day you will get it. It's not a good situation, but there are too many people for the number of jobs available.


University policy of publishing student course evaluations: Prevalence and pros and cons These days it is very common to have some course evaluation towards the end of a course, in which students respond to standardized questions on a numerical scale (e.g. between 1 and 5) and can additionally give free-form comments.

Sometimes individual lecturers make student comments (and their responses) available to the cohort in which the survey was taken and the next cohort, to show that they are open to critique and how they respond to it.

I am, however, more interested in cases where there is a departmental/faculty/university-wide policy to consistently publish evaluation results for all of their courses (averages of numerical data only, or perhaps the free-form comments as well) to the current and future cohorts.

Is it common for universities to have a policy of publishing student course evaluations?
What are advantages and disadvantages of doing this?
Has this been looked at in the educational literature?

I used to adjunct at a strong college as part of a larger university where the student government was able to get a policy in place on publishing (statistics on) evaluations.  The professor/adjunct had the choice to not publish their results; but this was uncommon since then you would be an outlier and it would seem like you had something to hide.

Pros:  Frankly, with things like "rate my professor" out there, I'd rather have everyone's evaluations take into account than just the extremes.  I think the point is that, provided we avoid the cons I will outline, there is transparency of some sort of metric of performance.  Generally I found the statistics to show something reliable about professors based on what other faculty and students said about them.  It prevents faculty from thinking they can just disregard the opinions of their students and it helps students have a consistent and official place to decide which instructor they would like to teach them (in a larger college anyway).
Cons:  You need not look far to see academics complain about this practice.  The only concern for me would be if for some reason there was some sort of plot to purposely bomb a professor's evaluations or a professor tried to game the system; these are generally not serious worries and one would hope there would be checks and balances for these concerns.


Would uploading preliminary research results on Arxiv certify new discovery as mine? I have some preliminary results in my research, but due to my current situation I won’t have time to send these to a relevant journal. Yet I would like to claim these as my discoveries, in case someone else have similar results.  Would I be able to claim these as my discoveries if I upload them to Arxiv?

In short: yes.

Of course, as Wrzlprmft suggested, you need to make it look decent enough so that arXiv won’t reject it, but once it’s there, it will have your name on it, be connected forever to your arXiv account etc. You can always claim that you were first. (I.e. if someone publishes exactly the same thing, or at least very similar, you can always write to the journal and say their research was not original, and point to your arXiv preprint. By the way, this might not mean stealing your ideas, but simply overlooking your work; still a bad thing, though.) And of course there is no problem in improving the manuscript and sending it to journal later.

On the other hand, however, others can use your idea in their own research, apply it to something else, or generalize it, and with proper citation, they will be able to publish their own results while conforming with academic ethics. So they might do some further research that you have in mind, and you can’t prevent it.


Is there a chance for a new university in another country to accept my passed courses/classes? I'm looking to transfer to another university in another country - University of Geneva.

Is there a chance that they will accept my passed classes in homeland university as all/most of my classes are the same with the one I'm willing to transfer?

I'm looking to finish the last year in University of Geneva.

Thanks

Many universities/countries in europe have adopted the "bologna system" which mainly aims for comparability of degrees so that it gets easy to do masters studies in a different country than your bachelor. With this they also adopted the ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) which should make different courses comparable. There are definitely ambitions to make it possible to switch mid studies.

So much for theory. In the real world, at least here in Austria, it is definitely possible to finish your study at another university. However, they might not accept all your finished courses or not with that amount of credits. We even had cases where master/PhD students were required to do bachelor studies lab courses to get to a similar level.

All of this is usually handeled by the dean of studies who can decide if you are allowed to finish your studies at that university and what you have to do to reach that goal. What you should do is speak to the dean and ask them directly, only he/she can give you an answer if it works in your case.


How (un)usual is changing fields? For a long time I thought that when I start my PhD, my field of research is fixed for the rest of my academic career. However, I've encountered multiple people who have a PhD in space science or particle physics, and have later moved to atmospheric science or remote sensing — one of them even after already having tenure, starting an entirely new topic while remaining at the same institute. How common or uncommon is it to change to an unrelated field within natural science? How much chance would one have of a post-doc if the newly graduated PhD has no experience with the actual topic whatsoever? Is it expected that a Postdoc spends the first 3–6 months getting into the field, or that he/she can dive into the depth right away? Of course, a lot of scientifically relevant skills (data analysis, critical thinking, programming, statistics, etc.) are in common between different fields, but how important is the content of ones experience, really?

Related but different question: How might changing topic affect a career in academia? (different because from e.g. particle physics to climate science is more than just changing topic)

Most successful career researchers choose their field fairly early on in their career. This is often due to their approach to research; they have a fundamental question they're attempting to answer, and they spend years attacking different parts of the question through various projects. Pursuing research in this manner allows for flexibility in the research and can lead to some very interesting breakthroughs.

From what I've seen, those who do change areas of interest often do so within a single field, so that the majority of their expertise is still relevant. Yes, data analysis skills can transfer, but much of a researcher's expertise is in the form of a deep understanding of what the past and current state of the field; knowing important (and less important) papers, what different lab groups are researching, what's been tried and what hasn't. Since such a knowledge base can take many years to gain, people are often reluctant to switch.

I would venture that it's more common for a field to shift than for a single researcher to shift; i.e., some new technology or methodology allows a whole group of researchers in a given field to investigate something new or different.


Can journals share information about your submission? Can journals share information about your submission or for that matter your entire submission at will? Is that fair game? Is this a varying practice based on who you submit to?

Is the general idea that the implications of sharing the notes and related content is trivial?

In general, no, journals cannot arbitrarily share your submission with others—at least not before it's been accepted.

However, they can share your submission with:

Reviewers, so that the peer-review process can be completed
Other staff members within the publisher, which can be useful when a paper is submitted to the "wrong" section of a journal, or to the wrong journal, but is otherwise acceptable for publication.

Once the paper has been accepted and appropriate copyrights assigned, though, they can do more or less whatever they normally do in their publication and advertising process.


How do universities verify qualifications? I want to apply for an academic job in the US or UK. I am curious how the universities verify my academic degrees. Do they call/write to my home university to verify my qualifications. In my home country, universities are not responsive to requests. Even, they do not ship the transcripts to employers (it's only available for pick up).

Can they reject my application because of no response from my university?

For entry level positions (postdocs, visiting assistant professors, assistant professors), we usually start with letters of recommendations and copies of publications, including the thesis.

Usually one of the letter writers is the chair of the dissertation committee. That gives confidence that the dissertation is being completed or almost finished.

In one of my early jobs, I did have to send scans of my diplomas, but that was done after the job offer.

There's remarkably little authentication in academia. But that is likely because there is the perception that there is little outright credential fraud and because the consequences are so large.


Is it worth it to master LaTeX or MS Word? I want to know, if I submit a paper to a journal, will they change the formatting of the paper? For example, will they change the position of the tables or the figures?

If they change these, then I think it is not necessary for me to learn MS Word or LaTeX in depth. As long as I can write the paper in a readable manner, it should be fine because the journal will make the format better if the paper is accepted. But if there is a specific style and format of the papers published in the journal which must be fulfilled by the authors, then it is a different story.

My field is physics and biophysics.

This depends entirely on the journal policy, which in turn tends to depend strongly on field.  For example:

In computer science and electrical engineering, many ACM and IEEE journals expect papers to be turned in using a format that is very close to publication and then re-format little if at all.  For these journals, good mastery of LaTeX is a must.
Many biology journals, by contrast, will refuse to take nicely formatted submissions and require text to be submitted separately from figures.  For these journals, you mostly just need to know how to use your citation manager.

Beyond looking at individual journals, I would say that a good rule of thumb is to consider how many equations you are likely to publish.  The more mathematical your work, the more likely that your publication venue is to have embraced LaTeX and the more benefit expertise with it is likely to be to you.


How do I cite a result that I've only seen stated without a proof, and I prove myself? I am writing my PhD thesis in mathematics.

It happens frequently that I use results that I don't have a reference for except

textbooks stating "it is easily seen that ..." or "it is well-known that..."
it is stated on Wikipedia (without proof)
I have derived it with colleagues or people from Q&A sites

Then I try to find a source for some time, before I write down a proof by myself. However, most probably, there has been an earlier mention of this result that I could  reference instead.

How should I proceed in such cases?

If it's a textbook-level result, you could just cite a textbook. Otherwise, if you derived it yourself or with colleagues, no citation is required unless you published that proof earlier (not likely if it's a minor one). But you should definitely thank the people who helped in acknowledgments.

Finally, note that there is a threshold for citation: if a result is trivial, and as such is likely to have been independently demonstrated by many people over time, with no clear historical/seminal work, then you do not need to cite it.


Does APA style have a simplified short-paper format? I teach a course in college writing. My students must learn to write papers for college following APA format.

I recall that, as a student, my instructors were never very consistent in their requirements for the format. For example, some instructors required a cover page if the paper exceeded 5 pages or so, but otherwise preferred a heading like this, even if they said they requested APA format:

<name>
<date>
<course>
<assignment>

I encountered other instructors who required a complete cover page, abstract, introduction, and conclusion, in 500 word essays.

Does APA have any special specification for shorter essays? If so, at what point is the paper short enough to do away with these extra parts?

From an on-line search of APA style guides it appears that the APA style-guide is set up for research papers that would include a title page and abstract.

It appears though that most universities that I searched either had a defined page count before an abstract page was needed or said to check with the course instructor.

These are just a sample of some;

At this private college the exceptions from an abstract are where,

  Smaller essays (3 pages or less)
  Informal writings (in almost all instances, the paper will be 3 pages or less).
  Papers over 3 pages in length that are formatted in APA style but do not contain a citation or reference.

At Western Oregon University they have two sample papers, one for a short paper (without abstract) and one for a formal paper (with abstract)

Lastly ,as an example, these two colleges Capital Community College and Empire State College state that the student should check if an abstract is needed.

Connecticut

  Check with your instructor to see if an abstract and/or keywords are required elements of your paper.

Empire State

  Be sure to ask your mentor whether or not s/he requires an abstract.

So while it appears that APA does not have any special short paper format it appears , from samples above, that institutions either have a formal policy or leave it to the discretion of the instructor.


Is the rise of pre-prints lowering the quality and credibility of researcher and increasing the pressure to publish? From what I understand pre-prints have been common in some fields for many years because of some practical obvious reasons, for example very long lag time from submission to publication.
However, it is clear that publishing in pre-prints is becoming more and more popular across many fields with the main reason of calling yourself first to a particular research/method/idea/etc. The only problem is that these pre-prints are not peer-reviewed, and even though they require a certain standard, which is quite low, nobody is really checking the credibility and soundness of any of it. People might rush through the scientific process to publish a pre-print because the scrutiny level is almost non-existent. Some of this has been already observed with pre-prints about COVID https://science.slashdot.org/story/21/02/13/1558235/misleading-viral-claims-show-dangers-of-preprint-servers-researchers-warn, I think there's even no verification on affiliations.
The more pre-print papers are being published, the more these papers are being cited in peer-reviewed papers. They might be correct but nobody might check in detail as a reviewer or could even content since it's not "published". In addition, usually citations such as "in preparation" or "submitted" are not accepted by many journals. It just seems that this could trigger a vicious cycle in which more non-peer reviewed papers are being cited in permanent publications which then remains in print for years to come.
Does the rise of pre-prints make science and publishing less credible?
Does it increase the pressure to publish because it adds an additional tier to the publishing process?

The people churning out garbage preprints are also churning out garbage papers in predatory journals which are "peer reviewed".
The preprints aren't why these people are doing it. Being shit scientists driven by perverse incentives is why they're doing it.
Also I cite preprints all the time from people I know (either directly or by reputation) and it's not a problem because I don't need reviewers to tell me if a paper is good. I can read.


Is it common in any other first world countries besides the US to work while attending university? I have an old family friend in Japan (born and raised). We were recently talking about academics as he is in his 2nd year of Uni and I have 1 B.S and soon to have another with the goal of moving on to a Masters this fall.

While talking he asked if I "Work or study" as he knew I completed my first degree but was unaware I started my second. When I mentioned that I both go to Uni and work a corporate job in my industry he was, no joke, speechless.

He couldn't believe someone could both attend a Uni and work at the same time without failing classes. He told me that people only work part time jobs very sparingly during school semesters and then work more during the summer but can't even begin to believe working in a corporate job while still studying.

I don't know too many people that attend my Uni and don't either have 2 part-time jobs or a full time jobs (except for those with free rides or very generous parents).

Many people I know from other countries (I try to culture myself) ask me the same question "Do you work or study?" and they get very confused when I tell them "both" and explain my situation.

Is this only common in the US? I've talked to people from Singapore, Japan, Canada, Greece, and the UK and they all can't believe working and going to Uni at the same time.

In Germany, at least one survey reports that 47 percent of students work during the semester, and 63 percent work during the holidays between semester.

Most of these students earn less than 500 Euros a month, but 6 percent earn more than 1000€ after taxes. Over 60 percent that have jobs have one to finance their studies/living expenses. For 7 percent of students, their job is their only source of income.

According to the Sozialerhebung 2012 (a large survey by a federal agency)  figure 9.10, 13 percent of students studying towards their first degree  worked more than 20 hours a week on average in 2012. Whether that's "common" is a matter of interpretation.

The part on financing reports a median income of 300€ from working, with 63 percent of students doing some kind of work. Figure 6.5 shows that 2 percent of students only finance through studies through work, with an average income of 960 Euro, and 13 percent mainly finance their life through working, with an average income of 660 Euros.

(All sources in German)


What if I forgot to bring my poster to the conference? Until all conferences provide digital screens, this could happen. One may leave the poster at home/office or lose it in the train. I think what to do next should depend on the value of the work and the participation in the conference, the poster content, and the conference policy.

Options:

just talk about my work
present it on my laptop/tablet screen
print it on an A4 sheet, or get a larger sheet (e.g., from a flip-chart) and draw the outline and handwrite the key parts of my poster
withdraw from the conference (no poster, no presentation), but some people may be wondering why I'm not there.

What are the pros and cons of these options in regards to academic prestige and reputation? Usually, are there other better options?

Print it locally.

Hopefully, your conference is in a city of some non-negligible size and not in the middle of nowhere.  Find a copy shop in the city and print your poster there.

Large conferences may even have their own on-site printing, although a last-minute print job may be expensive or even unavailable.

Some people do this in any case, so that they don't have to travel with a poster.

(Your university/employer may or may not be willing to pay for a 2nd printing of the poster)


How to deal with a student who talks too much in my class? I am teaching English for an Employment course; the entire course usually takes 2 months.

This semester I have a student who is talking too much in the class and for anything that I teach he has something to say—sometimes related to the course and sometimes not. However, he performs well enough in my class activities and homework and he doesn't seem to be deliberately rude.

He is not a chatterbox—he's not talking continuously for a long time, but for many and many times, but each time he speaks for a short time. Sometimes he is also a bit aggressive, saying things like "non-human employers" or "psychologists talking empty for money". I think he is suffering from aspergers since he also usually brings some maths stuff to read in class.

How can I deal with such an unpleasant situation?

BTW, I am a woman teacher and the student is a man; does this makes him more rude?

In the first place, I would take him aside for a quiet chat. Nothing aggressive - just explain how you see the situation he is creating. If he has some interesting points to make, do listen. But also make it clear you are teaching all the students in class, not just one. This, hopefully, should be sufficient.

The second stage -if needed- is a serious warning in class, in front of everyone. Other students need to see you are taking things in hand. He has been forewarned.

The third level is OUT, plus whatever disciplinary measures are current in your institution.

Unfortunately, just ignoring him will not help him see his errors.


PhD or physics as a hobby? I completed my undergraduate degree in physics in a good university (outside the US). Because of financial commitments, I couldn't leave for grad school straight away. So I worked for a couple of years as a research assistant at the same university after I graduated. I did very well, got three papers out in around three years and picked up a master's by research for that. I loved my time working in physics but the research assistant job was a temp job at best and I eventually had to leave it.

Now I work at a well known engineering company. The job is relaxed and spare time is plenty and I'm being paid well. There are good opportunities for growth because the company is about to expand in a big way. I also love having enough time for hobbies, fitness and just life in general.

I also applied to PhD programs in the US and was accepted into several good ones. The reason I applied is primarily because I miss physics and I am interested in being really good at core physics. I have this feeling that my education is unfinished in some way. I want to be that guy who has a deep understanding of fundamental physics. That guy who can easily answer questions on the physics stacks. Maybe I'd even like to write a textbook someday. I liked research when I did it but to be honest, I'm not sure I have that same fierce passion for it as I do for learning. In addition to this, I know I'm not cut out for the academic tenure track - Even if I were smart enough (and this is not impostor syndrome or anything, I am self aware enough know that I am good but not great), I have no interest in chasing low paid postdocs and living with the general instability of post PhD life. In five years, when I complete my PhD, I will likely end up in a very similar job to what I have now.

With this in mind, should I simply stay in my regular job and do physics as a side hobby or actually do the PhD?

TL;DR Is it worth doing a PhD if learning and mastery of physics over research is the primary motivation and sacrifice a great career for it?

One possible way is to do both, in a way.

To help explain, I am drawing on my own current experience -  I earned my PhD in Physics back in 2014, but I still work in a different field. However, I continue research in Physics (and am still getting published) as an Adjunct researcher to the university where I completed the PhD. (Of course, you should check with the university if it is possible to be an Adjunct).

Completing a PhD can provide a foundation for you to continue research in an area of interest as an Adjunct (especially if you published while completing the PhD). Analytical and research skills developed in the PhD could potentially greatly benefit your work in your job (as I have found in my situation).

As in your case, my job allows a considerable amount of spare time, where I have found plenty of time to continue to do research, exercise and engage in my hobbies in my time.

Depending on your time constraints, there is no reason to give up either.


Which authority dictates/regulates that in computer science a journal paper cannot be presented in a conference? I was taught that conference papers in computer science count as publications. Therefore, a journal paper cannot be presented in a conference because of plagiarism reasons, and vice versa.

I confirmed this information:

Publishing the same results at multiple conferences
Submitting the same research to multiple conferences
Journal publication and acceptance to competitive conferences
Under what circumstances can one republish a conference paper/presentation?
Present journal paper at conference or the same work at multiple conferences

The weird part for me is understanding which authority (IEEE?, ACM?) regulates this? Is there any document that support this? It seem that this policy in CS emerged from the community (bottom-up; see for example this) – sort of like hand shaking or bowing in Japan – and is therefore self-regulated by people.

Related to this question (EDIT: I will ask them separatedly later as suggested in the comments but I feel I need to clarify certain issues I seem to be confused with):

I have had multiple arguments with colleagues of other fields
that disagree with me in that conferences papers/presentations don't
count  as  publications (I am in a multidisciplinary field). I feel I
tend to loss these argumentations because it is one CS student against
the rest. In a way, it would be easier if I could refer people to some
authority.
If I simply don’t want to follow the rule for conferences that
apparently don't count papers as publications, what are the real
consequences apart from the social lynching? To be clear, the work is
done but not published - just somehow presented in a conference (*).
Is there any way to confirm that a conference or proceeding is formally
registered as an (or to an) editorial/publisher?
Is there any other way of presenting published results in a
conference as, for example, simply abstracts (*)?

(*) In some areas people just present abstracts, and depending on the area, the conference accepts almost everything. The main goal of this seems to be networking - presenting the work and having the opportunity to interact with people that assist to your presentation (if any).

As is, a journal paper cannot be presented in a conference in many fields, not only in computer science, whether the conferences are counted as publications or not. Of course, you can always present an improved version of a previous work, if the improvement is significant.

  It seem that this policy in CS emerged from the community (bottom-up) (e.g. see this), sort of hand shaking or bowing in Japan - and therefore self regulated by people.

The entire academic world is somehow self-regulated by people, and most people agree on the fact that trying to resell the same paper twice is unethical because it can lead to an artificial inflation of the number of publications, which is one of the many indicators employed to hire people in academia.

And even if you don't find that unethical, you don't want to read the same publication again and again, do you?


What do you do when your PhD student is spending too long on a problem? I am in math and I am fairly new in supervising PhD students, so I need some advice. I have a fairly good student who has made very good progress initially. But after a promising start, he's been stuck at the same problem for over one year, without making any progress. I have at a few occasions suggested that he should try another problem. He would then spend one or two weeks on another problem, but then he would always get back to the original problem with some new approaches/ideas (which still haven't turned out to work). He seems to have grown attached to this problem and feels that it would be a waste to abandon on something he's been working on for so long. I obviously admire his persistance and I always feel bad to discourage him from working on something he feels passionate about. But at the same time, I am worried that the longer he spends on this problem, the less likely he would be willing to move on and eventually give up altogether. What would you do in this situation?

Thanks in advance.

This is one of the hardest questions a math PhD advisor can face.  (Perhaps it is the hardest question.  It is certainly the one whose failure to adequately solve has caused me to feel most, um, inadequate as an advisor over the years.)  Here are some ideas:

1) You say the student is fairly good. I'm not sure exactly what that means.  For me, a good student can make substantial progress on problems of interest if the advisor sets things up very well: by choosing the problems well and by providing help when needed.  You don't want to watch a good student waste much more than a year working on something that is not going to come to anything.  Within this category, a better student will be faster, more successful and independent, and a worse student will need so much help from the advisor that although the student does solve his own problems, the advisor must put at least as much thought and energy into the situation as would be needed to solve the problems herself.

So for me, "fairly good" would mean a student who can be quite successful with a very hands-on advisor.  I would not want such a student to spend a substantial amount of time on a problem that I didn't have some idea how to solve.  That's a strategy for a higher grade of students (a really excellent student can carry the risk of failure of working on truly difficult problems and can also learn from the experience of choosing the wrong problem).

2) One year is too long for almost any mathematician to work on a problem without making any progress.  Certainly I have never done anything close to this (although I have spent many years writing certain papers: progress was being made, just slowly and there was always more to do).

  I obviously admire his persistance and I always feel bad to discourage him from working on something he feels passionate about.

To be honest, I don't really feel the same way.  Working on something for a year without any payoff sounds irrational, maybe a bit obsessive to me.

3)

  But at the same time, I am worried that the longer he spends on this problem, the less likely he would be willing to move on and eventually give up altogether.

To be honest, you don't sound quite worried enough.  The fact that he has nothing to show for a full year of work is already a problem for him and his future career.  A student can no longer graduate with "one theorem" and expect to be competitive in the academic job market: increasingly, successful graduates already have a body of work.  Moreover, most successful graduates draw on the knowledge and skills of their advisors in very deep, substantial ways: without enough of this access, they may not be competitive.

For a student who has been spinning his wheels for a year, I think you need to step in and give him a new problem in which you know exactly how to solve some initial segment of it.  Starting in a place where you are essentially telling them what to do seems like a good remedy for the situation: even implementing exactly what your advisor is telling you is more than one or two weeks work for a good student.  If you make clear that you do expect him to work and make progress on this new problem -- with your help -- he is likely to do so.  If you have a meeting with him in which he tells you that he worked on the other problem instead, reiterate what you want him to do and schedule another meeting only a couple of days later. If you can keep on him closely enough, he'll get the idea: you fully expect him to make progress on this new problem.  If he wants to work on his own problem in his spare time, great, but you are making sure that doesn't interfere too much with his new day job.

I hope it doesn't sound like I am scolding you.  As I said, advising is such a hard job that most people I know don't feel they are doing as well as they should.  Anyway, good luck.


My professor changed a take-home test to an in-class test with no notice. Can I fight the grade? I’m a college student. For a recent test, the professor originally said that the test was extremely difficult and long and therefore they were going to send us a picture of the exam an hour and a half before we had to take it. They said an hour and a half would not leave enough time for people to look up answers online. We were also allowed to bring a notecard for use on the test.

For some reason they were not able to send the pictures, so they said they would make it a take-home test. I was elated, and switched my focus to a different exam I had later that evening.

At our next lecture, the professor announced that we were taking the test in class that day, but open-note. I was obviously not prepared at all, and had not even brought the proper notes for the test with me.  The result was me leaving half the test blank.

How should I proceed? Is it reasonable to fight this grade?

I'm a bit perplexed why they choose to do it that way. If one is doing major changes to an exam, then the students need to be informed of that in due time. I'm assuming you are not the only one who was negatively affected by this behavior? Assuming the situation is as you've described it, I would myself had lodged a complaint at the central examination office or whichever unit is responsible for that at your college. The issue is not that the teacher changed things regarding the exam, it's that the students weren't given enough time to prepare for it.


Why do some US states have multiple universities? California, for example, has two universities: University of California and California State University. Why would any state not simply have one university for all the higher-education programs it wishes to fund? It'd be easier for the students, as they now wouldn't have to go through a transfer application process just to go to a different state-run campus. They wouldn't even have to worry about whether the course work they did in - or to get into - their current university will be enough to get them onto that other campus.

The only reason I can come up with is feasibility.

Your question seems to assume the default is for all campuses to be the same, but there's no reason for this to be true.  For example, the UC schools are far more research-oriented than the Cal State schools.  There's nothing wrong with that: California wants to have some public research universities, but that doesn't mean every public university should be a research university.  That would be extremely expensive, and the net result would be either more research than the state wanted to fund or fewer universities.

There are many ways universities can vary (degree of research focus, graduate and professional programs, selectivity and prestige, etc.), and by default they will be different.  This is typical in U.S. states, not just limited to California.

  It'd be easier for the students, as they now wouldn't have to go through a transfer application process just to go to a different state-run campus.

That's not generally true, and indeed you can't easily transfer between UC campuses.  From this perspective, California doesn't have two public universities, but rather dozens of them.  It would require massive changes to make easy transfers work in practice, because some locations are far more popular than others and would be terribly overcrowded if everyone could transfer wherever they liked.


Getting accepted to a funded PhD in the UK with low MSc grades I have a distinction (first-class honours) in my undergrad degree from one on the top universities in my home country, which sadly is not in the top ratings worldwide.
This followed by a MSc in the UK, in one of the top-20 world universities. My grades were very low, I failed two subjects.

I was advised to make up for it by getting research experience. In the year after getting my MSc, I got two research internships in the EU, and also a research scientist position at a university.

My goal is to get accepted to a PhD program at the University where I did my masters. I need overseas funding. Now my background is sufficient for that, and I have enough research experience to succeed.

However, I was told that with low masters grades I have no chance to get the funding, ever. Even if I do another masters elsewhere and graduate with distinction, or get even more experience. The answer I got from my advisor was: "Studentships are allocated fairly schematically based on grades, references, publications. In order to get funding, a student has to tick all these boxes."

Is there any way to deal with this situation? Just the idea of not being able to get there ever, no matter what I do, even if I get another degree with outstanding grades, is too harsh to accept..

Short Answer: Yes you can, however it might take longer time to find a place.

Longer Answer

In the UK, as long as you find a supervisor that is fine with you being at his/her research group, the university does not interrupt the flow of the supervisor get you as a PhD student.

Tricky Parts: Now you need to find a supervisor that find you suitable, please consider the following:

What are your strongest abilities? If you failed in a subject about software architecture for example, finding a supervisor in this area is waste of time; as you can not demonstrate that you will be a good candidate for that. See in what subjects you got a good mark, or even excellent mark; go and talk to the corresponding supervisor. See if he/she knows someone so you can apply for a place.

Supervisor First Then Funding: Based on your question, I'm assuming you are a European national. In this case, there is more likely for you to get a some European-based funding compare to Asian students for example. So, first focus on finding a supervisor, and then talk to him/her about funding; I'm sure seasoned professor, knows how to help you to apply for a funding.

Possibilities In Smaller Towns: You could also try to find a good university in smaller towns, where the price of living is much less than big cities. Also, because the demand is lower compare to big cities, they might have a funding for you.


Statement of purpose for applying to graduate school in a different field of study than high school I have to write a statement of purpose for a computer science graduate program. In high school I was in a different field of study (aeronautics), then I switched to computer science for my undergraduate course after attending a computer science course which I liked.

Now I can't lie about this, also because this university also asked me about which high school I attended. But is this a negative thing to write on a statement of purpose? Maybe I should just write it on the fly without giving it much attention. Or instead I should say it clearly and justify my choice?

I ask this because I see that many people on the statement of purpose say that they always liked their field of study, from when they were children. So I don't know if the admission examiners would consider it negatively or not.

Short answer: It doesn't matter at all.

Particularly in the US, high school degrees don't have "concentrations"; you simply get a high school diploma. In certain circumstances, your school may have a special focus, but accreditation rules for high school diplomas typically specify some distribution of courses which all students have to meet to receive the diploma.

Moreover, the statement of purpose tells us what you want to do in graduate school, why you want to do it, and why you're qualified to do it. That's pretty much it—most people on admissions committees aren't interested in knowing what early pearl of wisdom some random relative imparted, or other "humanizing" anecdote that too many applicants include. In fact, many of them actively hate it.

Statements of purpose are not your life story, they're a summary of your past and future career. Tell us about your relevant experiences, and why you should be admitted to our graduate program.


Weak Survey as Poster? My question is related to the fact that at a specific conference, if a submission is rejected then the reviewers may instead recommend that it be presented as a poster session.

Specifically, consider a paper that has no technical contribution. Rather, assume that it is a superficial survey of the main topics included in a scientific domain, i.e. This new domain should take points A, B, C, etc. into consideration, and some of these points may use technologies D, E, F as solutions. Not much literature surveyed and no results by the author included.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress. My questions therefore are:

Can weak surveys fit as poster sessions? Is this normal or unheard of?
Using the case described in paragraph 2 above, have you witnessed papers of the same quality presented as posters at conferences? Most importantly, is this acceptable behaviour?

Thanks in advance.

Edit: In response to the discussion between xLeitix and O.R. Mapper (thank you both, honestly), I believe my use of the word superficial is a little vague. Let's for example take the combination of two large domains: virtualization and the automotive industry. Instead of the author surveying specific works integrating these two techs, let's assume the author takes the following broad and hence superficial approach:

The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in virtualization.
The author mentions and discusses a few of the major considerations involved in vehicular networks
The author mentions a few of the major considerations involved in integrating virtualization and vehicular networks together.
The author ends the paper by discussing how some technologies may address some of the aforementioned issues. The solutions are not in themselves surveyed extensively, but more so:

"This person did this, that one did that to address X, etc.", without any deep or insightful comparisons.
"To address this issue type 2 hypervisors may be more useful", no evidence backing this claim.
etc..

Very brief, the paper is useful in that it groups together eloquently quite a bit of information, albeit, not in an informative way for the expert, but more so for a person starting their research in a similar domain. Hence, my dilemma; the paper would make a great article in a technical magazine, but not as a conference paper. Perhaps as a poster it would be stimulating and beneficial to the authors and for non-experts interested in the domain (possibly stimulating inter-field synergies etc.).

I have not seen something like this before, but I am not seasoned; hence, why I ask if this is acceptable, or even normal.

Note: The example given is fictional.

Now, it is my understanding that poster sessions are normally works in progress.

Not quite. Poster sessions normally readily accept work in progress. However, I have yet to see a poster session that requires the presented work to be in progress, or unfinished.

The reason why you normally see much work in progress on poster sessions besides few finished results is that authors who have complete, final results will rather aim for something more reputable than "just" a poster, by trying to publish a regular conference paper.

However, it is completely acceptable to present final results on a poster, if you deem a poster to be the best way to draw benefit from your results (e.g. get in touch with other researchers).

EDIT: As explained by the updated question, the "final results" are actually just final for a very early step in a research endeavour. It seems that they are meant to show a direction into which future research could proceed.

This kind of statements, especially when it refers to the future research that the author would like to start, is rather common on posters. Like this, posters serve two purposes:

On the one hand, they show a small contribution. Even though they are comparably abstract and superficial, the early conclusions on how several aspects can be combined and thus lead to new research questions may provide a good overview of the new topic to other researchers. In this interpretation, the content of the poster is a newly discovered research question that is possibly interesting to other people beside the poster author.
On the other hand, they serve as a request for comments on the author's work. Poster sessions are perfectly suited for finding opportunities to let experienced researchers have a look at one's work and provide comments or enter into a discussion with them. In this interpretation, the content of the poster is a kind of a research proposal.


Should I ask to meet graduate students during a TT job interview? I'm about to start interviewing for tenure-track computer science positions in the US. I've read various bits of advice online [1,2,3] about meeting with graduate students in the department I am visiting.

I can see the value in getting the student perspective on the department. (Although it's also a bit scary. I'm not much older than the students and sometimes the students can be overzealous and ask tougher questions than the faculty.)

I'm told that most places will organize such a meeting automatically. However, should I ask for a student meeting anyway when setting up the job interview?

I worry that, if this is not standard, then it might be an awkward request for them. One school of thought is that this is a bad sign I should be aware of, but I don't think I should read too much into it.

There is two different styles of "prospective faculty meets grad students" meetings:

The interview (the grad students are in some form on the selection panel or their input is otherwise valued by the panel)
The applicant gathering data (the grad students are not involved in the decision, but the applicant is interested in getting a different - probably more accurate - perspective on how the department really operates)

These are fairly different meetings. The former is basically the same as all the interviews with faculty, only that it's now a grad student on the other side. The latter should be much more driven by the candidate, and it's the candidate who will ask most of the questions.

For the former, the department will tell you whether you should meet students, and which. If they do not have it planned and you don't care about the second angle, there really is no point in meeting with students.

However, I have found the second angle to be extremely valuable if you have any doubts at all about the institution. Grad students tend to be more honest about administrative procedures, quality of life, work culture, etc. However, you need to enter this with the right mind set - this is not part of the interview, but people external to the entire process doing you, the candidate, a favor. It pays to be friendly and open here, and putting down the interview guard just a little may be necessary to get an open conversation going. I have found a good pattern to be to take out 2 or 3 grad student volunteers to an informal lunch (if schedule permits), or at least to a longer coffee break - and the candidate should invite them (or, in some cases, the department offered to pay, which is also fine as long as the students are invited).

  I worry that, if this is not standard, then it might be an awkward request for them. One school of thought is that this is a bad sign I should be aware of, but I don't think I should read too much into it.

It may be a little non-standard, but not standard is good! Your goal isn't to appear exactly like the other four candidates. If your request makes you seem more interested, more thorough, or just plain nicer than the others, this is a good thing. I am not sure what "school of thought" you are talking about, but trying to be as uniform in your requests to any other candidate seems horrendously bad advice to me. That is not to say that every department will say yes. Sometimes they really don't bother setting it up, sometimes they simply did not find students that were interested in meeting prospective faculty, both of which may be a small red flags on their own.