How much time/effort should I put into writing a reference letter for an application for a Master's program? I taught a large introductory undergraduate course
in the most recent Fall semester (Sept to Dec 2017).
An exchange student who took the course
asked me to write a reference letter
for her application to a Master's program.

I spent a bit of time looking through the webpage of the Master's program,
and I found the following information:

  Step 1 - Online Application

  The admissions process starts upon submission of the online application along with the relevant documents.

  At this stage, the following documents will be requested:

  (other documents not relevant to me as a reference letter writer)
  Any other documents in English that you think may enrich your application, such as a motivation letter or reference letter

Based on the information that I found,
it appears that a reference letter is not required,
and is only marginally helpful.
Because I am busy,
I don't want to put any more time into writing the letter than needed.

Questions:

How much time/effort should I put into writing a reference letter
for this former student's application for a Master's program?
Should I feel bad if I send her a quick and simple letter?

Should I feel bad if I send her a quick and simple letter?

Yes. I cannot stress enough how much this can hurt your student.
I once had a professor agree to write a letter for me, and I learned afterwards that he wrote "Kerkyra was an intern in my lab for 6 months. She's great, she got along well with everyone and did a good job." (I'm almost not exaggerating.) This basically reads as "This person worked with me for 6 months and all I have to say about her is that she's a nice girl", which is terrible.

Which brings me to your main question:

  How much time/effort should I put into writing a reference letter for this former student's application for a Master's program?

You should spend the time/effort that you feel like spending.

If you remember the student and have something to say about her that you feel could help her application (Did she stand out in some way during your course? Did she perform particularly well, or ask interesting questions?), it's nice to do it. It does not necessarily take long to write an enthusiastic letter.

If you don't remember her, or if she was an average student, it's perfectly okay to tell her that you don't know her or her work that well, and don't feel that you could write a helpful recommendation under these circumstances. Since her recommendation letter is optional, no letter is way better than a lukewarm or empty one.


eInk eBook reader for reading scientific PDF papers (as of 2018) While reading lot's of papers for my Thesis, I was looking for another solution than printing important papers. So I started browsing the internets, watched tons of reviews on YouTube, etc.

I learned that, as of 2018, most of the current eInk eBook readers support PDF reading. However, none of the reviews covered, if the readers can be used for highlighting and adding annotations to the PDF-files as necessary for a sufficient literature review.

Therefore, I wanted to ask if any of you can share their experiences with certain devices and include some advantages and drawbacks. Some rather outdated discussions on this topic does not cover current devices.

I thought that probably devices that support working with a stylus (such as Onyx Boox Max, reMarkable, etc.) are more suited for excessive reading (and marking). What do you think.

I'm not asking whether or not to read on an eReader, but trying to shed some light on which device in this giant ecosystem is suitable for the needs within academic work.

I love my Kindle and was looking for a solution that would allow me to read scientific papers on epaper display. Generally, that boils down to finding a reader that has a screen big enough so that it can acomodate single PDF page, with margins possibly removed.

I don't annotate printed papers much, so option of having a stylus is not deciding for me. You'd have to think how much marking does your workflow involve. For me, the speed and software quality of a reader are first priority for me, as you have to be able to read comfortably before you can start thinking about annotation.The screen has to be also big enough to read PDFs comfortably.

That said, recently I have been contemplating two readers: reMarkable and soon-to-be released Onyx Boox Note, both sporting a little more than 10" display. Both adverise as supporting marking of documents. The reviews for the former unfortunately point out that it's reading experience is sub-par, the latter has not yet been reviewed, as far as I know. I've also emailed manufacturers of those solutions and asked for a precise dimensions of active part of the screen (to know whether PDFs fit well). Nobody answered, what is not very reassuring.
EDIT: reMarkable manufacturer has replied stating that the screen dimensions are 210x162 mm.


What to do if the corresponding author is presumably dead? I need further information on a botany paper I found on jstor which is from the 1920s. So I am assuming the workers wouldn't still be alive. Sadly, there has no work been done in recent times on the subject.

What is to be done if I require further/supplementary information if the corresponding author doesn't exist?

You could contact their institution (or its successor), explain your issue and ask if you can access its archive. There is at least a chance that supplementary information or even a specimen preparation can be found there. Obviously, going through an archive can be a big effort.


How/when to become independent in research as a graduate student? I am in the last months of my MSc and I have done my thesis. I have published some conference papers but most of them were literature reviews.  My MSc thesis is about solving wave equations by means of method of potentials and boundary elements. I am interested in pursuing research in another field (differential equations) but I have no idea how to start any topic that may lead to a journal publication.

By asking this question, I want to understand how a research student, whether a recently graduated MSc student or a PhD student, can start searching for a new research topic and develop some researches based on his own interests. Specially, I would like to know:

To what extent should a graduate student be dependent on faculty members? How can he be more independent and start his own research activities?
Is it a good idea that the graduate work on another topic with the faculty member or work independently on a more recent research topic?
If the person is in a research group or at the university, is it a good idea or is it ethical that he develop his own research interests, besides to the topics which are being developed in that institute?
How should a graduate student manage this and make some progress in the research fields of his own interest? (In particular, sometimes the faculty members are not interested in the topics you are interested in and the person has to start his own research activity.)

And also, if this research is part of his independent research, at the time of publishing what affiliation should be used in the publications. Should it be "Independent Scholar" as mentioned in this link or something else? This is important in academic publications, because sometimes, the person is in a research group, but he is publishing a paper as part of his own researches not the things he is doing in that institute; in this case, has he mention that institute's affiliation or use his own one? So please make it clear that how the affiliation would be when the person does research independently in the cases like when he is not working in a research group or he is working with a professor or research group but his publication is output of his own research activities? It is a little unclear.

Context: I'm an older PhD student (mid-50s) and had a couple of publications before entering the PhD program. I'm in an interdisciplinary field where there are few well-established research programs. It's very common for PhD students to embark on their own research interests that are different from their advisers.  Myself, I started submitting papers after my first semester based on class projects and side projects. I even developed a paper that started as my answer to a question on our Candidacy Exam. I was a research assistant for three years with sole responsibility for a very complex Agent-based Modeling simulation.

  To what extent should a graduate student be dependent on faculty members? How can he be more independent and start his own research activities?

Start as soon as possible to develop your own intellectual curiosity. This involves thinking hard about the research in your field relative to the fundamental questions in the field. This is more than "picking sides" in intellectual debates. It involves developing mental models of your field, the various research methods, research questions, and research results.  What's important?  What is not?

You might start with a single important paper.  Look at the section of the paper where they describe opportunities for further research, or maybe limitations. Read other papers that critique this important paper.  All the time, you should be asking yourself: "What do I think should be done to improve/extend/solidify this research?"

You could also start with a survey paper, which often include extensive discussions of future research directions.

As soon as possible, you should put your intellectual curiosity into action.  I'm fond of class projects and papers for that but not all disciplines have courses that support project work.  Either way, "directed reading" courses are ideal settings to write conference or journal papers of your choice under the supervision of a professor (not necessarily your adviser).

  Is it a good idea [to do] the graduate work on another topic with the faculty member or work independently on a more recent research topic?

If your intellectual curiosity leads you to research questions/methods that can be successfully done in collaboration with a faculty member, then approach them and suggest a collaboration.  If, like me, your interests and ideas lead elsewhere, then do your research independently.

  If the person is in a research group or at the university, is it a good idea or is it ethical that he develop his own research interests, besides to the topics which are being developed in that institute?

It's a good idea to develop and invest in your own research interests if they diverge from your research group.  There is no problem with ethics if you are open and forthcoming about what you are doing and why.  This might go against the cultural norms of the university or research group, but you should make decisions you feel good about in terms of your ethics and values.  If other people aren't happy with them or push back, then my view is that is their problem. If they have power, you may suffer negative consequences.  So be it.  Don't bow before people in power just because they are in power.

  How should a graduate student manage this and make some progress in the research fields of his own interest? (In particular, sometimes the faculty members are not interested in the topics you are interested in and the person has to start his own research activity.)

Make a work plan.  What is your output (results, papers, articles)?  Where will you submit it?  In what sequence?  How much time will it take -- daily, weekly, monthly?  If you can't make a plan that answers these questions, recruit a mentor.  It could be anyone who you respect and who knows your field, maybe faculty at your university or maybe someone far distant.

In general, the more you can weave your independent research into your other activities and projects, the better off you will be.  That's why I like class projects.  But same goes for research assistant work, industry work, or other work.  Look for as much synergy between all these activities as you can.

  [...] if this research is part of his independent research, [...] what affiliation should be used in the publications? Should it be "Independent Scholar" as mentioned in this link or something else?

No, you shouldn't use "Independent Scholar" as affiliation as long as you have an official affiliation as a graduate student, post-doc, or other. You should always use your primary affiliation, even if it is Physics and your paper is in Art History.  The exception is if you have multiple official affiliations (e.g. Visiting Researcher) and your research was done at or was supported by these other affiliated institutions.


I have fewer relevant publications than I can highlight in my application I am applying for a tenure-track position. I am allowed to add up to five particularly relevant publications. I have four first author papers and a bunch of more or less important co-authorships, nothing that directly relates to the topic of the position or were I am only one of many co-authors.
Should I just add something to the list, or stick with four papers?

A separate publication list is included.

I’d only add the four relevant ones, unless you have one that particularly speaks to your narrative about your research, etc.

The search committee can read your CV already. What they want is something they can grab onto and think about deeply, and generally I’ve found that “The applicant is a co-author in the middle of the paper” just gets it discounted.


Will a low grade in my final year of an undergraduate program affect my chances of being accepted into graduate school? I am currently taking a course where my final mark is determine by 2 papers worth 50% each. I really hoped to get at least a B on my first paper. Unfortunately, I got a B- (71%?). I worked for 2-3 weeks on this very short paper and got help from both my TA and the writing clinic. I am in my final semester of undergrad (have not applied to grad school yet) and now I am considering dropping this course. If I drop this course, I will not be able to graduate in June and will have to take a course in the summer. This also means that I will only have 3 courses on my transcript this semester (if I drop it). This is a philosophy course and thus there is no positive correlation between how hard one studies and their mark (professors have told my class this many times). I will need a B+ on my second essay. I want to graduate in the top 10% of my class and, in order to do that, I need at least a 75% in this class. However, I am not sure how possible this is no matter how much I study or how much help I get. My other marks on my transcript are good, especially the ones that relate to the program I am interested in doing graduate work in. I am not studying philosophy in graduate school. My cGPA is a 3.5 and my GPA for the past 2 years of study is a 3.6-3.7. Graduate schools usually require at least a 3.3 for the last 2 years and a 3.0 overall.

I am not sure whether or not to drop this course. Will a low mark (high 60s/low 70s) in my last year affect my chances for grad school?

EDIT: "Good" GRE scores will not be able to "make up" for an discrepancies in my transcript since I am not required to take the GRE (nor is it accepted by most places).

This is March.  Isn't a little late to start applying for fall?

If you get a conditional acceptance somewhere, you should be able to satisfy the conditions with summer study.

For a PhD, grades are not the be-all end-all -- as long as you are not falling out of good standing.

As a PhD student, you'll need to take responsibility for your progress.

You could start preparing for your new role as a student by pretending that you are already a PhD student, and focusing on things that matter more than a letter grade.

Think: what other criteria can help you decide whether to drop a particular course?


How to get objective advice on my CV and career progress in detail? My research is in computational modeling of an additive manufacturing (3D printing) process.
My PhD advisor and now my postdoc advisor seems satisfied with my research output. My collaborators (professors from my university and other universities) seem happy with my work. I like my research field and there's so much to learn. I enjoy developing problems and finding solutions. I am decently published (8 publications) in my field and have received some commendation for my papers.
However, I feel I am wasting my time. I have been feeling this since midway of my PhD. I feel that my research is too easy and doesn't impact society or scientific community in any way. I think I am just good for short term projects and I am not required anywhere for permanent position.
I want to have an objective opinion on my experience and my career path. Is there any place to get that?
I am interested both in staying in academia or working in industry. I have applied for positions in industry, but openings are bleak at the moment and I haven't heard from them.

Your university might have a career services office that can help.  Otherwise, hire a private career coach or consultant.


How should I deal with need-to-define terms in introduction? I am currently writing a paper, which starts with an "Introduction" and a "Definition" section. Would it be OK if there are some terms I plan to define in "Definition" first appear in "Introduction", without defining it in "Introduction"?

If no, how should I deal with it?

There are at several possible ways, actually.

First is to avoid the yet-to-be-defined term in the intro and use a descriptive phrase instead. This assumes the term isn't frequently used in the intro.

A second way is to footnote the definition or an pointer to it when it first appears in the introduction. Putting the definition itself in the footnote repeats it, but a pointer doesn't require that.

You could also just add "... frytopper (defined in the next section)..." at the first appearance.

Yet another would be to write the intro as: "... frytopper (italicized terms defined in the next section)...". For this you would only need the pointing phrase at the first of the later-defined terms, but just italicize all of them - at least for the first appearance.

Some of these require the reader to hop about a bit, but it should work.


Where should a question mark be placed in a short citation? According to Modern Language Association (MLA) norms we should use punctuation marks after the page number, within parentheses, that follows the closing quotation mark. For example:

  According to Foulkes's study, dreams may express "profound aspects of
  personality" (184).

But what if a question mark is inherent to the quotation? Example:

  “[t]o what extent do translation theorists engage with the experience
  of translators and how are their theories shaped by what happens in
  practice?” (16)

How should this be cited? Possibilities I can see:

  “[t]o what extent do translation theorists engage with the experience
  of translators and how are their theories shaped by what happens in
  practice” (16)?

Or

  “[t]o what extent do translation theorists engage with the experience
  of translators and how are their theories shaped by what happens in
  practice?” (16).

Which one is correct?

As Peter indicates, the question mark should remain with the original quotation, since it's in the original source material. Therefore, your second example is clearly incorrect. In addition, you still need the period following the citation, to indicate that you are ending the sentence in question. Therefore, you should use the last example.

However, I would also note that, as written, it looks like your example would also require the name of the author along with the parenthetical reference, so it would be more like:

  “[t]o what extent do translation theorists engage ith the experience of translators and how are their theories shaped by what happens in practice?” (Smith 16).


Why do most tenure at an institution less prestigious than the one where they began teaching, and than where they received their Ph.D? Can you please elaborate on these two tendencies separately? The quotation assumes that your PhD alma mater differs from the university where you first taught. First, why less prestigious than PhD alma mater? Second, why less prestigious than the university of the first teaching position?

In 2005, thanks largely to his field experiments, List was offered a tenured professor position at the
University of Chicago, perhaps the most storied economics program in the world. This wasn’t supposed to
happen. It is a nearly inexorable law of academia that when a professor lands a tenured job, he does so at
an institution less prestigious than the one where he began teaching, and also less prestigious than where
he received his Ph.D. John List, meanwhile, was like a salmon who swam downstream to spawn, into the
open water. Back in Wisconsin, his family was unimpressed. “They wonder why I’ve failed so miserably,” he
says, “why I’m not still in Orlando, where the weather is really great, instead of Chicago, where the crime is
really high.”

Dubner, Levitt. SuperFreakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance (2009). P 118.

This is called the "law of descending prestige."

Most universities hire the most prestigious faculty they can.
The number of PhDs from the top universities is larger than the number of job openings at universities.
Therefore, so long as PhDs seek employment at universities, most of them will get jobs at less prestigious universities than their PhD university.

It is not "inexorable," just probable.


Is it possible for the international graduate student to take the exam of professional courses? I would like to know whether the international graduate student can also take the exam of professional courses such as CPA,or CFA?Are there any legal restrictions?

if you are in Japan, there are many people that go to Guam to take the CPA. Essentially anybody can do it, but if you graduate from an American University, there are some modules that you do not need to take, pretty much like the Japanese CPA.


Letter of Rec. for future University application I'm getting my Software Engineer degree in one year here in my country, and I want to continue my studies with a Master degree in the US.
Since here in my country is not a common practice to ask or write such letters, I'm not sure about some details.
I have two main concerns about them:

1) How important is the written date of the letter? (It's OK to get one now, dated accordingly, if I will be submitting it in say, 2 years?)

2) Must the letter be always addressed? (It's OK to be generic, not addressed at anyone in particular? -At this moment I don't know what University I would like to apply-)

I'm asking those two questions because currently I'm developing an important software for the local Police (the 911 emergency line) and I think this could be a nice vouch for my technical skills, however since I'm changing jobs in a few weeks it's possible I won't stay in touch anymore with the Chief, or maybe this Chief won't be around in the future to ask him. This also because now I can ask for it and get it in paper, with the official letterhead and seal/stamp, so that will be a proof of authenticity.

Let's say my idea is to get this letter now and save it for later. Of course this would be a field expertise type of letter.
Thanks!

Your letters should preferably be written by one of your professors, that will hopefully be aware of the protocols on how to write them. Also, usually you don't get access to your letters, but provide the university you are applying to with the contact of recommendation writers that have agreed to write your letter. The idea is that letters are supposed to be blind, so the recommender can freely express their opinions about you, and also make sure you haven't tampered with it.

I would advise against getting a letter from the police chief. He can certify that you did that job (and that should be attached to your application), but he doesn't have the technical skills to evaluate your job beyond "it works", and he cannot put you in perspective compared with other students. Plus, industry letters are usually a string of cold facts:

  This person worked here from November to April developing the system C.

Whereas an academic letter is on the line of:

  I strongly recommend the student for the program because... as he showed working on ...
  [And some paragraphs more saying how awesome you are].


Writing a Personal Statement (Mathematics Ph.D Programs) I am beginning to plan for graduate school. I will be applying to many Ph.D programs and a few Masters programs as a backup plan (all pure mathematics).

I am starting to think about how to write my personal statement. I am seeking advice regarding the process of writing a personal statement . I am mostly curious about what people usually talk about in these things. I obviously want to convey my interest and potential in mathematics research. But my problem is: I do not have the mathematical background to have an idea what I want to specialize in. I know that this hurts my chances at being competitive. My undergraduate degree has simply not exposed me to enough mathematics.

I appreciate any advice - relevant to my concerns or just advice in general.

Thank you.

Honestly, it seems like you are worrying more than you should about not having chosen a specialization.  I wouldn't worry about that: that's not something which is expected of students finishing a BA in the US.  Even if you think you have, changing your mind about it is something which is normal and expected.  So, it's very reasonable to worry about having less background than other students, but more in the context of general preparedness, rather than your personal statement.

So what should you write in your personal statement?  Generally it's for things that the person considering your application would like to know, but which aren't clear from the other parts of your application. Things like: explaining about something unusual in your career path, like taking time off after finishing your degree; what your ultimate career plans are; how you became interested in mathematics; how your undergraduate research projects went and what you did in them; any work you did outside of courses (which is relevant to math! No one cares about your great success in the marching band). I have to admit, generally these personal statements contain no useful information, and a lot more attention is paid to transcripts and letters.  I generally only read them carefully if there's something I'm confused about with the application they should explain.


What are the most important factors when considering graduate school in chemistry? I'm considering applying to chemistry graduate schools within the next six months and am hoping for some guidance in prioritizing aspects.  For instance, among my list of considerations there exists: renown of school, programs of interest, appeal of location, amount of financial aid, duration of program, and success of past alumni.

Do others who have already gone through this process have suggestions about how to prioritize these considerations?  Were there things in your experience that you thought would be important and ended up not being so.  Or visa-versa, are there aspects that you neglected and wish you hadn't?

As a second year grad student in chemistry, I would say the two most important factors are if there are multiple professors you could see yourself working for and if you feel like you could spend the next 5+ years of your life at the school/in the area. You are going to be stressed out with work, so you want to enjoy where you're living.

I haven't heard of any US chemistry PhD grad programs that don't pay tuition + insurance + stipend, so I don't think that's much of a worry (I would, however, make sure you get all that).

The renown of the school and success of past alumni is actually less important than you'd think. Grad school is all about your research advisor and your research (i.e. a better professor at a lower tier school is better than the other way around).


Should I omit my master's supervisor from Referees list in PhD Application? I've finished my masters thesis and waiting for results. Meanwhile, I've started searching for PhD position. and I find out one of the requirement of one to three referee contacts, one of them preferably the masters supervisor.

I've 3.93/4.00 CGPA with coursework and My current masters supervisor is quite satisfied with my research performance so far. He wants me to continue my PhD with him and has offered me the position as well. Whereas, I don't want to continue with him and that's why I haven't told him about my PhD plans.

I'm confused and I'm not sure if I tell him that I don't want to my PhD with him, Will he write good remarks about me or he'll write bad remarks so that I don't get PhD position somewhere else.

Another problem is that if I tell him straight forward that I am not interested to continue my PhD with him I might lose this opportunity as well.

I've no one to discuss with about this issue and about my further PhD plans. Time is running and I'm becoming more and more stressful.

Should I omit my master's supervisor from Referees list in PhD Application?

Almost certainly no. Your master's supervisor is likely the only person who can actually speak to your ability as a researcher. As someone who has done well on their coursework, their recommendation is the most valuable to you. The fact that he wants you to continue with him is good! If he didn't, he probably wouldn't recommend you to anyone else!

  I'm confused and I'm not sure if I tell him that I don't want to my PhD with him, Will he write good remarks about me or he'll write bad remarks so that I don't get PhD position somewhere else.

This would be incredibly unprofessional and unethical. That's not to say that it's impossible, but you should have a good idea of whether it is likely based on your interactions with him. You should not assume this will happen unless you have a bad feeling about him already.

  Another problem is that if I tell him straight forward that I am not interested to continue my PhD with him I might lose this opportunity as well.

This is just something you will have to bite the bullet and do. Since you haven't already promised that you will do your PhD with him, he has no legitimate objection. If he is acting in good faith, he should not withdraw his offer from you. There is absolutely nothing wrong with applying to multiple supervisors. If he seems angry that you are, then you definitely do not want to do your PhD with him. Of course, he may then decide to hire someone else, so it is possible you will lose the opportunity, but this is unavoidable. You cannot have it both ways.


When to negotiate an offer? After receiving an offer and a deadline of 2 weeks, when to start negotiation? According to some opinions, that one round of negotiation is fine. So is it advisable to start negotiating in the first days or wait until last days, with the hope that other offer may arrive?

Start immediately, accept as late as possible when you are happy. If another offer comes in while you are negotiating, that's fine. You can work on negotiating that, too. You may even have to tell the first school that you are negotiating with the second school and vice versa. There's no point in delaying the negotiations, just the acceptance. Of course, as soon as you accept an offer (and it's confirmed), you should immediately withdraw all other pending applications.


Is it OK to review a manuscript written by an editor who handled (and accepted) one of your papers? I have been invited to review a manuscript written by several authors. One of them has been the editor of one of my recently published papers. This is the only interaction I have ever had with the author of the manuscript.

Would it be OK for me to accept the review request?

While I personally do not see anything wrong with it, it might be the case that I am positively biased towards the paper, without realising it. Hence my question.

Bonus question: the journal adopts an open peer review system, where the reviews and the reviewers' names can be published alongside the paper. Shall I accept the review request, would it make sense to disclose my concern in the review I submit? Assuming that the paper gets accepted, of course.

Short answer: yes it is ok to accept the review.

Long answer: Yes, it is (still) ok to accept the review. If you can only review paper written by authors you have never ever interacted with, at some point in your career, you'll stop reviewing. Especially if you are working in a small field of research. For me, in your case, it is more than fine to accept the review. The question becomes more tricky if it is from someone you work(ed) with...

If you want to try out some really tricky reviewing scenario, try out this test: http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2015/08/21/quiz-can-navigate-tricky-peer-review-scenarios/


Easy subjects with high grade vs tough subject with lower grade I have about 80% weighted average (years count 1, 3, 5), I am on my third BSc year and I would like to apply for a MSc afterwards in top university.

There are 2 4th year subjects that I really, really would like to take, but they are known to be the most difficult subjects in my university. The alternative is to take the easiest courses and keep the grades up.

I did a calculation that I should have about 64% this year to pass with a first.

Should I risk it? Will anyone really acknowledge this risk I am taking? Is it really worth it?

Should I risk it?

That depends on the particulars: how useful are the easy courses, how hard are the hard courses, ...

  Will anyone really acknowledge this risk I am taking?

Yes, the admissions committee will certainly consider what subjects you studied.


Reference on abuse of stimulant medications among professors to enhance academic performance? Various research articles1 have been published on the prevalence of stimulant medicine (Adderall, Concerta, Ritalin) abuse among undergraduate students.

By "abuse of stimulant medicine," I am referring to the practice of students taking prescription medication that is prescribed to someone else (or, that is prescribed to them under false pretenses) in order to improve their focus and concentration while studying.

There is some anecdotal evidence of university faculty taking Adderall and related medications to enhance academic performance (and not to treat an attention disorder).

Is there any reference to research2 on the prevalance of stimulant medicine abuse among university faculty?

1 Here is a review article that covers some of them:

  Varga, Matthew D. "Adderall abuse on college campuses: a comprehensive literature review." Journal of evidence-based social work 9.3 (2012): 293-313.
  DOI: 10.1080/15433714.2010.525402

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

There were several prominent publications in Nature, spurred by a survey that they conducted of their readers who were able to broadly identify their area of work.  See this link here for information about the survey, which also cites the papers that were published in Nature.  http://network.nature.com/groups/naturenewsandopinion/forum/topics/1309

In researching this topic, I used google scholar and the search terms "stress stimulants faculty -students" and published 2008 or later to arrive at meaningful search results.

The most likely reason there is more work published on student use is that students as a demographic group are both easier to study and are a more similar group of cohorts than faculty as a demographic group, which are more diverse in age, race, ethnicity, etc.


Should an undergraduate summer research project be put under "employment history"? I am currently filling out an application for gradute study, which includes a section on employment history.

During my time as an undergraduate, I carried out two summer research projects in pure maths. One of them was based at my home institution, for which I obtained a monthly stipend from an outside organisation (a research bursary). For the second project, I was on the payroll of the university at which the project was based.

The application asks for details of "work experience, internships or volunteer work". Do either of these count?

Yes they count.

  "work experience, internships or volunteer work"

is clearly more broad then just regular employment. Just make clear what type of position each role was. If there is some other section that allows you to report other types of research experience you could be free to classify these either way, it wouldn't affect much. The people reading your application just what to know what you've done.


PI published my work after I graduated without informing me (and with a different first author) When leaving with my PhD I left a sizable amount of unpublished work, most of which was 95% or better complete.  After several attempts over the past 2 years to find out his plans for publishing I all but gave up.  Then tonight a google notification told me they were adding a pub on google scholar.  It was my work (that I had written a manuscript in 2012) with someone else as a first author.  I'm on the paper but was never informed or reviewed a manuscript.  Im concerned because I still have presumably 3 more papers pending that could turn out the same way.

I would like to see 3 things happen.

Reordering of authorship or at least an unbiased remediation/explanation of the current.
Access to the submission process (including establishing agreed upon authorship requirements) or at least advanced notice should some other work be published in the future.
I would love (but most likely won’t get) acknowledgment/censure by the institution, as this is not the first time the PI has acted dishonestly in this regard, and likely not the last.

I am looking for advice on who to contact, and how to approach the situation such that my claim is heard.

To clarify a few points: In my field it is customary for the author who contributed most both experimentally and conceptually to be listed first, followed by other contributing authors in roughly descending order of involvement.  Lastly the PI  (the Principle Investigator who oversees the work, funds the lab, the major professor involved, ect) is listed.

This order is largely taken into account when assessing a researchers body of work, as it is not common for papers in the field to have a breakdown of contributions by author in the text like in some other related fields.

Also common in the field is the ownership of the scholarship by the institution.  This work was written up and published in my thesis.  Additionally I prepared and formatted, and made available to the PI a manuscript for journal publication. Unfortunately, I cannot publish without the PI's approval, and I thought he was unable to publish without my approval.

It is a difficult situation, and the course of action may depend on many things we do not know (e.g. the influence of the PI, your current situation and dependency from him – do you need letters of recommendation, or did you leave academia –, how much factual evidence you can provide for your part on the works, etc.).

Here are various approaches which seem possible, but any of them may be impractical or dangerous depending on the unknowns mentioned above.

Contact the PI to sort the situation out; it is better not to corner her, but to let her an honorable way out or probably nothing good will happen.
Contact the university or department to notify the misconduct. It might be better to only do that after contacting the PI, but it really depend on the history.
Contact an ethic committee if one exists in your field (e.g. an ethic committee for publications, including misattribution of authorship, has been set for maths by the EMS).
Contact the editor-in-chief of the journal the paper is published in, and notify her that you should be first author (providing evidence) and that you were not asked for permission to publish the work.

Be aware that any of the above move may turn out to be explosive; it is difficult to say more given the limited amount of information. So let me end with probably the most important advice:

Seek guidance by a senior researcher you know and can trust with your case. You will be able to discuss the specifics of your situation, and someone ready to back you up is of utmost importance in this kind of situation.


Examples of research resources for which Wikipedia is known as being amongst top referrers? Wikimedia sites – and Wikipedias in particular – direct a lot of traffic to many web resources, including research-related ones.

Click stream data is not recorded on the Wikimedia end, so the alternative approach to finding out how important Wikimedia sites are in terms of traffic to research resources is analyzing the latter's referral logs.

One such analysis that was made public is from CrossRef. I am looking for other cases where such analyses have been made public.

Interesting questions to ask about such datasets:

Is wikipedia.org or one of its sister or subdomains (e.g. wikimedia.org or en.wikipedia.org) amongst the top referrers?
Is that pattern stable?
Since when has this been the case?
What are/might be the main drivers of that traffic (in the case of CrossRef, it's Wikipedia readers clicking on references cited by their respective DOIs)?

This doesn't directly answer your question, but in 2012, the Biodiversity Heritage Library's then-technical director published a presentation reporting on how users from Wikipedia stayed longer and browsed deeper than others, which included some analytics information. You could drop the the BHL an e-mail and see if they'd be interested in sharing any more recent details.


Why would a European-style professor want a Ph.D student instead of a research staff? What are the advantages and disadvantages? Related to my questions:

How much knowledge is expected of a PhD applicant as compared to a postdoc or a research assistant?
For the average pure math US PhD program, what are essential topics after basics topics of complex analysis, abstract algebra and topology?

The question from quora Why would a professor want a Ph.D student instead of a research staff? What are the advantages and disadvantages? is answered mostly by US or US-style professors. I would like to know the European or European-style take on this.

My ultimate goal is to understand Country A (see here or here) which seems European-style. You can go on about how academia varies and how I won't gain much understanding, but please answer the question also.

Well, I'm a German professor in CS - my answer is biased by those facts. Some might be generalized, though. Some answers are based on German employment rules in the public sector and those will most likely be specific to Germany.

Usually, contracts in the public sector are either permanent (horray!) or temporary positions. We have a law stating (simplified version) that you are not allowed to be employed more then 12 years in temporary contracts (if you want to know more look for the "Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz" - we love those words!)

An other rule is, that for "permanent tasks" you should have a permanent position whilst for temporary / project style jobs you can hire people in temporary positions.

To make things even more complicated: A university / department usually has both types of positions and can distribute them among researchers and central administration.

If the university does not have enough positions availabe, you have to acquire thrid party fuinding. This is by definition project related and therefore temporary.

This brings me to the following:

In general, I would love to have research staff - but ressources are limited and usually you are not having too many available.
If I acquire third party funding, it is just available during the project duration - in good cases this is long enough for a PhD candidate to finish a PhD thesis (in the field of the project).
If the projects ends without the PhD candidate beeing finished, I usually try to apply for a follow-up project which helps funding the candidate. Since I want successfull PhDs afterwars, this is a top priority - and induces some stress on professors.
Yes, I could hire someone without intention to do a PhD or even a postdoc, but at least in CS industry is paying that much better, that the possible PhD is the only chance to motivate highly skilled people for this salary (which is ok, but less than in industry).
This brings me to the last point: Motivation! A PhD candidate is not only interested in the project but in his/her PhD as well. So they are usually quite motivated and it is more fun to work with motivated people.

Things are a bit different if you are in a graduate program, but most of what I wrote above still applies.

To add a few words on the comment of Monika:

At least in Germany you cannot fire a PhD student at any time since you are usually having a labour contract.
I agree that there might be strong tensions when a permanent position becomes available and it is open who might get it. But permanent positions in research are quitre rare nowadays in Germany so it does not happen that often.

Added after OPs remark:

In fact the situation for postdocs is or less the same: Usually you don't have the funding to support a postdoc for a longer period of time. With this, it is questionable why a postdoc would like to work in such an environment. Doning a habilitation / postdoc-phase and preparing for a full professorship could be a very good motivation as well. The tasks for a postdoc are usully different from the ones for PhD candidates: As postdoc, you want to demonstrate that you are capable of running a group - which involves writing grants, guiding PhD candicates, involvement in teaching, etc. Depending on your field it allows you to do original independent research for the first time (e.g. in medicine in Germany). So if you are looking for such a person in your group, a postdoc is great, but usually most funding schemes are more hands on and so it is difficult to get funding for a postdoc, unless you are having very large funding schemes.


Dealing with poor management, lack of supervision, and the desire to move into a different field I am halfway through the 4th year of my PhD and I have grown to find that I dislike the direction of my dissertation and the project that I am working on. My supervisor is extremely absent as he is running another research group overseas (bigger budget there so he puts his time there). On our side, we have little to no post-docs, and those that are around are trying to use the students to publish more papers for themselves to get faculty positions.

I have found a distaste in my current project and research subject and hope to move to another one that I have found more interest in. I find it mentally taxing to work in this group, as there is no help from seniority and there is a complete lack of focus (for myself and for many other group members in my situation). I am thinking about leaving with an MSc and pursuing a PhD elsewhere, but I'm worried about two things:

1) Will the fact that I took 4 years and quit my PhD for a Masters look bad when applying to a different school? I think I have legitimate reasons but I'm not sure if that is enough.

2) I imagine my supervisor will not write me a good letter for wanting to leave to pursue other interests.

Unfortunately I think this is a bit of a dilemma as I don't think I can graduate in 1.5 years (members in our group typically take 6 - 7 years), so stretching it would be hard. The lack of supervision, direction, and interest all make it hard for me to want to stay, despite my deep interest in research.

It almost goes without saying but still: it's really hard for internet strangers to correctly judge exactly how difficult this situation is for you. I'm answering just based on what you wrote and it's entirely possible I am missing the mark here. In that case, feel free to disregard my answer.

I'd be a bit wary to apply to a different school for a PhD now. It will indeed look bad on your application, you will need to get letters of recommendation from other people than your current supervisor, and you will essentially lose all the time you put into your PhD until now.

Your supervisor's absence and lack of local leadership is really demotivating. And it is easy to lose interest in your own research in such circumstances. Then again, research can at times be very demotivating and future research employers will want to see a certain tenacity in you dealing with demotivation. Giving up three years of research to go somewhere else does not show that tenacity.

Are there other options to explore? Can you move overseas with your supervisor? Can you start collaborating with a local professor, or find local trustworthy people to help you regain direction and interest? Is there any way you can involve your current supervisor more in your project?


How do grad schools train grad students to be teaching assistants? I am an international student and doing Ph.D. in Physics at a US university.

My teaching assistant (TA) duty is to tutor undergrad students. I am supposed to solve whatever problems undergrads bringing to me. The problem is that I do not know which problems they are having to prepare in advance. Every undergrad from every lab, class in the physics department can bring whatever homework they have to me to ask. Also, I am an International Student and when I was an undergrad, I did not use the textbook undergrad here in US use and many problems are totally strange to me. Sometimes I cannot solve their homework problems. I felt very embarrassed and sorry since I wasted their time, sitting there for 15 -20 minutes to wait for me to solve it.

I am not a terribly bad student, I consistently perform about 80 percent for all the courses as well as standard exams like GRE Physics. But I feel like I am not smart enough to pursue a Ph.D. Sometimes I can come up with very good solutions for grad problems but I am not a fast thinker to solve some undergrad problems which might be solved in a very simple way.

Do grad schools train grad students to be teaching assistants? I think the Ph.D. students need to be prepared to do good TA jobs, isn't it? For example, if someone teaches labs, they should know the content of the lab for that day to come in preparation? How can I become a better TA given my described task?

How do grad schools train teaching assistants?
Some graduate programs offer specific workshops to teach the fundamentals of teaching. However, being a good TA usually comes down to 3 things:

Proper understanding of the material
Experience in teaching beforehand (I am a much better TA now compared to a few years ago)
Preparation (this is necessary even if you are experienced)

Nonetheless, the content of your actual question (and corresponding comments) is quite worrisome. It is absolutely not the responsibility of a TA to be prepared to answer any question from students of every lab, especially without previous preparation. I would dare to say this is not even the responsibility of the professor teaching the course. I have yet to meet a professor who doesn't feel the need for previous preparation when teaching a course for the tenth time, nevermind teaching new courses for the first time.


How to list this accomplishment on my vita? I just saw that one of my research articles was the most-read paper in one of the top journals in my field in February of this year.  What is the appropriate way, if any, to list this on a vita?  It's not an "Award", strictly speaking, so would it be best to just list it as a comment next to the paper?

Great work ! The way I do it is under the Publications section of my CV. The following citation is formatted in the ACM style. You can modify it for your own citation styles.

J1. Smith, J. 2013. "The best paper ever". ACM Transactions of Awesomeness, 1 (4). ACM Press, NY, USA. (most read article in March 2013)


Is it my responsibility to refute misinformation in social situations? Seldom does a day pass without a juicy piece of misinformation catching my eye. Generally these are the regular thoroughly debunked myths. Be it that vaccines cause autism, or humans cannot possibly influence the climate system since 'we're so small compared to the Sun'. Sure, I utter to myself after a four pi-radian eyeroll.
Is that all I should be doing?

Voices in my head

A second-year chemistry student hardly possesses sufficient experience in climatology or immunology.

But established basic scientific facts do not need a PhD to communicate. After all, science is not about arguments from authority. Rather it bases upon peer-reviewed research published in reputable journals. As far as I restrict myself to citable argumentation, I should be fine.

Good luck with that! This individual has already made up their mind. Any mention of a myth will have them in a defensive position, ready to turn on caps lock. Then you will only reinforce the erroneous beliefs you set out to disprove.

Fine, I shall not proceed.

(repeat)

Ultimately, these are my friends. Former training buddies, in some cases relatives, or even an occasional lecturer. Sitting idly has not worked once. If anything, one myth seems to build on the other. A guy who thought Coca-Cola Zero contained no calories now shares blogs which propose that smoking is beneficial. Not a true story (yet) but you get the idea.
Is it my responsibility as a student of science to embark on this quest? Or is the exercise in vain, at best up to representatives of the corresponding fields of study?
By the way, there is no evidence that the Earth is round... (Yes, a bad joke I left for last.)

I think you should say more, but definitely don't respond all the time, and definitely don't be too harsh all the time.

It's not black and white, and you have to judge every time if it's worth it, if it's your place to say something and if anybody benefits from you saying it.

Compare it too remarks about looks. You'd tell a friend he should wear another color, you'd tell a colleague that his sweater is inside out, you'd tell a stranger on the elevator that a label is sticking out, but internet remarks about how Britney looks nowadays are completely useless.


I want to change my thesis topic (to the extent that the ethos is still in tact) but my advisor does not agree. What can I do? I am doing a phd where my aim is to solve a problem A which is very interesting. My supervisor has got a lot of connections in a technology B and he claims to be an expert in B. I came to this group because of these accomplishments. But soon I realized that B is not really a great technology for A.

So in my phd proposal I proposed a method which encompasses B but is more general (say R). Now I realize that I do not want to use B at all because my preliminary results are not encouraging. In fact, I am inclined to use E as a base technique which does not have any impact on R.  But my supervisor, who is interested in only publishing in B  and frowns upon everything else (it was a nightmare to convince him to let me work on R) is dead against it. He says that he is an expert in B and his vision of the group is not inclined with me trying other things.

There are other professors in my university who have worked in E and could collaborate but my supervisor won't collaborate with people from outside his kingdom. I also know professors from outside my university who could help me if needed. I could knock the doors of school committee in order to  help me but that would create a lot of problems as my supervisor wields a lot of power and influence everywhere.

Another query is, is it ethical to collaborate with people outside the university (of course after letting my supervisor know) for my PhD work. My Masters supervisor would be happy to help me out.

Edit: After looking at comments, I am thinking that after all, it is MY PhD. Yes, I have spent 1.5 years, but 1.5 years is left. Why should I spend any moment of my life on something I find to be not exciting, particularly less exciting because it is forced on me. And in those 1.5 years I learnt to write well and also learnt 'A' which is important. Its not total waste. My supervisor has his agenda, and why should I give up mine to make him happy? His vision is fine, but he does not have the right to force his vision on me.

The problem that you are facing is that your supervisor is not necessarily wrong to say:

  He says that he is an expert in B and his vision of the group is not inclined with me trying other things.

As hard as this sounds, as the head of a research group one needs to make sure that the people in the group follow some sort of unifying theme or vision. Otherwise, it is basically impossible to build any sort of profile. I am personally not a big fan of visions that resolve around a specific tool rather than a problem set or topic, because this often leads to the kind of research that boils down to "we have a hammer, and use it to punch whatever problem we can think of", but unquestionably a lot of research groups work like that. It also makes sense on some level, because in many fields techniques are more difficult to master than learning new problems and application domains, so it makes sense to keep the thing constant that is hard to learn and vary the things that are easier to get into from scratch.

Realistically, if 'B' is actually useless for your project, and your supervisor is adamant that you need to be using 'B', you can either change what you are trying to accomplish (the 'A' in your terminology), or change supervisor. That being said, depending on what you mean with 'preliminary results', this seems far from obvious to me.

  Another query is, is it ethical to collaborate with people outside the university (of course after letting my supervisor know) for my PhD work. My Masters supervisor would be happy to help me out.

Ethical? Sure - but that does not mean that your supervisor needs to be happy about it or let you do it if (s)he perceives that your main work suffers from it. Look around on this site on the topic of side projects - this has been discussed a number of times here.


PhD without previous academic degree: truth or myth? Is it possible at all to do a PhD without a Master or a Bachelor's degree?

Every now and then I meet someone who claims he knows someone who knows someone who was able to do a PhD without previous degrees (maybe only with high-school).

Is that true, was it true in some specific cases?

My (former) thesis advisor, Barry Mazur, has only a PhD.  In fact, according to Stephen Krantz's Mathematical Apocrypha Redux, he does not have a high school diploma either, having left Bronx High School of Science after his junior year to attend MIT.

The story is that he had not completed an ROTC requirement at MIT but had already been accepted for graduate school at Princeton.  Princeton was not insistent that this requirement be completed, so Barry did not take it seriously.  (I have heard more colorful stories about this, but not from him, so I won't repeat them here.)

You might say that this is a technicality.  I would agree with that but still claim it to be an interesting (even slightly inspirational, in some weird way) case.  Moreover, Barry was 22 when he attained his PhD, so some actual schooling must have been skipped (or highly abridged).


How do I cite a source from a another source? Suppose I'm writing an article about topic X. During research I come across a related article in which the author has made statement Y and referenced publication Z. For one reason or another, I haven't read Z. Perhaps it is an expensive textbook or I'm just lazy. Can I in my article also make statement Y and reference Z, bypassing the middle author, or is that wrong?

Under some circumstances, citing a source inside another source is acceptable. For example, perhaps the original source is not in a language you can read or not readily available. This page describes the APA method for citing using this style. Here is an example that demonstrates how to do this.

For example, if Allport's work is cited in Nicholson and you did not read Allport's work, list the Nicholson reference in the reference list. In the text, use the following citation:
Allport's diary (as cited in Nicholson, 2003).

I would add the caveat one should always try to view the original document whenever possible. I knew a professor in grad school who was added to a manuscript late in the publication process and his name did not appear in the yearly abstract book, but was only included as an author on the original article. He could tell who did not read his article, but only read the abstract book or cited other people because he was not listed as a coauthor in the work cited. For perspective, I was told this story in 2007 and the article was likely published in the 1980s.
This example was possible because prior to online journals and widespread use of search engines, annual abstract and indexes were published (for this professor's field, the practice continued until the mid-to-late 1990s). As noted in a comment, this would be more difficult with the advent of Google Scholar and other online search tools and their corresponding reference manager tools.


How long are typical letters of recommendation for grad school admission? Is it bad if a letter of recommendation for graduate school is over 1 page, like 1.5 pages?

An LOR is typically one to two pages.  If it was five pages, that would be odd.


Why do some editors/journals withhold response letters from reviewers? I recently reviewed a paper for which I recommended rejection. I wrote a comprehensive review with a list of items that needed fixing to motivate my decision. I spent some time (between a day and a day and a half, perhaps) carefully reading the manuscript, writing and motivation my review.

Today I was curious to see what happened to the paper but since the journal uses Manuscriptcentral, the information regarding what decision was taken does not appear on the online system. I googled the title and found out that the paper has indeed been accepted by the journal. Having a quick look, it is obvious from its present form that the authors did receive my review and made changes accordingly.

I would have expected to receive a response letter to my review, especially within the context of my negative recommendation. However, this did not happen. On the one hand, I understand (and fully respect) that it's up to the editor whether to follow a reviewer's recommendations or even fully discard their review. On the other hand, given that I spent some of my time producing the review, it would have been nice to at least be able to see the response of the authors (even if not requested to produce a second review). Precisely because the paper was eventually accepted, I would have liked to read the author's criticism/rebuttal of my own criticisms - I might have been wrong after all.

What is the reason behind some journals keeping reviewers "in the dark" regarding what happens to the paper? Would it be appropriate to ask the editor to have a look at the author's response letter?

You learnt that the  authors' response was essentially "we accept the reviewers comments and have revised the manuscript accordingly."  If such revisions were clear to the editor there's no need for further review or communication.

Don't forget that while you may turn reviews round quickly (or you may not), there are plenty of reviewers who even for a second review  have a high chance of sitting on the paper for an unreasonably long time.  This (on top of workload) is a further incentive for the editor to minimise unnecessary links in the chain.


How can I use my mathematical background when applying to physics PhD program? I am a senior undergraduate and I am in the process of applying to physics graduate programs in the US.
Through my course of study, I've been excited about the interplay between physics and mathematics and studied mathematics up to graduate-level algebra, geometry, topology, functional analysis, etc. while pursuing a double major in mathematics.
I recently finished my first draft of SOP (Statement of Purpose). I stated that my experience in mathematics helped me grasp modern physics' mathematical formalism.
When I asked my colleagues to review my SOP, most of them said my mathematical background is "irrelevant and unimpressive," and they advised me to elaborate on my physics research experience.
I do have some research experience in physics, but it is rather weak. All I can say is that I attended the undergraduate research programs in both the physics and mathematics departments, and I wrote my theses there.
Admittedly, I didn't specialize in a specific research area in physics while pouring a lot of effort into completing a double major and exploring various subjects. Will this critically reduce my opportunities for being accepted to physics graduate school? What can I do to look appealing to admissions committees without exaggerating my experience?

I actually think the problem isn't that your math classes are off-topic. I know lots of Physics PhDs who double majored or minored in math.
The problem is that you're focusing an awful lot on your coursework in your SOP. Your classes really shouldn't be the focus: anyone reviewing your application gets that information from skimming your transcript. Most professors in physics departments are familiar with the classes you took by their titles and already know how they would relate to physics research, so making it a centerpiece of your SOP is a waste of space. You can give the double major at most one paragraph to tie it into your goals.
You should talk about your research more. It doesn't necessarily have to be impressive, but your ability to function as a researcher is more important to your promise as a PhD student than how many upper div math classes you took.
A double major will not totally make up for a lack of research experience in a grad school application. Succeeding in classes is a different skill set than succeeding in research.


How to handle sexist questions toward a faculty job candidate by other undergraduates? I am an undergraduate in the U.S., and my university is currently interviewing for an open faculty position. The department arranges lunches with the job candidates and current undergraduate students, where we can ask the candidate questions and get to know them. Students fill out an evaluation of the candidate following the lunch (which is in theory taken into consideration for the hiring decision). However, the atmosphere of this meeting itself is quite informal and conversational.

Two of the candidates are currently expecting a baby. The male candidate said on their own that he was expecting a baby. One fellow undergraduate specifically asked the female candidate (in front of 20 other undergrads) if she would be able to balance a new baby and the job at the same time. However, she did not bring this up with the male candidate, who is also expecting a baby. We met with the male candidate first.

As a fellow undergraduate, how could I respectfully address this?

There are two issues at play here depending on if you are formally part of the hiring process.

If you are formally part of the hiring processing asking questions about the family life of a job candidate, man or woman, is treading on thin ice. Even if the information is not meant to be discriminatory (e.g., as a search chair you might want to be helpful and look into spaces in the university nursery), it is just a topic you do not bring up. As a formal part of the search committee, it is reasonable to mention to the person who asked the question that family life is a topic to avoid. You may also want to mention it to the search chair so they can be prepared for any claims of discrimination.

If you are not formally part of the hiring process (e.g., potential faculty tend to like to meet students), the issue is difficult. It is perfectly reasonable, and non-sexist, for a female student to ask a female applicant about work life balance. It is a topic that a female student might have questions and concerns about for themselves going forward. Of course it could be a sexist remark to intentionally sabotage the candidate. Note that any combination of student and applicant sex could be non sexist (a male student may want to understand how their potential wife might would handle the work-life balance and a female student might want to know about how a husband would handle it). Given that, I would not raise it with the student that the question was sexist. Rather, I would point out that while the point of meeting with the candidates is to give undergraduate students exposure, that the students should be welcoming to the applicants and try and put their best foot forward. Asking about touchy subjects is not in the best interest of the department.


Mothers listing children's dates of birth on academic CV? I've heard anecdotally that some mothers will list the dates of birth of their children on their CV, but I've never seen it done myself. The intended effect seems to provide a kind of excuse for lower output around those dates, I suppose. Is this common? Am I totally misinterpreting the motive?

This is common in Europe. Parents are not supposed to (and to some extent not allowed to) work during maternity or paternity leave. Thus, such periods are deducted from your phd-age, tenure clock etc.

Quoting from the ERC Starting Grant 2017 call:

  For maternity, the effective elapsed time since the award of the first PhD will be considered
  reduced by 18 months or if longer by the documented amount of leave actually taken for
  each child born before or after the PhD award. For paternity, the effective elapsed time since
  the award of the first PhD will be considered reduced by the documented amount of
  paternity leave actually taken for each child born before or after the PhD award.

And from one of the largest commercial foundations supporting basic research in Denmark, which explicitly states that the CV should contain this information:

  In the case of maternity leave, the number of months on leave, times two, will be deducted from the seniority.
  The specific dates for the period of maternity leave must be clearly stated in the CV/resume.


I have slightly over 3 weeks left before my master's thesis submission and I have done nothing. What can I do now? I am in a very sticky situation here. I was forced into a field I had very little interest in (for lack of other options) and I have been slacking off a lot. Whatever little enthusiasm I had for getting things done got waned because the professor assigned me to one of his senior research scholars whom I did not get along with. To top that, I have a major supervisor phobia. I didn't read papers I was assigned, to learn the techniques I needed for my thesis. And I never reported to my supervisor. I rushed into choosing a topic for my thesis which on surface appeared manageable, and my supervisor believed I had my things sorted. However, that is far from the case. I didn't set a limit to how deep I should delve into it, and I wasted a lot of time learning things that haven't gotten me anywhere. Now I'm left with a hazy problem definition, I do not understand the necessary techniques well, I have barely started writing my thesis, and I have no results. What are my options now? I am too afraid to talk it out with my supervisor because the result of that wouldn't be good and would further contribute to worsening my grade.

Moreover, I am beginning to question if I am really cut out for research at all. I do want to pursue a PhD but in a field I have a penchant for, and not what I'm stuck with right now. I am also worried that if things go further downhill, my supervisor wouldn't be writing out recommendation letters for me, thus making it impossible for me to get into any labs. Will I have to repeat the masters course because of this?

The first thing to do is to bring your situation to your supervisor's attention. It is going to be a difficult conversation, because you should have warned much, much sooner. The later you delay this, the worse it is going to be. If there is any chance to salvage your degree, it depends on getting your supervisor's help and advice as soon as possible. If there is any chance of getting a recommendation from your supervisor, it depends on how you handle recovery from your current problem. Continuing to hide it is totally counter-productive.

Your supervisor should be able to help with deciding whether the three week deadline is achievable, given the requirements for a thesis in your department. If it is not achievable, maybe there is an option to delay the thesis for a few  months, giving you time to do the work properly. My own master's degree thesis was delayed for several months because of an unusually heavy workload and travel for my day job.

Regardless of whether you go into research or industry, there are going to be times when you are required to work on something you do not find particularly interesting. You are going to have to work professionally with colleagues you would not choose as friends. It is going to be very, very important to keep your bosses informed of the state of your work, especially when it is going slower than expected, and you are in danger of missing a deadline. I suggest looking at recovering your master's degree thesis as an opportunity to work on those critical meta-skills.


Conversion of GPA from scale of 10 to 4 (India) I am an undergraduate student from India, interested in applying for Ph.D. programs in Astronomy in US institutes. My institute evaluates the CGPA from a scale of 10.
Since the cutoff for Astronomy is 3.0 on a scale of 4 for most US Institutes, my question is what would be the minimum on a scale of 10 in India, assuming I dont go by the conversion (3/4)*10=7.5

Just provide the official evidence of your results, and perhaps the topics covered in the subjects (such as the syllabi).
Then the university will make their own evaluations based on their knowledge of their own courses and experience.


Ratio of applicants to jobs for engineering professor or assistant professor Where can I find statistics for jobs to applicant ratios for engineering professorships or assistant professorships?

The reason I'm asking this is I'm thinking this might be the best metric to determine whether become a professor in an engineering field is "easier" (greater probability of being hired) than a humanities related field.

If the ratio I requested isn't a useful statistic, I am also open to other metrics.

At my institution I would say the ration is about 1:6. But this is a really bad metric for 'hardness of getting hired'. For example in the humanities typically applicants' hair is already greying, while engineering applicants almost still have their milk teeth. That is a much stronger indication that humanities jobs are much harder to get than engineering academic jobs.


Is the professor positive toward me? As an international graduate applicant, I'd contacted professor that I am interested to work in his research. He replied that I should apply to school first and if I get admission, then contact him? Is he aware that I want to join as an graduate assistant? What does he really mean?

In the US and some other places, graduate (and other) admissions is handled by the university itself in coordination with an academic department. They are not under control of individual professors. Therefore, in such places, you need to deal first with the admissions system, and than with a professor.

Depending on how you phrased your letter he may just be informing you of the rules.

You could, of course, send a letter to professors expressing your interest, telling them that you are applying through normal channels and asking if they are considering taking on students for advising. Such a letter should show some knowledge of the research interests of the professor and your own matching background.

For your specific question, I think the professor is being as positive as he can be. Don't take it as a negative.

Also, depending on the field, the professor may not be responsible for choosing graduate assistants. Again, it may be a university or department decision. In some other fields, the professor, if grant funded, can staff his/her own labs. In mathematics, for example, while you have a specific advisor, you may 'work for' the department, not that professor.


Completely stuck with nonsensical project I am a graduate student in Mathematics. I have solved my original thesis problem, and that will probably one or two papers, at least one of them very good. After that, my advisor basically told me: "Here is this paper that I wrote (together with two other very strong professors), there are some cases missing, I would like you to do them". Problem is, none of them has an idea on how to solve these cases (otherwise they would have written them in their paper, of course), so here I am, stuck on this problem for months, with basically no advance whatsoever (at the beginning at least I was learning a lot of stuff, now I know everything that's relevant that's been written up to know - I spent a lot of time looking at the literature). How can a PhD student (decently good, but certainly not a star) be expected to improve upon the work of some professors, if there nobody has a precise idea on how to do so? I think this is overambitious and nonsensical, to say the least (especially after spending 3-4 months on it).

It is one of those problems where once you have found the key idea, the problem is completely done (exactly the opposite of what I like working on).

I would like to work on other lower risk projects, but my advisor made it pretty clear that he wants me to spend time on this, so I would be completely on my own. I don't think I can come up with something new just on my own, but I think that spending other months trying to outdo professors is not going to work either! What should I do?

I think you should stick with it.

As far as my understanding goes, publishing 1-2 papers as a mathematics PhD student is (more than) enough to get your degree. It may not rank you as a star but it's a solid proof of competence. Working on other lower risk projects may not improve your thesis significantly. Successfully completing a high risk project, however, will be a boon to your PhD.

Furthermore, this project yanks you out of your comfort zone where you can gradually work towards a solution. Instead, you now have to find one key idea and you're basically done. Again, you've already shown you're a good mathematician inside your comfort zone, so showing that you can solve those kind of problems should not be your main priority.

I think your advisor has a high opinion of you and wants to give you an opportunity to prove exactly how much you're capable of. That's a nice vote of confidence. If you actually do want to stick with it, it's probably a good idea to find ways to enjoy the project. Possible ideas: talk to other people about the project, especially to your advisor and the other two professors. Sometimes spend as much time as possible trying to find a solution even if you feel it may not work. And sometimes work on unrelated fields or do other stuff (such as teaching) that is both inspiring and relaxing.


How should an educational institute woo good faculty? What steps must an educational institution wanting to recruit good faculty take? There is a cycle in the academia:

Good doctorates from top universities invariably join other top universities as faculty members.
Good students aspire to study in top universities under excellent faculty members.

Suppose a new educational institution or department springs up and desires to set up a top-quality group, how does it break into this cycle? I suppose this could take some years, but is money-power the only thing that could be wielded by the institute to achieve its end?

Money

First, there's very little way - I think - for a university to improve its standing across the board. Institutional reputation on the level of say, an Ivy League school, where everyone assumes each department must be excellent because they're at Ivy is a tall order, and one that I suspect is impossible.

But in a particular field (or a particular School)? Money. And the willingness to take risks. A few ways to help:

Find a few key faculty members. Established researchers with very solid reputations, and see if you can poach them. This might not just be a question of "how big of a check do we need to write"? There are other factors. A considerable bump in prestige. Quality of living perks. The chance to shape a promising new department in ways that you rarely get in established departments - a chance to be the formative voice in something.
Be looking for promising potential new hires. Maybe they're coming out of the universities you hired these key faculty members from. Maybe they're coming from top schools generally. A generous start-up package, extra lab space and internal funding, a generous tenure process - these are things that might lure top candidates away from a harder path at a more prestigious institution. It represents a risk for both parties - you might get a dud researcher with a good degree, and they might get a department languishing in obscurity. But if it works, it works very well for both.
Buy something big. Are there no Expensive Piece of Equipment equipped centers in the region? Become the people who have one.


How can I stop a "citation cartel" still active? How can I fight against a "citation cartel" (still active)?
They are manipulating citations (mostly through "coercive citation") from at least two journals. Two journal are used as "platforms" and two journals are receiving biased citations.

Clearly, they are trying to boost one journal and also boost "selected" papers from researchers close to the editors of one the journals.
Awful!

Are there uninvolved editors you can report it to? Do you have enough evidence to contact Retraction Watch, which might take an interest? If the journal(s) in question belong to a scholarly society, perhaps a report to the board would suffice?

The ten-ton anvil would be contacting Thomson Reuters to ask for an investigation -- they'll boot journals they catch manipulating Journal Impact Factor out of the Impact Factor rankings altogether -- but I am not entirely sure how to accomplish this feat.


How to approach admissions when applying for a Master's without Bachelor's degree? I have a decade of experience as a network engineer. At this point I'm consulting large ISP in a network design role.

I am thinking about applying for a Master's in computer networking without a Bachelor's degree.

Any recommendations on how to approach admission?

Within the UK all degrees will have entry requirements for a course, and I expect this is the same throughout Europe although I suggest you check for yourself. As I dont know the exact situation for the entry, ie university or country, I will answer in general terms.

Typical entry requrements are based on a progressive points system, where your previous qualification accrues you a certain number of points and these points can be used as validation of your suitability to be on the higher level course. Within the UK, we use UCAS Tarrif Points to acheive progress through the undergraduate (UG) phase and the UG degree award for suitability of Postgraduate progression. Note: Some UK Universities also offer access through the UCAS Postgraduate scheme, although this is not widely used by all institutions.

In non-typical situations as yours where you do not have the preceding qualification level, so therefore, do not have the correct number of points or potentially the preceding degree award, you can demonstrate your suitability by evidencing that you have professinally worked at a very high level. Then usually, the university will conduct their own assessment of the qualifications you do have, the level of your subject knowledge, the relevance of your work experience and your academic potential. It might also be that you have to submit a pre-entry assessment of some sort, so a demonstration that you can perform to the epected academic level. This non-typical route is more common in situations where the applicant is considered a "Mature Student" ie has had time in the workplace and is returning to education.

So, to answer your question directly, I would contact the admissions office of the relevant universities you are interested in and be clear that you would have to take a non-typical admission route, and enquire directly as to what their requirements would be in this regard. It might help to have examples of your work already in mind, case studies perhaps, that you can discuss with admissions, but bear in mind they will be non-specialists and will have to refer your query on to the course managers or similar.

HTH.


What skills can I get during a PhD to be competitive on the job market against non-PhD holders? Earning a PhD help you learn tools and techniques in your field, and lets you become an expert in a very specific field of science. However, once you get your degree and try to enter the labor market, you're competing against people who are younger than you (i.e. recently graduated non-phd engineers) and may have actual work experience (i.e. non-phd engineers with a few years in the market).

There are, of course, some positions in which they cannot compete, including research and teaching position. Those are the minority, though... in most other fields it seems that holding a PhD is not as important as (for example) work experience.

So, I would like to know:

Is work experience more important than having a PhD in the many work environments?
What skills can I acquire/demonstrate during my PhD to become more "valuable" than a non-PhD candidate for the same job?

This question is too broad, but I have a feeling it's a commonly asked one, so I'm going to try to answer it anyways.

To address (what used to be) your second question first: holding a PhD does not make a job candidate any more desirable for the vast majority of positions. Indeed, it can be a factor against the candidate, as they will be perceived as more expensive. For positions where a less-qualified candidate could also fill the role, being overqualified is rarely a good thing. Jobs that are specifically looking for a PhD will typically state that in the requirements. For example, "Masters required, PhD preferred" is a common one in certain parts of the banking sector. However, for entry-level positions (data entry, lower-level analyst roles, etc), you may be at a disadvantage.

Regarding your first question, though, you're being overly harsh on yourself. The process of earning a PhD is significant work experience; indeed, that's your main selling point when looking for your first job. Depending on what you did, you will have some or all of the following experience:

Identifying, clearly stating, and figuring out how to address a problem - this alone qualifies you to be a consultant at any large firm; this is all they do, all the time, for different clients
Project management
Advanced technical writing - your thesis, academic publications
Communication skills - working through the peer-review process
Public speaking - presenting at conferences
Experimental design - your research project
The art of researching - the simple knowledge of how to properly find articles, sources, etc
...

Even better, you've been doing all that for four years. You should be selling every single one of those points as hard as you can when you move to industry.

EDIT: The above answer stands for the edited second question as well; as a graduate student, you will want to learn all of the above if you wish to enter the workforce. More specifically, though, almost industry positions seeking PhD candidates will apply to value the following three above most else:

Self-starter - shown in that you got your work done
Collaborative - demonstrated through successful collaborations with other researchers (successful = researched together, published together)
Good communication - demonstrated through publications, public speaking, conference presentations, teaching, etc.

During the PhD, aim to do those things, and during your job search, emphasize all those traits in your resume and during interviews.


Is it acceptable for paid online course to use quizzes and materials from elsewhere on the internet? This question is specifically about a high school course, but it should be applicable to any online course in general.

I was taking a physics course online to skip it in school, those courses are really expensive, so I took the cheapest one that my school was allowing me to take, and it was understandably low quality. This much was ok and expected.

What wasn't ok however, was that all the questions on the quizzes and exams were stolen from the internet. Every single question was taken from some school's "Ch 3 Review Sheet" or "2008 XYZ High School Physics Final Exam" etc. that was made public online.

My parents paid $500 for this course and the people didn't actually write anything themselves, and I'm pretty angry.

So my question is twofold:

Is it ok for a course to do this?
If not, is there any official organization I can complain to.

Is it ok for a course to do this?

It is common for instructors to use teaching materials from outside sources. There is generally no expectation of originality when it comes to teaching materials, including lecture slides, assignments and exam questions (which may be provided by the publisher, especially at the high school and undergrad level). See this answer for details.

This is similar to the way we don't consider politicians to have plagiarised when they give a speech that was written by a speechwriter - in that scenario, too, there is no expectation that the material was written by the politician who delivers it. (In that situation, we only seem to mind if the speechwriter lifts parts of the speech from another source...) But if a student submits a homework assignment that was written for him by someone else, or an advisor puts chunks of her student's thesis in a paper without proper attribution, we would consider that plagiarism, because there is an expectation of originality.

You wrote

  I'm not getting taught off a textbook here that comes with a set of slides and test questions, I'm supposed to be paying them to write their own material.

I'm not sure why you think so. You're not paying anyone to develop course materials. It is common for instructors to use prepared material, including slides, test bank questions, etc. that might come with the textbook. It's also common for instructors to share material between themselves.

What you are paying for is for them to deliver an effective educational experience to you. If they have been educating you effectively, it shouldn't matter whether the materials are original, or whether they came from a test bank or other outside source. If they haven't been educating you effectively, you can complain on those grounds - not because you expect them to develop original materials.

  If not, is there any official organization I can complain to.

If you believe you have been treated to a sub-par educational experience, you can complain to whomever is responsible for the course.


Is it possible/acceptable to publish the same article in 2 journals, if one is un-categorized? So as the title says I got the opportunity to publish my article right around the time my article has already been accepted by other student journal.
My question now is - is it acceptable to publish an article in both journals, with informing the editorial board first, if in the case of student journal I'm not getting any academic points for it?
I know that self-plagiarism is seen as publishing your paper multiple times in categorized journals to cheat the system for academic progression, but what is the general stand on an issue like in this case?

It will most likely depend on the status of the "student journal". We had a "student journal" which was, officially, an archive of master theses in our program. As such, it is comparable to an archive of proceedings of a conference and does not prohibit submission to internationally recognized journals (or elsewhere) [in our field, "conference papers" do not exist - there are posters, but work presented on posters is usually later published in a journal paper without any issues].
Many of the papers published in this student journal ended up in high-ranked international journals without problems.


How to ask for a shift in graduate assistantship from research to teaching? I am a graduate student in NYC and would like to learn how to ask my advisor and my professor to shift from research assistantship to teaching.
I have been working on a research project for one semester which I am not interested in anymore. I am more interested in the teaching experience and need to explain it clearly.
Since my research colleagues are graduating nowadays, my professor distributes all the tasks on me out of the schedule. I need a certain schedule because of my parenting situation.
Could you help me to figure out how to explain it to the advisor and to my professor too?
Thank you and happy new year to all!

Let me suggest a few things. First, having some teaching experience is useful for most beginning academics. So a TA has value in itself. It shouldn't be hard to "sell" that. However, the professor now funning you has no input into who is a TA. That is normally a department decision. You apply there for a position, not to a particular professor. You may have little control over your schedule as a TA, but it will be fixed, at least, so perhaps you can work around that.

Next, your relationship with the professors needs to be managed separately. They are probably depending on you for important work. If you just quit the project they might be unhappy enough to negatively affect your future, at least in the short term. But having family responsibilities is a reasonable enough reason for changing things around. But you should, I think, negotiate an exit, leaving the project in a good state. You want their attitude to be "Sorry to see you go, but we understand."

I would talk to whoever in the department is responsible for TAs first, so that you know whether a position would be open to you. In some fields (math) there is usually a need for lots of TAs. But you would probably be assisting in lower level courses, which might be a bit boring. That might be good, or not, depending on your other responsibilities.

And these are the kinds of discussions/negotiations that need to be done face-to-face, not by email.


How can I find somebody to chat about papers? I’m a computer-science PhD student. I want to find people to chat about papers (by others) online. How can I go about this?

I was looking into the chat of this website. I was also looking at some IRC channels.

Ask your supervisor and other people at your institute if something like this already exists, maybe you can join an existing group.

If it doesn't exist yet, maybe you can get their endorsement and assistance to set one up. It could help if they spread the word a bit even if they don't have time to join themselves.

Another avenue to explore is Meetup, trying out a variety of keywords in your field. Although that might end up being a bit more industry. Which doesn't have to be bad, if you had thoughts about going into industry after your PhD.


Is it okay to apply to more than one professors for internship at the same time? I am a math undergraduate in my second year. I was thinking of applying to internship but I am confused about this.
1. Is it okay to apply to more than one professors at the same time? If so if I get selected in more than one and I consider only one will that affect my reputation with professor badly? If so how can I avoid it?
2. Will it be okay if I try to apply in two fields of the same
 subjects?
I am kind of inexperienced in this; so any help would be appreciated. :)

User Karl has good advice, I will only add that if you ask two professors for positions, make sure that you at least hint that there are other possibilities under consideration.  If you indicate that you would take an internship with a professor while you are looking for another, it might cause hard feelings later.

But if you present it as "I'm looking around for opportunities for an internship and wonder ..." then it doesn't immediately sound exclusive. If you get more than one offer you then have a comfortable way to go back to the ones you aren't taking with an update. "Thanks for the opportunity, but ..."

Keep your lines of communication open as much as possible.