Is there a reliable way to measure how difficult it is to be admitted to a PhD program? If I wanted to check how competitive it is to get into a school's PhD (or MS/PhD track) program, what should I look at? For undergraduate, I usually search for the incoming SAT/ACT scores and the acceptance rate, and I found that pretty reliable. Is there something like that for grad schools?

I am not aware of any absolute measure for this. However, you can have a general idea by:

Some schools provide last year(s) statistics about their programs
(usually in the prospective student section). For example, program A
has attracted X number of applications and Y applications were
accepted.
Also, some programs have a fix limit (i.e. due to number of equipments available)  for number of applications to be accepted.
Sometimes online admission results like the one in Grad Cafe
give you a sense on how strict the school is.


Difference of professor salaries between different department in the United States Is there any research/study/survey/... that looked at the difference of professor salaries between different department in the United States?

Here's one that's readily accessible, though the full data isn't public (but can be obtained).   Here's another one in a much more concise format, though a bit older.

At least for public universities, it's not too hard to do such a survey since our salaries are public record.  I haven't actually checked but I would imagine that the groups that have done these surveys keep them updated every so many years so you can use the ones I linked to to find more.


What's the benefit of delaying a tenure-track position for doing a postdoc (when you already have a tenure-track offer)? I've seen candidates for tenure-track positions in computer science that managed to negotiate a starting date that is a year later than originally planned. During that additional year, they all seem to be doing a PostDoc in various places.

I'm wondering what the benefit of this is. Many departments provide you with a lighter teaching load during your first year, so it seems to me that the overhead with moving to a new place (for just a year), working on a postdoc salary, and then, before the 12 months are up, moving again, doesn't strike me as an efficient way to develop one's career.

Is there some big advantage of doing such a postdoc rather than immediately starting your tenure-track position that I'm missing?

Once you have a t-t position, you're in a race against time to get as many publications as you can before your tenure clock runs out.

A postdoc effectively gives you one more year of focused attention to research and publications before you have to start teaching.

Note that teaching can be highly disruptive to research and publications, especially in your first year.


Can one excel in graduate school with a demanding family life? The essential gist of my question relates to what the real, unvarnished realities are of graduate, post-graduate, research, fellowship, and professorship attainment - when you aren't a single person with no pressing demands other than feeding yourself.

[EDIT: I am humbled by the incredibly helpful and thoughtful responses so far, all of which are +1 from me. I'll leave the question open a few more days before clicking 'accept' on any one, but you all have my gratitude and I hope others will benefit anywhere near as much as I have. ]

What I don't know is what succeeding in this path truly requires in time committment and family support.

Right now I can handle a 12-14 credit course schedule with 3.7-4.0 GPA (in the top 5-10% for college and program, dean's list, etc), work part-time, and still have time to be home and not have a burn-out/breakdown - and the academics are the easy part by far! I could do more, but I need to work more too.

What I really need to know is how sharply different is the time/dedication curve of graduate work and above. I realize each step is a filter that removes most of the entrants (most people don't get a degree, most who do don't attend/finish graduate school, most who do don't seek a PhD,  most who do don't seek/gain professorship...and on and on). But I don't know how severe the stepping is - I'm not talking "tenured professor at MIT or bust" - I realize that bar is many orders of magnitude higher.

Background Details: As an "adult, returning" undergraduate student with a (disabled) wife and kids, I'm halfway through a bachelor degree now. I've located a field of study (in a focus of Industrial Engineering) that has made me very interested in altering my life path to include seeking a Masters and maybe even a PhD/professorship (my father was a professor, so its not a purely novel concept to me). I've met and spoken with my advisor and 2 other professors with experience in related fields, and all is encouraging; I have a graduate school in mind, I've received lots of great advice on preparing for school (on this forum and in person), I test well (no GRE fears remain), good grades/class rank, good prospects for future strong referal letters, etc - a comparitively charmed existence for which I am very grateful! I just have to investigate whether I can make it through with an intact, cared for family!

Any guidance you could provide me, and other aspiring "non-traditional" students alike, would be appreciated immensely - thank you!

I feel for once I am somewhat qualified to give an answer here.

A bit of background to know where I am coming from and hopefully give some insight to my situation.  I am currently finishing my second year in a MA Mathematics program and beginning my first year of my Ph.D. in Mathematics in the fall.  I am married with two children(a 3 year old and an 8 month old).  I had my first child during undergrad and my second child came two weeks before the current school year started.  I attend a smaller department that is most certainly less intensive in regards to the expectations that another school would have(such as a top tier research university).  I've been a Research Assistant for the past two years doing active and successful research with an amazing supervisor.  This past year has been the most stressful since I decided to take three core year long sequences, which is a great deal of work to keep up with.

Above all, put your family first.

I would hope this goes without saying, but it can be easy to lose sight of this when you're up to your neck in homework/deadlines.  When something comes up with my family, I drop my schoolwork to deal with it.  I make it a point to always put my family before school.  I'm sure there are professors out there who would argue otherwise, but I'm grateful that my professors seem to (hopefully) understand the situation and that I just can't put in the hours that other students can.  I generally score lower on average than other students but I think I do fairly well.  Could I do better?  Absolutely...if I were to put in the hours and sacrifice time with my family I could score better on my tests and homework, but that isn't what really matters in the long term to me.  Of course I want to do well in school(and I generally do!), but sometimes I have to make a choice and school gets the axe.

In the end, you choose your own priorities, and I would suggest opting for spending time with your family over finishing that HW.  You just can't get those moments back.

Having a Strong Support System

I would absolutely not be able to do this without the support of my wife, family, and friends.  Without my wife to help out with the kids and pick up some extra housework when studying for tests/finals/my oral MA exam, I would certainly have dropped out or (worse) ruined my marriage or become a terrible father.  I make sure to try and do extra work whenever the stressful times pass and try to make it up to her as I can.

We are lucky to have family close that can help out with childcare and babysitting when I need to go in on an off day or want to stay late for a seminar.  Without the support system we have in place, I'm not sure I could physically do it.  If you have a similar support system, then it will be a huge relief to your stressed.

I should also mention that without some amazing people at my department, I wouldn't be able to succeed.  Professors have been amazing with deadlines if the time just wasn't there for me some week.  My RA supervisor has been absolutely amazing as well.  She's extremely understanding with the kids and even being cool with me bringing the little one to meetings if everything just fell apart for that day.  If I had a less understanding supervisor, I probably wouldn't have made it.

Time Management

This is probably the trickiest part.  Time management is always important, but it's extremely important to successful manage school and family.  You just don't have all the time that other students do so when it's time to work you need to remove all distractions and get as much done as possible.  I arrive at school between 8-9am and in between classes I work nonstop on homework or studying until I leave at 3-4pm.  I have a computer in my office, but I purposely keep it off unless I absolutely need it on.  I disable the wifi on my smartphone and removed nearly all the time wasting apps(facebook, games, etc..).  I check my e-mail probably twice, once near the beginning of the day and once around the time I'm getting ready to leave for the day.

I do take small breaks from work to socialize with other students or check in with professors as needed, but I strive to make sure that I don't waste an hour doing absolutely nothing in someone else's office.  Socializing is an important part of graduate school, so don't neglect it but don't let it consume all your precious time.

When I come home after school I shut off school mode.  I spend the rest of the night with my family, eat dinner, and help get the kids into bed.  Once the kids are in bed then I'm free to do homework.  I don't always go straight into homework though because it's important to me to spend time with my wife relaxing and watching an episode or two of TV shows to wind down.  It doesn't happen every night, but I usually make an effort to take it easy on weeknights when I don't have school the next day.  The "school nights" I usually retire upstairs to work on homework.  I'll work until midnight or later depending on how early I have to get up and I'll average around 6 hours of sleep.  It's not great, but sacrifices have to be made somewhere.

Finally, in my opinion, give yourself the weekend.  Once I leave school on Friday, I'm done with math until at least Sunday night.  The weekends are prime family time and we spend every weekend visiting the zoo, science center, art museum, the park, or virtually anything else the kids would enjoy.  I initially thought it would be impossible to take the entire weekend off schoolwork and still succeed, but I've been doing it for 2 years.  This past year was the worst, but I stuck to it and I can safely say I managed to survive it and do just fine in my courses.

Dealing with Stress

Let's face it, you'll be stressed.  Grad school is stressful as all hell to begin with, but then you go and toss kids into the mix?  It's insanity, and you have to handle it somehow.  I'm a fan of exercise, which takes up that precious time but is totally worth it.  You have to feel as good as you can and any sort of activity is a great way to relieve stress.  You could also do another hobby, or something that you do to relax.  I'm also an avid reader, so losing myself into a book every now and then is great.  The time I have to read varies, but it's one of my top hobbies.  Find something you enjoy and do it frequently to relax.

Sometimes it just can't be helped.  If you find yourself really freaking out, you really should seek out the school's counseling center.  They are no doubt used to overworked students and having a place to lay all your problems on the table and have a trained therapist help you sort it out is probably exactly what you need.

To sum it up, I put my family before everything else.  School takes a high priority but there are far more important things in my life than getting an A in every course.  Schedule your time wisely, remove distractions, and work when it's time to work.  Do something relaxing for yourself on a regular basis.  Give your family the attention and time they deserve.  You can't get those moments back and no letter grade in the world is worth that sacrifice.

Above all, make sure you are happy.  It's such a small thing but I've seen students absolutely miserable hating what they are doing.  Don't be that person!  Life is too short to waste it being miserable.  I suggest every 6 months or so, take a step back and evaluate how you feel about your situation(this should apply to anyone, not just graduate students).  For instance, I vow to myself that if there ever comes a time when I begin to genuinely dislike what I'm doing, I will quit and find something else.

Good luck and don't forget what's really important.  Grad school has a way of giving you tunnel vision and destroying you emotionally...just don't let it do it too often. :)


Is it okay to ask a former tenured professor why he suddenly left his job? He's also not listed in the faculty directory / contact list any longer.

I used to meet him about twice a semester to talk about life and academics, so he knew me fairly well.

He was tenured and, to me, was brilliant.

Can I email him to say hello and ask why he left? Or is that being too nosy and inappropriate?

Unless you are a very good friend, you should not ask the question. You can, of course, continue to meet him in private if he is up for that. I do not recommend prying into the issue if he does not talk about that from his own initiative.


What to do when you find out someone else presented your research without crediting you? One of my collaborators recently sent me a link to a video of someone presenting at a professional conference.  In the presentation, they use some of my published research that I did as an intern, including figures from my paper, but they never credit me in the presentation.

I have several questions about this:

Is this normal or is this something that I should be credited for?
Is it typical for someone to contact you before using your research in a presentation?
Is it worth contacting the company about this?

On the one hand, I'm happy that more people are seeing my research.  On the other, it feels a little upsetting to see my research getting presented without getting the credit for it.

You clearly said that your paper is published and has your name on it. No matter who presents this paper or this work, your name will be forever there. Everyone who will lookup this paper to find out more about this research will see that you are a co-author, regardless of who actually presented it.

TL, DR; I would not worry too much about it.


Can I apply for a masters degree in Canada with a three years bachelors degree from India? I have a three years bachelors degree from a university in India(Top 10 by NIRF ranking). I want to do my masters in Canada but I have heard that a 4 years bachelor's degree is required.
The thing is, my 3 years bachelor's degree has the same amount of credit compared to a 4 years bachelor's degree. So in this case, am I eligible or not?

In most international universities the requirements for admission generally specify that the candidate should have passed out of a recognised institution with an undergraduate degree and do not impose the duration of the undergraduate course. However if there is an age barrier you can do an internship for a year.

It is very unusual for universities to question the duration of the undergraduate course, please verify your source and you should always contact the admissions office of the universities through email to enquire about such matters, after all they are here to help and most enquiries will get a response within 24 hours.


What's the correct order of writing for a MSc. and a Dipl.-Ing. degree? (e.g. on a business card) I finished my (german) Dipl.-Ing. (FH) degree after 4 1/2 years of studying. After that I started to work and studied parallel via a correspondence course. I'll now shortly (hopefully ;-) ) have the additional title of a MSc. That took me 2 1/2 years but only in part time, so the amount of time I invested was much less, than that for my Diploma.
So in order to reflect the increase in qualification I'd put the degrees like that:

Dipl.-Ing. (FH), MSc. Firstname Lastname

But as the Master is sometimes regarded as a higher form of qualification than the Diploma, it might be correct like this:

MSc., Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Firstname Lastname

What's the correct order?

edit:
Like it was pointed out the MSc. is written after the name. So the choice is between:

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Firstname Lastname, MSc.
Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Firstname Lastname
Firstname Lastname, MSc.

You should notice that in Germany academic titles such as Dr., Dipl.Ing, Mag are writen in front of the name, whereas titles such as M.Sc., B.Sc., M.A., etc., a written behind the name (see here). So if it all I would say the correct order is

  Dipl.Ing (FH) Firstname Lastname, M. Sc.

However, I would just ignore the Dipl.Ing (FH).


Obligation to quote source of grammatical knowledge Do I need to name a source (a website for example), which lists grammar rules for a language? I would like to know if this is considered one of these goods, which cannot be owned and thus needs no quotation.

For example a website lists prepositions, which cause a specific casus in a language. If I take those prepositions and list them in a document for that casus, do I then have reference a source, or can I assume this to be something not owned by anyone?

What about example phrases? They're also part of daily language and should not be owned by anyone.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with having to quote, but I'd probably prefer inventing my own example phrases and such. I don't lack the creativity.

I would like to know if this is considered one of these goods, which cannot be owned and thus needs no quotation.

Academic citation isn't about ownership. It's not about copyright. It's not about intellectual property. It's about allowing the reader to know where you got your ideas. It's about recognizing other people for their work.

In many cases different people might describe the grammar of a language a bit differently. They might even describe different dialects of the same language. Different dialects of the language might treat the same prepositions as treating a different casus.

Maria Brenda wrote "The Cognitive Perspective on the Polysemy of the English Spatial Preposition Over" – a whole book over a single preposition and what it does in different cases.

If you cite a specific source for your list then a reader can understand of why your list looks the way it does. If the care they can go to the original source to understand how the list got created.


Getting faculty position in the US: after Postdoc in the US or Lecturer in the UK? I am a postdoc in a US university (Rank A, edit: R1). I tried to get an academic faculty position in the US, but was unsuccessful. I got an offer (lecturer in the UK system) from the UK university (say, Rank B, edit: "new university"). Is it worth to accept the offer, and again try from the UK to get a faculty position in the US? Or I should try to get another postdoc in the US only? Would it be difficult to get the position once I move out from the US?

I have gone through In order to get a CS faculty position in the U.S, should I have a Ph.D. from an "American" university?, Is it more difficult to score a Tenure Track position in the US when applying from outside?, and What should a faculty member outside of the US do to move to a top-tiered American university?. But still not sure in my case.

One of the reasons of not short-listing is that I do not have a PhD from the US, (I thought). I got only two on-campus calls (from college/new univ. only) for the interview out of many.

Any suggestions? Thanks in advance!

Of course it is possible to switch from a UK lectureship to a TT, or even tenured, position at a US Research University. Being at a lower ranked "new university" in the UK, however, means that you likely not get a lot of research support and have a heavy teaching load. Further, the obsession with the UK REF will likely push your CV in directions that are not ideal for getting a job in the US. You don't mention your citizenship, but there is currently a lot of uncertainty regarding immigration and access to funding for non-UK citizens.

Overall, I would say that it will be easier, or more accurately, less difficult, to get a US TT position by spending another year or two as a post doc than as a lecturer with a high teaching load. US research universities just do not care that much about teaching and if you really need teaching experience you can always get a little as a post doc.

While a lecturer position might put you at a disadvantage, assuming it is a permanent lectureship in a UK city that you do not mind living in, having job security is a major benefit.


W2 positions at the universities of applied sciences in Germany The W2 professorship ads of all universities of applied sciences in Germany have a passage requring (e.g., for Bavaria)

  darüber hinaus besondere Leistungen bei der Anwendung oder Entwicklung wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse und Methoden in einer mindestens fünfjährigen beruflichen Praxis, die nach Abschluss des Hochschulstudiums erworben sein muss und von der mindestens drei Jahre außerhalb des Hochschulbereichs ausgeübt worden sein müssen; [...] der Nachweis der außerhalb des Hochschulbereichs ausgeübten beruflichen Praxis kann in besonderen Fällen dadurch erfolgen, dass über einen Zeitraum von mindestens fünf Jahren ein erheblicher Teil der beruflichen Tätigkeit in Kooperation zwischen Hochschule und außerhochschulischer beruflicher Praxis erbracht wurde.

It roughly means that you have to have worked on applying your knowledge and scientific methods 5 years after graduation, 3 of which outside of academia, or, in special cases, a minimum of 5 years most of the time in cooperation between non-academic industry and academia. Regulations in other federal states are similar.

Considering the second passage, what counts (and what does not count) as such a cooperation? E.g., does working 5 years long at a research university on BMBF-financed projects with industrial partners count?

The definition is left intentionally vague, in my opinion, so as to not further reduce the pool of applicants unnecessarily.

The general idea, I believe, is to show that you have cooperation with (and possibly support from) industry. So a BMBF-funded project with an industrial partner is just as viable as a project whose funding comes directly from industry. I think even if neither of those holds, but you have an industrial partner on a project—perhaps seen through joint publications—you could make the case of industrial cooperation.


Does conference presentation of preliminary findings conflict with publication? I am exciting to share our preliminary results. I also want to demonstrate productivity, so I'm wrestling with the idea of presenting findings in presentation and poster format at an upcoming conference. The research is in health care. However, our big journals typically don't publish papers on data that has been published or presented elsewhere. I'm looking for any advice on navigating journal requirements such as:

Resuscitation:

  The paper should deal with original material, neither
  previously published nor being considered for publication elsewhere,
  except in special circumstances agreed with the Editor-in-Chief.

Annals of Emergency Medicine:

  Annals publishes only original work in
  accordance with the ICMJE policy on overlapping publications. If your
  manuscript or data, in whole or part, has been published elsewhere, or
  has been or will be submitted for publication elsewhere, this may
  constitute unacceptable prior and/or duplicate publication. Should
  there be any doubt, please detail the specific circumstances to us in
  your cover letter. Failure to do so could be interpreted as deliberate
  duplicate publication.

What would people think if we published secondary outcomes and answered a different research question than the research manuscript we intend to ultimately publish? Thoughts?

To codify the comments: These policies say nothing about presentations, only publications.  As conferences are not journals, it's highly unlikely that this is double-dipping.


I'm about to graduate and enter a 1-year master's program. I don't really know any professors, and I've never done research. How can I get involved? I'm a senior in CS and will be finishing my undergrad this coming semester at a university with a well-respected CS department. My school has a 1-year extension to our B.S. that gets you a master's, and I'm in that program. The program does not require any research, but recently I've gotten interested in the idea of doing research and possibly a PhD after my master's.

The thing is, the whole research thing being a recent interest, I have no experience whatsoever with academic research. I also have had very little contact with my professors throughout my time here, since I've been doing fine in classes and I've never really needed to talk to them. I do ask/answer questions in lecture more than the average student, but I rarely see professors outside of class. I do have a number of fairly complex projects on my resume (several that I'm still involved in), but that's complexity in terms of coding on a large code-base and not in terms of fancy theoretical stuff.

Is it too late for me to get involved in research? If not, how do I actually get started? Do I literally just send someone an email?

Is it too late for me to get involved in research?

No, your timing is excellent.

  how do I actually get started?

Presumably you know what fields interests you. One of those fields should probably be your research field. If possible, opt for a master's degree with a research focus (rather than an entirely taught degree). Opt for any research focused modules. Opt for any modules in your chosen field. Conduct any coursework on research problems. Establish whether you really want to do a PhD.

In parallel, start searching for a PhD supervisor. That supervisor can be located anywhere in the world that you are willing to live. Selecting a supervisor is most likely covered elsewhere (e.g., https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/10878/22768), so I wouldn't discuss further.


verbally accepted offer; got a second interview call I was made a verbal offer for a job at a college, which I accepted over the phone. I haven't got the written offer and I have not signed anything yet. I was informed the written offer will be sent to me in a few days.

That evening, I received an interview e-mail from the same college but a different campus (which I prefer).

What should I do? Wait till I get a formal offer letter from the first campus and then let them know I need more time?

What is the wisest and the ethical course of action?

You're not under any contractual obligation (and don't have any legal recourse if the college were to withdraw the offer!) until you've gotten a written offer (which will normally have a deadline by which you must respond) and returned it with your signature.  It's in your interest to continue pursuing other opportunities until the first institution has come through with a complete written offer and you've accepted it.

I would contact the second campus, explain that you would prefer to work there if you got an offer, but that you've already got an offer in hand (and what the deadline on that offer is, if you've been given one.)  You need to know how rapidly the second campus will be able to conduct their interview and make an offer.  If they couldn't possibly make an offer to you before the deadline on the first offer, then I would decline to interview and just take the first position.  If it is possible for them to move quickly, then I'd suggest that you go ahead and interview.

There is a risk here- if the first institution finds out that you're interviewing elsewhere, they might decide to withdraw their offer.  The only way to avoid this risk entirely is to turn down the second interview.


Do I need permission from my past supervisor? I am currently a postdoc in computer science. Last year I completed my PhD. I have published one research paper during my PhD with my research supervisor. I am trying to work on that paper. I mean I have got something and I think it is going to be an incremental result of the previous research paper.

Question: Do I need to get permission from my past supervisor to publish a paper that builds on our previous co-authored paper?

If your past supervisor made a significant intellectual contribution to the new paper, then he should be a coauthor.  And then, yes, you need his permission to publish the paper, because publication requires the consent of all coauthors.

If your past supervisor did not make a significant intellectual contribution to the new paper, then he should not be a coauthor.  And then no, you don't need his permission to publish the paper, because he is not a coauthor.

In short: The fact that he is your former supervisor is utterly irrelevant.  (This would also be true if he were your current supervisor.)


How to get confidence in myself after making several errors? I am a PhD student in mathematics. I was always brilliant in my studies. Now, I have a problem consisting in doing wrong things without paying attention.

For example, I was asked to do some computations, and I did and checked but after sending an e-mail to my supervisor, I discovered that it missed other details.

Also, I submitted a paper to two journals and it was rejected, but one of them I selected without asking my supervisor and after hearing this he was so angry. I know, he is right but I tried to be responsible for my work and
each time I tried to work better and give a good result.

I commit many errors in small details and that is why I lost confidence in myself. My supervisor is always blaming me, but he doesn't know that I did all my best. I don't know how to solve this problem and to make me confident in myself? Maybe my problem is essentially the way that I should learn to complete my thesis successfully.

I see three different issues in what you have described:

You make some mistakes in computations.  That happens to all of us, but whether you should be concerned about it depends on what type of mistakes you are making.  You need to look at what mistakes you are making and how, and see whether they are "sloppy" mistakes (in which case you can develop a checklist for yourself to avoid making them) or whether they are just coming form the fact that research is hard.
You submitted to a paper without consulting with your advisor (and maybe dual-submitted as well).  This is a serious problem, especially if you did a simultaneous submission to two journals, which is almost always forbidden and unethical.  If your advisor is a co-author, then you are definitely in the wrong to submit without approval: you are not taking responsibility for yourself, you are denying responsibility to your co-author.  Even if you did not commit either ethical sin, most advisors want to help advise their students, and submitting without consulting is a good way to make mistakes that will reflect badly on both yourself and your advisor.
Your advisor has been angry at you, and you are losing self-confidence.  Maybe you need to lose some of the undergraduate-style self-confidence, and to develop a more mature self-confidence.  What you describe as "being responsible" and "working your hardest" does not actually sound like responsibility to me: it sounds like you are not yet reflecting on how to manage your own behavior and its impact on others.

For all of this, I think self-reflection and learning from your mistakes is the solution.  If you can understand how you have been making mistakes, then you can act to make them less likely in the future, and all three of these issues are likely to improve.


Is that a good idea to send an errata list to a professor whose class I'm currently enrolled in? There is a professor at our school whose textbook I was using in class A (not taught by the professor). I've studied the textbook from cover to cover and have spotted about twenty typos (many of which are quite serious, e.g. make an exercise unsolvable). I wanted to TeX them into a list and send it to the professor yet the following two aspects concern me:

I'm currently enrolled in his class B (not the book's subject). It's a rather small class and he knows me by name. Wouldn't it look as if I'm trying to improve my standing in his class by submitting the list?
It's known to me that the professor is aware about some typos (since he commented on a couple of them while teaching from the book two years ago). Yet for some puzzling reason there is no errata list on his website. It gives me an impression that he might be somewhat unhappy to see the extended list of typos.

The professor is working in the field I'm interested in, so I'd definitely like to make a good impression (and more importantly not to make a bad one). So is there a way that sending the list could harm me?

Unless the professor is a total jerk, I don't see any way this could hurt.  My experience has been that academics in general are quite happy to hear from people who are interested enough in their work to offer corrections.  (This has been the case even with authors who, for whatever reason, don't post errata.)

I wouldn't worry about being seen as kissing up.  But if you are concerned you could always wait to send it until after the end of the term.

Before sending it, you may want to casually mention: "I've been reading your book which I really like.  I did notice a few typos though.  Is there an errata list posted somewhere?  If not, I could make a list of the ones I found and send them to you."

If there is any chance that a given typo is not really an error, but something you have misunderstood, you can be more delicate by phrasing it as a question.  Instead of "On page 34 you forgot to require that X is compact" you could say "Are you sure the argument on page 34 works without assuming that X is compact?  Isn't the punctured plane a counterexample?"


Can you resubmit a rejected manuscript to the same journal if you have made many changes to improve the manuscript? Last year one of my papers was rejected. The editor provided the comments of referees so I have continued to work on this paper following their suggestion. I have done a great deal of work and I think that now the paper is really worth a publication.
I was considering to resubmit it to the same journal: can I do this or is it frowned upon?

Some journals won't accept a resubmission after rejection. For some others it might depend on the reason for rejection. If the editor deemed it not suitable for the journal it isn't likely to be reconsidered.
But otherwise you should be able to resubmit it. You can also ask the editor whether it would be advisable or not. Follow their advice, of course.
And "frowned upon" only matters if the editor is the one frowning.


What style questions should I ask potential graduate students interviewing for positions in my lab? As a converse to this question, as a professor, I find it difficult to conduct a useful interview. What types of questions should I ask which would give me a good idea as to how (1) productive and (2) self-sustaining of a student the interviewee may be? If different questions are required for each parameter, please mention that in your answer.

I underwent an interview recently from a prospective adviser, and I found the questions he asked of me to be pretty insightful - hence I'm sharing them here.

Why do you want to pursue research in this specific area?

This would highlight the candidate's motivation in wanting to do research in a particular field - and would also tell the professor more about the candidate's exposure to this area.
What made you apply to this lab/university, as a continuation of the previous question?

The answer would tell you whether the applicant had simply browsed the rankings list of universities, or did he/she actually go through the research publications of the lab - and the application was done due to an intersection of the two!
What would you like to be doing post Ph.D.?

There is no "right" answer to this, but it also tells a lot about the candidate's motivation in pursuing a PhD.
Finally, you can ask the candidate to discuss any problem that he is familiar with in that field - doesn't have to be anything fancy/complicated, but that would serve to highlight the clarity of the applicant's reasoning, communication skills, and level of exposure to the field.


How much damage would I be incurring if I turn down an informal postdoc offer? So I have been in touch with a prof for a few months about being a postdoc in his group. He promised (verbally) one year of funding saying he was not sure if his grant proposal for my second year of funding would be successful. After being in touch with him over six months, he let me know that he the proposal has been successful and he now has funding for my second year. In the mean time, my opinion about being a postdoc and going the academic route have changed quite a bit due to family and other personal circumstances and I want to move into the industry [I have an offer in hand too]. My question is, how bad would it be, in terms of loss of face, if I said no to being a postdoc with the prof? I haven't signed a contract with him or anything and all communication between us has been informal. How do I even begin to explain things to him? I haven't even given a hint to him so far.

Since you haven't  agreed to take the job, there's no damage being done at all.  Being offered a job does not put you under any obligation to take it, in academia or otherwise.  You shouldn't feel embarrassed or awkward.  If you're sure about your decision, then it's helpful to tell the professor now.


On MathJobs, what does "Faculty contacts in our dept?" means? I've noticed that several MathJobs applications asks "Faculty contacts in our dept?", always with this exact, confusing wording.

I'm not clear what this means. Can someone explain?

Is it, "do you personally know anyone in our faculty?" or is it "who is the person in our faculty that's closest to your research area so that they can evaluate your application?"

This is a really really important question, and it's really important that the correct answer is option 2.  Most graduate students interpret it to mean 1, and this puts them at a disadvantage.  You should list any people in the department who might be interested in serving a postdoc mentor for you.  You should always list someone.

There are two main reasons for this:

On mathjobs you can run a search for all applicants who listed a given faculty member as a contact.  I always look at the applicants who list me as a reference.  Along with sending an email, this is the best way to assure that at least one person looks at your file.
When I served on the postdoc hiring committee I was responsible for looking through 20% of the applicants.  We're only going to hire a postdoc if there's a good research match for them in the department who is interested in mentoring them.  If I see a good file, one of the most important things is to make it easy for me to know which faculty member to mention the file to.  Sometimes I can work that out myself, but it's not always obvious.  Listing someone as faculty contact immediately indicates who I should email.


Should your PhD students call you by your first name? I've read at least one career advice essay that calls out asking your PhD students to call you by your first name as unprofessional.

My coworkers and I always called our PhD advisor by his first name, and a graduate student calling any professor by their last name, much less their own advisor, strikes my sensibilities as quaint and old-fashioned (undergraduates are a different story, of course).

What is the standard practice for this?

Yes, a PhD is essentially an apprenticeship in academic research, so they should be treated as a colleague in potential (it seems normal practice for an RA to refer to their supervisor by their first name).  Also I think it is a bad idea for researchers to be overly formal and deferential towards their supervisors; if you ware working at the cutting edge of your subject, not all of your ideas will be good ones, and the PhD student should feel comfortable pointing out where they feel this is the case.  This sort of self-skepticism (being comfortable with the idea of being wrong occasionally) is a key component of being a good scientist, and it seems to me to be difficult to communicate this by example if the student is constantly reminded of their place in the hierarchy by making them call me "Dr Marsupial".


How to get into research jobs after working in corporate technical jobs I am Performance and Automation Testing engineer who recently moved into IT Security in Singapore. I hold a BSc in software system (full-time) and MSc in IT (distance learning program). I have 9+ years experience working in Testing projects where major contribution was into Performance and Automaton testing.

I wish to get into research jobs (specifically, academic research). I am looking for opportunities any place however my preference will be Germany, Singapore and USA. However whenever I have approached universities they aren't willing to consider me, stating that I don't have any research experience.

Can anyone help me with path to get into IT Security Research. I guess attending a part-time/full-time masters program (IT/INFOSEC) followed by PhD (INFOSEC) program should help. Is this an appropriate path? Will this suffice to give me a chance at getting hired into an academic research job?

By Academic Research, I assume you mean Phd.

So, I am aware of cases where people chose to move back from industry to academia. A Phd student that I know, used to work for EA, and after 3 (or 5 years) of working as a programmer he switched to academia to the field of Computer Networks to pursue his Phd.

So basically, there is the possibility of getting to such a position directly from the industry even if you have worked on completely unrelated stuff. However, any professor from a medium - top ranked program in the academia will look at you research capabilities in order to accept you as a Phd student.

What I would do in this case, is to create a strategy to achieve the goal. First be realistic with what you really have in hand to offer. What are your pros/cons compared to any other Phd student that want to apply to a given program.

Define your target universities. Maybe you should do some research and look where is deficiency of Phd students. In which country people look less interested to pursue a Phd.

Then look at the specific program that you want to apply for. If you don't have a preferred topic, I suggest that you should apply in a place where your experience will give you the upper hand in the application process.

You say you are interested in the IT security research. Do you like the applicative side or the theoretical stuff (crypto)?

I think there are many variables that may affect your application. The fact that you hold a Masters degree from a distance program, maybe your age, and the fact that you want to switch to a completely new topic (academic-wise, assuming that your Master studies were not related to IT security) are the downsides. But, don't be discouraged, give it a try.

I would target the mid to low ranked programmes and send applications around.

Good luck!


Manuscript revision deadline: how strict are these [at Scientific Reports] I am a Ph.D. student and presently dealing with my first paper that I had submitted to Scientific Reports.

I received back the reviewer comments together with a note from the editor asking me (as the first author) to revise and resubmit within 4 weeks (exact wording below*). However, my coauthors and I will likely not be able to finish the revision in time (there are only a few days left), and I am wondering how strictly editors stick to these deadlines, and if they are typically likely to close the submission altogether, or rather happy to accept the revision even sometime later. The editor him/herself would obviously be the best person to ask, however, I am not getting a reply to my request for an extension, and I would need to know soon whether to drop everything and just work crazy hours to get the revision to them in time.

  We hope to receive your revised paper within four weeks. If you cannot send it within this time, please let us know so that we can close your file. In this event, we will still be happy to reconsider your paper at a later date as long as you haven’t submitted similar or related work elsewhere in the meantime.

I had the same issue with Scientific Reports and I contacted the staff asking for an extension. Here is the answer:

  Dear authors, Thank you for your email. This will not be a problem –
  we do appreciate that some revisions do take longer than others and we
  would be more than happy to accommodate an extension for you. Please
  submit your revised manuscript when you are ready.


Scholarships in general and Ontario Trillium Scholarship in particular I am a new PhD student in Canada. Recently my university nominated me for the Ontario Trillium Scholarship (to my surprise), which I eventually won. I originally come from a country which do not use the system of scholarships and awards, so I do not know much about the benefits of scholarships. As I see there are three potential benefits:

More money for living ($40.000 each year for four years in this case, for living and tuition)
The Scholarhip pays for tuition and other fees, so your supervisor/institute do not need to pay anything
Looks good on a CV

I have not much advantage of the point 1, since my institute usually gives higher PhD salaries than standards in Canada and therefore I only receive slightly higher salary relative to that (people from other institutes will of course benefit from the extra cash). Number 2 seems to be a really good benefit of scholarships, since they make you more free and able to pursue your own interests even more (since your supervisor is not paying).

My question is primarily about point 3. How big a role does Scholarships play when applying for a post doc position? I generally see many people in North America, especially the US, which have a lot of scholarships and awards they have won. This is my first ever, since we do not have awards in my original country. Is there any real advantage to be able to mention previously won scholarships? And my final question is, how good is the Ontario Trillium Scholarship in this regard? Is this a standard type of scholarship?

(Sorry for asking this anonymously rather than using my stack exchange profile. My profile contain my real name and I would rather stay anonymous for various reasons).

The Trillium scholarship is very good.  The only scholarship I know of that's worth more is the Vanier ($50,000 for two or three years).  The Vanier is open to both Canadian and international PhD students as long as they're studying at a Canadian institution, so it's extremely competitive.  The Trillium is only open to international PhD students studying in Ontario, so the applicant pool is a bit smaller; however, only 75 are awarded each year, so it's also very competitive.

Two other typical scholarships are the NSERC PGS/CGS, which pays between $17,300 and $35,000 a year, and the Ontario Graduate Scholarship, which pays $15,000.  In my department, about a quarter of the people who apply for these scholarships will win.

As for the the other part of your question, when applying for a post doc position, scholarships certainly won't hurt you.  Your publications are more important, of course, but since the Trillium application includes a "plan of studies", winning it suggests that you will be able to win grants in the future.  A scholarship won't make up for a lack of publications, but it can give you an edge over a similar applicant who didn't win one.


How important is being in a good institute for a theoretical physicist? Will being in a underfunded institute and with mediocre colleagues hinder the performance of a theoretical physicist to a great degree?

It depends.

A good student who is very self motivated can rise above. That means you would need to be doing a lot of work in addition to the work assigned in class. If you can do that, consistently for your entire degree, you can come out knowing as much as you would in a "tough" school.

It's a two-fold challenge.

First, there is doing it and keeping it up without somebody to drive you.  If you are that sort of person then GREAT! More power to you, I wish you well. But you won't need my good wishes, you will be too busy creating your own good future.

Second, there is getting recognition for this extra work. Eventually you will want to do something after undergrad. Whether that's grad school or industry or whatever, you need an entrance that allows you to get some credit for the extra work.

Sometimes, a possible solution to the second part is to publish something in a research journal. Lots of undergrads publish a research article. Of course, it's a small fraction of undergrads overall. But if you can publish something it will go a long way to helping you in whatever your plans are for after undergrad.

Sometimes it's extra-curricular projects. Are you technologically gifted? Build something keen. Are you software creative? Write an interesting and useful computer program. Are you the gifted writer? Write a web site that explains some interesting physics topic. Are you a good video presenter? Maybe something for the Khan academy.

https://www.khanacademy.org/

If you are fortunate in the "summer jobs" you get, that can be very helpful also. One of the undergrads I met at a "cow college" was doing some interesting work with a local research company. They were doing a thing with testing microwaves for therapy in sports medicine. He got to do some of the mundane measurement work. It looked good on his resume, it taught him a lot about microwaves, and it paid the bills.

Sometimes a nearby school will have enrichment opportunities. If you were at a small school in Southern Ontario, you could consider managing to get some time at McMaster University.  They have a pool type nuclear reactor. You could get training on that for a few months. That would look pretty good on your resume for certain jobs and grad schools. Many universities will have some kind of lab or facility that you can do some kind of exchange program.

From the other side of things, a gifted student in a "tough" school may not achieve maximum results. Tough schools can sometimes be very regimented and by-the-regulation-book. "My way or the highway" kind of thing. It does not always nurture the creativity of a young student who has just come from a high school where he was top-of-the-pops while hardly trying. And tough schools might not have a friendly environment. Students might be far more competitive minded, angling for scholarships and such.

The right school for you is a difficult choice. And it's one that, once made, is difficult to unmake.


What can be done to possibly avoid corrupt practices in the blind peer review process? During my short career as a researcher I observed a few seemingly unethical behaviors by Editors and Associate Editors:

being asked to include a particular new author in order to be accepted
being asked to cite articles with no apparent link with my article
being told by the conference TCP (one of the top conference) to reject all the articles I review
In one unique case, I reviewed an article and recommended strong rejection, it was subsequently accepted without revision. Reviewing the authors profile and handling editor, I found one of the author is an Associate Editor for another journal. It appears that both help each to publish articles in their journals.

All the above experiences were observed in well-reputed journals and conferences. Given all this, how what can I do to "clean this mess" in academic the journal/conference review process?

There is not a lot that you can do change the system. However, there are certain things you can do in the various instances you describe:

  being asked to include a particular new author in order to be accepted

If the person has no good claim to authorship, I would politely refuse such a request and explain why this person is not an author. If they refuse to publish your paper, then submit elsewhere.

  being asked to cite articles with no apparent link with my article

If there is no apparent link, then you can't cite it. I would respond with something like "We do not see how this article is related to our work. If the reviewer wishes to explain the relationship, we can include a citation."

  being told by the conference TCP (one of the top conference) to reject all the articles I review

There is little point in reviewing the papers if the decision has already been made. You can politely refuse the review request.

  In one unique case, I reviewed an article and recommended strong rejection, it was subsequently accepted without revision. Reviewing the authors profile and handling editor, I found one of the author is an Associate Editor for another journal. It appears that both help each to publish articles in their journals.

It's up to the editor to make the accept/reject decision, not the reviewer. Sometimes reviewers get it wrong and the editor has good reason to ignore their recommendation. However, it sounds like you believe this to be a case of corruption. There is little you can do about this other than refusing to have further interactions with these journals. You can tell others about what you have witnessed. Presumably others have witnessed it too. If news of this spreads, then it will (deservedly) harm the reputation of the editor.

  All the above experiences were observed in well-reputed journals and conferences.

This is unfortunate. Such behaviours should bring journals and conferences into disrepute.

On the individual level, you can choose where to submit your articles and which review requests to accept. There are many factors to consider when choosing where to submit. Of course, prestige is a big factor, as publications in prestigious venues helps advance your career. However, you can include reviewing practices as a factor. You can also refuse review requests from venues that you believe will ignore your reviews. And, if there are venues that you believe are doing a good job, you can support them by submitting and reviewing.

If enough people begin to avoid venues with questionable practices, then that will have an effect on them. Likewise, if people support venues with good practices, then those will go up in the prestige rankings.


How can I keep up with all the important advances in fields related to mine? Being updated with new ideas in many research fields is impossible, seen the diversity of research topics and the strong relations that exists between them. Most of the researchers in the world, are needing to interact with many fields and to be up to date with the trending ideas in each one of them.

Example: if one researcher is specialized in remote-sensing. Being up to date in this field is possible with some effort. But, this field is related to many other fields ( computer vision, image processing, machine learning, artificial intelligence..). Any new idea in any of these fields could directly impact remote sensing as well. The problem is that this researcher cannot cope with the high speed changes that occurs in these fields.

This example is applicable to many cases as well. And many of you are facing the same situation.

I am in the beginning of my PhD, my thesis interact with many research fields. I have to summarizes the trending ideas in many fields to conclude the state of the art of my thesis. Following the traditional method by accessing the literature of each field may out passes the goal of my thesis.

I want to know if there is a mean to know the trending research ideas in one research topic and the statistics related to them that are gaining some interest.

Is there any mean to track advancement in a research field?

There is no easy way:

First step would be to talk to your advisor.

Second step would be to look at recent issues of the main journals in your field.

Third step would be to attend some of the main conferences in your field, listen to the talks and talk to the people.

After that you make up your mind what your opinion the trending issues are, and repeat steps 1 and 2 (and maybe 3) to try to confirm that.


one on ones during campus visit Do all schools have candidates at tenure-track campus interviews meet extensively with faculty members and administrators one-on-one? Are there schools where it is customary to devote a campus visit primarily to group interviews (faculty and students), job talk and/or sample class, tours of the facilities, and meals (with faculty)? Basically, does such a schedule signal lack of interest or is that the usual in some places?

Whatever the schedule is, it's almost certainly identical for all candidates.  You can't deduce anything about the school's interest from the schedule.

The way my department does tenure-track interviews, the only one-on-one meetings are with the department chair and the dean.  Other than that, there are, as in your description, group interviews with faculty and students, a research talk, a sample class, and meals with a group of faculty.  The schedule doesn't include one-on-one meetings with individual faculty.  And this is the same for all candidates.

(This is a mathematical sciences department at a medium-sized public university in the US.)


verbal agreement to convert masters to PhD but reconsidering I am currently doing a Masters of Philosophy, with my key interests being ecology and evolution.

When I enrolled earlier this year, I had an agreement with my professor that I would continue to a PhD. Unfortunately in the first two months, my first project fell through to lack of funding. My professor then showed me another project I could do. This project is very similar to my honours research...in fact, it is almost exactly the same, with very few new techniques included. I had a few weeks to think about if I wanted this project, but did feel a bit of pressure to make a decision. I decided to continue with this project despite my reservations.

My main issue now is that I have realised (at 5 months) that this project, while interesting, isn't going to get me a job when I finish. While I am doing some lab based work and doing some phylogenetic analyses, I'm not doing any of the field work or statistical experience that I need to be competitive for post-docs.

I've considered reworking my project, however I've had a number of concerns about it. First of all is that my supervisor doesn't seem keen to rework it to a large extent and doesn't seem to understand the time it takes for me to read and analyse papers to determine how to change my project.
The second issue is that no one in my lab is an ecologist, statistician or evolutionary biologist (primarily genetics and bioinformatics) and I will not be able to get the support I'll inevitably need down the track. The final issue is that I am getting no funding. My supervisor is paying for my labwork, but I am not able to conduct more field studies or more complex genetic analyses because we can't afford it.

I've sort of come to the realisation that this isn't what I want from a PhD. The only issue is I have a verbal agreement to change to a PhD at 1 year into my masters. I love my supervisor and the lab, so don't want to burn bridges by changing my mind on them. I also feel guilty as my supervisor is paying for my lab work, and I don't want to put him out. I am just stuck as to what to do in this situation, and how to bring this up with my professor without ruining my chances of working with them later or affecting my relationships with them.

Basically, this can be summarised as: I don't want to do this PhD project and would like to keep it as a masters, but am not sure how to go about discussing this with my supervisor, and am not sure how it would impact me if I decide to do a PhD in the future.

Has anyone been in a similar situation and can offer advice? Is there a way to do this without impacting my career as a researcher, or my relationships with my lab mates and supervisor?

I would love any advice you have on this because it's really distressing me!

Thanks

I don't want to do this PhD project

If you don't want to do this project, DON'T DO IT. PhD is not everyday fun and it is sometime harsh to keep motivation through the ups and downs.

About your adviser, I will not be too worried for him/her burning bridge. How many PhD student actually drop during the PhD. As Nate Eldredge said, It is quite bad for an adviser/group to have an unmotivated student. Moreover you haven't yet start the PhD. It will be much worse for you adviser if you start and quit after 2 years because you cannot stand it anymore.

As often, you should just be frank with your adviser. Explain this is not the project you are ready to invest 4 years in your life and if he/she has a minimum understanding, it should be fine. If you are not at ease, do it in several discussions, where first you express your doubts on the current project. I think any adviser hearing that should actually advise you to not continue with a PhD.


Should I contact potential referees for a job application? When applying for an academic position, usually you provide a list of names of people who can give you a reference or letter of recommendation e.g. postdoc advisor or someone you often collaborate with. In this case, obviously you first ask the person if they are willing to do this.

However, for applications to academic positions in some countries, e.g. Switzerland, there's a different system. One is asked to provide the names of potential external referees, i.e. people who work in the same field as you and can evaluate the quality of your scientific output. These are people who don't necessarily know you personally, i.e. the kind of people you would suggest as potential reviewers for one of your articles or grant applications.

My question is this: in the latter case, is it usual or necessary to contact the people before suggesting them as referees? Obviously you wouldn't do so for an article or a grant application, but what about when it's for a job application?

As I don't know about the academic practice in Switzerland, I may contribute some theoretical thoughts.

What is the benefit of having people evaluate one's achievements or products in general when they do not know you in person? I guess the key is to have them unbiased. Then it will be better to name them without contacting them in advance.

A drawback may be, that if you name a person who has no time or interest in judging your scientific output it may look unprofessional if you provided their name without checking for their willingness to do that task.


Should I invite my idle team mates to participate in our project discussion with our professor? I am about to deliver one year-long project assignment I've been working at my undergraduate school. This was a group project, but out of the three of us, I was the only one to do work on it (100% of it). There were two team mates with me, let's call them X and Y

X was idle all the time -- he would seldom answer messages and stopped entirely after a certain point
Y was new to the field, and overwhelmed by the coursework. I recognize other courses kept him busy, but in the end he too produced zero amount of work

That being said, should I invite them to discuss this project with our professor/tutors, pretending we did it all together, or just declare myself as the sole worker, and why?

In an ideal world you would have worked this out with the professor long ago. But you can't turn back the clock.

Depending on the project and the professor's expectations, declaring yourself the sole worker can be a terrible solution. Especially if the prof was expecting you to learn about teamwork.

I suspect your best course is just to turn it in and not discuss process more than necessary.

Whether you discuss it with them or not is another matter. I don't know what your goals would be in that. I don't actually see much positive that could come out of it. Since they are nominally on the project they need to see the result, I think, before it is submitted.

But, your professor is partly to blame here for not monitoring your work more closely.

Unfortunately, out in the real world, this is often the outcome on joint projects. Sometimes for good reasons, though not always.

With the comments, I'm not sure, now, about your real concern. If you are worried that you will be downgraded because you didn't actually work as a team, then it is what it is and there is a record of it in the logs. But if the prof is happy that somehow the work got done, even if all by one person, then you don't seem to have any risk here.

The prof has established a process for evaluating your work. If it calls for a meeting of the team with evaluators then you will just have to do that, but be honest. Dishonesty often leads to the worst outcome. But if it doesn't require such a meeting, don't offer one. If you are happy with the work your grade will properly reflect your work.

But, it might also be a mistake to claim, in a meeting, that all the work is yours. It would be better if the team mates first give an honest appraisal of their own contributions. If it is honest, then it is clear that the work is primarily or wholly yours. But that is better coming from them if they are willing to be honest. If you meet with them, I'd suggest you let them know that you will be honest with the evaluators and not try to cover for them.

Your team mates may have to offer explanations about why they didn't participate, but that is "on" them, not you.

If you were my student, I'd be unhappy with you, but I'd also realize that this is a learning situation. My unhappiness would be, primarily, that you didn't let me know earlier so that I could help you formulate a team more effectively.

The tone of your question, however, doesn't raise another issue that sometimes occurs. Sometimes a "team" member will just cut out the rest of the team and do the work him/herself, ignoring the others. I don't see that here, of course, but it is something that professors need to watch for and halt when it occurs. Team work is an important skill in computing, but it isn't the most natural thing in and educational environment where students are often forbidden to work together before they reach this stage. But it needs to be taught, and that is the responsibility of the professor.

The actual project code here isn't the most important thing. Learning is. Learning about systems, certainly, but also learning about process.

Again, in the real world, a manager would probably be happy that the work was done, no matter how. But in the real world the product itself has a much higher value than the process. But a professor should be much more concerned with the learning, compared to the product.


Should one cite unethical research that may contradict one's current research? Most people are familiar with the controversy over citing Nazi medical experimentation and related unethical findings. I'm not questioning that.
Assuming that citing unethical research in order to bolster or support one's own findings is, in fact, unethical, does the situation change if the prior unethical findings may contradict, falsify, or otherwise be potentially detrimental to one's own findings?
For example, many feel that publishing this is unethical:

In this paper, we demonstrate that splines are reticulatable in six-space under the Transhalpine Coordinate System. Evil Nazi Supervillain (1941) demonstrated that a spline can exist in six-space. Assuming this to be true, our model demonstrates how such as spline can be reticulated with respect to the Transhalpine system, to wit....

Assuming that would be, in fact, unethical, would this be any different:

In this paper, we demonstrate that splines are reticulatable in six-space under the Transhalpine Coordinate System. Goody-Two-Shoes, Angel, Seraphim, Hero, Superhero, and Person-Who-Was-Mostly-Good-Except-That-He-Jaywalked-Once-When-He-Was-Eight-And-Was-Continuously-And-Justly-Punished-Throughout-His-Lifetime-For-Said-Act (1932) demonstrated that a spline can exist in six-space. Evil Nazi Supervillain (1941) obtained a contrary result in which splines cannot exist in six-space, but we only mention this because ethical requirements require that we disclose to you that we are are aware of a prior result that may affect our findings. The result was gained by attempting coordinate transformations on splines that had not granted informed consent for geometric experimentation. In this case the researcher was, like, a super bad guy and you, like, totally should ignore his findings because he was even more evil than Dr. Doom and his paper is probably full of shoddy praxis, negligent notetaking, and even outright fabrications.
Assuming that a spline can actually exist in six-space, our model demonstrates how such as spline can be reticulated with respect to the Transhalpine system, to wit....

Generally speaking, is it more ethical to cite or not cite the potentially problematic prior result?
I suppose the gist of this question is which ethical duty is paramount:

The duty to honestly account for the current state of research and disclose potential findings that may affect the current paper.
The duty to not acknowledge or use unethical research.

Could this one of the "unusual circumstances" mentioned in this answer?
I suppose that the Don't Cite Unethical Research rule could be clarified as actually meaning that it is unethical to benefit from prior unethical results, so a citation that does not benefit the later researcher (but in fact serves more as a disclaimer) would be allowed. Would that be more along the lines of how this would actually be handled?

Are you conflating evil people with scientific results that they achieve (by valid means)? They should not be conflated. Condemn the people and the evil acts that they do, but not any valid results obtained by honorable means. Evil monsters don't need to always act in an evil manner.

There is, for example, a lot of both computer engineering and mathematics that was done by total racists. This was in the US and in fairly recent years. This doesn't make it invalid to use computers, nor does it invalidate the mathematics itself.

It isn't even necessary to state that X was an evil monster otherwise when citing X. However, if you are writing about racism or other evils, then it is perfectly appropriate to point out the flaws.

Of course, the spline research would be discredited if to do it evil acts needed to be carried out, but you don't seem to be saying that here.

What is true is true, even if uttered by monsters. What is false is false, even if uttered by angels.

Since the question was changed, I'll add this. If "research" has been discredited for any reason then there is no need to cite it other than as something not to be done. There is no need to cite failures to prove a theorem when you provide a proof, and there is no need to cite research that was done unethically. The results themselves are in question.

There are a lot of ways to fail at research. Lack of ethical behavior is only one. Don't cite the failures, except as failures.

In the case at hand, the research resulting from unethical behavior doesn't "contradict" the current work. It wasn't valid in the first place.


Is it appropriate to include actual maths in a mathematics personal statement? So, the title speaks for itself, but essentially over the course of the last few weeks I've been doing a course in complex analysis, and some of the identities that pop up are immaculate, and I think including one of these will enable me to convey that not only am I passionate about my subject (mathematics), but I am also well informed. Is this an acceptable thing to do?

In my opinion, it feels "too unconventional to be acceptable," but I'd like to hear your input rather than my own.

Any responses are appreciated.

Here's the thing about personal statements in math: a bad one can hurt you, but a good one doesn't help you all that much. Your grades and letters are what will get the committee's attention and convince them that you're smart. You don't have to use the personal statement to keep convincing them that you're smart. The goal is more to demonstrate that you know what grad school in math is generally all about. It's also good if your enthusiasm shines through, but don't try too hard. For example, talking about how much you loved math as a kid would just be trite.

To answer the question: yes, it's probably fine to include a formula that you really like, and talk a bit about how it captured your imagination. But it's better if you can relate this to your future plans, because that is what the statement should be focused on.

And again, don't formula-drop to look smart, especially not if the formula is something everyone learns in a first course in complex analysis (because knowing it doesn't set you apart from other applicants).

The above advice assumes you're applying for a graduate program. If you're applying for a summer REU or something similar, the same advice mostly applies, but there is less of an expectation that you know what your future plans are. But you can still tie your enthusiasm for Cool Identity X to your desire to learn more advanced math and get a taste of research through whatever program you're applying to.


I'm worried my former collaborators are going to publish without including me as an author. What should I do? I have worked for a project of a Ex-Postdoc, as I was promised an authorship. I was told “You will be a major author”.  I did almost all the labor job as postdoc was my cosupervisor too. I trusted the person.
This was while ago and I had inquire PI few times how is the current status of the project. I got told they are preparing a manuscript several times about a year.
Now I sense manuscript is about to submit and I have not heard back. I need the promised authorship.
After reading an answer from SE politely refusing authorship opportunity?
As they can publish without giving credit to me, I am worried thinking what can I do if they it publish bypassing me. As a international student I do not think I have any support around.
Could it be possible to write to the editor of the journal then?

I would contact the PI/supervisor and say that you are aware that the publication is still in preparation and that you expect to be a co-author of it. But you should also offer to continue to participate in the development in whatever way is appropriate.
You should, at least, have an opportunity to proof the paper before submission.


What to do if most of the students did badly in the 1st midterm? What to do if the average of the 1st midterm is like 35%?
Should I repeat the exam? should I ask them to redo the problems in which most of them did poorly in the exam and average the old score and the new score?
Other suggestions?

(The level of the exam is not different from past exams, where the average was around 60%. Same learning outcomes, same everything as past semesters. The only difference I made this semester was to break each question into sub questions, each of which will target certain concept in the main question. Students usually have the habit of asking for partial credits for writing relevant equations without knowing how to use them properly. I made that change to see how clear they understand things and to make grading scheme less ambiguous. I have already trained them on similar problems and concept questions in class, but it seems that they did not take it seriously or they are not used to that, I am not sure)

An Update: I regraded some papers using the same way I graded papers in past semesters (just by looking at the overall solution of each question) and the average became slightly higher (~40)

What I usually do, and this would also apply in this situation: I tell the students that if their performance improves significantly in the final exam, and if any of the remaining exams/quizes, I am willing to ignore the grade for the first midterm when I calculate their grades.

But they have to prove that the first midterm was an accident.

This usually motivates them to work harder for the remaining of the class, and for some students a poor first midterm is a good wake up call.


Academic dismissal from PhD program. What next? A couple semesters after beginning my PhD program (in the US), I was dismissed from the program because:

My GPA was slightly below the program's minimum (after being on academic probation for one semester already).
After months of work as an RA in a research group, at the end of the semester, my adviser informed me that he was not satisfied with my research and would not continue to fund me.
After that, the department was not willing to hire me as a TA, because TA funding was seen as an "interim" measure, and having a new adviser was necessary to continue in the program.
I couldn't find a new research adviser because everybody would freak out about my GPA.

However, I have done very well on exams, and I had a great GRE score. What are my options now? Applying again? What could I say about my messed up situation in applications? What if I applied to another school?

This answer is going to sting, but it's how I read the situation based on what you've written here. It sounds like there is something going on that you haven't addressed.

If a department wanted to keep someone who they felt was a promising student, who they thought could contribute with good work, I think they'd find a way to waive the GPA for another term, seeing that it's so close to the threshold. On the other hand, if they felt like a student was not worth keeping, they might be relieved that the student's GPA fell below the specified threshold, so they could use it as grounds for dismissal from the program.

As for the lab reports, there's a difference between being late and being unreliable. One is a fact, and the other is a perception. You emphasize the fact, but I suspect it's the perception that is behind their unwillingness to rehire.

As for the GRE score, those scores used to measure potential from an admissions perspective. Once you're in the program, GRE scores become pretty much meaningless; from that point on, you're judged by the work you do at the institution. (The fact that you even mention it makes me wonder if you have a habit of overestimating your own value in a way that annoys your professors and your peers.)

As for your options, I wouldn't recommend reapplying. That's an uphill battle; they seem to be sending pretty clear signals that they'd rather be done with you. That leaves transferring somewhere else. Given that your GPA is so close to 3.0, I'll bet you could find a school willing to accept you as a transfer student; however, they might have second thoughts based on some of the reasons for your departure. I would be very careful about who I listed as a reference from the school that is dismissing you now.

You might want to look in the mirror, and try to more accurately assess why you are being let go. As I mentioned, I think it has to do with intangible qualities such as personality, reliability, and teamwork – things that are hard to quantify, but easy to spot notice once you start working alongside someone, especially in an environment where the goal is to achieve a complex and long-term endeavor.


Rejecting an admit to Computer Science Graduate School and re-applying The situation is that if I get accepted from this school, say A, I would like to go but there are certain circumstances such that if they unfold, then I would like to go to school next year. So should I even apply to A? If I reject an acceptance from A and then reapply the next year, does it put me in the bad books of the Graduate committee of that school for rejecting and reapplying?

Do apply. If you don't get admitted, nothing needs to happen. If you do get accepted, accept the position if you're in a position to do so. If you can't accept the position, then talk to the graduate adviser and see if they're willing to defer you going there by a year. Most departments will be willing to do this -- they've already found you fitting for the job, so whether you come this year or next is not all that important to them. Deferrals for good reason are not uncommon.

The point is that if you don't apply, you won't get admitted this year (if circumstances would allow you to take the position), and you don't have a guarantee that you'll be admitted next year either.


What is the best way to see if my students understood? What are the methods you use to check if your students really understood the material you presented them with?

‘Bloom’s Taxonomy’ is a useful tool for classroom educators. Benjamin Bloom creates the taxonomy, which was later revised by Lorin Anderson.

His taxonomy helps educators develop critical thinking and higher order cognitive abilities in students. It provides a framework, or organisation, for classifying classroom lesson objectives.

Bloom’s Taxonomy states that, from the lowest level of cognitive rigour to the highest, a student is required to:

Remember
Understand
Apply
Analyse
Evaluate
and, Create

Changes to the Model:
The term ‘Remember’ was previously known as ‘Knowledge’; ‘Understand’ also replaced ‘Comprehension’; and, lastly, the order of ‘Create’ and ‘Evaluate’ was switched.

Bloom’s Taxonomy is actually a hierarchy, where students must first master the lower levels before mastering the higher levels. The levels represent a shift from simple and concrete thinking to more abstract and complex modes of thinking.

Tables of descriptive verbs have been made available to help educators plan lessons. These tables have been aligned to Bloom’s levels of Taxonomy.

‘Remember’ can be described as to: Arrange, Describe, Order, Name or Memorise terms.
‘Understand’: Explain, Summarise, Paraphrase, Discuss
‘Apply’: Choose, Modify, Discover, Diagram, Show
‘Analyse’: Break down, Calculate, Model, Subdivide, Infer
‘Evaluate’: Critique, Judge
‘Create’: Generate, Plan, Produce

If students are able to apply their understanding and analyse, evaluate or synthesise something from it, this is evidence that they have understood what they have been taught.

Whereas, if they were only to memorise something, this would not show understanding.


Publishing a conference version of a journal paper at the same time ? (copyright issues) This may be a question repeated many times, but I want to know your opinion.

I submitted a journal paper for an algorithm (Computer Science). Fearing that the review process take too long, I decided to submit a short-version conference paper, while the long version is under-review. I received the journal review comments, and re-sent the modifications to the journal. Meanwhile, the conference paper was accepted. But the camera-ready is not sent yet.

The problem is that both papers are about the same idea. There is also some copy-pasted parts in both papers. But:

1) the editor of the journal was not informed about the conference paper (I heard that I should tell the journal about any published papers - but note that the conference paper is not yet published - not even the camera ready is submitted),

2) the organization organizing the conference, is not the same that manage the journal. I have been told that there are conflicting copyrights.

The proposed solutions (that colleagues told me about):

a) submit both as is !

b) submit both (but with change in text).

c) do not submit the conference paper (but I heard this can be harmful)

d) tell the editor now (but honestly, the journal is way more important than the conference).

The problem is that you have painted yourself into a corner.

You have made a very serious mistake by submitting simultaneously to a conference (with formal proceedings) and a journal. Most likely both the conference and the journal have explicit rules forbidding this, and in any case any kind of simultaneous submission is highly unethical: you are abusing the peer-review system.

No matter what you do, someone will be upset.

If you are a student, perhaps the best approach is to play stupid. Contact the conference organisers, apologise sincerely, explain that you were not aware that simultaneous submissions are not permitted, explain that you are just a student, apologise again, and withdraw the conference paper.

The conference organisers will be upset. But maybe this is much better in the long run than proceeding with the publication of both versions, in which case you will make your mistake public and anyone is able to see it (conference submission & acceptance dates are public information, and journals typically publish the submission & acceptance dates of the articles).


What is a "professional student"? What is a professional student, in the context of a "Graduate and Professional Student Organization" in the United States (cf. this one)? How are they different than or similar to post-docs?

While Bill Barth's description of "professional student" as someone whose sheltering in academia and trying not to graduate is one I have heard, there's also a more formal designation for the term.

Mainly, post-graduate students who are in professional degree programs. For example, medical and dental students, law students, many students pursuing Masters of Public Health degrees, or MBAs, etc. are all pursuing degrees that are intended to be applied to a profession, rather than going further into academia. They often have somewhat different concerns than graduate students, hence the different term.


How to write an email to request a dataset to a professor I'm interested in a dataset used in a scientific article, but I am not able to find this dataset on the Internet, I guess it is because the dataset was provided by NSTAR (an energy company) that no longer exists (it has merged with Eversource).

I have thought of requesting it to the corresponding author of the article, but I have never sent anything to a MIT visitant professor (female, just for the record) and I have never called a teacher of mine by its title. I think that there is not such a strict culture in Spain of calling everyone by its title. Can anyone help me in writing the letter? Will it bother her if I send such request? How should I start? What should I say about myself? How should I end the letter?

Professors are just normal humans, even at MIT. Be friendly and brief. How about this:

Subject:

  Request for dataset used in [article name]

Body:

  Dear Professor [last name],

  on page [page number] of the article "[article name]" you are referring to a dataset consisting of [elements of dataset]. I am currently working on _____ and would like to ask if you could send me this dataset for further analysis as it would help me [benefit for you, e.g. "verify your results"].

  Thank you,

  [your first name] [your last name]


What should I ask a potential PhD advisor in an informal interview? I emailed a professor at a school I am applying to, outlining my research interests, two specific projects proposals, and how they align with his research. I let him know that I am applying and I'd be interested in working together and chatting if he's taking students. He said he is taking students and asked if I'd like to set up some time to talk.
What do I talk about?
Here are the main topics regarding his research I can think of:

How did you come to your line of research?
What topics do you feel are under-explored in our sub-area?
What projects are you most actively working on now?

Should I also ask for feedback on my proposals, or would that sound stupid?
To clarify, I closed my email with something like: If you are looking for graduate students and feel our interests align, I'd like to discuss opportunities for working together.

Actually, your questions sounds like you are trying to hire him for a position, whereas he would be the one taking on an obligation to you and your future. I would probably have a chuckle if a student asked me those in a first interview. The first question would be good over coffee after we'd worked together for a while. For the last question you might first find a couple of his recent papers rather than ask.
But the more important questions are things like

Can you help me find a topic that interests both of us? Follow up on this question if some suggestions are made.

How independent do I need to be (do you expect me to be) and are you available to help if needed?

How successful have other students of yours have been in completion and in their careers?

Is there a seminar in which you and grad students share ideas?

If you already have a topic that you want to work on then:

Do you think ABC is a fruitful line of enquiry and (if so) can you help me explore it?

But approach such questions cautiously. Some will take offense. Be prepared to be the answerer of questions, not the asker.


Can I back out a tenure track faculty offer? Summary: Signed a contract with school A while waiting for decisions from school B. Now got offer from B, and want to back out of the signed contract with A

What is the best strategy to back out a tenure track faculty offer and minimize its negative impact on both sides?
I am in an awkward situation. I interviewed two schools, A & B, this spring. School A made me an offer while B is still in the interview process. I contacted the B's committee chair about A's offer, the committee chair just said, everything is slow, no way to control it.
I asked around for suggestions. I was suggested by many people to take A's offer just to secure a faculty position. Yes, I did. After I signed A's offer and got ready to start this August, B suddenly notified me and is gonna make an offer.
B is a big top university and is very close to my family. A is a small teaching university and is very far away from my spouse. I visited A and their faculties are very nice. The chair is very supportive.
What should I do? I feel very guilty if I tell A, say - sorry, I cannot join you now.
Should I ask B to defer the starting date for 1 academic year, so that I can fulfill my duty at school A for my first year's contract so that A will not get mad at me? What shall I do if B will not agree to defer a year? Just back out A's offer brutally?
Any comments and suggestions are welcome and appreciated here.
Thank you!

There's no way to do this gracefully. You call school A and tell them that you will not be joining them after all. Afterwards you deal with the fallout.
Before doing so you may want to estimate exactly how bad the fallout will be and whether it might affect your ability to do your job at school B.


Publishing results that were trimmed from another paper I submitted a paper for publication. The editor accepted it but asked that I remove some results to make the paper shorter. He suggested that I put the full paper with the full results in arXiv, and refer to it from the published paper.
My question: if I do this, can I later send the trimmed results to a different (lower level) journal? I.e, are they considered "published" since they appear in a preprint that is referred from a published article, or "unpublished" since they do not appear in the published article itself?

EDIT: in my field, in general, it is allowed to upload preprints and then submit them for journal publication, so the preprint itself is not an issue; the issue is that the preprint is referred to from a published paper, so it might be considered an "appendix" of that paper.

I suppose you could.  When submitting the paper with the "leftover" results, you'll probably want to explain in your cover letter what's going on, so that the editor doesn't think you're double-publishing those results.

However, I don't think it's a very good idea.  People usually expect a one-to-one correspondence between preprints and published papers.  Having results from a single preprint going in two separate papers will confuse people and make it harder for them to find and properly cite your work.  So if you are going to have two papers, I think you should have two preprints.

So first, decide how you are going to split up the results among papers.  Update the preprint of your current paper so that it matches the content (and title) that will be in its published version.  Then submit a new preprint with a new title containing the leftover results, corresponding to your second paper.

In your current paper, you can then cite the second preprint.


Legal framework for academic recruiting in UK This is related to a previous question.
When a university posts a public ad for a vacancy does it only have to follow its internal policy for conflicts of interest or is there also some law that applies? What is the legal framework under which the recruitment happens?

I am not a lawyer, but as I understand it, the main legislation that must be followed when hiring in the UK is the Equalities Act 2010, which states that Direct discrimination, Indirect discrimination or discrimination by association is illegal if the discrimination arises from a protected characteristic. The protected characteristics are: age, disability, gender reassignment, married or people in civil partnerships, pregnant people and those on maternity leave, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation.

Beyond that Universities, like all private employers are free to set their own guidelines for recruitment. Most universities do have pretty strict codes for recruitment however, both to ensure they employ the best person for the job, but also to guard against the possibility of a case being brought under the above legislation (if you hired your white sister, rather than a black person, that might be a case of race discrimination).


Professor's weird behavior I have just started a thesis-based masters degree.

My supervisor has asked me to help with another student's project. So I am working with another student of my supervisor. We work together and send him a report weekly. We send reports on time.

One time our report had a mistake, the professor got mad at me (at that time I sent the report to him). He told me unpleasant things and I got really disappointed at that moment and it happened two times. It was weird because firstly he was very good with me and this behaviour was very unlikely. Secondly, he was not mad at my colleague (another student) we were working together.

Both of us wrote and sent that report and both of us made that mistake. Why he was not mad at him? did he tell any bad thing about me to the supervisor?
What should I tell to my professor? I feel very bad. He made me feel that I am useless.

I heard that my colleague has a bad reputation of gossiping about others to the supervisor.

I should add that my colleague, thinks that he is the boss in the lab and he sometimes bullies me and tries to correct me in everything even when we are filling a form which is not related to the project.

How can I handle this situation?

It sounds like an unpleasant environment to me. But still, this is one incident, right? So it might make sense to wait a little longer and see if this was a one-off or fits into a pattern.

If this turns out to be a pattern, you shouldn't stay in this lab beyond your Masters degree. If you really need a publication from your Masters degree (something that's not at all required in my field, for example), you should actually consider going to a different lab. If you feel like your supervisors anger, or your colleague's backstabbing, is too much, go to another lab as well.

While you are in this lab, there is surprisingly little to 'handle' about the situation. Just do your work, as separate from your colleague as possible, ignore your supervisor's anger but do try to get as specific feedback from them as possible, finish your Masters on time, get your recommendation letter and leave.

This answer sounds incredibly jaded and that's because it is quite self-centered: this is just a way for you to get through your Masters as painless as possible.