Are Identical Make-up Exams Fair? I recently took an exam, and our professor told us that we should submit our question sheets since 2 other students in our class are going to take a make-up exam. We were also told that we were not allowed to talk about our exam while the other 2 are around. I presume this means that their exams are going to be identical to ours (For the sake of argument, let us assume that this is the case, and it is not in fact a strategy or something of our professor).

Our class is on weekdays (MWF for 1 section and TTh for another), but we had our exam on Saturday afternoon. Since we all have class on Saturday morning, it is okay to have an exam on Saturday afternoon since we would already be on campus. Apparently those doing the make-up exam have conflicts with their plans for Saturday afternoon which the professor accepts.

Essentially, we can't tell them the contents of the exam. Our professor claims that this is so as to not compromise the integrity of the exam.

So here's my first question:

Is it fair to the students taking the exam earlier that the make-up exams are identical to the original?

We are grad students of mathematical finance.

Expansion:

It seems to me that the fact that it is too easy for the two others to find out the exam questions should be reason enough for our professor to give a different and possibly even harder exam and that doing otherwise is in itself compromising the integrity of the exam.

If it's not compromising the integrity of the exam, why not just have the same exam every year and collect the question sheet from students (which, cmiiw, actually doesn't really do anything since we can just copy the questions on a bond paper and bring the bond paper home)?

See possibly related question.

Second question:

I seem to recall that department policy is that make-up exams are "generally" (exact word in undergrad syllabuses but not in our grad syllabuses which makes no mention of such) more difficult. If the answer to the first question above is yes, then does it follow that the "generally" should be removed?

P.S. I truly cannot imagine how difficult it must be to a mathematician: research, teaching, consultation, conferences, etc. Thus, I am aware that it is no easy task for a teacher to just come up with a make-up exam, but nevertheless for the sake of maintaining the integrity (maintain is not compromise?) of exams, I believe this should be done.

Whether identical make-up exams are fair depends on the circumstances.  The key point is that you can't eliminate all potential for cheating: there are too many ways to cheat, and you can't even try to rule them all out without brutal and expensive oversight.  Ultimately, you have to make a trade-off, in which you take some anti-cheating steps but stop focusing on cheating once you reach the point of diminishing returns.  [For example, if you are really concerned about cheating, then you can't use take-home exams, and you'll have to police restroom visits very carefully for in-class exams.  These steps might be sensible under some circumstances, but counterproductive in others.]

So how does this apply to identical make-up exams?  If you're teaching a required, low-level class to a large group of unenthusiastic students who desperately want good grades, then cheating sounds like a real worry, and giving the same exam twice would be a foolish decision.  If you're teaching an advanced class to a small group of students you know and trust, then there may be no issue at all.  Reasonable people could differ as to where to draw the line between these scenarios, and it depends on their judgment of the likelihood and consequences of cheating.

There's more to this than laziness, although writing a second exam is certainly a pain.  Instead, there's a trade-off between several effects.  If you write a new exam, then you've eliminated the possibility of learning the questions from a classmate.  However, there's no way to calibrate the exams perfectly, so you've introduced the possibility that the make-up exam was inadvertently easier or harder, and the students may feel stress or bitterness over this.  Both the cheating and the differing difficulty are bad, and there's no way to completely eliminate them both, so you have to decide how much they worry you and balance between them.

There are also matters of educational philosophy.  I'm not fond of any approach that tells students I don't trust them or that challenges them to see if they can slip anything by me.  That doesn't mean I won't take countermeasures against cheating, but it means I consider the countermeasures to be problematic in and of themselves, so I try to use them as sparingly as I reasonably can.

In practice, how I design make-up exams differs from course to course.  Sometimes I write a new exam from scratch (while allowing some possibility of overlap with the previous exam, so students can't be sure something won't be on the make-up just because it was on the original exam).  In other cases, I just fiddle with some of the details or replace a few questions, while warning students not to discuss the exam until after the make-up exam.

Regarding outcomes, I find that students who take similar make-up exams rarely do surprisingly well, and on average they do a little worse than I would have expected.  Of course I don't know what's happening behind the scenes, and perhaps cheating saved them from scoring even lower.  However, I'm at least confident that students aren't using this as an opportunity to rack up lots of undeserved points.

  If it's not compromising the integrity of the exam, why not just have the same exam every year and collect the question sheet from students?

It's not a matter of absolutes, but rather of how much the integrity is compromised and what the consequences are.  Re-using the same exams every year offers much more scope and temptation for cheating than a single make-up exam does.  The longer you re-use an exam, the more likely it is that unscrupulous students will piece together and circulate a list of questions, even if you collect the question sheets.  If you do this for all the exams in the course, then the potential benefits of cheating are quite a bit higher than in just one make-up exam.  (If I saw the same student repeatedly requesting make-up exams, I would wonder why and might become suspicious.)  If the ease of cheating in every exam is known, then the course will attract dishonest students who might never have taken it otherwise.  There's a big difference between possibly being able to learn about one exam if you convince someone else to help you cheat, and being able to learn about every exam by downloading a file from the internet.  It's reasonable to draw a distinction between these scenarios.


Co-authors with the same initial and surname I am submitting a paper with my brother as a co-author. We share the same initials and surname, and neither of us has a middle name.

How should we deal with being required to use the format Initial. Surname?

The computer scientist brothers Marcin and Michał Pilipczuk have written many papers together. I think I've seen them referred to as "Ma." and "Mi.", though I can't find an example in writing. This is similar to an older style of initials for non-Roman alphabets which would, e.g., initialize Yuri as "Yu." and Phokion as "Ph."

However, journals seem to handle them inconsistently. For example, Algorithmica says we should cite one of their papers as "Cygan, M., Marcin Pilipczuk & Michał Pilipczuk". However, the same authors have a paper in the SIAM Journal on Computing which consistently cites the brothers as "M. Pilipczuk, M. Pilipczuk". There are also papers on ArXiv where they use initials in citations and just refer to themselves as "M. Pilipczuk", which suggests they don't feel a strong need to disambiguate. (I don't know them personally so this is pure speculation on my part.)

So, if it's possible, you could try using the second letters of your first names to make your initials unique but, if you do this, there's a good chance that the journals (and other authors!) will mess it up and you'll both be "J. Doe". And this doesn't work very well if you're James and Jason. An alternative would be to invent middle initials. There's no requirement to publish under your legal name, and there are famous cases of people having middle initials that don't stand for anything (e.g., Harry S. Truman and Ulysses S. Grant). However, the downside of this is that whoever chooses the initial earlier in the alphabet will always be listed first if your discipline orders authors alphabetically and, again, people will mess it up and not realize that they need to use both initials, especially for papers where only one of you is an author.

Another, rather off-the-wall suggestion is that some English names have abbreviations that were often used in company names up to, I'd guess, about a hundred years ago. So you'll often see "Wm" for William, "Thos" for Thomas, "Jas." for James, "Geo." for George and so on. But that only works for certain, traditional, English names, it's archaic and I doubt the journals would go with it.


Do undergraduate students usually share poster award money with their PhD student supervisor? I participated in an poster competition (for undergraduate students) and I won an award with a decent amount of money. My research supervisor was a PhD student at a researcher's lab. Do people usually share the money of the award with their research supervisor, with the PhD student since he helped me a lot with my poster?

I'm a PhD student who often supervises more "junior" students (masters students and undergrads). When I do, they keep any money they win (or if it was a group effort, it is equally divided between all the students, not including myself and faculty supervisors).


Publishing rejected papers I was reading a blog post, How to reject a rejection, by biologist Claus Wilke where he explains that it is common to resubmit a rejected paper to the same journal after a revision or appeal a rejection and get it published there.  This was surprising to me because, in mathematics, my impression is that this is very uncommon.  I believe overall resubmissions and appeals are uncommon, not just successful ones.  I suspect a reason for this is that are many good journals that are appropriate for any given (good) paper, but maybe it happens more than I thought for the most prestigious math journals like the Annals.

While I'm interested in mathematics, I'm also curious about how things are different in different fields, so let me ask generally:

  How common are resubmissions and appeals for rejections for the very top journals in your field?  How often are these successful?

Good question.  At the risk of telling you mostly what you already know, here is my perspective:

  After 12-15 years and 40-50 submitted mathematics papers (not counting multiple submissions), I have learned that one should virtually never appeal to the editor with the expectation of it changing the outcome.

In my experience "what's done is done" is the philosophy taken by editors and referees more than 90% of the time.  When I have brought up flaws in the refereeing process to an editor after rejection, the most common reaction I get is indifference / mild agreement but with the view that what's done is done. Only rarely have I had an editor willing to substantively engage with issues in the referee process.  In one of my earliest experiences, this resulted in an invitation to resubmit...and N months later the paper was rejected again.

At this point, when I remonstrate with the editor, I make it explicitly clear that I am not appealing the decision but just speaking up on the process as a matter of principle.  In fact this kind of "principled reply" has twice resulted in an invitation to resubmit.  In one case I declined that invitation (cf. the above story); the paper was published elsewhere after one more rejection.  The second (rather recent) time this followed a desk rejection by the editor.  I just couldn't fathom why this paper was desk rejected by this journal, and since I had had bad luck with the same paper previously, I wrote to the editor basically asking "I just don't get it; could you please explain?"  Amazingly, the editor wrote back immediately saying he had completely misunderstood the paper.  He invited us to resubmit the paper to the journal.  The editor in chief of the journal got involved as well (see below!) in a positive way, and the paper was accepted soon after with minimal fuss.  This experience made me realize that submitting a paper was like watching a baseball game: no matter how many times you've done so previously, there's a reasonable chance that you'll see something completely new!

Speaking of resubmitting following a rejection: in our field, I think that is unequivocally a terrible idea.  The part of the above story that I didn't tell yet was: after the handling editor apologized profusely, he asked us to resubmit the paper via the journal's automated submission system.  My coauthor and I almost did that....but we were stopped short by the dire warnings about resubmitting the same paper after rejection causing us to get automatically banned from the system!  We relayed this to the handling editor, whose response was essentially "OMG" and then he contacted the editor in chief.  The editor in chief looked into this and eventually asked us if we would be willing to change the title in order to resubmit.  We did so, decided not to change it back at the end, and this published paper has a slightly different title than the version on the arxiv or my homepage.

Even if that doesn't happen, I think that resubmitting what is even essentially the same paper to the same journal after rejection is the swiftest way to wear out your welcome with that portion of the community.  Imagine how many iterations of proofs of the Riemann hypothesis / twin primes conjecture / ... the Annals of Mathematics must get.  At some point they just have to ignore them.

[However, I now remember that I got added as a coauthor to a paper after it had been rejected by a previous journal in combinatorics.  My feeling was that the new version of the paper was only by historical accident a new version of the paper; in all other ways it was a different paper.  So we resubmitted to that journal, and it was accepted.  Then I submitted a solo followup paper to the same journal the following year.  They told me that they didn't want to publish two papers in the same subject at approximately the same time (long backlog)...and they offered me the option of merging my new solo paper with the previously accepted triply authored paper!! Baseball indeed.]

Your question is about "top journals."  I am starting to suspect that "top journal" means something different in mathematics than in some other academic fields, e.g. after reading questions like "I have five papers accepted in top journals but don't think I can complete my PhD." I mean, I am a successful research mathematician but have never even submitted a paper to any of the top three math journals.  But I find it unlikely that e.g. the Annals is more forgiving about resubmissions / more amenable to editorial remonstrations than other math journals.  I would expect it to be less so...


What should a student do, when a professor delays submitting his letter of recommendation? I'm applying to Stanford, which requires 2 letters of recommendation from teachers, due in 2 days.

Both teachers have known about this since mid-September, but one of them hasn't submitted his letter.  I've asked him, and he tells me that he has one prepared, but he hasn't submitted it yet.

I can't add a third letter that would qualify because of the way that the common application works.

Should I wait for the deadline to pass, hoping that he turns his letter in at the last minute?

Or should I ask someone else to write a letter in his place?

I'm mainly considering the first option, because I have no reason not to trust him, but I'm not sure what will happen if he doesn't pull through.

Turns out that they do accept letters of recommendation after the deadline, so long as the application is in on time.

Politely and very gently remind the professor that the letter of recommendation is due. That's really all you can do. If your professors says they will submit it on time, try to believe them.

As you have found out after posting the question, to the extent that it doesn't hold up other parts of their process, people on admissions committees understand that your flakey letter writers don't mean that you are flakey and will usually do what they can to accept or consider late letters. Often, departments will remind students or letter writers that their letters are missing, at, or even after, a deadline.


Expectations when contacted by an acquisitions editor about a course I teach This morning I received the email I've posted below, which says it comes from an "acquisitions editor."
1. What should I expect from a meeting if I agree to meet with the rep?
2. Is Kendall/Hunt a trustworthy company?

"Dear Professor Cruiser,

My name is [redacted] and I am an Acquisitions Editor with Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

As an Editor, I am particularly interested in speaking with you about the business math course that you teach.  I am curious to learn how the particular course is taught and the materials being used.

I am not a textbook rep. I am going to be at the [redacted] University campus during the week of [redacted] and I would like to meet with you during my visit.

Please let me know what day(s) and time(s) works best for us to speak during the week of [redacted].

I look forward to meeting you!

Kindest regards,

[redacted]

Acquisitions Representative"

I would probably ignore such a message, but if you want to know what to expect from a hypothetical meeting, I suggest asking the person who emailed you, since they weren't very specific. Why do they want to know about your course? What's in it for them, and what's potentially in it for you? If they can't or won't give you clear answers to those questions before the meeting, you can conclude they are not worth your time.


Publishing a paper on research with a previous employer, funded by my current employer I will be an author or co-author on a few papers at an upcoming conference. The papers are on work that I did as a government contractor. As of a few months ago, I accepted a position with the government, working on the same things with the same people, continuing my previous research. The abstracts were submitted when I was a contractor, and I stated my affiliation as being with that company. My question is: when submitting and publishing the final paper, should my affiliation be with my previous employer or the government?

Some relevant info:

At the time of publication, the government contracting company will no longer exist.
The government will be funding my travel to this conference.
Although the contractor was paying my bills when I was conducting this research, we were under a cost-plus contract and the government was funding everything.

An acknowledgement would be proper: Researcher X was previously funded in this research by Z.

It keeps it clean. While the company may no longer exist, its principals still do.

In general, acknowledging liberally is preferred over being stingy.


How do industrial researchers get access to online journals? When one is hired by industry to research (or something of innovative nature), he or she may want (or need) to access online journal articles.
But I suppose normal industrial jobs (e.g. software engineer in Amazon) don't grant online subscriptions to journals (like, access to a network IP with a subscription, just like many university accounts).
So, do industrial researchers purchase subscriptions themselves (this seems to be close to impossible)? Or do they apply for subscriptions through their company?
I have not worked in the industry, but I am curious.

But I suppose normal industrial jobs (e.g. software engineer in Amazon) don't grant online subscription to journal (like, access to a network IP with subscription, just like many university accounts).

Some industry research labs do subscribe to digital libraries, though in my experience, not as many as a university. For example, in the industry research lab where I'm currently spending my summer, I can access the ACM digital library, but not Elsevier journals.

To access papers that are not available by subscription, researchers in industry usually try one of the methods described in the answers to these questions:

What do you do when you find yourselves with an unreadable/inaccessible paper?
Access to journals for individuals outside of an institution?
Ways to get free and legal access to research papers as a researcher


On the use of hypocorisms on publications and university personnel list Suppose my legal name is Stephen and that everyone (family, friends, and also colleagues and professors) calls me Steve (being aware that my legal name is actually Stephen).

Suppose also that I prefer being called Steve and would like to publish my papers (starting from the first one) under "Steve Surname".

It seems to me that the academic world (in particular, the mathematical world, as it is pointed out in other questions asked on this website) is very liberal when it comes to these matters (i.e. pseudonyms).

However, I'd like to ask preemptively if -- to the best of your knowledge and experience -- there could be any nuissances of any kind (not necessarily in the form of legal troubles) in signing legal documents (which, of course, include my thesis) using Stephen while employing Steve instead of Stephen on papers or (if in the future it will be the case) monographs (let's assume published by the main publishers -- Springer, AMS, PUP, OUP, etc.) and in the personnel list on the university website.

To make an example of possible nuissance: do Research Gate, Academia.edu, and other similar websites allow you to register under a name that is a shorter form of your legal one?

To clarify: in order to pose this question, I choose

Stephen: because, like my own name, it is a nice name, that is to say, neither too long nor cumbersome;
Steve: because, like my own "calling name", it is slightly shorter, but not very-informal-sounding per se: in fact many people in various countries use it as legal first name.

Further clarification: I've seen this question. Mine is quite different though. In fact, I realize that it is possible (and accepted) to publish under a pen-name, and I'm asking specifically if there are any "legal" (so to say) nuissances associated to this practice. To make just few examples, when being included in the personnel list on the university website, when being included in the list of participants to a conference, when signing up to a website like Research Gate, etc.

Typically, you have full choice over which variant of your name you choose to publish under.

I know people who use a shortened version of their first name, substitute their (preferred) middle name, use their pre-marriage last name, etc. Publishers don't care and funding agencies use stronger unique identifiers.  I doubt that places like ResearchGate and Academia.edu constrain you either.

Just be sure to be consistent, and consider ORCID to help with disambiguation.


PhD applications and explaining poor results I had a couple of bouts of depression during my masters degree which resulted in very bad grades. Is it a good or bad idea to mention this in PhD applications to explain my grades?

First of all, I hope you are doing fine now, have recovered from depression, or are on the way to recovery!
I believe that there is no need to give insight in your mental health to a possible future employer. I would advise you to generally speak about „health conditions“ instead of disclosing your mental state, if you feel the need to explain your grades.


Can I write a systematic review by myself? I am a nascent academic in a medical field. I want to start publishing early, even before my master's. I see people like me do a lot of systematic reviews, though they collaborate with one or two people with them.

I want to make systematic reviews alone and get published in an open-source journal.

Is it possible? Please also recommend where I can find people to make reviews with other than my workplace.

There is no reason why you cannot write a review on your own, but there are at least three possible problems:

Many journals accept reviews on invitation only (but if you can find a journal that is willing to publish your review that is great).
Writing a review takes a lot more time than you think, especially if you are starting in the field and are not familiar with the literature.
You may need (or at least greatly benefit from) the experience of someone who has already published multiple papers or reviews: both to check and improve the article and to help choosing a journal to submit to.

But there is absolutely no reason not to try if you feel confident enough. Don't underestimate the time it takes though.

To answer your second question: your co-authors are usually your colleagues or people you have worked with. I doubt you will find "people to write reviews with" elsewhere.


What should I do if my final year project supervisor does not answer my questions Currently I am working on my Final Year Project. I have worked with the current supervisor for 4 months. In the first month, everything went smooth. Whenever I email a question to her, she will answer it within 3 days. However, as times goes by, she started to ignore my question. This happens from 2nd month onwards till now. I don't know whether she hates my for asking so many questions or simply don't have time.

What should I do to deal with this kind of situation as my Final Year Project's grade depends on her. If I don't have a good relationship with her, I think my grade will suffer.

Email is a terrible way to supervise work for both parties involved.  It's difficult to ask a good question over email and it's difficult to address a misconception over email.  From your question, there's no way of knowing which of several types of problems you are experiencing with your advisor.  The answer to all of them, however, is to have regularly scheduled meetings that are face-to-face if possible, or over a video link if you are doing distance learning.


What to check when examining paper proofs? When you receive a paper proof and review it prior to publication, what exactly should you be looking for?

The things that come to mind are any changes in the annotation of author list and the corresponding author. What else is there?

This is basically the last chance to fix anything (non-substantial) in the paper, so in addition to the things you mentioned, I usually check for spelling or grammatical errors, misprints in formulas, etc. Sometimes one might want to add a sentence to clarify something.

Finally, if the journal did any copy-editing, you should check its job. Some journals provide a list of changes they made for that purpose. You should also check if the pictures and formulas are still in the right places.

Added: sometimes it's necessary to update the literature list, for example if preprints cited there have been published in the meantime.


PhD defense in germany: how do they decide for the final grade? I am a PhD student in Germany (physics) and I will have my PhD defense in some months. I am not German.
My thesis is mainly based on 2 PRL's and a paper not yet published (submitted to PRB). The reviews (Gutachten) on my thesis are positive: I've got 1.3 and 1.7 (1 is very good, 4 is sufficient).
The defense will consist of an oral presentation of my thesis and of an oral exam (Rigorosum) in the presence of two professors (two main topics, one of which is completely not related with my thesis).

My question is, how much are important the presentation, the rigorosum, and the reviews respectively, to the decision of the final grade? Is it possible to fail the PhD defense, having good reviews? Actually, I am mainly concerned about nasty questions after the thesis presentation and during the Rigorosum...

To me it seems that your defense will decide whether you will get the grade 1.3 or 1.7. You will certainly not fail.

During my PhD it was roughly 2/3 the written thesis and 1/3 the defense, which is divided equally in your presentation and the rigorosum. However, for you I think this is not relevant since your Gutachten gave different grades and your performance will decide whether Gutachten 1 or 2 is "right".

If I were you I would take the defense seriously and be prepared for the topic the professors are going to ask you. Often professors give some hint on the topic or might even tell you in advance.

You should know that 1.7 will be rounded to 2, so I think it will be a "cum laude" vs. "magna cum laude". So it makes a difference.

To my knowledge virtually all grades are summa cum laude (1+) (approx 20%-30%), magna cum laude (1) and cum laude (2). So cum laude is practically the lowest grade, although it is a 2.

BTW: For the summa cum laude (the distinction) you need 1.0 in both Gutachten and also make an excellent presentation, where professors test you for your limits. Professors often use it to indicate that they think you are ready for the academic career. Also during selection of some programs of the DFG it is expected to have such a grade.

I hope this does answer your question.


Publishing elementary results As the title suggests, I am interested to know the chances of a middle-ranking journal's acceptance of a paper by an unknown author, detailing comparatively elementary results. By elementary, I mean results which are simply stated and simply proven: requiring knowledge only up to perhaps undergraduate year 3 or 4 courses. The results are new but do not have any obvious implications, nor are they usually considered as well-known interesting questions (not like open questions posed by previous authors). The "interestingness" of the results are mediocre at best. The methodology involved is new, but there is nothing to show that it is applicable in other related problems in the field, nor that it is significant in any way beyond the paper. Note that the field I am interested in is mathematics.

So, what are the chances of a journal accepting such a paper? My initial reaction is that perhaps this kind of papers would seem too trivial, given that often papers published in journals consider material from the PhD level or beyond. But then again, it is novel research with results interesting to some, so perhaps they are worth publishing.

(You can assume that the results and methodology given in the paper are truly novel and correct.)

From your description it sounds like the results have no implications, no relation to other problems, and is not significant in any way beyond that paper. In that case, chances are journals will not accept the paper. A paper needs to convince the editors & reviewers that its results are actually interesting.
Check out Steven Gubkin's answer to another question:

Here is a brand new mathematical theory I have invented just now (in the last 30 seconds):
A Gobleflump is a set together with a ternary operation Star(a,b,c), and a binary operation Spade(a,b) satisfying Star(Spade(a,b),Spade(c,d),Spade(e,f)) = Spade(Star(a,b,c),Star(d,e,f)).
I could now devote my life to the study of Gobleflumps. I could publish papers about extremely regular gobleflumps, and the equivalence between hyperconvex gobleflumps and hypoconvex grendleflops. This might all be legitimate, correct mathematics.
No one will ever care about my lifes work, or probably even read it, unless it makes some connection to existing mathematical theory, illuminates why something disconnected from the theory works the way it does, or solves some existing problem.

... and if no one will ever care about the results, most reputable journals will not publish them, either.


Will my paper get an ISBN/ISSN number if I upload to arXiv.org? I want to upload my paper to arxiv.org.
I also want to submit the same paper to a conference (computer science/multimedia related). The PC chair informed me that if the paper already has an ISBN/ISSN number, then it cannot be submitted to the conference.

Does arxiv, add an ISBN/ISSN number to all uploaded papers by default ? (assuming I choose the minimal, 'perpetual, non-exclusive' license option on arxiv)

Thank you

No. ISBNs are assigned to published books (print or electronic), and ISSNs are assigned to published journals (or other serials, such as conference proceedings).

arXiv is not publishing either of these and so will not issue such identifiers.

This is effectively saying "if it's been published, it's not allowed, but informal circulation online or as a working paper is fine". Having an ISBN or ISSN is a simple (though of course not perfect) test to see if something counts as "properly" published. (It's worth noting that papers as such never get an ISSN - the serials they are published in have ISSNs but this will be common to all papers in that serial.)


Misguided plagiarism phobia - is it a thing? (mainly related to difficulties in understanding English) I'm an enthusiastic contributor to one or two sites that help learners of English. I've noticed a problem that crops up again and again.
Many non-native speakers of English make efforts to disguise a quotation that they haven't understood when asking for help with its meaning.
I suspect this is because they have had it drilled into them that plagiarism is a deadly sin (which it is of course).
What they don't appear to realise is that a correct quotation with a proper attribution to the original author is good practice.
Perhaps none of this would matter but for the fact that their attempt to rewrite a sentence that they already don't understand, usually ends up so mangled as to be incomprehensible. (I don't want to single anyone out but if it's vital to the discussion I could provide a link to such a question)
In my experience this practice is common amongst students of whatever discipline who haven't understood a particular phrase when reading a text-book or academic paper.
Question
I can't imagine I'm the only one to have noticed this. Is it a phenomenon that is recognised by teachers in general? If so what do you do about it? Better still, is there a way to propagate the distinction between copying and quoting so that teachers world-wide are not misleading their students?

Example
I have invented an example for the sake of clarity.

The student submits the following question to English Language Stack
Exchange:
How can I use the expression "distant type"?
I saw a friend write the sentence, "X got bigger because of distant type Y"
What does this mean? How can I use it?

On investigation it turns out that the original was

"... obtained results suggesting a totally unexpected acceleration in
the expansion of the universe by using distant type Ia supernovae as
standard candles..."
Accelerating universe From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you think this example is exaggerated, I can assure you it is not. I see this sort of thing all the time.

NOTE
I raised this issue on English Language Meta. The difference is that
there I was explicitly asking about ways to deal with the phenomenon on Stack Exchange. Here I am asking if there is a solution (or even a problem) with regard to academic students when pursuing formal courses. I see this as sufficiently different to justify both questions.

I must agree with chasly.

I have come from the backgrounds of monastic education in Burma. They have a very different perspective on plagiarism. For these people, quoting an authority on the subject matter is for the sake of learned readers who will not believe an author on his or her own words. Therefore:

1) Even though the quoted text is in Pali, an ancient Buddhist language, translations are usually not provided. For, if you are a learned reader, you are expected to already know Pali.

2) The text is quoted only by title, or sometimes with the chapter title, but page numbers are never given. It means: if you are not learned enough to find out the quoted text on your own, you are not qualified to question the author's words.

See also the pages (611-617) of the following paper Intellectual Property in Early Buddhism.


How can I get feedback for my work in math if I'm not in academia? I will soon finish my undergraduate degree in math, and I want to study mathematics as a hobby after I graduate.

Online, I see a general trend of people saying

  You can't learn real math without collaboration and feedback. Go to graduate school!

But I don't want to go to graduate school, and I have found that I learn better through self-study than by taking notes in class. That being said, it always does help to get my questions answered by professors, and collaboration with other students is sometimes helpful as well.

Question:  Is it possible to have this kind of mathematical community without actually being in academia?

What I fear is studying for years by myself obsessively on a subject only to find that I had a horrible misconception the whole time that could have been avoided if only a professor had looked at my work.

Nowadays, you can get feedback and answers to questions from places like MathStackExchange, and MathOverflow. Most of the responses are (in my observation) either entirely competent or quickly corrected by others. Good quality control. No, that wouldn't be the same as having a good advisor (ideally a world-class scholar on your subject) that you talk to in person every week. Still, these sites can give guidance.

Also, quite a few of the more-senior people who like to contribute to such sites may be amenable to direct email contact, etc.

(Grad school is not about "taking notes in lectures" per se, but is about having access to the informal observations of very good mathematicians, and being able to ask them questions immediately, in the moment.)


Endnote: citing highlighted text from a PDF as direct quote In Endnote X8 for Windows, how can I use the text I've highlighted in a PDF (stored directly in the Endnote library) as a direct quote in my Word document, and cite it properly?

You asked a follow-up question later (here) but this contains a specific aspect - pulling a highlighted citation directly from the PDF for an in-text quote. There is not a way to automatically pull highlighted text from a PDF so I would recommend the following:

Open the PDF and find the quote and page number. Type the quote carefully so that it is accurately represented.
Insert the citation as normal following the quote.

For an APA example you might have:

  "This is an important quote which justifies my research" (Jackson, 2017, p. 1)

or with the field codes visible the citation would be {jackson, 2017@1}.


Pros and cons of supervising master's students as a postdoc I'm an American postdoc working at a university in the UK, working in a mathematics department. I am planning on applying to jobs in both the US and UK, including smaller places, and SLACs.

I have the opportunity to supervise a master's thesis. In the grand scheme of things, is it worth it? My suspicion is that nobody gets a job for having supervised an MSc thesis, but on the other hand, permanent job applications do seem to ask about such experience.

What are the pros and cons of supervising students? Would the time be better spent on doing my own research?

If you are planning a career in Academia that includes any non-trivial teaching component, it would probably do you good to get some experience with this. Whether it is enough to compensate for the time is a judgement call.

But, one thing that you need to learn as a teacher is that other people don't learn like you do. Every student is different and each has a unique way of learning. Things that are easy for you may not be for others. This is more pronounced at the undergraduate level, but even at the MS level you will get a sense of the kinds of struggles that students have by doing some supervision.

The experience may also give you some insight into coming up with the sort of problems that are appropriate for MS students. Problems that are hard enough so that something can be learned but not so hard as to require years of effort. Having a lot of problems at hand can serve your own research interests well.

A more remote advantage is that some of these students will continue to a doctorate. When they do, they will form part of your academic circle with you as a "senior" member. This can open possibilities for collaboration later.

I think there are a lot of pros for this and few cons as long as you don't take on too much initially. Since there is only one such offer currently, it might be worth it to dip your toe in that stream.


PhD supervisor is taking really long to read my thesis I am at the final point of my pretty satisfying PhD. I like working alone and I did not need constant supervision, and I had a pretty good relationship with my supervisor until now. I noticed in the past that when it was time to proof-read papers, it took EXTREMELY LONG TIME to do it, and almost always waited until the day of the deadline (however, it was always corrected at the end).

Now that it is time for my thesis, though, things are getting difficult. I sent  the first experimental chapter more than one month ago, and it still hasn't been read, every time saying that there has some other deadline. I have been asking three times a week, and every time the the same thing is said. Of course, I don't find any pleasure in keep pressuring my supervisor, and I wish it was understood that it HAS to be done. I am afraid that it he takes 1+ month to check a chapter, it will take a year to read the whole stuff!
In the meantime I have kept working on the thesis and I will finish writing the first draft soon, but it hasn't been corrected yet. I am not sure about the course of action here. How to deal with this situation?

Should I talk with the director of studies? Should I keep pressuring my supervisor? Should I give a deadline?
If I decide to talk with the director of studies, should I tell my supervisor first?

The main point is that until now I have had a good relationship and I don't want to ruin it just now. However, I need to find a way to push to get the supervisor to complete the job.

Edit to add some related details from the comments:

I'm in the UK, and my research is in a field related to psychology.
My second supervisor is not involved in my project, and it wouldn't be appropriate for me to contact them for this question.
My scholarship ended a few months back, and I'm now being paid as a research assistant with my supervisor for a few more months.
All research work has been completed, the analysis are done, and I'm almost finished with writing. Changing departments is not an option.

EDIT: Thank you to everybody for your help. This is the way I proceeded: without mentioning to my supervisor about this chapter again, I just discussed about the timing to complete my PhD, mentioning that I plan to finish writing in around one month. This requires me to complete some bureaucratic paperwork soon, which means that we have to set up some deadlines, find examiners etc., which also means that my thesis will be corrected before a deadline. Since my supervisor works better with deadlines, I think that this method will work. Therefore, I ignored the particular problem about correcting the single chapter, and I used the main topic (finishing my PhD) as a way to get things rolling. Not sure if this is the best solution, but I think it may work for me.
Thank you again, your support has been very appreciated.

A good starting assumption is that your supervisor has good intentions, but like many of us, has trouble getting things done because of workload and/or procrastination.

Artificial deadlines may help.  Perhaps your supervisor is too busy right now but would be able to agree on a date several weeks in the future by which he can read the chapter.  Or even better, perhaps you could agree an overall schedule for completing your thesis, including deadlines by which you will send each chapter, he will review it, and so on.  This could help prevent the problem from recurring in the future.

If this doesn't work, I would have a chat and share your concerns with him about how you feel this is needed for your own successful completion of your thesis.

If all of this still doesn't have any impact, you are in a tough position.  You are dependent on your supervisor, but outside of extreme situations, there is no real formal mechanism requiring his action.  You could try getting your second supervisor involved.  Even if you have had no contact so far, you do have a formal relationship with this person, and that is a good enough basis to do so.

Talking to the director of studies would be a last resort.  It probably isn't worthwhile until the continued inaction is clearly going to delay your PhD completion.  If you want to maintain a good relationship, I would discuss this with your supervisor first, making it clear that the delays are about to have a big impact on your life, and you feel you have no other choice.


No luck with postdoc hunting after PhD. Will things change with a major paper out? During my PhD (defended in Fall 2016), I developed a new microscopy technique, which allows investigating the internal structure of materials non-destructively and in 3D using neutrons. The work was technique development \ proof of concept, and I wrote my thesis the old way: as a book, also because I did not publish along the way. I guess that is the main reason why all the postdoc applications (about 20) and fellowship (about 5) I submitted were rejected.

The paper presenting the work I did will be soon submitted to a journal of the Nature group. I am the first author and there will be about 20 co-authors. After submitting, I plan to upload the draft to arXiv, so that during the editorial process people can see the work I did.

Basing on your experience, having a paper out (first on arXiv and then hopefully on the Nature website) does change a lot how people judge a postdoctoral application? Do you have any tips on how to maximize the impact of the paper? After that many failures, I feel a bit discouraged to continue applying.

Thanks for your help!

In case it might be helpful: the work I did was at the intersection between computer science, physics and materials science. I am looking for postdocs combining computer science with biology or physics.

Think about it this way: What would make things different after your paper is out?

You'd be a person who has published a paper in a prestigious venue.
More people will read about your work (in that paper and through it, elsewhere)

No. 1 will likely help to some extent - perhaps even enough to secure a post-doctoral position. But I think the key is no. 2; and publishing a paper is just one way to get people to know about your work and its importance. If you have a clear idea of what you want to be doing, you don't just "submit applications". You talk to relevant researchers in groups which could use your expertise and input, and make a pitch - for a collaboration, for a visit, and possibly for employment. The fact that you made 20 applications makes me guess that for most of them were somewhat generic: You noticed a posting and mailed/email your application. Try to find a researcher who would not pick you among applicants, but rather just offer you work because s/he believes you would help their lab and their research.

Sorry for being a bit vague - I'm from a different academic field; but I think my point is valid for life scientists as well.


How to write a proper subject line for a follow up email I emailed a professor about a postdoc position three weeks ago. He replied me on Friday that week and showed his interest. I answered his question about partial funding in the new email but have not heard from him since then. It's been two weeks and I think it's time to send a followup email. I'm not sure how to write the subject line. Should I forward the previous email and write subject like this: Follow-up about postdoc position?
Thanks a lot. I'm a little nervous about the position and hope I can get it.

You can reply to the email again and change the email body to "Gentle Reminder " with a smiley and you can insert [Reminder] before your previous subject


How can I make use of iterative "work in progress" versions of papers I often find myself writing the N+1st version of the same paper: we might have a short periodic internal report, a longer report for the funding agency, and  we're now writing a conference paper.
As N gets larger, this gets more and more confusing.

While the early iterations were good, they had different purposes, lengths, and level of details.
For example, the internal "work in progress" version of a paper might have many preliminary results, but almost no introduction.
The conference version needs to have a more detailed introduction, but fewer (more focused) results.

Currently, I find that writing paper version N+1 requires starting with a rough copy/paste from version N, printing all version until N, and then looking in all previous versions for any missing information.

What are some strategies for better handing these multiple iterative versions of these papers?

Note that in contrast with this question, we don't start with a complete result (something that could be considered the "superset" paper).
Early iterations are mostly rough drafts, and sometimes middle versions do diverge because of different audience/requirements.

Not sure if I understood you correctly, but if you need a better workflow for managing the progress and evolution of your drafts, then I think the question you've linked to actually answers your question.

A combination of git and modular LaTeX can help you to:

track changes in your draft(s)
make sure new versions (and new versions of new versions) start with everything that was in the version they were started from
merge changes between versions
split your draft(s) in such a way that it is easy to include different bits and pieces in different versions
greatly simplify collaborative work
reuse parts of your projects (e.g. git project setup, LaTeX macros/environments/styles, any compilation scripts)
and many more things


Whether to complete revise and resubmit that requires major changes or submit to lower impact factor journal? I have just received an email from the editor of a major journal in my field (engineering). He's rejected the paper, but advised me to do some modifications. These are his words:
"..thanks for submitting your paper to "...". While the paper is well written and structured I see several limitations in the assessment of the method. I am rejecting it for now, but it could be reconsidered if the following issues can be addressed:
MAJOR
1.
2.
.
.
MINOR
1.
2.
.
.
..."

Minor items can be done easily. Major items, I believe, are not necessary. Most of relevant articles do not include them.
My question is: should I do these modifications and resubmit the paper to the same journal, or consider submitting the article to another less IF journal to save my time? What are the chances to get published if I did these modifications.

General Issues

Presumably this depends on your perceptions of:

The time and resources required to make the major changes
The probability of acceptance should you make the major changes
The degree to which the paper will be improved by the changes and the value you place on that improvement
The probability of acceptance in another journal were you to not make the changes (or just the minor changes), and how much work any future journal might request from you as part of making changes, and any cost assigned to the delay in publication that this may involve
How much lower impact the alternate journals are  (and how much you care about impact factors and rankings)?

General advice

If I get a revise and resubmit from a high ranking journal, I would almost always try to make the changes requested. There is a little bit of luck involved with publishing in good journals. If you go on to submit elsewhere, these other journals may reject, or they may have equally onerous edits. However, once you get a revise and resubmit, if you do a good job of implementing the requested changes, then the editor will typically accept the manuscript. Furthermore, at least in my world, publishing in prestigious high-impact journals has many broader benefits (e.g., increased exposure for your idea, and improved cv which helps for grants, promotions, job security, etc.).

That said, I can think of a few exceptions where I might not make the changes.

The editor says something about liking the broad topic, but is basically requesting a whole new study (e.g., collecting a whole new dataset with a bigger sample, better measures, different design, etc.). In particular, this is often combined by comments suggesting that the editor would be happy to consider such a study: i.e., not really offering a commitment to publish even if such a study was implemented well.
Sometimes, I'm working on a paper that is not my core focus: e.g., perhaps converting a student thesis for publication, or helping out a colleague. The paper might be fine as is. I understand that it could be even better were we to collect whole new datasets or invest substantial time in some other respect. But in such a case, this time and these resources may feel like a distraction from my core program of research.

Ultimately, it's up to you to weigh the issues up. But I would assign a high-value to publishing in high impact journals and taking advantage of the opportunity that you have been given to make revisions.


How much would writing a thesis help for a person's career in industry(not in academia)? There are many people who pursue a thesis-based master's degree but do not want to pursue academia after graduation. If people just want to have a good job, is thesis writing helpful to them? My major is electrical engineering.

I can think of two reasons you might want to write a thesis.

If you would inherently enjoy the challenge.
If digging in and writing up specialized knowledge in a particular topic might be related to your future work on the job.

Either of these would be a good reason -- you don't need both.


Doctoral stay in foreign university I am a PhD student in my second year, and I am thinking about doing a doctoral stay in some foreign university with a group that works on the same topic as I am. I do know about some interesting research groups where I could do this kind of doctoral activity. However, I am unsure about how does some proceed to pursue this kind of research position.

Does one directly write to the group presenting yourself and what are you doing (also presenting some of your published work)? Do you have to follow a formal application at the target university? Does it depend on the country/institution?

If you simply want to work with them and don't require either a formal position or funding then you just need to talk to the PI of the research group and deal with visas and such.

But if you need funding, it is a separate issue that might be handled by the PI (via their grants) or by the university. You might be able to arrange your own grant, of course via some agency.

If you desire some official position, such as formal matriculation, then that can only be granted by the institution. That will generate an academic record for your stay. Later in your career, the position of Visiting Professor might be open to you, but from the institution.

But you need to talk to the PI in every case. Give them your qualifications and your interests. Treat it like you would any application. Convince them of your suitability and likelihood of success.


Asking reference letter earlier or later if I need to go mandatory service for my country I'm currently working in a research institution as a RA, and I'm thinking of asking my professor for recommendation letter for PhD application. But because of mandatory national service in my home country, I have to go back and serve my country for 2 years before going into PhD. In that duration of 2 years, I'll have minimum contact with my professor, if anything.

Should I ask for a recommendation now, given that his memory of me is much more fresh, or should I ask him after I'm done with my mandatory national service, at which I will be applying?

I've heard both cases of arguments:

Pros of asking earlier

Professor will forget the minute details about my projects and my skill (two years isn't that long, but I don't think it's short either, given that he has interaction with many other RAs and students)
It will give him plenty (perhaps too much?) of time to write the recommendation letter when he is free.
It is more likely that he will write a letter for someone that is working for him now, then someone that has worked for him in the past, since he does not have to see me when he rejects my request, but it will be awkward if he rejects my request now when I still work for him.

Pros of asking later

Professor may fear that I may decide not to pursue PhD after that duration has past, and his effort in that letter might be in vain. While I'm confident that I'll apply after that 2 years has past, I cannot give a proof to him.
If I've accomplished anything during the time I was away, then he would like to put it in the letter. In my case, I'm doubtful if I can do any academic work when I'm serving my country, but who knows.

I'd like to hear if there are any other reasons to favor one option over the other, and ultimately to know which option to take.

I've seen related question: Letter of Rec. for future University application but this is quite irrelevant since most answers deal with the question of asking the police chief for letter.

This is also related, but my circumstance is different from the OP in this post.

I would suggest explaining your situation to the professor and asking him to write the letter now.

Later on, if you do manage to do some extra work you can ask him to revise the reference letter. The revisions will be quick and easy, but writing a reference letter from scratch after two years might be difficult.

The professor should not be disappointed if he writes the letter but you decide not to continue in academia. A good reference letter will also be very useful when applying for other jobs.


Should we input Chinese characters in a table of summarizing vernacular names in a Scientific Paper? or only write in Pinyin I got a comment from a reviewer  who suggested that i should remove Chinese character in the table which shows different names of a plant from different countries. Actually i typed pinyin( Chinese character), namely Ding Cao(丁草). I saw several published papers do the same thing. But i have no academic proof or authentic documents so far. So please share or give some consultancies if someone encountered. Thanks very much.

My suggestion differs from the reviewer. I think that for maximum readability across countries, your solution is very good. Including the local names as well as a translation when appropriate makes your results accessible for more people, especially as you are dealing with international data. Some kinds of research will depend on having the "official" name expressed in the local way.

But, it may be that the reviewer is also concerned about the difficulty of typesetting your paper at that particular journal. They may be correct or not. It might be worth a note to the editor asking if including various non-Roman scripts in the paper will cause any difficulty. At this point in time they should not, but the editor will know for sure.


Should I quit if I'm having problems with the Marie Curie industry partner? Unfortunately I am having a really hard time with the industry partners that have made me think I should quit. First of all, they are aggressive every time I come up with a research idea, and they shut it down in an aggressive way. I have been having some issues to be there to the secondments (bureaucracy not from my side). It is now on their side how to solve the bureaucracy. They have been trying to convince me the secondments are not important, and I can work for them from abroad. They are not being transparent or providing information about what they are doing to have me in place and finally one of them just got out of control and insane and scream at me in a meeting in front of everyone. Frankly I don't want to work with these people again.

What should I do in case of having troubles with the industry partner? What are the risks for the project, if I quit?

I would not quit a MCS fellowship. Either you solve the problem with the industry partner, maybe by collaborating with another person or unit (if possible), or try to minimize as much as possible their importance in your project. Usually secondments are a nice addition but a MCS project should stand on its own even without the secondment.

You could also try to reach out to someone in the Horizon2020 and see if they have a person that can help with this kind of problem. In the meantime I would also gather some proofs that you can use to build your case. In the worst case you will have to justify to H2020/EU why the secondment was not useful/successful.

PS: how to improve the working relationship with industry partner seems more a question for another Stack.


Response to project proposal feedback I have recently submitted a project proposal for the final project of one of my graduate courses.

The unit lecturer who marked my proposal is in his 70s and he has once stated in class that he's an engineer for so long that he knows everything better than us and there is very little that we can outsmart him. (Maybe not exactly with these words but something very similar.) Although I am not very comfortable with the way he said it, he is not entirely wrong as he is a well-known professor with a lot of experience.

He marked me down in 2 sections and his comments are quite controversial.

The 1st section is the historical background of the product I have proposed. He is the history himself I give him that but my writing was based on a research and I didn't made up a random historical background. I even cited the books I have used while writing that section. The books that I have used are highly reputable in my field of study.

The 2nd section I got marked down is about the assumptions I made to simplify the design while running computer simulations. Mid/small scaled robot arms often use "servo" motors and these motors are capable of rotating 180 degrees and some can be modified to rotate 360 degrees. I have got several datasheets to verify this information. Yet, the lecturer commented "All servo motors rotate 360 degrees." which is clearly not the case.

I will email him to respond his comments but I sometimes have trouble with expressing my ideas without being annoying/impolite and hence I need your advice on how to structure my email. I don't want him to get annoyed and start picking up on me in the upcoming submissions.

I am a person who gets motivated by the marks I receive. At the beginning I was very excited about this project and the way my proposal was marked discouraged me. I don't think it received the mark I have deserved. Consequently,  I don't feel motivated anymore. Some of the proposal (from other students) are marked by the unit TA and he is a very fair guy. Although both the unit lecturer and the TA mark based on the same marking rubric, I bet I could get 10 more points if TA was marking me.

If you believe you have been unfairly graded, stick to the facts in writing to your professor. Don't argue "I should get a higher grade." Instead, frame it as a question.

Dear Prof. X
I am confused about a couple of the comments you made in grading my paper.

On page A, you said "B," but I found (cite literature supporting your claim).
[Repeat for each comment you'd like a response to.]

Could you please explain the discrepancy?
[Closings.]

This usually works better as a way of requesting a regrade than saying "I deserve a higher grade because [reasons]."


Why do American universities receive lots of endowments? The amount of endowments that American universities receive is much more than European counterparts. Why alumni of American universities and other people have such a big desire to donate money to universities.

This happens in Europe too, but much less than America. Almost all American universities (at least major ones) have many named chairs (funded by external donors), but you see it rarely in Europe.

There is a greater tradition of alumni giving in America, which European universities are trying to also foster (especially in the public funding cuts to universities seen in the UK).

In America there are also generous tax breaks when giving money to charities and foundations which encourages gifting.


How do I reply to a professor whether I accept his postdoc. offer? I have been applying for postdoc positions recently. Yesterday I got an offer from one professor, but I didn't reply to him whether I accept it or not. The reason is that I am waiting for another professor's reply, whose university is much better. But I am not sure the second professor can give me the job. So I am worried to lose all if I refuse the first professor right now. Could you please give me some suggestions to deal with such situations?

I think you are thinking of it backwards. You should use this offer to try to get an early decision from the other professor!
You can say that you're very interested in their position, but you also have another competing offer. You could ask them to make a decision, or give you a timeline for when a decision would be made. Then, to the professor you have the offer from, just write a polite e-mail thanking them for their offer. You can be honest and say you're waiting on a competing offer, or you can say something vague like you need a few days to consider, and give them a deadline (probably no more than 10 days) for your decision.


Will it be a bad move for Master's to do summer internship in industry when trying to pursue a PhD program? Currently, I am in second semester of Master's program in Computer Science and Engineering. Even though I am yet undecided, I lean a little bit more towards pursuing PhD program rather than getting into industry.

Many people tell me that research experience is the only factor in getting accepted to PhD. The problem is that I have a summer internship offer from an established industry, and I do not have any professors that will accept me as a summer research intern at this time.

Personally, I do want to try out the internship to see what it is like, possibly helping me decide whether to definitely pursue PhD or look for more industry options. However, as of now, I feel that it will be a bad move in terms of applying for PhD next semester, where I will probably lack research experience that other candidates might have. Meanwhile, I am trying to build research experience through course projects and directed research within academic semesters.

How much adverse impact will it have in PhD application if I were to choose summer internship at the industry?

A person who has had his finger in both the academic and industrial pie, and then tells me that they want to do a PhD, comes across as more credible. You understand what each has to offer and you are more likely to stick with your choice. As for research ability - it has to be quality, not quantity, at this point. The rest surely will come in the course of a good program.

If the internship is interesting I would take it. Just make sure you learn something while you are there - do more than "just your job".


PhD supervisor wants me to quit after break I have been studying for a PhD and unfortunately had been suffering from depression during the first year and on medication, so I didn't make much progress at all. My supervisor seemed understanding, telling me I was 'one of the strongest students' he'd taught, and not to worry as sometimes life gets in the way, and I should take a study break if necessary.

I therefore took an official study break for one year, and came off the medication. Just before I was considering returning, I sent an email to the supervisor just asking about what we should do next. His reply was to say how terrible my performance had been so far and that he strongly advises I should quit. I felt devastated to say the least. Is he right after all and should I really quit? I thought he was so supportive to begin with and actually suggested the break. Or is the blunt truth correct? Doing a PhD was my dream and now it is shattered.

Edit: I have been advised to add that I did not tell the supervisor in advance that I was going to be on break for a year, just that I was taking a break as he advised. I did not know in advance how long a break would last. Neither was I in communication during this time. When I was depressed, nothing else mattered.

Edit 2: Clarification that the break was officially sanctioned by the university. Please note technically I am still "on break" as the supervisor has not allowed me to return.

Update: The supervisor has ignored my last email so I guess I will be quitting or moving on. Thanks to everyone who answered and commented.

If your advisor is suggesting that you quit, it is likely that you will have a hard time carrying on with the same advisor.

You maybe need to have a discussion with them about why your performance was bad, and why you needed a break. As it currently stands, it sounds like you had one year in the program without any progress, and then another year where you took a break and also made no progress, so it is two years since you were admitted to the program and you are essentially a new student. From your advisor's point of view, suggesting you quit is good advice as they feel it is unlikely that you will finish your degree. If you want to work with them, you need to convince them that this is not the case.

If you want to continue to pursue a PhD, and you are unable to reach a point in discussion where your advisor is empathetic to your situation and enthusiastic about working with you (not just grudgingly willing to work with you), you probably should either 1: change advisor at the same university, 2: leave your current program and apply to other programs.


How and why would I "claim ownership" of a paper on arXiv? My colleague has just published a paper on which I am co-author. This is the first paper that has my name on so I am not familiar with the systems yet.

He has received an email from arXiv to confirm his submission and it gave a "paper password". It recommended he forward this to the co-authors so "They may use it to claim ownership."

What does this mean, why would I want to do it and how do I go about it?

By claiming ownership the paper appears in your arXiv account, and you can manage it there (e.g. uploading a new version or adding a journal reference). It also means it will appear in the list of papers associated to your arXiv author identifier, which is especially useful if you have a common name.

You can claim ownership by logging in to your arXiv account (create one first if you don't have one yet), and then click on the "Claim ownerhsip" link. It will ask for the paper ID and the password.

Edit: As Wrzlprmft pointed out in the comments, it will likely also add to your endorsement record, meaning that you are less likely to need to be endorsed for future submissions you make yourself, and will sooner be able to endorse others.


Are authors of papers okay with receiving questions from people in industry? Would authors of a paper be okay with fielding technical questions about the paper (implementation, theory, etc.) from a person in industry?

I see this as a moral grey area because an engineer in industry is in some way profiting off the work of a researcher without necessarily paying them for the time they took to respond to emails, etc. On the other hand, is the researcher responsible for clarifying details about their paper regardless of who they are being contacted by?

Of course, this will vary from person to person and the length of the engagement, but I was just wondering what the general attitude towards this situation is.

I certainly don't see anything immoral about asking questions.  You may want to mention your affiliation, which will clarify the issue and perhaps also help the author give a more useful response.

The author doesn't have any particular obligation to respond to your questions or anyone else's, but probably will if they are interesting and well thought out.  Academics generally would want to encourage anyone who is interested in their work.

If your questions get very involved, to the point where an academic might consider suggesting a collaboration, you may want to consider offering the author a consultant contract.


From a lesser known uni, but very prestigious in my country - do I tell my referee to make this clear in my LOR for USA applications? I'm applying to the US and Canada for PhDs this cycle, my undergraduate university is very well regarded in my country (UK) and generally in the top 5 for domestic rankings/prestige. Even more so for my undergrad program (Physics), which generally accepts people who very narrowly missed out on Oxford/Cambridge places. However is pretty much unheard of outside of Britain (ranked in the 60s/70s globally). Do I ask my referees to make the relative prestige of my uni clear on my LOR so that admissions committees can understand the context of my grades and experiences?? Or would this be considered too on the nose?

I am preparing to send materials to all of my referees with some advice on how to write LORs for North American applications, which they may not have done before, so I would really like to clarify this before I do so.

First of all, it is a tough position to be in as a student to have to give faculty advice on how to write your graduate school letter of recommendation.  To give them too much guidance may not be appropriate, and as someone who has not yet completed a PhD program or read or written any such letters, you almost certainly don't have the expertise do properly advise them either.  Thus I would urge you rather to seek out writers who have previous experience writing letters to North American universities.  One of the most important qualities of a top world university is that they regularly place their students at other top world universities, so (as @Tobias Kildetoft has pointed out in comment) I would expect there to be many faculty members in your department who have experience writing such letters.  I think it is much less awkward to try to choose letter writers based on this expertise than to try to give your letter writers letter writing advice.

But assuming the premise of the proposal: it is not clear to me exactly what information you are hoping to provide.  The world's top hundred universities are largely well known to each other, and moreover it is the responsibility of those who are evaluating your application to know or learn enough about your university in order to perform that evaluation.  When I do graduate admissions and get an application from an institution that I am not familiar with, I do spend time familiarizing myself with it.

In terms of rankings: Times Higher Education [a London based magazine] places twelve UK universities within the world's top hundred: Oxford (1), Cambridge (4), Imperial (8), University College London (15), London School of Economics (25), Edinburgh (27), King's College (36), Manchester (55), Bristol (71), Warwick (82), Glasgow (88), Durham (96).  It is reasonable to expect a reputable North American PhD program to have heard of all of these institutions.    Individual faculty members will also have their own opinions on the relative merits: for instance, in terms of the kind of mathematics that I do, I view Bristol as being very strong, perhaps at about the same level as Imperial.

If the faculty who process graduate admission do not agree that your institution is one of the world's most prestigious, simply pointing out that it is one of the top ones in the UK according to some metric may not change their mind.  They should instead offer concrete evidence of the excellence of their program, e.g. by talking about world-leading faculty members and former students who have been placed in other top institutions.


What happens if an IRB mistakenly approves unethical research? In human subjects research, it's fairly well settled that researchers may not go ahead without the guidance and approval of an IRB, even if their research otherwise lacks ethical infirmities.

What happens in the opposite situation? That is, suppose a researcher gets IRB approval for their project, but later on, ethical issues are found in the research that the IRB missed?

Since researchers are not allowed to trust their own understanding and must seek IRB approval even in the most obvious "there's no way that could be unethical" scenarios, it stands to reason that the opposite is true - that if research has been IRB approved, then researchers may go ahead with a clear conscience even if there could still potentially be ethical issues in the research.

I recognize that there could possibly be civil or criminal liability outside of academia, but I'm not asking about this.

If research turns out to be unethical, but it received IRB approval, who is held responsible? Is it solely the responsibility of the IRB for misguiding researchers, or does the researcher bear some responsibility for not recognizing the ethical infirmity?

Another way of asking this is whether researchers have a duty to police their own IRB, potentially second-guessing their approvals.

To be clear, I'm asking about situations where the average non-expert might be unclear as to whether or not something is ethical. Obviously, if an IRB tells someone, "Yes, it's ok to torture political prisoners as long as you kickback 5% of your grant to us", that's blatantly unethical and no one should accept that, but an IRB saying, "Yes, we reviewed your consent form and we don't think you need to disclose the extremely remote risk of the subject being hyperspace tunneled" might be one where the average person (or even researcher) would just get glazed eyes and defer to the IRB.

Since researchers are not allowed to trust their own understanding and must seek IRB approval even in the most obvious "there's no way that could be unethical" scenarios, it stands to reason that the opposite is true - that if research has been IRB approved, then researchers may go ahead with a clear conscience even if they personally feel that the research still has ethical issues.

I don't see it that way.  The IRB doesn't replace the author's judgment, it supplements it, and the ultimate decision should be based on the "logical AND" of the author's and IRB's approval.

Since conducting unethical research seems clearly worse than not conducting ethical research (a Type II error is worse here than a Type I error), it makes sense to have an asymmetry between approval and rejection.

So in my view, even if the IRB has approved the research, the author should not go ahead if they do not believe it is ethical.

  If research turns out to be unethical, but it received IRB approval, who is held responsible? Is it solely the responsibility of the IRB for misguiding researchers, or does the researcher bear some responsibility for not recognizing the ethical infirmity?

Practically speaking, the researcher would have some cover because of the IRB approval, but I would still hold the researcher primarily responsible.  After all, it is their name on the paper.

  Another way of asking this is whether researchers have a duty to police their own IRB, potentially second-guessing their approvals.

Well, the researcher ought to make sure they think the work is ethically OK before submitting to the IRB in the first place.  But if they start having doubts later, or they are ethically uncomfortable with changes recommended by the IRB, they should not proceed until those issues are resolved.  So in short: yes.


Marshall Scholarship question Please let me know if there is a better place to post this.

From the document, http://www.marshallscholarship.org/applications/2020_rules_2_year_updated, I have,

"In addition if a candidate puts Oxford, Cambridge or Imperial College, King’s College London, LSE or UCL as their first choice institution none of these universities can be listed as second choice institutions."

I'm not sure how to read that. It seems from only that sentence, that it is somehow more difficult to get a Marshall at one of those institutions, and it would benefit you to choose an institution not listed there so the cohorts for each year are spread around...? But then looking at previous years this is simply not the case, http://www.marshallscholarship.org/scholars/winners_2018

Is there any benefit to applying to say Durham/Edinburgh/Southampton over Oxford/Cambridge?

Thanks in advance!

Without asking them directly, it's hard to say for certain what their intent is, but it seems like a mechanism to dissuade applicants from applying solely to those institutions. For example, they don't want everyone putting Oxford as 1st choice, and Cambridge as 2nd choice.


I got kicked out from graduate school in the past. How do I include this on my CV? I got kicked out from graduate school in the past. The reason was that I had very poor GPA, and I failed to meet the academic criteria (some administrative regulations, nothing personal like disciplinary action or anything). Actually I left before I got technically kicked out, but you get the idea.

So I do not know how to include this on my CV, because I believe it is too long a time frame to ignore - almost 2 years.

After getting kicked out, I managed to get into another program (THANK GOD), and I am getting back on my feet again. Obviously I need a CV, and I need some help with that.

In addition, I also had a decent scholarship there. Is it reasonable if I omit the university on "Education" section but include my scholarship in "Awards" section?

I have "Education" and "Experience" sections on my resume.

Option 1: Including it on the "Education" section as "Graduate student", and including it on "Experience" as "Research Assistant"

Option 2: Omitting it on "Education", and only including it on "Experience" as "Research Assistant".

Option 3: Your suggestions?

I would only mention it as part of your work experience. The Education header in a CV is usually where people put their finished and ongoing studies. Since you have not, and will not ever, actually graduate from your previous program it is essentially just a work experience now.


Statement of research interest for summer schools I'm doing a PHD in physics (not in US), and I'm applying for a summer school in US (an example). I'm required to upload a statement of research interest.

I have searched for webpages on how to write statement of research interest for a while but found that most of them are for applying for graduate schools. So my question is, what is the difference between statement of research interest for graduate schools admission and that for summer school?

So my question is, what is the difference between statement of research interest for graduate schools admission and that for summer school?

The way you phrase the question suggests that you see this statement of research interest as a form to fill in some details. But it's not like there's a "P27.B: Statement Of Research Interest for Summer Schools" form that's slightly different from the usual "P27.A: Statement Of Research Interest for Graduate Schools" form in Annex B. These things don't exist.

I think you're approaching the question all wrong.

A research statement is a letter you write to a person with a specific purpose. So a better question would be "what is the purpose of writing a research letter for a summer school?".

The answer is pretty much the same, but instead of trying to demonstrate why you and your background are a good fit for a grad school, now you're trying to demonstrate why you and your background are a good fit for a summer school and that you will benefit greatly from that school.

There's lots of tips on the Web on how to write a good research statement. Maybe some personal pointers ...

First and foremost you need to appreciate that it will be read by a human being, not a machine. So don't make it boring or clichéd, esp. if that human being will have to read hundreds of statements like yours. Keep it concise and interesting. Many students are too concerned with filling "the requirements" than communicating; the key part of such a letter is communication, not topic lists.

Second you need to figure out what that human being is looking for from you. Such statements are not just paperwork; they have a purpose. Why are they asking you for the document? Why will they spend valuable time to read it? What is important to them?

Third you need to frame your personal context into what they are looking for.

If you can, try to figure out specifically who is going to read it ... what kind of technical expertise they have, what are their research interests, etc. That person will probably be a postdoc or junior professor in the area.
In the research statement, they'll want to see how the student will benefit from the school ... why that student is worth the chair space. They will simply be looking for enthusiastic students with a convincing story as to why they will benefit from the summer school. If the school is very narrow and technical, there may also be a check to make sure that the student has sufficient background knowledge to follow the topics. If you sound too expert in a topic, that's not good either; they'll want you to learn!
In the text, discuss your research interests and goals. Relate your goals to the types of topics covered by the school. Add details; perhaps a specific lecture or lecturer or topic you are especially interested in and why. Be enthusiastic but not fake. Don't get stuck in technical details. Try to make the letter sound personal, almost conversational, like a person wrote it ... versus someone taking a template and filling in topics. Edit and remove irrelevant statements. Get feedback from peers or an advisor.


Failed my BEng dissertation in a computer/electronics related field twice, how do I move forward? I went to university to study a degree which has computer software and hardware elements to it. I didn't do badly in my normal modules at all, I never got below a 2:1 grade in any module, and some of them I got to over 80% percentage wise. Now, I don't feel like I come from a terribly good home, and there has been a lot going on in the background that is sort of still there, at least some of it is.
When it came to my dissertation I picked a topic somewhere in September last year. My topic was to do more with physics and graphics than my actual degree. I thought it would be interesting to find out about these things. I tried to do it in C++ which I already knew, and apply OpenGL to see it on the screen.
Honestly, I didn't know how or why but learning anything on the topic didn't work for me. Creating the programming environment took me days and sometimes I still have issues with just making the bare skeleton of things work. I followed a tutorial from over 10 years ago (so quite outdated for my liking) on how to do this particular thing, but its 2 days from hand in date number two and the practical side doesn't work. To give you an idea of time, I say I failed twice because I managed to get a 3 month extension due to Covid, and failed to hand anything in on hand in date one, and now will fail to hand in anything on hand-in date two because I simply can't learn how this works.
When it came to actually working and meeting with my supervisor, every meeting I would want to break down and cry, and so I'd avoid most meetings, and then further not be able to do any meetings online during Covid, because every single second I knew that I didn't understand a thing, and there was nothing to say to him. I haven't spoken to him for over 3 months. I generally tried to do work in the mornings, and only started with my hobbies in the evening so that I gave myself at least 3-6 hours of work per day to do this, especially after the extension was given as this was my only work for those three months. But it looks like I am just too stupid to do this. Tutorials for OpenGL took me days to get through in a way that I understand what was going on. I got some medication for my panic attacks, but generally, due to this work, I've been waking up to me sweating and breathing really fast for the last few weeks especially, not to mention constant nightmares I have. Needless to say, I find it difficult to be happy right now and people have been telling me I am distant and I act like I hate them.
I don't know how to move on from this failure and tackle the re-take, if it happens at all at this point. I want to ask for some sort of study leave, so that I can study what a dissertation is, and what is it that I could possibly research instead of this, and then hopefully go back and do the retake, not run away from my supervisor, and actually feel like I know what I am doing like I usually did during my modules. In general, I need some recommendations on how to tackle dissertation and failure, as well as how to pick a dissertation topic I feel like I can do.
Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask for help, please leave a comment on where I can go otherwise, but mostly I just wanted advice from people that actually have an academia background and could write a dissertation, especially in a computer or programming related field.

Your first and main source for help and advice on this should be your supervisor.
Working in industry I went through a high stress phase when I tended to cry during meetings with my boss. He was a very courteous person, and ignored my crying except for moving a box of tissues next to where I was sitting. Depending on your supervisor, you may need to bring your own tissues, but that is no reason to cut yourself off from essential help and advice.
Your supervisor knows what is expected for your dissertation. It is not something you should go off and study by yourself. Your supervisor should also be able to help you with where to go from here in terms of getting an extension and modifying your project if that is the best thing to do.
As for not having anything to say to him, "I am stuck, and will not be able to hand anything in on the current schedule" is something you should tell him as soon as possible - a few weeks ago would have been better than today, but today is much better than tomorrow.
In addition to a PhD in computer science I have over 30 years computer industry experience. I would plan and expect to spend a week or so learning my way round OpenGL if I needed it. Needing a few days to understand a tutorial, especially as you probably have less experience learning programming languages and libraries, does not seem like a very serious problem to me.
If you are using a current version of OpenGL with a ten-year-old tutorial that may be part of the problem. The tutorial and the OpenGL version you are using may not be compatible. In general, if a tutorial or book is not working for you, try a different one - there are plenty to choose from. Also, once the tutorial tells you what features you need to use, read the reference documentation on those features.
Given that you have medication for panic attacks, you may be able to use that issue to get extra time and help from your university's disability services. If you have not already done so, discuss your project difficulties with whoever is treating you for the panic attacks.


What is my degree if I am still a bachelor student? I am registering to submit an article and I am asked to give my current degree, the problem is that I don't have a bachelor degree yet. So, what is the usual term and acronym to use for the current degree if you are still a degree student?

In the US system, I would advise to leave it blank. But in some European education systems (and in particular with the impetus of the Bologna process), the high-school diploma is considered a formal degree. In France, it is called baccalauréat, in the UK it's the A levels, in Spain (you seem to be Spanish) it's the bachillerato.

So, if you are in a European system, I would advise you to write bachillerato/*baccalauréat*/A-levels, otherwise leave blank.


Asking for help in refereeing a paper? I was asked to referee a paper. The topic is within my field but not in my exact area of research. The paper seems all good and fine, but I struggle to judge the originality or whether they miss relevant work. I have a friend/colleague in my department who works in the same area. Would there be any problem with asking for their input on refereeing the paper?

I would assume that it is a fairly common practice as long as no conflicts of interest arise. But, to be sure, this is really a question to address to the editor. You might have to say a few words about the colleague.
Some situations, of course, require confidentiality. Most do not as long as the normal rules and expectations apply.


If I am going for a second masters and my previous GRE score is expired, do I have to take the GRE again? I am already done with my masters but I want to go back to school for another one. The only thing is that I got my masters 9 years ago. I know GRE is only valid for 5 years. Since I already done with one masters, would I be required to take the GRE again if I want to go for another one?

Not necessarily.

I applied to a top department at an RU/VH university in the United States, and asked to have the GRE requirement waived for exactly the same reason, and they waived the requirement, and then admitted me to the program.

Ask the admissions office/committee if they will wave the requirement.


Applying to Ph.D. programs: Should I include my master's degree transcript? I am trying to get into a Ph.D. pure mathematics program in the U.S. I have a Master’s degree in mathematics. It took me a decade to figure out I do not see myself being happy without doing mathematics and teaching in a full-time job. I don’t care about getting into an Ivy League or solving famous problems. I would be perfectly fine teaching anywhere and exploring a problem no one really cares about. Given that I have already made up my mind about applying to Ph. D. programs, I have a problem I would like advice for.

My problem: I have a Master’s degree in pure mathematics, but my grad school GPA is a 3.03. It was a painful period of my life as I was diagnosed with a personality disorder and endured strong medication regiments.

Would it be detrimental to me to include my graduate school transcript in my Ph.D. applications? In this case, I would essentially be applying only showing my Bachelor’s degree (where my GPA was a 3.32).

If I do not include my graduate transcript in my applications (apply as if I only have a Bachelor’s degree), the fact I have a Master’s degree will likely be revealed in my resume/vitae, letters of recommendation, the fact it is required to teach at the level I currently teach, or somewhere else. Thus, the schools may ask me for my transcript. Or perhaps not, I do not know.

Can someone please offer me advice on what I could do?

You do need to include your Master's transcripts when applying for a PhD.
Aside from the academic dishonesty issue of not including your transcripts, having taken many of the core courses at the graduate level will make you a more attractive candidate, as they will know that you do not need to take remedial coursework before beginning doctoral-level studies.  Having the Masters will also make it a lot easier to get teaching assistantships, since those often go first to those who already have Master's degrees.  Your letters of recommendation, too, need to come from academic references for your PhD (not supervisors or coworkers or general character references), so you will need to get letters from your Master's degree professors that can speak to your potential/experience as both a researcher and as a graduate student.  So I would say a definitive yes to including the transcripts.

The second question you need to consider is about whether to address extenuating circumstances in your application.  I think it is helpful to address, but only insofar as it presents you in a more positive light; that your disability helps you to better understand the situations that your students face, that your health issues have helped to build your resilience so that you'll be capable of long term study and research, etc...  This might be especially important to include if you have obvious "red flags" on your transcript like withdraws or incompletes - so that they both know there's extenuating circumstances but also know that those same circumstances are not going to wash you out of the doctorate.  (Which is why you'd always want to portray those circumstances as an asset rather than a liability). So this one is a little more complicated and will require a lot of thought to deal with in your application statements.


Would an MDS (Master of Dental Surgery) from India be adequate for a research position in Australia? I’ve earned an MDS (Master of Dental Surgery) in public-health dentistry in India. My thesis and other research projects focused on developing a module for dental students on tobacco cessation counselling.

Now I am in Australia, currently with an Australian spouse visa.

What qualifications are required to work as a research assistant in Australia?
Is it possible for me to work in research field as a research assistant or as a public-health professional without clearing the Australian Dental Council exam?

Generally, research assistant is not a regulatory job in Australia (I work with many!). I've seen RA coming from all different background. As long as your boss is happy, there's nothing stopping you working as an RA. However, I have never seen an RA without a university degree, it's hard to convince anyone for your research potential if you don't even have a degree.

Of course, you won't be able to work as a dentist in Australia as dentist is regulatory job.