Tutoring is depressing because my students are struggling too much with my exercises. What do I do? I am a tutor for first year students in mathematics, and I feel pretty bad about it.

I recently changed universities. At my previous university, where I also tutored, the exercises were very demanding for the students; the problems were interesting and not easy. So I was really glad to be able to help.

Now, this is not the case anymore. Exercises consist simply of paraphrasing the definitions, and almost all the students are struggling pretty hard on these very simple exercises. Typically, they think that solving Ax = 0 when A is a 3×3 matrix is too hard. They have very little intuition about what is going on, especially in algebra. When they ask me questions, I try to answer so they see a way of thinking that can be generalized. But sometimes they just look at me as if I was an alien.

I am not here to complain, but to ask for advice. What should I do? Should I simply answer their questions as simply as possible? What I really want is to push them to work harder and become more familiar with mathematics. On the other hand, I am probably doing this already a bit and I don't want them to be disgusted by mathematics. I really don't know what to do.

Edit: Thanks everyone for your answers and your comments! This is really helpful. As asked here is some more detail: I am a tutor for students in the first year of a university in Europe. We are two tutors, staying in a classroom during 3 hours and answering every question they ask to us. I am paid by university, this is not private tutoring. They are studying mathematics, so they are not e.g. engineers. (In fact, two years ago I did teach complex and Fourier analysis to engineers in my previous university and I was surprised by the high level of the class! They were only in second year but got very hardcore stuff to do, and some of them were doing very well!) My current university does not organize one tutoring session for each class but only one "big" session where we should answer questions on all subjects: geometry, algebra and calculus.

What you're experiencing is pretty much what all college teachers are wrestling with all the time everywhere.

Allow me to point out that the abyss of need can go much, much deeper than what you're currently dealing with. In the U.S., most college students are attending a community college. And most students entering U.S. community colleges do not have 8th grade algebra skills, nor even 6th grade arithmetic skills (e.g., fractions, proportions, negatives, estimations, times tables). I've had a good chunk of a college math lecturer career at this point and I've never taught anything as high level as matrices.

Here's how I've been able to jiu-jitsu it in my own mind. Think of it like a diagnostician. Doctors have to find it fascinating to track down hideous diseases. Detectives have to find it compelling to decipher ostensibly horrible crime cases. So too: I find it endlessly fascinating to diagnose what exactly is the block or problem in students' heads, or to track down the place where their reasoning first went off the rails. Ask questions to try and find where their reasoning starts and where it stops. Do something of a binary search to try to narrow down the problem spot. I'm continually discovering new gaps in people's knowledge that I never would have expected. It's surprising and amazing every day.

Usually I do find that students simply cannot remember starting definitions. If they've come up through a system that depends on raw faith and memory (and not mathematical reasoning), they don't get how important that axiomatic basis is. Many also clearly have learning disabilities that make this difficult for them. "All your answers are back in the definitions", I say several dozen times per semester. Have the book handy so you can turn back to the starting definitions at any time, and see if they recall or can see how their reasoning got off track that way. In fact -- this explains why at your current school they're asking students to reiterate definitions; whereas for us that's natural and obvious, for some it's an overwhelmingly difficult blind spot to fill in.

The course is too easy, many students are not so motivated, many of them see your math TA class as the ideal time to relax. You can deal with that by announcing in class that in two weeks time there will be a take home test that they must submit within a day. So, if they haven't mastered solving systems of linear equation by that time (something that ten year old primary school children can learn to do), they're going to be in deep trouble.  Also tell them that you're available for questions, extra exercise problems via email and on some hours of some days in your office that suits you best.

You should propose this to the instructor of the course, just tell him/her that most of your students are at F-level and they're not making progress and you see doing an intermediary test as a possible way out.


Prof's neurological health is declining rapidly. What can I (TA) do? I'm a law student acting as a teaching assistant/fellow for a tenured and notable law professor. Between last year when I took the course myself and now when I am a TA/TF, his mental acuity and health has declined significantly. He has essentially no short-term memory, tremors, and can't follow conversations. He rambles, mixes up classes and assignments, and even physically wanders off to look for things (not returning with anything...) in the middle of class.
The students know that something is wrong and often exchange looks when he loses the conversation or rambles.  The faculty certainly does know. His assistant attempted to see someone in the administration for help but they brushed her off, and once the professor found out, he never forgave his assistant and there is a rift between them.
My heart breaks for him. He's had an excellent career and I don't want him to face this kind of humiliation. But at the same time, his condition is so poor that I had to teach the two-hour class today. He must know that something is wrong, too, because he will often make awkward jokes to cover memory lapses.
What can I do? He won't see a doctor. I am afraid of burning bridges with him by confronting him, since that's what happened to his assistant. I don't want to go behind his back to the administration for the same reason. I need his recommendation/reference for my career aspirations. His family is absent. I also worry that any intervention at this stage, in the middle of the semester, will only hurt his students.
Who, if anyone, in a school administration could I speak to about this? Is there someone who handles this sort of thing? Should I? Is it inappropriate for me to insert myself in someone's personal affairs like that?
Update one year later: posted as an answer here.

Let the department head know what you've observed. You can write an anonymous letter if you feel uncomfortable or are worried about burning bridges.

(I've been in this situation, as a student. We - the students in the class - wrote a collective letter to the department head. He was able to arrange extra TA support for the professor for the rest of that semester. He also arranged things so that this professor had other duties in the department going forward, but no more teaching.)

If you think you can handle the extra work, you could speak privately to the professor yourself, and -- cautiously -- offer to take over the lectures for the rest of the term.  He might be glad of a way to get out of this situation without losing face.


Loss of an exam day in a four-week class A friend of mine is a mathematics professor at a college in the southeast United States (where they're currently expecting significant snowfall) and just asked an interesting question that I'm reposting here:

I'm currently teaching a four-week class, and next week is the final week.  There is a good chance that the college will be closed Friday due to the weather, but Friday is also scheduled to be an exam day.
How should I handle this?  I cannot afford to use the last Monday as the new exam day.  My initial thought is that I could post it as take-home exam with strict warnings about using resources, but we can probably guess how well that will go.

I'm sure that she would appreciate any suggestions you might have, and I am also curious to see what they might be.

This is a college level issue. The school should come up with a plan for how such a problem should be handled. It seems absurd to ask each individual professor to come up with a specific plan for his/her own students.

Be honest and realize that the administrator(s) know the weather ,time have already decided the right thing you should do. If they saw how much you struggle with this you may lost your credentials to teach in la esquela? Comprende amigo


What would an inclusive curriculum look like in a computer science course? There exists plenty of literature about how to be inclusive, both in the workplace and in the classroom.

I'm wondering how this might be done intentionally — specifically in the context of a computer science class — from a curricular standpoint. I'm thinking of generic intro-to-programming types of courses, which usually include algorithms and data structures.

I have attended several workshops and have read a few articles, but haven't really delved into the literature about inclusivity in the classroom. From these workshops, I am quite comfortable being inclusive in the classroom (lectures, interactions, etc.) -- but I'm looking for ways to have that reach to homework, projects, and so on -- and specifically for computer science as far as possible.

This is an interesting question. The program I am doing most of my teaching in has recently been faced with a similar question (due to comments of an external evaluation), and I can't say we have come up with a satisfying solution yet.

Here are some pointers (in no particular order) that have come up in our discussion:

For exam tasks / homework descriptions: evaluate critically if your tasks (or rather, their descriptions) carry bias. Naturally, you want to avoid the cool developer being called Bob and the silly user Alice or Ahmed, but it goes deeper than that. For example, in an Intro to Programming exam I was giving many years back the task was to model and implement a simulation of a game of football/soccer (the assumption here being that the majority population - white, male college kids in Europe - would be intimately aware of the rules and have an easy time conceptualizing the task). As it turns out, those that did not fall into the majority population (some women, foreign students) did worse on this task, presumably because they needed to spend a lot more brain cycles even understanding the game they were supposed to simulate.
For deadlines: consider that some students may not be able to, if need be, work through the night or the weekend. It's easy to think that a deadline Sunday evening is not a big deal if you think of your students as a homogenious mass of 20-year-olds with no other obligations than to study, but if one of your students is a father / mother of two, or working on the weekend to sustain themselves, the story becomes different.
For extra-curricular activities: the same is also true for extra-curriculars. If at all possible schedule attractive extra-curriculars (e.g., Hackathons, job fairs, whatever your university does) in a way that they can also be attended by people outside the majority population.
For social events: the same applies to social events. Make sure that social events, to the extent possible, not only cater towards the majority population. For instance, when I studied, a lot of the student social events boiled down to "find an excuse to drink", and basically all conversation was in the local language. Both of this together unsurprisingly meant that foreign students, especially Islamic students, never showed up.
Avoiding "hidden knowledge": in many universities and courses, there are official rules and "unspoken rules". For example, a teacher may say that students are expected to learn the entire book, but well-connected members of the majority population know from previous years that in reality most of the questions are about Chapters 3-8. Given that (some) minorities are less well-connected than the majority population, these constructions can disadvantage these students severely.
Diversity of TAs: ensure that not all TAs are always from the majority population (i.e., ensure that there is some amount of representation of non-majority students). This may need active steering, because if you just take the first 5 qualified students, you may easily end up with only students from the majority population (because they are more, because they are better-connected, and because a lot of TA contracts are written in a way to appeal to 20-year-olds).

To summarize: keep in mind that some of your students may have a different cultural background, different life constraints, different priorities, or different access to "common knowledge". Try to level the playing field as well as you can.

Adding to what @xLeitix said, and from a curricular/class activities and program standpoint:

Add a class regarding BIAS in data with plenty of examples of GIGO
(Garbage in- Garbage Out).
On the grading, force part of the grade to
correspond to BIAS/exclusion testing for all homework/projects, and
to consider the potential economic cost of such bias.
Assign works that are targeted to a different sample of people than the average majority. VG: Model how a daycare works rather than a futbol match.
Include mandatory books and lectures like: 'Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men', 'Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World' , Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech, 'When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures'
Be open with times and regarding remote work.
Be strict regarding noninclusive behavior.

A lot of noninclusive behavior can be traced to the lack of knowledge about it or the comprehension of it's importance.  Anything tech however is tricky, because for IT people (my field), social or political reasons are completely useless, you need to give rational reasons to why this matters, and the best and easiest way is to pinpoint economic or productivity reasons. If it seems that in small quantities its not much, then escalate to a country or society levels, even species/world level. With this you can ensure that the reasoning behind the curricula is sound and will be headed.


What is the grammatical number of an inline citation? Which of the following is correct?

a) Johnson et al. (2010) prove that all snow is yellow.
b) Johnson et al. (2010) proves that all snow is yellow.

I suppose the question boils down to whether I'm citing the authors or their paper. If the paper is the subject of the sentence, it's singular (b). If the authors are the subject, then it's plural (a).

I personally am comfortable with both ways, for exactly the reasons that you give: it's entirely reasonable to refer to either the authors or the paper.  The important thing is to be consistent with your usage throughout a manuscript, else your readers may wonder why you feel it appropriate to refer to some authors directly but not others.

I'd offer another alternative:

c)  Johnson, et al. (2010) a proof of yellow snow.

The paper penned and published by Johnson and his buddies back in 2010, entitled "An analysis of the purity of driven snow" does not PROVE that all fallen snow is tainted, thus is "yellow."  His paper OFFERS A PROOF that all fallen snow is tainted.

I believe, though I reserve the right to be ridiculed and otherwise piled on by both Chicago and MLA acolytes, that when you first cite a reference, it is of the general form:

1) Johnson, et al. "An Analysis Of The Purity Of Driven Snow" (2010) p.544. (optional summary descriptive text)

...and subsequent cites can be shorthand:

2) Johnson, et al. (2010)


Mentioning that a part of the thesis was done at another university in my PhD thesis While working on my thesis, and for about a month, I did some simulation studies on another university with the supervision of another professor. I want to mention this at the begining of the section where the results of this study are reported. How do I properly acknowledge this?

A simple statement such as "This study was carried out at X University under the supervision of Professor A" would probably suffice, but check with your supervisor in case there are any local regulations that you have to follow.

For example, my university requires every PhD thesis to have a "declaration" statement after the abstract, in which you list things like funding sources, collaborators and any publications resulting from your research. Your university may require something similar, in which case you would put this statement there.

Apart from the mention, you'll also need to mention this as a part of your affiliations. You can also check what both universities' guidelines say about how to mention your affiliations.


two body problem - tenure track and PhD My partner is currently interviewing for tenure track positions. I am a first year PhD students and We would ideally like to be in the same city. Ideally I would like to find a co-superviser to continue the path of my current PhD or find a new PhD that I like and start over.
When is the best time to mention this two body problem? ( It is not mentioned in his application)
What is a good way of phrasing it? The positions we are talking about are in the UK and Denmark.
p.s: Is it possible that mentioning the two body problem will reduce his chances of getting the position?

Two-body problems is something which is usually only brought up proper once you have the offer during the negotiations phase. Then, hopefully, your partner's future institution will really want to have them, and hopefully try to accommodate their wishes.
Of course, the room for negotiations at tenure-track level might be limited, depending on the place. But then again, giving a funded PhD position is a comparatively low effort/risk, as compared to giving a partner a permanent faculty-level position. So I would think that chances should be reasonably good, though it might of course mean that your partner will get less startup funding e.g. for PhD students (the university will ultimately look at the full package).
Finally, if your partner is being asked in the interview if there is a two-body problem, or generally about family-related issues with relocation, they should answer truthfully.
Independent of all that, it should also be a feasible task to find a new PhD yourself in the new place (unless it is very small), as PhD positions are much easier to get than faculty positions. So overall this might not be so much of an issue.

(The question changed.  This advice is not for Europe.)

Is it possible that mentioning the two body problem will reduce his chances of getting the position?

It's possible.  I see no reason to inform the search committee that you have a problem that might make the hire more complicated.

When is the best time to mention this two body problem?

Probably never.  The faculty search committee does not control PhD admissions, particularly if you plan to get your PhD in another department or at a nearby university.  They will not be able to help you achieve your goal.
I think the most you can hope for is that your partner's new job comes with a tuition waver for you.  Tuition wavers are not usually negotiated as part of salary packages.  They are automatic.


Who is a "Vowel" in a panel of Jury for a Master's Defense? I have to give my Master's defense soon. I am provided with the name of a "Jury", a professor. And two professors in my 'vowel', one of whom is my advisor. (total 3 on Jury)

What is the definition of this 'vowel' and what does it mean? What is their role in relation to the 'jury'?

My university is also Portuguese and the Portuguese word is Vogal (singular).

"Vowel" is likely a translation error from Portuguese, Spanish or another Romance language - probably caused by Google Translate.

In a committee or a board, a "vogal" or "vocal" is a member without a specific role. For example, in a committee I was recently to grade end-of-degree dissertations, the three members were the president (tasked with chairing the committee), the secretary (tasked with writing grades down) and one "vocal", with no specific task besides deciding grades with the other two members.

Another meaning of "vogal" or "vocal" is vowel. Both meanings come from the Latin word for voice or speak, because a "vocal" is a person who just speaks in a committee and vowels are sounds or letters that can be pronounced alone.

I tried to find a translation into English but no dictionary gave me a suitable one. Then, I would translate "vocal" to "board/committee/jury member". Maybe boards are organized in a different way in English speaking countries.

Just for reference, definition of vogal in Portuguese (see meanings 3 and 4), and vocal in Spanish (meaning 5) and Catalan (meaning 2).

I think you have misunderstood the term somehow. On some juries one person will serve as your "advocate" and their job is to support you against unreasonable questions. Often that is the advisor.

But the term "vowel" seems foreign to the readers here.

I suggest that you ask your advisor about the role of each member of the jury and also try to learn what sorts of things you might be asked so the you can prepare.


When Does "Adapting" An Image Go Too Far? I am interested in using a particular figure from the literature, but I do not want to go through the hassle of paying to use a figure. What I am wondering is if I made a similar figure, how easy is it to get in trouble for copyright infringement? If I were to essentially redo the image, it would not be verbatim the same, but very similar depictions would be pulled from the image. As an example, I provided two illustrative examples where the bottom image is an "adapted" version:

The second one is in a published paper as well from a reputable journal, so I am guessing that it should be okay to go about making a similar diagram myself, but again, I wouldn't mind other opinions as too when I might start to tow the line on copyright infringement.

If this is for a book, rather than for a paper, you have another option. Many book publishers will give you a certain budget for paying royalties on figures and such. Another alternative, if you are to receive royalties from book sales is to have the publisher pay any fees up front and charge it against your future earnings on the book. The former is preferable, of course. But book publishers expect to have to pay for some things such as cover pictures and some internal figures.

I doubt that this is an option for any journal, however.

If you do the image you then have no problem and under the image description you use :'fuente propia' (self source/made). if you want to use a figure from a magazine/paper/site/etc, then you simply  add the proper source and citing in your references. Remember that the difference between plagiarism and fair use is merely citation.

Clarification:

As long as it is cited and properly explained it's a problem, although it would be wise to check the local legislation because it varies from country to country. In my country the law specifies 'copy or reproduction'of the exact same thing, but redoing a new image/chart is no problem.

If its different for your countries then add a comment of what exactly the law in your places say to contribute to responding OPs question.


Is it fair to my PhD student if I ask them to do "miscellaneous" work for a paper they're not going to be a coauthor of? I've started work as an assistant professor recently,
and my first PhD student has just started her first semester.

I'm working on a paper with my collaborators
which is almost ready to submit.
I am thinking of asking my PhD student
to help us in the writing of the paper
by drawing a graph using LaTeX/PGFPlots.
However, I am not sure if this is fair to her.
Here are how I see the pros and cons of giving this work to her.

Pros:
Offloading the drawing of the graph to her
would be beneficial to me because it would save my time.
In addition, she would be learning skills
that are useful in her academic career.
Indeed, I have used LaTeX and PGFPlots in my two most recent papers
and will almost certainly use it in the papers I write with my PhD student.
Cons:
I am afraid that she might feel taken advantage of,
in that I am offloading menial and tedious tasks to her,
asking her to do work for a paper
without allowing her to benefit by being a coauthor.
In our field (a type of applied mathematics),
the real work is doing math theory,
formulating problems, solving them or proving math results.
What I am asking her to do (drawing graphs)
is sometimes an important part of paper writing,
but not nearly as important as mathematically rigorous work
such as developing theory and proving math results.

Note: I estimate that it would take me 3-4 hours to draw the plot,
although it may take her a longer time (perhaps one or two days),
given that she is fairly new to using LaTeX/PGFPlots.

Thank you all for your answers and comments.
I posted what I decided to do as an answer below.

Preparing a graph from already-generated data, to me, doesn't merit co-authorship but would justify a mention in the Acknowledgements. However, something that takes two days out of a student's time (even if it would only take you 3-4 hours) seems like a lot to ask for just an acknowledgement.

How useful is learning the process? If it's legitimately training that's important to her future career, that might tip the balance toward asking her to do it. However, I think my default would be to do it myself.

One other part of the equation (probably and hopefully only a very small part) is that the student is female, based on the pronouns in the question, and female scientists are often expected (from unexamined assumptions) to disproportionately look after administrative work.

"Co-authorship" must satisfy all of the following three conditions:

Provide ideas
Significant contribution
Approve the final submission

You could ask your student or RA to do the job for you, if they indeed agree and are compensated. If his contribution does not satisfy any of the 3, he should not, in principle, receive a co-authorship.

PS: Many BS and BA are willing to RA for free. Why not take a part-time one? This will help both of you, your PhD, and the BA. Many BA are good at Latex, btw, and many of them learn unfamiliar things much faster than the "old" PhD and the Profs (you).


How do some Ws on transcripts affect PhD admissions in mathematics? I am a senior who is graduating in December with a Bachelor's Degree in Pure math. I would really love to apply to the PhD program. However, I have been really depressed because even though I have a good GPA (3.85), and I have gotten mostly A's in all of my math classes (I have taken math classes up to Topology, measure theory, and Algebra), I feel like this is not good enough since I have 8 W's [withdrawals--no grade given] on my transcript. The horrible part is that 6 of these W's are on math courses. All those W's occurred during my first year at my university. The second year up to now I haven't gotten any W's.

My question is: How horrible (by the Committee who selects candidates for the program) is a W seen on a transcript? Is there anything I can do about it?

I feel like I have a big hole on my transcript, and it has been chasing me throughout my undergrad years even though I managed to hide myself from this monster and continued to take a lot of math courses, earning A's (and two B's) in all of them.

Your situation doesn't sound so bad to me at all.

First of all, though perhaps I shouldn't, I will admit that many graduate admissions personnel do not thoroughly scour the transcripts.  They look at the GPA and they look at the courses taken.  Often this information is given separately on the application, so a look at the actual transcript may only be required if there is something missing there.  So there's a tip for you: if you are asked for separate information about courses taken, definitely be sure to list it.  (If on the other hand you are asked to list the courses taken together with the grades you got, it seems to me that you are ethically obligated to list the W's.)

More than this though, W's occupy a sort of nether region in academic grading.  In my university we have WP (withdrew passing) and WF (withdrew failing).  Only the latter affects your grade, and my understanding is that WP is not meant to be a stigmatic mark at all.  (In fact undergraduate students are limited to 4 WP's over the course of their careers.)  Unless the registrar puts an asterisk next to your 3.85 GPA and says warning: there were some W's! then in at least one very official sense the W's are not being counted.

More good news: all of the W's are in your first year.  That is exactly the sort of localized difficulty followed by dramatic improvement that admissions committees are looking for.

I think it would be a good idea to use your personal statement to briefly address the W's.  I'm thinking of one or two sentences which acknowledge that they exist, say a few vague words of excuse (e.g. "time to adjust to a new academic environment", "personal difficulties long since resolved"; nothing too specific or gory), and especially: point out how nicely you've moved on.  If you feel like you can use the W's as part of a larger depiction of a crescendo of academic accomplishment, you might try that, but that's a more "advanced technique", so to speak.

I think it is quite likely that the average effect this will have on your application is little or none.  Honestly, to me you sound significantly more guilty / apprehensive about a minor issue long since resolved than you need to be.  I forgive you!  Please don't hesitate to apply to all the PhD programs you're interested in. (If you like algebra/number theory/geometry/topology, please consider UGA.)

Good point in your transcripts is your GPA. However, you have some withdrawing courses which may/may not affect your admission chances. Here are my general suggestions:

For a PhD admission, you will need two or three letters of recommendation. You can ask the professor who knows you and is writing the letter for you to explain why you had such problem. I think it will be better if the professor who is writing for you be the lecturer of the course you withdrew. He can explain the instances on it. (For instance, some other people in the same class also withdrew the course, the exams and assessment was really tough, etc.)
You can improve your chances and your problems with your transcripts by having a better GRE score report; so try to have higher scores on your GRE to improve your chances in your admissions.

And a final advice; this is your transcripts. You may not be able to change it. Don't be afraid of it and apply for the programs you like. Don't prejudge and let the admissions committee decide whether you are eligible for their program or not. May be the other applicants may not have better resumes than you and you be admitted in a good program, who knows? You will not miss anything.


What prevents reviewers from providing biased and very negative reviews? One of the fundamental features of science, maybe even the most important, is that publication of scientific results is peer-reviewed.

I want to understand why peer review is effective in the scientific community, because I want to apply principles of peer review to a different domain.

As I understand it, a researcher is reviewing work of a competitor who is producing scientific results in exchange for grant funds and reputation, usually same as the reviewing researcher does. Of course, this competition may not be very direct, but the reviewer is in an overlapping area of research. In addition, there is some natural bias of every human being to groom their own ego. Based on this, I expect most reviews to be very negative. However, it seems that biased and extremely negative reviews are rare for decent submissions.

What stops reviewers from providing biased negative reviews?

I think the main factor that makes the peer-review system to not fall in the trap you described is that academics are finally interested in the advance of science. If I have to review a good paper, then I enjoy it and want to see it published. If I review an almost good paper, I suggest some improvements and enjoy if these are incorporated and the work is published. The very mild advantage I may have if I reject more papers does not really seem to be worth it, if I have to act unfair and unreasonable to get this advantage.

Another factor may be: The reviewer is not anonymous for the editor. Editors are often influential people and writing consistently bad and unfair reviews will make you look like a mean and unfair person. Also, the editor will not choose you again as a reviewer if you write such reviews and you will be effectively eliminating yourself from the review system for that journal (while you can still submit papers).

In view of the bounty I gave the question another thought and here is one more thing: Community. Science is well organized in communities (e.g. I consider myself as part of the mathematical community, the applied math community, the community on mathematical imaging, the optimization community and some more). As part of a community one has a sense that there are some rules one should follow to be a valuable member of the community and of these rules is fairness. Being unfair feels like a misconduct by the unwritten community rules. So even though one may get along with several cases of unfair behavior, it feels like one is cheating the system. But staying a respected member of the communities is very important both for the scientific standing and also for productivity. This reasoning also explains that bad behavior sometimes happens, when several competing communities form which are somehow "enemies of each other": One can stay a respected member of one of the communities while still treating members from the other community unfair.

Your methodology itself is biased.  Anytime you are doing something to alter the review process you are creating a biased review.  This could be as simple as wording before or during the review process and at the other end of the spectrum leaving out some potential reviewers.

My advice:

worry more about your science than your review
welcome the biased reviewer.  I would rather see the flaws that my research/science has as soon as possible, not after it has been fully publicized.
understand that there is an element of risk or wasted time involved.  If someone is biased and using corrupt review tactics this is more time consuming. But and big but this also allows you to learn more about the outside forces you are going against and how to refute them better.
and a further point is an obviously biased review will be easily refuted.  As it is, it will lower the reviewer's stance/reputation and highlight the work that you are doing.  People are far more passionate when there is an A vs. Z dynamic than just hearing about A.

So really the only thing that you need to do (and I write review/survey systems) is to have a mechanism of review rebuttal and make sure the person writing the review understands this.  If I cared about my name I would not write an untrue/biased review about something if I knew that someone could refute my stance directed at me.  Transparency is key.


Self-plagiarism in Publication-based commentary PhD thesis? I am writing a publication-based PhD thesis, and the thesis will not be publicly accessible once has been finished due to classified data included. The thesis is not the traditional sandwiched thesis, it is supposed to be a commentary on my own publications.

I will use three papers in my thesis, two have been published in journals and another one is still under review. I have obtained permission to reuse the content of the two published papers for my thesis. I have two questions:

Dose reuse mean that I can use exactly the same words? like I can copy and paste the content of the two published papers? or do I need to rephrase the content?
The third paper has not been published yet. If I use the data in my thesis, can I still publish it in a journal? if so, can I copy and paste the same content?

When compiling a dissertation, copying parts or entire sections from published papers is perfectly fine and standard behaviour.

If a section is (mostly) identical with a published paper, it should say so clearly at the start. If the paper is submitted, but not yet published, you could either just treat it as published, and cite the submitted version; or you could use the text in the dissertation without further comment, and then add a note to the article that it is based on Section X of the dissertation.

Since you have the publisher's permission to use the words of the original you can quote freely. But make sure that it is a quote and that you actually cite the original.

Simply reusing the words without quoting will confuse any future reader. You avoid self-plagiarism by quoting the work as you would any other. You avoid copyright infringement by getting permission as you have done. You can quote longer passages from the papers than would normally be the case due to not having copyright issues. Alternatively you can rephrase and cite if you like, but don't avoid the citation. That is what lets a reader connect, properly, to the original work as is necessary for future research.

As to the third paper might be a bit different. If your thesis is not published and that paper is based on what is in the thesis, rather than the other way round, then the third "paper" that forms a part of the theses is really just a draft of any future paper and so you would normally be free to use it as you like. But your advisor could give you the best interpretation of that. The only issue I see is that while you don't intend to publish the thesis, things might change in the future. If that is a concern, then you could quote and cite just as in the other papers, avoiding self-plagiarism. You currently hold copyright yourself so you have no issues with that. But you are probably about to give up copyright since it is under review. So quote and cite seems the better path.

One worry I have is your use of the term classified data. If the work was done for a client, they may have some claims to the data and what is done with it that you will have to deal with.


Is it harder to get into PhD programs for some disciplines compared to others? Anecdotally it seems much harder to get into a good math program than a computer science program. How true is that? Are there any statistics available on the selectivity of different disciplines?

Statistics might be hard to come by, but you can always checks the requirements of the Phds on the webiste of universities.

In my alma mater (Canada), two were particularly easy to enter: psychology and semiotics. You could start them directly after a simple bachelor degree, you did not have to go trough a Master beforehand and, the teachers would try to entice you to do one. Anybody could do one even with relatively bad grades.


Advisor walked in while I was complaining about her; How can I minimize the damage to our relationship? I work in a lab. This evening, thinking that my advisor had already left for the day, I started telling my peers in the lab that she has a bad attitude about a few things, and she was showing off a lot about her work last summer. Out of nowhere, she walked into the lab and was visibly upset, and I feared that she had heard what I said.

I just finished my masters and had asked my advisor about pursuing a Ph.D. She kind of gave an OK and I am supposed to meet with her tomorrow morning to discuss about it.  Although our relationship has been on and off at times, I feel bad because she helped me a lot in past and now she will feel I am an ungrateful jerk.

What will be the best way to approach this issue so that I can minimize the damage to our relationship?

From what you have said, I am not sure even if she heard you. All you need to do for now is to STOP this attitude. You will never find a perfect supervisor... Yes, you can talk with a friend about how difficult your life is with this supervisor. But this should be out of the lab and avoid -- as much as you can -- other students with the same supervisor.

Show her that you value her research and expertise (in case you don't value her research, then find another supervisor).
Do not talk about anything happened unless she started the talk.

I completely disagree with @Penguin_Knight on the gift thing. Being so nice in a typical meeting indicates something weird is happening. Do not do it. (I believe this is a cultural thing some people may see it really good others will think about it in a very bad context.)

Well... I am not an entirely mentally normal person so take my suggestion with a lot of salt.

The damage is already done, and you probably cannot do too much on her side. Your side, though, can be fixed. If it bothers you enough to make a new account and ask this question, you probably do care, right?

This is how I will approach it:

Before the meeting, prepare a thank you card and/or perhaps some little snacks/gifts (chocolate usually work, as long as she is not diabetic Other choices are small office plants, coupon to a nearby restaurant, etc.)
Go to meet with her and act as if none of these had happened. If she confronts you, apologize and emphasize that the experience made you feel very bad as well. Remember to emphasize the feeling. Depending on the outcome, if she confronts, then talking about PhD project is probably a bad idea. Leave the gifts and thank you card, and tell her that "I fully understand why you are upset, I hope you can give me another chance to talk about this in another time. I'll be outside in the lab if you need to talk to me."
If she does not confront you, then go ahead and talk about the PhD project. Pay attention to it, because it may actually be things you spend a few years on.
When it's all set, regardless of the outcome, give her the thank you card and the gifts. No need to mention your stupid chat. Just say something like "Just my thanks to your constant help through my Masters studies, and I look forward to working with you as a PhD candidate." Or if you're unlucky "Just my thanks to your help through my Masters studies, I learned a lot and I hope these little gifts will make up for all the hard times I caused you."

If she talks to you about the PhD, then she has forgiven you (unless she is a psycho who has decided to torment you.) If she decides not to and withdraws the offer, your thank you gift will also work. Either way, you'll have a chance to express your thanks, and that probably can help you feel better about your mishap.

And please be professional in the future. Badmouthing is a really bad habit.


Two students having separate topics chose to use the same paper format Two students decided to consult each other about term paper formatting, because the teacher didn't provide guidance on the format. They used the same format, but different topics and totally different content on the subject matter. Is deciding to use the same format plagiarism?

No.
If using the same format were plagiarism, then almost every article published in a journal is plagiarizing, since they all have the same format. Plagiarism happens when some kind of intellectual idea is involved, and the format used is not an intellectual idea.

Could they have worked together on a previous project? It is very rare to create new templates, and if they worked together last academic year, they might just both have kept the same template?
Even if they haven't: it is a very strict interpretation of plagarism for "sharing Word template" without any actual content to be plagarism.


Are there people who have done so much work before PhD that they get a PhD automatically? This question addresses why it's a bad idea to try to do a lot of independent work before PhD in the hope of finishing PhD quickly.

Nevertheless, are there famous examples of people who have done so much work before PhD that they get a PhD pretty much automatically (say, 1-2 years or less)?

The closest example I can think of is Mihai Pătraşcu.  After publishing several extremely strong results as an undergraduate, Mihai earned an MS in one year and then a PhD in one year, all in computer science at MIT.

Schmitt found the Schmitt trigger circuit as a part of a project in his bachelors. He got a PhD for that.


Asking my PhD advisor for a postdoc position. Is it bad to appear desperate? I am soon to defend my PhD thesis in computational materials science. I have just two publications, which I believe is the most important reason for getting no response from postdoc applications. The lack of publications is majorly due to my initial slow productivity and subsequent delays from my advisor in manuscript corrections.

Earlier this year, my advisor said that if I am unable to find a postdoc position then I can remain as a postdoc in the lab after my PhD for 6 months and work on a different projects and publish the remaining papers. She also offered that alternatively, I can extend my PhD to next semester (till April) and look for positions in between (it's cheaper to pay for a PhD than a postdoc). I have already spent 5 years 2 months on my PhD. I don't want to extend it anymore.

Now, it's already November and I have no offers or responses. I am trying hard for any position. I am not sure if I will get one.

I want to ask my advisor for a postdoc position and want to let her know that I am desperate for an immediate position so that I can improve my CV.

Will that look bad?

First of all, your advisor of all people really should not be somebody who you need to play games with regarding the state of your career (academic or otherwise). They really can only do their job (advising you, also in questions of career development) if you are being honest with them. In that sense, it shouldn't really matter if it "looks bad" - if your situation is bad they should know.

Further, your advisor already offered you a temporary job, and presumably they did so under the assumption that it would only be a fallback if you did not find a more permanent next career step. Now this situation has arisen - why would it be bad to take them up on their offer in exactly the situation that the offer was made for?

My interpretation of the question:  You want to pursue an academic career.  You are considering taking the offered postdoctoral position in your PhD supervisor's lab.  You want to know the implications of doing this for your long-term career.

Doing a PhD and postdoc in the same lab does look desperate, and it is harmful to your career.

I recommend figuring out what job you want.  Identify people who have that job.  Read their CVs.  Then do better than what they did.

If you're seeking an academic job in computational materials science, you are right that having two publications at the end of your PhD will be a problem.


What books, biographies or survival guides are helpful for women in engineering in academia? Recently, I was giving a small informal talk in a local college. The audience comprised of engineers and my talk was based on current research in engineering. One of the girls asked about the position of women in academia. I answered that stating that academia was like just another field for women but now that I think of it, it might not be entirely true.

I thought that perhaps I could refer interested female student to resources explaining any gender specific aspects of academic life. I've read 2 books "Surviving your Stupid Stupid Decision" and "What you came for." Both were books to read before PhD to discuss common problems and their solutions presented as a preparatory handbook or survival guide. I am looking for something similar, but specifically addressing the aspect of gender in academia. I don't have a specific question in mind. A cursory Amazon search failed to yield any fruitful results.

I'd like to find resources applicable to female students:

Engineering in North America but maybe even Europe. These students showed some statistics of bias within academia.
Interested in joining faculty positions or industrial labs.

Are there books, biographies, or survival guides for women in academia?

About a month ago, MIT published their most recent Report on the Status of Women Faculty in Science and Engineering, following up on previous reports from 1999 and 2002.  It's not exactly a "survival guide"—it's written for existing faculty and administrators more than for prospective academics—but it does clearly describe several barriers to gender inequality, both past and present.  The National Academies published a similar report in 2006.

Even more recently, Nancy Hopkins (one of the authors of the MIT reports) gave a fascinating talk about MIT's efforts to attract and retain female faculty.

(Hopefully someone else will suggest something more useful for prospective academics.)

Update: One of my female colleagues sent me the following reply, which I'm posting with her permission.  (I'll delete this update if she decides to post an answer herself.)

  My more recent reading has focused more on survival with children in
  academia, which is not quite the same thing.  However, some of the
  issues might be the same.  Two good books are Mama,
  PhD and Motherhood: the Elephant in the
  Library,
  both of which are essay-based, with women sharing their stories.  Both
  are available on Amazon, and are quite good.

  Some of the best survival guides these days are the blogs - there are
  a bunch of good ones which provided sanity and good advice along the
  way.  My two favorite aren't active anymore, but their archives are
  nice, and there are plenty of good ones still active:

  http://scienceblogs.com/sciencewoman/
  http://scienceblogs.com/seejanecompute/
  http://science-professor.blogspot.com/

  There are tons of research papers on the issue, but to be honest, at
  least for me, those tend to be more depressing than helpful.  For
  example, an interesting (but outdated) one:
  http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/EKNU.html There was a recent
  article that retention is going better among faculty (except in math,
  which surprised me):
  http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6070/864.abstract

What advice would you give men wanting to do the same things?

That advice that you would give them, you give to women.

It'd be quite foolish to give women different advice and expect them to have realistic expectations and not set them up to fail, unless you feel that women aren't as competent and need to have their hands held, which would be wildly sexist.

Chances are high that if you direct them to a source that's "for women," it will more than likely ensure a negative outlook about their future coworkers and employment.

Engineering is engineering. Gender need not apply.


Posting a (non-original research) Masters thesis on arXiv? Based on the following posts:
Posting master's thesis on arxiv?
Should one put their Master's thesis online?
although my question differs in that my "Master's thesis" was not part of a formal Masters program. Rather it is more of an extensive reading project that I did over the last 10 months under a very well-known advisor in my field through the Fulbright Scholarship. I've a 150+ page review on a topic I think would be of interested to others in my field at my level of knowledge. However it does not contain anything new, and I think this means it has no place on the arXiv. It solely summarizes the inception of a topic from the 1960s, and summarizes a new take on the topic that my adviser uncovered in some seminal work around 2010.
Can I get some input on the pros and cons of posting it on the arxiv/ inspireHEP profile?
Pros:

easy to send to friends, peers, potential collaborators, and most importantly, potential PhD advisors at my uni

Cons:

it might look petty/immature

In my field (cosmology), plenty of researchers and professors post lecture notes on arXiv, and of course many people write and publish review articles which don't contain any new results. So there's no requirement of novelty to post on arXiv.
Whether it looks immature largely depends on the quality of your writing. A poorly written review will not be read, and could reflect badly on you if you continue in academia (employers and grant reviewers will look at your Inspire and/or ADS profile). Bear in mind that you can't remove things from arXiv.
I would highly recommend asking your supervisor about this. They are best placed to tell you whether it's appropriate or not, according to the quality of your work and the conventions in your field. If you don't post on arXiv, you could consider uploading the pdf to your own website, a public github repository, google drive or similar. Then you can still share the link with interested people.

Putting it online usually cannot hurt, but do not expect many people to read it. I would only recommend against putting it online when you know larger flaws.
Minor flaws should be not big problem, because people know that a masters thesis is one of your first works and probably not perfect. And they probably know that their own master thesis is less important than their recent works as well.
You write

However it does not contain anything new, and I think this means it has no place on the arXiv. It solely summarizes the inception of a topic from the 1960s, and summarizes a new take on the topic that my adviser uncovered in some seminal work around 2010.

Reading this, I would think you and your advisor actually did write about something new. Maybe not a major breakthrough, but you're thinking about putting it on arXiv and not about submitting it to nature.
It reads a bit like you are thinking the actual work could be the work of your advisor. But when it was his idea and your work to actually work on it, verify it and write it down, you still would be the main contributor and the first author on a paper.
Having a great idea justifies being an author (often the last author), but the actual work was delegated to you and the quality of the work was good enough to earn you a masters degree.
So I do not think you have anything to lose. But I am not sure if you will gain much, so I would just do what I am feeling what's right. Given your question, you seem to like to upload it, but when you are doubting it too much you do not have to.


Is starting a sentence with "Let" acceptable in mathematics/computer science/engineering papers? I received a comment from a colleague that starting a sentence with "let" is not good practice. I know that starting a sentence with "let" is grammatically correct, so that is not the question. My question is if starting a sentence with "let" is good practice and acceptable in technical writing.
Here are a couple examples:

Let scalars be denoted by lower case letters.
Let x be a real number greater than zero.
Let the set of real numbers be denoted by R.

These are all acceptable. My personal preference would be to reserve "let" for statements that are (essentially) assignments, like the second one in the question. The other two establish notation conventions. I might say something like

We use lower case letters for scalar variables.

or

Lower case letters represent scalar variables.

and

We write R for the set of real numbers.


How to deal with inactive students in a testing session? In testing sessions that I proctor now, there are frequently one or more students who are not actually working on the test for extended periods of time. Perhaps they are just staring into space, or out the window, for most of the period. Or they may be holding the test paper up in the air and apparently scrutinizing it for a long period of time. Or a student may lean back in their chair and go soundly to sleep.

Excepting this last case, the student likely only has to adjust their eyes a few degrees to be looking at another student's paper. It gives all appearances that they are watching for me to turn away so that they can cheat. I feel compelled to watch them constantly for the entire period, which is tiring and stressful, and doesn't let me watch other students or answer questions. Frequently, the paper I get back is mostly blank after this hour-long staring match, but I can't know that in advance.

What is the best way to deal with inactive students in the testing session? Is it appropriate to demand that they leave the testing area if they're not actively working? (Students are already told in advance that they can turn in their paper and leave as soon as they're done with it.)

I'm teaching mostly lower-level mathematics at a large urban community college in the U.S.

Added: This is in a moderate-sized course with around 25 students in the classroom, taking the exam. The students are known to me and registered for the course which I am teaching. I made the exam and distributed a practice version, with identical directions for each question, in advance of the exam.

It seems to me that students are permitted to spend exam time "as inactively as they choose," and that barring some truly exceptional edge cases it is neither fair to them nor the best use of your own time to try to deal with inactive students during the exam itself.

I'm sorry the behavior is stressful for you, but I don't have a good understanding of why.  Not working or writing on the exam is not an effective cheating technique; falling asleep or staring out the window less so.  If you see students with wandering eyes in a way that actually makes you concerned: okay, tell them not to do that when you catch them doing it.  But that's a problem of unwanted activity, not inactivity.  Moreover, you write

  Frequently the paper I get back is mostly blank after an hour of inactivity like this.

I find it kind of strange that you think that a student (whom you know is registered for your class; no funny business there) who turns in a mostly blank exam is somehow cheating.  Cheating means trying to succeed through illegal means; if they are pathologically avoiding trying to succeed, I somehow doubt that cheating is the explanation.

You write

  It puts me on edge because it's so inexplicable,

Okay, I get you there: it certainly must be distressing as an instructor to witness students walking into an exam -- i.e., a situation which is a pressure-packed performance opportunity to most students -- and respond to the high pressure situation by basically doing nothing.  I agree that there's something going wrong here.  However, I don't think that you should fix the problem by proctoring the exam differently: rather, during the exam you should take note of which students are behaving in this way, and then make a point of talking to them about it after the exam (presumably after it's been graded rather than immediately at the end of the exam).  In my experience, if a student is otherwise even moderately engaged with the course (coming to class, turning in homework) then they are very likely to be responsive to such questions on the part of the instructor.  Maybe once in a blue moon you get a student who really doesn't want to work much on their exams and really doesn't want to talk to you about it.  OK: you tried, they didn't, they'll fail.  But they have the right to play it that way, it seems to me.

Let me end by commenting on another answer which suggests running future courses with a policy that says students' exams can be taken away from them if they are not working on them.  While clearly well-intentioned, I think that's a bad idea.  You simply do not have access to students' interior processes and you shouldn't pretend to do so: maybe a student who is staring out the window for half an hour is nevertheless working on the one problem that they don't know how to do and is going to write out solutions to all the problems in the last ten minutes.  (I mean, probably not, but maybe.)  It's just not defensible enough to respond to inactivity on an exam by taking the exam away from the student (and especially, with a policy to return it later on if they show suitable penitence).  A student who has an exam taken away can go to the department chair or the dean saying "My exam got taken away from me just because I was thinking rather than writing."  If I were the chair or the dean...c'mon: the student has a very strong case.

A student who is not able to do any meaningful work on the exam is probably feeling embarrassed and somewhat paralyzed.

It's not your fault.

I would suggest adding something like the following to your course syllabus:

  During exams, if you are not making any progess on your exam, then a proctor will politely ask you to put your name on the exam and turn it in.  You will be offered a short, optional alternative assignment.  After five minutes, you may ask for the exam back if you feel ready to make some meaningful progress on it.

Here is one possible alternative assignment:

  Please write a couple of paragraphs that will help me get to know you better as a student.  For example, you could write about your academic and career goals, what your favorite course in high school was and why, and what special challenges, if any, are you currently facing as a student at XX Community College.  Is there anything I can do, as your instructor, to make the material in my course more accessible for you?

Follow that up with some placement-type math problems.  I suppose the students have all been through the placement process, but clearly, something's wrong -- so let's try to find out what.

If a student is sleeping, you may put a hand on a shoulder, offer a bottle of water, and ask if s/he would like to work on the exam or turn it in.  (This is a gentle discouragement to continued sleeping in the exam room, and an opportunity to wake up and start working on it.)

Additional note: If you're on edge, that tells me you need one or two additional proctors, and/or a larger room.

Edit:

  (from comment) "At my institution, the facilities are fairly cramped (no way to minimize sight lines) and added proctoring personnel are not available."

Thank you for explaining this.  You can buy or make cardboard carrels, also called privacy shields.  You need a full set of these to use on exam days.  Not only do they make proctoring easier and more effective, they can also reduce exam anxiety.  Each student feels more in his or her own world, with less comparing of self to others.


Was forced out of PhD for academic/health reasons, need advice on what to do next I was accepted into a PhD in maths at a fairly highly ranked school in 2017. My supervisor was known for being quite demanding, but I wanted this because I wanted to push myself, and he is quite well known in the field I was interested in, which is algebraic geometry.

During the first year I was doing background work and developed my maths up to the point where I could start actually doing research. This involved going through textbooks and exercises and generally learning maths at a high level. Each week he was unhappy with my work, and would find holes in the proofs and logic, and holes in my understanding. After this happened over months, he began to suggest that maybe maths wasn't for me. Eventually he basically explicitly said this, and said that I wasn't understanding the material and wasn't able to think mathematically. He suggested that I drop out and "do something else with my life".

The other issue here is that I was suffering from depression, and was fairly burned out from my undergrad, and I blame that in large part for not being able to study efficiently and think clearly. I did end up leaving the program late 2018, and I got a medical certificate to document the depression.

The thing is, I am determined to succeed. I know for a fact that a PhD in maths is what I want to do, and I am not willing to give up on that. I am certain I have the ability, and am putting my failure down to the above mentioned issues. I am still doing maths every day to keep my skill level up and increase my understanding. At some point I want to reenter a PhD program. That is where my question comes in.

What is the best way to get back into a PhD? How much will my past dismissal (technically I left voluntarily) affect my chances? Given that my supervisor has said flat out that he doesn't think I am cut out for maths research, how would I go about getting an academic reference for any future application? Any other advice is appreciated.

If you want to continue at the same school I'd start by going to talk to the administrators in your department, hopefully as a PhD student they will be familiar with you and your situation. Ask about your options to continue your studies, and possibly seek out a new supervisor.

I'd also make a list of other schools you'd be interested in attending, and find faculty there with similar research interests, ideally you could try setting up a meeting to discuss your shared interests and ask them if they might be willing to supervise you or if they have any projects that might be a good fit for you as a PhD student.

I am generally in favor of finishing the Ph.D., once started, even for weaker students.  At least it is a decent resume bullet, even if you are not top of the heap. If you're halfway through, you might as well get it done and cross it off.
But getting back into another program after not hacking it in a first one?  Seems low reward/risk.  Even in general, starting a Ph.D. should be looked at very skeptically (there is a lot of push to get students, but it is not always the right thing when you look at foregone earnings and issues with jobs after getting out).  But once you have not made it in a first one?  Sure there is the possibility that you hack a second one ore that it is a good use of your time.  But I think you need to adjust your Bayesian prior even lower (after all you have data, the first attempt).
If you really want to just get the Ph.D., the best thing would be to talk to the department where you were.  They may feel some responsibility for you and give you an easier, more agreeable, etc. advisor.
I'm not sure why you have to go for this Ph.D.  You state it like it just makes sense to want one, but you don't clarify why or what will change after you get that particular certification.  Do you think you are a research grade mathematician?  A professor?  I just would seriously consider other areas.  There may well be something else satisfying and that you are good at (even have a differential advantage) versus top tier algebraic geometry.  Note, even if this isn't for sure the answer (do something else), you should at least examine the possibility.  Not just stay wedded to this initial dream.  Just seriously investigate this.


Do I have to be concerned about self-plagiarism in a short accessible methods description? I published a methods paper about a data analysis method (in cognitive neuroscience), and I'm now working as a co-author with colleagues on two experimental papers using that method. Since the main audience of these papers will be much less technically inclined than that of my own, I have been asked to provide a concise (1 paragraph, about 300 words) summary of the method which explains its logic and workings as precisely as possible for that less technical audience. In one case the need for such a paragraph has been stated also by a reviewer, explicitly writing that just referring the reader to the methods paper is not sufficient.

My question is: Since the requirements of this paragraph for these two papers are identical, it would make sense to use the same text for both – but would this be considered as a case of self-plagiarism? And if yes, what can I do to avoid that?

Options I have considered:

– Include the text in one paper (likely to be published first) as-is, and then quote it in the other paper. However, explicit quotations either in quotation marks or as an indented block are extremely uncommon in (at least my) science. So would a footnote like "this paragraph has been copied verbatim from XYZ" be the right thing to do to mark it as a quotation?

– Slightly change the wording, sentence structure, etc. – In my understanding this is worse, because it just adds an attempt to disguise on top of the self-plagiarism.

– Just write a separate text for each. But because the requirements are identical and I'm writing them both within a matter of days, it his highly likely that I'll end up with near-identical text anyway, and that any differences would be artificial, just like in the last option. There are only so many ways one can explain a technical matter in a concise, clear, and accessible way.

In each case the paragraph is embedded in a longer passage that details how the method is applied to the specific experimental design of each study. In one case the text is going to go into the supplementary material, while in the other it will be part of a regular methods section.

Morally speaking I don't see any concern here, because this text in no way claims to be original anyway, but just paraphrases a paper which is of course properly cited. But should I be concerned about others seeing this as a case of self-plagiarism?

I'm interested in your personal evaluations of this matter, but if possible also in some "official" references.

My personal belief is that it's fine to duplicate the text with a reference to the original methods paper and a statement that this is a short summary of that work. Unfortunately, you will find people in the world who think you should be drawn and quartered for doing this, so your best bet is to write two different descriptions lest you get "caught" by a pedant. Worries about self-plagiarism for methodology sections, in my opinion, are vastly overblown, but not everyone agrees with me, so you have to be careful who you work ends up in front of. You never know who is going to run your papers through plagiarism detection software and reject your work because of one paragraph.

Pedant here -- you need to be very clear about the fact that copying the text could have serious implications. Many publishers today use plagiarism detection software (that doesn't work as they expect it to, but that's a different topic) so your text may come back as "plagiarized" when it is submitted. Even if you are summarizing, give a reference to where the original methods section is given. Never copy text, even if you wrote it, into another paper. As a commenter has said: there could be copyright restrictions!

And maybe you can start to get your field to accept indentations or quotation marks for methods sections by showing how elegantly you can do this.


What should I do if I don't know the answer to a question posed by a student? If I am the TA for a class, what should I do if a student asks me a question which I can't answer? While "tell the truth and say you don't know" is one approach, are there other options?

I agree that honesty is the best policy, and it's too bad if you're in a situation in which you feel worried about admitting you don't know the answer.  You shouldn't try to bluff, by pretending you know but don't have time to explain or by giving an intentionally vague answer.  However, there are ways of handling it more smoothly than just saying "I don't know" and leaving it at that.  Depending on the circumstances, you can say "That's a really interesting question.  I haven't thought about it, so I'll have to look into it, but let's talk about it in office hours."  (Or you can promise to return to the topic in the next class meeting if it's really relevant to the course and everyone in the class will want to know the answer.)  Or "These issues can be complicated.  I don't know the details off the top of my head, but the place I'd look them up is Reference Work X.  I'd be happy to show you where to find it after class."  Or "That's a good question, but it's somewhat beyond the scope of this class.  I'd be happy to investigate it with you outside of class."

The key is to respect the student's desire to learn.  If you avoid the question or give an answer you know is inadequate, then you're being deliberately unhelpful.  If you just give up and admit defeat, then at least you're being honest, but the student still isn't finding out what he/she wanted to know.  If you respond by pointing the student on the road to an answer, even if you can't supply it off the top of your head, then you've done everything that can be expected of you.

If that is course related Just tell them  "we will get there", don't hurry. Go home find out the answer and give them answer the next day or so. :)


Is it possible to save a (science) PhD in 10 months? In short: I am starting my fourth year of PhD, and my funding is running out in roughly ten months. I could use some advice about how to make the most of the time I have left, in particular to make sure I deliver something coherent and I am employable afterwards.

More context:

During the past three years, I have struggled with personal issues (breakup of a long-term relationship due to moving away for the PhD), poor lifestyle choices, and discipline problems, all impacting my PhD research.
The result: after three years, I still haven't finished writing the manuscript of my main project, a project I don't like at all because it was half-baked since the beginning. What makes it harder to swallow is that I am 100% responsible for this situation.
My supervisor was understanding at first, and started becoming stricter and stricter over time because of the lack of output. This in turn caused some other problems (stress, loss of sleep). Recently we had a discussion where he told me he would not let me finish my PhD, because otherwise I'd need 10 years to complete it and he can't afford to pay me for such time...
I reached the point where I am completely disgusted with what I am doing and I am seeking a way out. My only problem is that I'd like to make sure I am employable. So I figured my best bet would be to try completing the PhD, no matter if it is imperfect / incomplete.
Since I have only ~10 months left (roughly 10 because I could probably survive a few more months with my savings) to make up for the last three years, I'd like some pointers about how to make the most out of it, without going completely insane. To be more specific, I guess I am looking for advice about efficiency (both in professional and personal life), how to be more stable, how to make strategic choices and set priorities when there is a lack of time.

To be honest, from your description I would be less concerned with finishing your PhD and more concerned about your mental health.

You should probably talk to a mental health professional or GP, and then worry about this. The chances that the road to a PhD would be forever closed for you is reasonably small, but if you don't take care of yourself the impacts can be significant.

It is possible. That is an answer to your question. It will require writing 5-10 good pages a week steadily for about half a year, and a good part of revision.

It can be done. I am not saying it should be done.


Professor Job Prospects for PhD in Computer Science vs Computational Neuroscience? If one wants to do research in computational neuroscience, which PhD program would increase the chances of getting a professor job at a research university immediately upon graduation from that PhD program the most? Assuming, all else being equal.

A) PhD in Computer Science

B) PhD in Computational Neuroscience

In other words, for which of the two PhD degrees is there more demand and less supply in academic job markets, if research interests are in neuroscience?

I will share my own results from my research as I am on the same boat (Torn between Bioinformatics/CS). From looking at profiles of recently appointed faculty across institutions, it certainly seems easier to get a position if you are a CS graduate.
Due to higher volumes of CS PhD's, most end up going in industry or doing post-docs for 1-2 yrs before getting a faculty position. Whereas grads from other disciplines (Computational neuroscience/bioinformatics) usually end up doing post-docs for a bit longer and I have rarely seen a recent faculty appointment in these areas without a post-doc.
All reasons aside, It will greatly depend on your research/publications and to some degree the institution and your supervisor.

Both of them will not "increase the chances of getting a professor job at a research university immediately upon graduation from that PhD program".

Once u graduate you might become a lecturer and after you have been a lecturer for at least 10~20 years, you could have become a professor then.


Is it lawful for a fellowship linked to a permanent faculty position at a British university in the STEM field to only be available to females? The internally funded Anne McLaren Fellowships at The University of Nottingham state in their eligibility that "Candidates for the Anne McLaren Fellowships must be female and pursuing a career in a STEM subject". (link) One of the benefits of the fellowship is

  The linking of the Fellowship to an indefinite academic post, subject to performance against a high-quality threshold and the continued right to work in the UK

What this means is that fellows will be presented 2 contracts. The first is a 3-year fixed term research only contract with a start date mutually agreed upon by the university and fellow. The second contract is a permanent research and teaching contract with a start date immediately following the end of the first contract. The second contract has stipulations regarding if you get terminated during the first contract (e.g., due to a loss of the right to work in the UK or performance issues) then the second contract is also terminated. There is no hiring process at the time of the second contract.

The Equality Act 2010 protects people from being treated less favourably because of their gender during recruitment. Section 159 of the Act does allow positive action (e.g. favouring an underrepresented group in a tie-break) but as those not classed as female are completely excluded from applying then this appears to be unlawful discrimination not positive action.

It could be that The University of Nottingham has a general exception due to being a charity.  But then it would need to be included in the aim of the charity and the  University's Charter of Incorporation contains "16. The University shall treat students, staff and other people solely on the basis of their merits, abilities and potential, regardless of gender".

In the UK, there are a number of fellowships exclusively for women (e.g., L'Oréal WISE fellowship). The Equality Act of 2010 allows for positive action outside of recruitment which these fellowships likely fall under. The Equality Act of 2010, however, does not allow for positive action in recruitment (apart from giving preference for equally qualified applicants).

The Anne McLaren Fellowship is a little strange in that it is a fellowship that is linked to a permanent job. If you view it as a fellowship, it legal positive action. If you view it as a job, it is illegal positive action. I think the key thing is that when the school is making a decision about the job, the gender of the applicant is not considered. It is obviously very relevant to the school that the applicant has a fellowship as generous as the Anne McLaren fellowship, but the fact that the fellowship is limited to women does not matter in the hiring process. So the Equality Act of 2010 is likely not being violated.

Providing fellowships that only women are eligible for may go against the university charter or may be illegal in some other manner, but I do not think it runs afoul of the Equality Act of 2010.

There is a long tradition of grants, fellowships, bursaries etc which have very specific eligibility  requirements

These are usually charitable bequests from an individual or organisation and are more like  gift or inheritance than an offer of employment.

The very fact that it is called the Anne McLaren fellowship implies that it is funded by an individual bequest and just administered by the university ie it is effectively a gift given to a person who fulfils specific criteria.


Journal turnaround time of 18 months I submitted a paper to an economics journal. They have promptly replied to let me know that the review process generally takes 12 to 18 months. I also have to give them a go-ahead confirming their policies before they can begin the review (so I could effectively withdraw at this point). Since this is my first paper, I do not want to be too picky about journal timelines. However, I also planned to apply for a PhD at the end of the year (less than 12 months), and was hoping for a better chance to be able to put a publication on my CV.

My question being: should I attempt to get published faster with a different journal, or is this timeline of 12-18 months acceptable to stick around with?

I advise to move to a faster journal AND to make sure the papers are absolutely as clean as you can make them in logic, writing, etc. so that they fly through reviews.


Are graduate school applications processed before the submission deadline? I will be applying for PhD positions starting in fall 2016. Most of the application deadlines are in January. If I send my application now, will it be processed immediately? Or are the recruiters waiting until the deadline has passed? This probably varies somewhat per geographic region (and university, and department) but I would be mostly interested in UK institutions in the STEM fields.

In my experience (in a large public American computer science department), review of applications begins as soon as they are submitted, but no decisions are announced until well after the posted deadline.  Reviewing graduate applications actually takes significant time, and admissions decisions are based at least in part on comparisons with the rest of the applicant pool.

My university actually forbids announcing admissions decisions before the application deadline.  Other universities/countries may have more relaxed policies.

"Deadline" is a guide and is definitely not set in stone. They could admit you immediately or almost before the deadline to signup for classes. I doubt they'd do it immediately because it takes quite some time, people are lazy, holidays, weekends etc... They'd even do it after the deadline if you're extremely talented. There is no telling.... Good luck!


Can I, as a reviewer, tell authors to get a native English speaker to proofread their paper? I am reviewing a paper for possible publication in a respected journal. The English in the paper is very poor. The authors are clearly not native English speakers. I want to write something to the effect of the following in my review.

I advise the authors to find a native English speaker to proofread the manuscript.

My question: Is this appropriate in a review?

On one hand, I think it is good, constructive advice. The paper would be significantly clearer if someone spent a few hours helping them fix it up. I can try to help them through reviewer comments, but it would be much easier if someone could help them in person. The authors are located in a western English-speaking country, so they should be able to find someone.

On the other hand, I don't want to be "the mean reviewer." I understand that English can be difficult to master for immigrants. Perhaps there is a more diplomatic way of saying this.

It's obviously appropriate and constructive to comment on writing issues that significantly affect the quality of the paper. The only question is how to do it as constructively as possible.

Personally, I prefer to suggest that "the authors get editing help from someone with full professional proficiency in English" rather than asking for "a native English speaker." I see other reviewers write the latter, so it's not uncommon, but I feel like it sounds a little bit like I'm "punishing" the authors for not having been born in an English-speaking country. There are plenty of academics who are not native English speakers, and don't have the same proficiency as native English speakers, but are still perfectly capable of high-quality academic writing.

I think this sort of review comment is pretty common, but I dislike it.  The purpose of the review is to advise the editor about the quality of the manuscript.  Advising the authors is beyond the scope of the review.  For most journals, corrections to spelling/grammar are (in theory) provided by a copy editor. For expensive subscription journals, authors should be allowed to use this service.

There are also three ways this sort of comment can make the reviewer look bad:

The paper was written by a bunch of native speakers who have funny names.  Yes, I have seen this happen.
The review has terrible grammar.  This happens > 30% of the time.
An implication of bias, which can be avoided by replacing "native English speaker" with "expert editor" or similar.


Why do some authors seem to ignore reviewer comments? For example a review might say:

This paper is acceptable if the following comments are addressed:

In section two, change "this is a topy" into "this is a typo"
Instead of writing "Log" for the natural logarithm, write "Ln". This issue is present in sections two, three and four.
In section four, [do some serious work].

Then when the revision arrives, the authors make some attempt to address point 3 but completely do not address points 1 and 2, even though they're not controversial.
Why do some authors do this? I certainly do not want to Ctrl + F "Log" and list where all occurrences of it are when the authors can do that just as easily (besides, even if I do that, it often goes unfixed anyway). On the other hand, outright not fixing these issues when they've been pointed out seems pretty rude.
In my experience it seems that authors from India do this especially often, but I have no idea why this would be the case.

Personally I would do things the other way round fix 1 and 2, and not ignore 3 but maybe push back in what's asked.

Anyway back to the question, I expect it's a either an expectation that the journal will correct spelling/formatting issues (depends on the journal) or a gamble that you wouldn't reject a paper just because of a spelling mistake.

You think those points are not controversial, but they maybe are (not speaking about typos, of course). Maybe it is a bad example, but there might be some country where the natural logarithm would be written as log and the authors would like to have it that way. [Exchange this example with anything you like.] If that was the case, it could be discussed like that in their reply, no doubt, and it would be better, but:

I also suspect that in many such cases people do not know better. It might be good practice to reply to every reviewer comment, but not everybody follows good practice. They might be inexperienced, never got good advice on this issue, or simply do it on purpose. [It reminds me a bit of quite a few PhD students' first attempts to prepare a reply for the reviewer comments to their first paper. They very often need good tutoring to end up with an acceptable response letter.]

But so what? You are not the author of the paper and are not responsible for it either. You do your share with your review, and in your example it would be only fair to let the editor know of the unwillingness of the authors to improve the standard of the manuscript. Then the editor can decide.

I would not call such behavior rude, it is just wrong/not helpful. Do not take it personally.


I have a strong suspicion and weak proof that the data in the paper are fake. What to do? I reviewed a paper submitted for a smallish magazine. It presented an algorithm to perform some allocation task and compared its performance to that of several other algorithms from the literature performing the same task in several ways (the results, i.e. the allocation, can be evaluated based on the usage of several different resources, so a result could use less of resource A, but more of resource B, and so on).

My opinion was that, although the algorithm was badly presented and the paper was nigh-incomprehensible, the results presented seemed good, so the authors deserved another shot at better explaining themselves, so I did not suggest to reject it altogether.

The first review round went through with a unanimous "major revisions" verdict.

Then I was asked to review the second submitted version of the paper too. In this new version, the algorithm had been compared to a much broader range of algorithms. Problem is: even though the algorithms it was being compared to changed, the comparison charts remained exactly the same, and looking at them side-by-side revealed no difference whatsoever (no explicit numerical data was provided).

What is worse is that the change was not even one-to-one. In the first submission, the algorithm (let's call it A) was compared with the same three other algorithms in all categories (resource A usage, resource B usage etc.) while in the second submission, each resource comparison involved different algorithms, so for example, A was compared to B,C and D in resource A utilization, but it was compared to C, E and F in resource B utilization, and so on.

Nonetheless, each chart in the second submission was identical to one from the first submission.

At this point, I was fairly certain that at least the second round of comparisons had been completely faked, i.e. the authors just changed the labels on the charts.

Asking one of my senior coworkers, I was advised to just ignore the issue and to not raise a ruckus, since this issue has a high chance of backfiring: we are not an academic institution, we are the R&D department of a pretty small private firm, hence we have very little political weight and scientific reputation.

I am wondering if I really should raise this issue with the editor, with whom my firm has business relations, as we are partners in several government-funded projects, or I should heed the advice of my colleague.

While the paper has very little chance of being published as the second submission is also nigh-unreadable, a co-author of this paper has an extremely high h-index (100+), hence I feel if my suspicion is founded, it really should be brought to the light.

You should definitely report your concern, but assume good faith.

This certainly sounds like a significant problem.  However, fabricating data is a very serious (even career-ending) allegation. You shouldn't accuse someone of this without very strong evidence, and I don't think you have it in this case. There could be an innocent explanation.

You might have misunderstood what they are doing. For example, rather than running all new tests, did they use the same results for their algorithm, but then compare it to different algorithms?  (I'm not sure from the question whether this would be possible).
It could be a simple error.  For example, what if they accidentally opened the wrong image file and added labels to it?

I would raise the issue, but rather than saying "this looks faked", something like this:

  The authors purport to have run new comparisons, and yet the results on the graphs are exactly the same as in their previous draft.  I don't understand how this can be correct.  Could they please explain, or correct the graphs if necessary?

Another thing you should do is ask for more detailed results and more information about their methods. It sounds like their reporting on what they have done is far from adequate. How they respond to this request might give more evidence on whether the results might be faked. If they are unable to convincingly explain the strange results and fully describe their methods, you should then at least raise the concern with the editor.  I don't think you have enough cause to do that yet, though.

If there is further action to be taken, it will be the editor's responsibility.  Here is what the Committee on Publication Ethics recommends to editors in this situation.  If the authors cannot satisfactorily explain themselves, it should result in a report to their institution and an investigation.

That is why we have reproducibility requirement in science. Whatever was measured must be verifiable independently by others. Over and over and over...

But if the claims don't get accepted for publication anywhere it won't even be known to the community what to try to verify or to disprove. Imagine Mickelson-Morleys paper of the measurement of the speed of light being refused everywhere for example. Would clearly be no good.


Ethics of Accepting Unneeded Merit Based Scholarships I come from a fairly wealthy background, and am lucky enough to have parents who are both footing the bill for my tuition, as well as providing a very comfortable living stipend while I'm in school.

Without thinking much about it, I dropped a resume to be considered for one of several merit-based scholarships awarded each semester by my college. Short story short, I've been awarded a partial scholarship for next semester, but I've come to wonder whether it's ethical to accept it.

On the one hand, the criteria for the scholarship makes me as deserving is anyone, and that's of course why it was awarded to me.  But I can't help but wonder if that doesn't ring a bit hollow.  I don't even have to work while I'm in school, and am starting to feel as though I'd be taking the money out of the pocket of someone in a rougher spot.

It may be worth noting that my parents consider this money earned by me, and will simply pass any tuition savings directly to me in cash.

Is there a generally accepted view on this one?

Congratulations! It's your decision, but I think the most commonly accepted point of view is that it's totally fine to keep the money. One thing you could do with it, or with part of it, is to give back to a need-based scholarship fund or to any other worthy cause.

Also, at least in the US, it is common for universities to solicit donations from alumni, so if you so choose you will have an opportunity to 'pay it forward' after you graduate.

Again, congratulations!

Your college education will greatly increase your income. This increases the government's tax revenue significantly, which is important. That education is an investment that will pay both you and the government back many, many, many times over during your life.

If the scholarship is coming from the institution itself, you're in luck because that makes the ethical considerations easier. They will simply write off some of the expense of teaching you. This is not the same as them giving you a pile of money. However, even if it was, there's a good case for why it still doesn't matter.

Suppose the institution is publicly funded. It gets money from the state's tax revenues. They give you a helping hand. Your education nets you far more money than someone who only has a high school diploma. That income is taxed. Education is a huge part of the budget in any state; my own (California) spent over $50 billion on it yearly the last time I checked. If you make more and get taxed more, a big chunk of that is going to go into helping other students. In a public institution, the government already foots almost all of the bill. Whatever you pay per term is a small portion of what the institution actually gets!

Furthermore, the government is going to gank your money year after year and spend it on incredibly stupid, unethical, wasteful things whether you agree or not. If they give you back 0.5% of what they take out of you, TAKE IT!!!

Now, suppose the institution is privately funded. It gets money from other students' tuitions, donations from living alumni, endowments from dead millionaire/billionaire alumni, and a few other sources like trademarks, patents, property holdings, etc. In the case of fellow students, they had the same opportunity to win that scholarship on merit, and did not; so if they don't get the scholarship, is it your fault? Hardly.

Likewise, suppose a dead billionaire bequests $50 million to the university. A great deal of that money is there solely because of the reputation and connections that billionaire enjoyed. You probably know that most of the reason people try to get into Ivy League schools is the gravitas of the university's name, and the connections that can be made there!!! Merely saying "I went to UCLA" or "I went to Harvard" will open doors that would remained closed if you'd said "I went to Bumf*** College of East Nowhere". If a tiny drop in that billionaire's bucket propels you to great success, increasing the glory of the university the billionaire loved to the tune of $50 million, I would see that as a positive rather than a negative.

Ultimately, it's up to you. These are all just rationalizations. Someone else will have different rationalizations. Some may say it's immoral, but morals are just opinions we automatically absorb from the people who we grow up around and go through adulthood with. Morals are almost never thought through; they are merely parroted for the sake of group membership, which is why the subconscious mind cares about them in the first place.

Instead, it's best to consider one's moral sense as a source of information, but hardly an infallible one. Consider morals in 1850 vs. today - is someone's moral conviction enough reason to think they're right? Certainly not! With ethics, the question becomes this:

"What are other peoples' rights and reasonable expectations?"

If someone says they have a reasonable expectation and/or a right to get the scholarship because they're poorer than you, ask why their interpretation is necessarily the only valid one. (I've given you plenty of valid interpretations above that are perfectly valid, so this is not difficult.)