What exactly is an "academic plan"? I am looking to one job opening for a Lecturer position in a university (mostly dedicated to teaching but expanding its research capabilities), which asks me to submit a "proposal of academic plan". The application is actually in Spanish, and the above is a literal translation of "propuesta de plan academico". The job opening has no further information on what the latter means, as if it were self explanatory. I could well contact them, but first I want to see if this is something very obvious to you.

What do I think it would be? Not sure. A bit of research agenda perhaps, combined with prospect teaching courses, and perhaps personal development as academic, e.g. training, network building, etc.

Any ideas?

I suspect that even if the TERM is not defined, that knowing the JOB will help you make a proper submission.  Is it a postdoc or lecutureship or tenure track? Even if the job description is scanty (but why would you invest time in a detailed submission for a job that you don't know what it is), you can make some guesses based on the school, group, etc.  Is the school a teaching or research university?

So, I really don't understand coming at this thing with a "can you explain this term to me" versus giving more context, clues.  This is both you might answer the question yourself or how we might help you.

Also, I would reach out say you are interested and ask for guidance.

I understand that you should explain what are your plans in academic terms: if you have the intention of taking a Master or teaching or whatever.

My academic plan is: finish writing my article and using it to help me to get my Master degree.


Should I still use "Dear Prof." to begin an email to a professor that I know? Let Smith be the last name of a U.S.-grown-up professor you not only have taken part in whose class but also ended up becoming a friend of whom in a general sense; I wonder if it still sounds good if in an email to him one uses "Dear Prof. Smith" to address him. I am not really sure, given this condition, if using "Dear Prof." to begin an email to him would somehow become a tone that he does not like? But, on the other hand, I am afraid using, say "Hi Prof. Smith", would sound like one is exalting himself to the place at which Smith stands as a professional scholar.

The title of this question may not be precise (I am not an English native speaker); please feel free to edit it.

In the US, it is very unusual to combine the title "Professor" with a first name. I have never been referred to as "Professor Tom" in my whole career.

You can either write "Dear Prof. Smith", using the family name, or "Dear John". You should only write "Dear John" if you would call him "John" when you speak in person. (For people you haven't met in person, the decision is a bit different; but for people who you know personally, this is a good rule.) For example, my students generally call me "Prof. Church", but sometimes after they graduate I invite them to call me Tom; in this case, it would be perfectly appropriate to send me a letter beginning "Dear Tom".

I would use "Hi John" only to convey a very informal tone. Even with colleagues or students with whom I'm good friends outside of work, I still use "Dear Mary" when contacting them about professional business. For this reason, I don't recommend using "Hi Prof. Smith"; it mixes an informal term with a formal term.

"Dear"?  Is he dear to you?  "Hi" is no good either, and is reserved for friends.

No, the answer to this is to just address him/her directly:  "Professor Smith,".


Citing article where listed author is pseudonym If one wanted to cite an article where the listed author is a pseudonym and it is well-known that the name is a pseudonym then which name ought one use?

Normally I would just use the name listed on the paper, however there is the following situation that made me wonder: there is a paper by one Maurizio Boyarsky which is a pseudonym of one Bernard Dwork. It is somewhat 'well-known' that this is a pseudonym as it is listed in the Wikipedia article and in the MathSciNet review of the paper. However, in a certain textbook there is the line

  On the other hand, Dwork in [Bo]...

and the reference at the end of the book corresponding to [Bo] is the paper of Boyarsky.

So it made me wonder, should I follow the example in the textbook or not?

EDIT: to clarify, I am not debating the entry in the bibliography, I am debating whether one should write "On the other hand, Dwork in [Bo]" or "On the other hand, Boyarsky in [Bo]".

Always use the name that is used on the article/book you are referring to.

If someone searches for an article referred to as being written by Dwork, but the name on the article is Boyarsky it will only cause confusion about whether this is the article they are looking for.

Regarding the pseudonym: I would not mention it at all. It is up to the author when or where they reveal that they use a pseudonym. Even when it is commonly known I would still not do this, except when you have explicit permission from the user of the pseudonym. This way you avoid spreading awareness of the use of the pseudonym in a situation where the user may not desire this. One exception could be when there is suspicion of the pseudonym being used with ill intent. Generally though I think it is good to be cautious about such revelations.

If the pseudonym is not listed in that book and the author refers to [Bo] as "Dwork" that would cause a lot of confusion, in my opinion. Personally, I'd go with a consistent naming of the author, be it pseudonym or real name. The choice which name you choose depends on which name is better known or listed on the source. So it should be either

  On the other hand, Dwork in [Dw] ...

or

  On the other hand, Boyarsky in [Bo] ...

to avoid any confusion.


How do you judge an Indian CGPA score? Let's start with background: I'm European, don't know much about undergrad educational systems, and especially grading, outside my own area. So, I receive a CV from an Indian undergrad with the following section:

Now, I have no idea whether the scores displayed here are dismal, average, good or excellent. Wikipedia doesn't know what CGPA is, except in Nepal (and the student in case was not educated in Nepal), so I turn to you, Academia Stack Exchange, to help me solve this riddle!

Two factors can be used to get a broad idea about an Indian engineering student - one is the college and the second is the CGPA.

College:

The Indian Institute of Science and Indian institutes of technology are top technical institutions in the country. Of late, multiple IITs have been set up, leading to (arguably) diminishing quality. The original seven IITs boast of excellent faculty in most departments and are understood to be better than the newer ones.

Besides, there are regional colleges like National Institutes of Technology and Anna University and BITS which are also among the top engineering colleges in the country.

Grading System:

Most of the above colleges use the CGPA system for grading. Students are awarded grades ranging from S (=10) to D (=6) in various courses that they enroll over a period of 4 years. In a course, the top performers could expect an S, the students who have scored 80%-90% could score an A and so on. Obviously, the exact grades depend on the instructor and the overall performance. A student that scores S in all his courses  over 4 years ends up with the perfect CGPA of 10.0. A 9-10 CGPA indicates mostly excellent track record and so on.

It should be clear that the CV in the question reflects a mediocre score in a top college.

I am not sure if that is the case in BITS Pilani. Its true that we get a 10 point evaluation, but we are also given grades and from the same WES scheme the gpa must be calculated like this-
A  4.00
A- 3.67
B+ 3.33
B  3.00
and so on.


In a statement of purpose for a PhD in computer science in the US is it better to express interest in a single subdiscipline or multiple? It seems that if I were to just express interest in a single subdiscipline (computer networking for example), and none of the networking professors are taking on students, I would not be considered based on any other merits my application may have. But if I were to express interest in several subdisciplines it may be difficult to create a structured statement of purpose.

A PhD is about expertise in a narrow field. Showing too wide spread interests is counterproductive, you should have a rather clear idea what your principal interest is. It is OK to have wider interests, but you need a focus.

Do your homework beforehand, select prospective advisors and contact them for openings.

If you can tie it in well, and show sincere interest, I would say that it could be helpful to include a second area.

In the computer science department I attended, one was expected to choose either two or three areas to specialize in.  One was not enough!  The department didn't want people graduating with too narrow a focus.  Once you had sufficient background knowledge in an area, you took an exam in that area.

Look at the list of areas in the department you're applying to, and pick one that looks interesting.  Perhaps Theory of Computing would go well with Computing Networks, for example.  You can talk a little bit about the second area in your statement.

Note that you'll likely be busy with coursework and preparing for exams during at least your first year.  Check in with the networking people from time to time, to renew your interest.  As a professor gets to know you, (s)he may be more motivated to squeeze you in.


How often is PhD work linked to life after the PhD? So I am currently a Master's Student in an earth sciences field, looking to get into the PhD program at my university, provided that there is funding. My current adviser likely won't have funding for my PhD. Recently, my adviser told me about an opportunity with a different adviser, working on a topic in life sciences with an influence of earth science, but one which I may be qualified for. If I do this, is it likely that I can find jobs/postdocs in earth science, where my true interest lies, or would I be irreversibly altering my career path for life science?

It depends on the exact topic and what guidance the new research group will offer you. There's plenty of opportunities to develop expertise in life sciences during PhD. Your options after may not be as limited as you perceive. There is a lot of demand for collaborative and interdisciplinary researchers both in academia and industry.

I'm doing an interdisciplinary PhD between stats and genetics. While on paper you do have to enrol in one course and will be assessed on it. In practice, you can lean on the other field. For instance, with the methods I use. My research questions are biological but my methods differ from lab trained biologists.

You ought to still have room to develop your earth science skills in this way, particularly if your new research group collaborates with people in your field that can advise you on those aspects. You should have a wider range of an advisory committee and peers to assist you with work in both disciplines. A PhD is also an independent project, especially near the end, you should be able to build up confidence ants negotiate using some of your current skills if they tie in the research topic cohesively.

In short. Consider it, it may not be a one way track to biology. It's also not too late to apply to other labs.

@BarocliniCplusplus , I can totally relate to your problem because I have been faced with a problem very similar to yours myself. When I was in my masters program I had research interests of my own and I managed to prepare an entire research grant proposal even in my masters in a field which was both promising and underexplored. As we use to say in my country "on paper" my proposal seemed like a very unique idea and had great potential to answer fundamental questions about the entire field I graduated in (I'm a graduate in life sciences), if not for all science in general. However, when I had to begin the actual work to build up my PhD thesis and work on the topic I choose I started to face a great deal of problems-both in the "pure" scientific sense as ever more and more research was needed to expand my initially very specific topic and in terms of funding for the experiments I was proposing and finding proper guidance, so in one point in time my initially "top score" expectations turned out to "bog into" an ever more difficult and more difficult challenges-both as scientific problems to solve and the inability to cope with the funding at hand.

It got so hard that I was forced to quit and abandon my research interests because there wasn't anyone in my country who was willing to fund such research even if the prospects were mind-boggling. I wish to give you this as an example as to what can happen if you just "pursue your dreams" and hop into something you know very well and have everything you need to expect you can excel there. Sometimes life just doesn't work like that no matter how good you are and how great are your ideas. If not for the lack of ideas people can stop you for the lack of funds if they dismiss your qualifications. And this happens all too easily. For example, I know for at least two other students in different countries working in my field or similar to it which were "cut down" not for the lack of ideas or prospects but simply because their peers felt it would be better to spend the cash somewhere else.

What I would suggest you is to find some good program you can get in even if it's only "remotely" related to your interest and to get a hold on some field even if it isn't related to your ideas per se. Time will pass and you would come to understand it's the best option right now. If you risk it all because you know your field (I assume you have already reach an expert's status in it) I can tell you from personal experience the chances are higher to drop out, than to actually succeed. And if you drop out you might have very hard time getting back in. It was almost 7 years for me and I still am not able to get back on the research path. I decided to answer you like that because I actually have some personal experience with trying to pursue your own agenda because you have simply grown so knowledgeable that you may know your field better even than your professors, but, please, believe me, knowledge doesn't always "count in" when the actual research in the PhD starts and there are zillions things that can go wrong any time no matter how much you know it. It's just better to be a part of a team of someone who has more experience than you do and to hope his/her advice will get you through the program.

So, my advice derived from personal experience is that you should enroll in the program you know has funding and prospects even is it isn't what you have hoped for rather than getting "stucked" in a field you like but obviously has not enough funds. Even if you turn out to be live scientists, rather than earth scientists it would be better than being no scientist at all! I would advice you that altering your career path is better than not having one at all which could happen if you try to "pressure" (if you even can) the people around you to pursue what you are really good at. Please, take this personal story into consideration.

P.S. In the end I would like to cite the popular saying: "If life offers you lemons, make lemonade." I know it may not seem to be very good choice as you see it now but it's better than nothing which may be what you will get if you try to pursue your own research interests. But, ultimately, it's your life-take a deep breath in and think thoroughly how you want to end up living it risking for a PhD in earth science or getting the "safe heaven" of life science. Nobody but YOU knows the answer. I think this is the best advice anyone can give you.


How can I withdraw my paper from a fake conference? I submitted one of my research paper in a fake conference by mistake. Now I want to withdraw my paper from it, But I am facing problem in withdrawal as no email id is given on that website. The problem is that now my paper has been accepted by another conference. But according to Turnitin, my abstract is already published somewhere else. Does anyone here know how and where to report such fake conferences?

The fake conference is unlikely to co-operate – it's a fake conference operating for unscrupulous reasons. You can try, but I wouldn't expect them to play ball.

Your best chance of success is to clearly explain the situation to the organizers real conference, and hope that they understand your situation and accept your paper / talk request without problems.

This is a horrible situation for you. Until this moment, I never heard of "fake conferences". I just read about them, and the source I was just reading said, and I'm paraphrasing, there is very little difference between fake and legitimate conferences because they are both based on status-enhancement and profit-making rather than the spreading/seeking of knowledge. Unbelievable.

I would report it to your administration and discuss it with them to find out if there's any official action that can be taken. If there isn't any recourse, then I think you have found yourself a MAJOR career opportunity. Set up a business that clarifies which conferences are fake and which are legitimate. Sort of like an "Angie's List" of conferences.


Is it a common practice for reviewers to recommend their own papers in the review? I am reviewing a paper on a topic on which I have published some work previously as an author. While going through this current paper as a reviewer, I felt I could recommend my paper on the similar topic, which addresses a particular point better than in the paper I am reviewing. My question in this regard is whether in such conditions it's a common practice for a reviewer to recommend their own paper?

This is a delicate issue.

On the one hand, a reviewer is most familiar with their own work, and will certainly know if their work is relevant to the paper that they are reviewing.
On the other hand, it can feel like a crass "citation for publication" trade.

The way that I typically approach it is to only recommend citation of my own work if I am also finding it appropriate to recommend citation of other related work at the same time.

Put another way: if the hole in their literature review is "me," then I find it likely that I'm wishing they cited me because of personal bias and my own ego.  If the hole in their literature review is "me and a whole bunch of other things like me," then I find it likely that it's a legitimate gap and it's OK to recommend my work as part of the set of things to fill said gap.

Yes. One of the jurors for my and a colleague's paper referenced his own work in refutation of our own. Our paper was rejected by that journal, but later accepted for publication in a journal with a higher impact score. I am uncertain whether this practice is ethical or not.


I sent an angry e-mail to my interviewers about a conflict at my home institution. Could this affect my application? I applied to a foreign university. I was interviewed and now I am waiting for the result.

I had also applied to another research opportunity abroad, which is organized by my current department head. I was very hopeful that I would be selected for this opportunity because I am the first-ranking student and my English is very good. I spoke respectfully with the head professor about it on several occasions, but it seemed like he was making excuses and was not fairly considering me.

I recently found out that my classmate was selected for the opportunity abroad. He had performed much worse than me on classes we had taken together, and his English is very weak. I lost control and told the head of the department where there is a research opportunity that I would report this obvious injustice to the leading mathematicians at the university that had interviewed me recently. I did indeed e-mail my interviewers.

Now that I have calmed down, I realize that I should not have emailed my interviewers in this manner. Could it affect the outcome of my application?

Appendix: Thank you for your suggestions and advice. In fact, I have realized that I should always remain academically professional. I also sent a follow-up email to my interviewer and expressed my regret at my previous email.

Appendix 2: Now that I am more calm, I realize that my act was childish. I was not the employer to decide whom to hire. I emailed the head professor and and the one at the institution where there is a research opportunity expressing my regret. But now I feel like I need to try even much more than before to become successful. Good luck specially to me

I had some troubles following your question, but if I understood correctly then I would assume that:

The professor interviewing you is highly confused right now. They seem to have literally nothing to do with your university, the program, you (other than having interviewed you recently), and the person that you accused of being unjust - and yet they are drawn into a conflict that they have no stakes in nor responsibility for.
You may indeed have lowered your chances of getting accepted considerably. In the best case your email would be seen as odd. In the worst case it would be seen as grossly unprofessional, painting you as a trouble maker who will randomly lash out whenever something happens that you consider unjust. I have seen students like that, and I know of no professor / admission committee that wants to bother with this kind of drama.

  However, now that I have calmed down I have realized that I should not have let even injustices affect me and it was unnecessary to email my interviewer.

I think your reflection should go deeper than that. It is true that part of being a professional is also being able to absorb smaller perceived unjustices like that (empathy and an ability to accept that grades aren't everything helps here), but I also can't help but wonder what you were trying to achieve with this email in the first place. To me (and note that I am only going by your short recap) this sounds rather vindictive, serving no other purpose than to get back at the person not recommending you. If that is indeed the case, you should take a good hard look at your actions in this case and learn from that for the future.

I think that most of the answers give you pertinent advice. You applied for a research program. In the future, you will probably apply for post-doc, permanent positions if you decide to stay in academia, otherwise you will still have to apply. The majority of the applications will fail, which is normal and there can be some disappointment. In order to be not too much affected, here are some advice.

First, we have to keep in mind that there is no total ordering of the candidates. It is surely not so often that there is a candidate who is better than all the others in all the possible aspects which are required for a position. It is also hard to say "A is better than B" otherwise the role of the commissions would be easy.
Second, as pointed out in other answers, there is a big part of unknown: about the profile of other candidates for examples and also how their interview went. Somehow surprisingly, there is also a part of unknown about your interview. The member of commissions are usually not emotional hence you do not know exactly how an answer to a question was received.
Third, we have to consider that we only need one application which works and that when one failed, we did not lose any thing because we had nothing before (having the position was not a debt).

It seems that it is the fact that you were affected that led you to write the email. Next time, it would be better to ask for example the aspects of your curriculum that you could improve instead of putting into question the choice of the commission.


Should seemingly arbitrary things like "play piano for Church" or "intramural badminton" go on M.S. or PhD applications in sciences/engineering? And if they should, I assume that these things should go on a resume under something like "Activities and Community Service". I mean I consider being able to sight read music to play at my Church as a significant feat (how many people can do that?) and might sway one person on an admissions committee if he or she enjoys music and understands how hard one must have worked to accomplish this.

Badminton?.... perhaps not so much

No.

These things are by and large irrelevant. Everyone has hobbies, and many of these may be challenging, but the purpose of a graduate school application is to understand your background as a potential scientist.

At best, this will make someone go "Huh, neat, the oboe..."

At worse, it will make someone assume that you're either attempting to pad out a relative lack of accomplishments, or don't really know what you're doing.

Yes. Include them under a title like you suggested. You're correct. The ability to read music in that fashion is an accomplishment and it may actually suggest an innate ability others don't have.

I've been personally convinced for a long time that artistic aptitude and technical aptitude are frequently paired in individuals. For example, I've known several people who had strong artistic aptitude who I also thought had abnormally high intellectual aptitude.


How much of advantage do US citizens have in American academia? How much of a disadvantage are you if you are not a US citizen, but want to enter American academia? It seems Americans have lots of advantages starting early, including NSF graduate fellowships, continuing with more access to DARPA money, US-citizen specific awards like PECASE, etc.

True, some federal funding of grad students in the US is restricted to US citizens or permanent residents, but, in mathematics, most funding of grad students is as TAs (=Teaching Assistant) supporting lower-division mathematics courses.

The question of admission itself is mostly separate from federal citizenship requirements. Let me explain some things an admission committee wonders about, statistically, at least, about international applications, that would not be  relevant to an applicant already in the US and with no visa issues:

It turns out that quite a few applicants simply want to get to the U.S., in effect as informal political asylum, while having limited genuine interest in mathematics, and this creates visa and other complications subsequently. I have no objection to fairly open immigration policies, but I do object to adding that noise to applications to our graduate program.
Given that the bulk of funding is as TAs, problems with understanding colloquial spoken English cannot be taken lightly. This isn't about "cultural bias", but about the practical features of teaching in this environment.
Minimum funding to generate visa papers: The INS (U.S. "Immigration and Naturalization Services", which controls visas of non-US-citizens) mandates that we promise a certain annual stipend for international grad students... ok... except that that number is several thousand dollars above what the university sets as the ceiling for standard stipends. Not hard to imagine the craziness and injustices this leads to.

Edit: Theoretically, the university is not necessarily responsible for guaranteeing the (needlessly high) minimum, but different universities develop policies designed to keep them at some safe distance from "trouble with INS", and sometimes/often such policies create complications not originally intended, and not due directly to INS. (Also, interpretations and policies drift over years, and I'm refering to a situation from a few years ago...)
International students demand resources for their spouses.  We have repeatedly "discovered" that an admitted international student is married, "needs" a visa for a spouse, the spouse needs admission to something, etc.  It is easy to understand the desperation that leads to such situations, but it also corrupts things, and absorbs resources.

Edit: Yes, if things are done right, as noted in comments, it "should not be" the university's responsibility to "take care of" other family members. Nevertheless, for reasons I do not fully understand, it somehow has come to this on many occasions. (The quasi-legal details are mercifully slipping from my mind! :)
Many other college-university cultures have a hugely different emphasis on problem-solving versus memorization, and relation of teacher and student. Thus, although in one sense the U.S. system generates the weakest outcomes in specialty, because of all the other required coursework for "breadth", the balance of demands, and the goals, of upper-division coursework is mostly compatible with what happens at the beginning of grad school. Further, the less structured parts of the rest of grad school have counterparts in some undergrad projects. In contrast, we have found that several other traditions give students not prototype whatsoever for coping with ambiguity, and this can lead to strange crises well into a PhD.

Edit: Again, not to be claiming that all non-USA programs are the same! For this last point, let's say "traditions which emphasize memorization and reciting, of definitions, theorems, proofs, and examples", as opposed to problem-solving as at least a component of activities. It seems that getting into the habit of thinking that there is a "sacred canon" of results, even perhaps including wording, is not a good habit of mind. Similarly, an exaggerated impulse of "following orders" or "compliance", while a habit highly rewarded in some situations, is not so much the desired methodology after the very beginning of grad school. Thus, success in a prior situation may be misleading to a student, when further adaptation and growth is needed.

Don't misunderstand me: I understand how such things come about. Nevertheless, with limited resources, not only money but energy to help people get in sync with their responsibilities as grad students, there is a serious question about how to allocate. Thus, we can capsulize this by saying that grad school applicants from within the US system are more "known quantities", are already fairly in-sync with the system, are cheaper dollar-wise, and are rarely or never under the threat of returning in disgrace to a genuinely dangerous situation in their home country if we stop renewing their TA!

A small further edit: At a university receiving state funds (although this amount is ever-decreasing), the state legislature, and the electorate, take the viewpoint that the university has an obligation to give priority to students from the region, if not literally the state, and to serve the state's and region's goals. This has become less idealistic during economic downturns, unsurprisingly.

Edit: in response to some comments... I certainly do not claim that "all" non-USA undergrad programs are the same, "bad", etc., nor that all in-USA programs are "good". At the same time, I didn't want to single out specific traditions for criticism. And, certainly, applicants in the U.S. can easily "achieve" weaknesses for no particular reason. As I understood the question, it was inquiring about the realities of the situation, advantages that in-USA applicants tend to have over not-in-USA, at least in the minds of admissions committees.

I do not think literal xenophobia or cultural bias plays any role in admissions, in case people wonder. If anything, the generally stronger undergrad prep of people from non-USA programs has created a "bias" against US students on that criterion alone. The practical and prosaic considerations mentioned above diminish post-PhD, so that "nationality" plays no detectable role in post-doc hiring or tenure-track hiring. (For that matter, examination of the faculty at most "research" universities shows a pretty international population!)

I'd say none , actually since the high-school system in the United States is an absolute disaster you might have an advantage . This really depends on you though , when did you start learning English , how comfortable are you in a conversation with native speakers , etc .


How to deal with a nosy fellow graduate student? There is another graduate student at my school working in the same area as me that is extremely nosy about my work. His curiosity definitely goes beyond the normal amount of "What are you working on?" chit-chat that I have with other graduate students. He frequently asks me to list exactly (his words) which papers I'm reading. If I walk past him in the hallway holding a book or a paper under my arm, he'll (very obviously) contort his neck to see what it is. If I'm working somewhere public, he'll walk up to the table and start reading what I'm working on.

This may sound silly, but I really feel like my privacy is being violated. I think this guy's behavior is creepy and rude. I could never imagine doing any of the things I listed above. What I do with my time is my business and no one else’s, and what other people do with their time is not my business. How can I deal with this guy without appearing unfriendly?

I don't want to appear unfriendly because this other graduate student works in the same area as me and I don't want to burn any bridges. In my very short time in academia, I have also never witnessed anyone acting unfriendly. I have no idea what is appropriate or how to calibrate my response. It is also difficult because the other student is not the same nationality as me, so maybe there are cultural things that I don't understand.

I can't merge my accounts to comment. I am indeed a woman.

In my experience, when it comes to dealing with people with boundary problems, you have to talk to them (in private).

This isn't nice (it might come off as unfriendly), this isn't fair (you just want to do your work, not deal with this issue), but it's the best course of action -- both for your job satisfaction and (in the long run) for the other person (if he can learn from feedback).

Framing the conversation is going to be difficult -- I'd suggest "I" statements ("I notice that you look at my material ...") and framing the issue as your perception ("I perceive this as nosy. I'd like to talk about my work, but I see this behavior as an intrusion of my privacy."). Given that probably most people would consider his behavior as "nosy", you might even point out that other people might regard this kind of behavior badly too. Hmm, just stick to describing the behavior and avoid making judgments about the person. You can change behavior, you can't (easily) change the person.

(Note: I might be biased here. I recently tried to solve a boundary problem via non-verbal communication, only to notice -- again -- that people with boundary problems don't notice non-verbal cues (correctly or at all). If they did, they would not have crossed boundaries in the first place. So non-verbal "cues" are either overlooked, ignored, or they react in the opposite direction of the desired effect. For example, they notice that a person is distancing himself from them, so they move in even closer. Addressing the issue verbally is anything but easy but I think it's the way to go.)

The following is a personal perspective, tries to answer the question, what would have I done in the mentioned situation.

  He frequently asks me to list exactly (his words) which papers I'm
  reading

I find nothing annoying in this statement, rather I feel the other person is extremely interested in my work and methods. I would be happy to give him the literature but not when I am working. I would say something like

Why don't we discuss about it while we have coffee tomorrow. I will send you some of the important works in the field tonight. By the way, I propose you to read P1 to have a preliminary understanding of what we would be talking about, of course if you haven't read already.

  If I walk past him in the hallway holding a book or a paper under my arm, he'll (very obviously) contort his neck to see what it is

I would show him happily. It doesn't bother me if I am not holding something inappropriate.

  If I'm working somewhere public, he'll walk up to the table and start reading what I'm working on.

Okay, now the line is crossed. If it bothers me, I would say something like

If you'd excuse me, I am reading something important, we will talk later.

I find it useless to waste your time thinking what would be the exact motivation behind his apparent nosiness, rather I would treat the problem objectively irrespective of gender or culture.

A side note.
 I find some very good ideas emerge out during the informal coffee break discussions, as a researcher I welcome such discussions, it is also a good way to judge if the person is genuinely interested in your work or not. Also, if possible invite one of your fellow graduate student in your group into the above mentioned discussion.


Cases of plagiarism in mathematics Are there known cases of plagiarism in mathematics? The writing practices in mathematics are clearly different from the writing practices in the humanities. In the latter area I roughly know how to characterize plagiarism because examples are known. But I do not know how plagiarism is possible in mathematics, except for blunt copies of text.

Do you know about examples how plagiarism in mathematics looks like?

The American Maths Society has been caught:

A plagiarised book on maths history.

Another notorious case concerned an Eastern European academician in the bad old days. He began with a bit of self-plagiarism, re-publishing his own works in English language journals. But then he moved on to translating and publishing as his own papers from Russian journals. He was exposed when a Russian mathematician, on moving/escaping to Paris, discovered that his best theorems had been stolen. I think the AMS published an analysis of the whole sad affair.

Plagiarism in mathematics is much similar to plagiarism in programming. People often try to manipulate the original equations to make them look like a new one.

Quite possible that people try to change variables or try to write the same piece of code in a different language. Same goes for core mathematics.


When someone cites one of your papers, is it a good idea to send an email to the authors to show appreciation? For an early career researcher in physics or science in general, is it a good idea to send a "thank you" email to other authors who cited one of the researcher's papers? Will this be perceived in a positive way and even start a possible collaboration, or it will be cheesy?

Notice that in physics, where people post online versions of papers before publications (on the arXiv), it is very common (sometimes annoying) to receive or send letter to request citations to your own paper when one finds a similar/related but yet unpublished work.

This question obviously applies only to early career researchers who receive few citations per week.

Straight answer: NO it's not a good idea

Citing someone is (and should) be neither a favor nor a gesture of politeness. So there's no point to send a thank you email. Thanking someone for a citation seems a way to beg for something. If you want to collaborate send an email explaining why you want to collaborate, or mention that you have read their paper when you meet the author/s. Take pride that someone more senior or expert has cited your work and move on.

Such a message would have no effect.  Sending one would be a neutral act.


Is it possible to get a PhD by writing only review and survey papers? Suppose that a PhD (in engineering) student has 3-4 review/survey papers in their domain, and has received more than 500 citations in total. In a situation like this, can they pass the oral defense and get the PhD degree without a research paper?
What I want to know if review/survey papers can compensate my lack of research output. Any examples and stories that I can refer to?

It is possible to get a PhD without writing any papers; the formal requirement is of writing a thesis, and many people do just that. So I think the formulation of your question is a bit misleading.
But cutting to what I think is the actual intent behind your question rather than the specific choice of words, the answer is almost certainly that you cannot get a PhD without doing original research. Just making expositions of research already done by others, no matter how detailed or how many citations you get for them, is not what a PhD is about and wouldn’t satisfy the requirements.

You might be able to get a PhD in metascience.
To quote Wikipedia, metascience is "the use of scientific methodology to study science itself", performing research on the process of research. Part of this process would involve writing a bunch of literature reviews in order to analyze aspects of the scientific literature to determine information about the scientific process. For instance, you might code a thousand recently-published Information Technology papers to determine what the most popular scientific methodologies are, and how the methodology chosen affects other aspects of the paper like reproducibility or the availability of software artifacts produced during the process of writing the paper.
As a result, when you perform a metascientific analysis of the literature, you're not just taking existing knowledge and packaging it into a more convenient location, but producing new knowledge about the scientific process.
This isn't just speculative, either; when looking up the publications of authors who created popular scientific methodologies and gotten thousands of citations on their papers introducing them, you'll sometimes find that they've created a career out of publishing papers on metascience and scientific methodologies.


Submitting more than three letters of recommendation to a math PhD program I will likely be applying for PhD programs in mathematics. Several of the schools I intend to apply to state that they require ‘a minimum of 3 letters’. Presently, I have three solid letters from well known professors in my current institution, as well as a fourth letter from a professor from a different institution, with whom I’ve conducted research. Is it acceptable if I send four letters to these programs? Will it have any sizable positive/negative impact on the application? My main reason for sending the fourth letter, is because I feel it would highlight a specific research experience, and add credibility. Thanks!

The first criterion, of course, is that if a particular institution's application intsructions communicate that only three letters should be sent, then abide by that. For the ones that say "at least three" or the like:
To be honest, in practice it really depends on the internal details of each university's application storage system and how it lets reviewers view applicants' files—and this can vary wildly from place to place. At my institution, if you have four letters of recommendation, they will all be visible when I look at your file. In other places, their online portal might have specific spots for three letters and no more (I would hope such institutions would make it clear in their instructions that only three letters should be sent).
As someone who has reviewed graduate applications for nearly twenty years, I can tell you that if my file system allows me to see the letters, I will read all the letters if I am interested in an applicant. (Well, I probably wouldn't read ten letters … but certainly four.) If you have reasons to believe that the letters will offer complementary perspectives on your excellence, I would use them all.

Having worked in various universities in all sorts of different roles, from being a systems programmer to teaching etc., I would go to the department's office at first. These are the people who send out letters, open the mail and, usually, are the ones who calm down students who are late with submissions - although they can't and won't break the rules.

In fact I would phone them. Or even visit! I did this a few times and
by making a personal connection I had a running start. For example I
visited one institution without any appointment. Someone asked if they
could help me. It turned out that they were a senior member on my
interview panel and were impressed by my making the effort. I got the job and had many enjoyable years.

Phone call
"Hello, I'm sure you are busy so I hope you don't my asking. I'm planning to apply for X and I notice that three letters of recommendation are asked for. Would it be unusual to submit four?"
Anyone who has worked in that office for less than a year will ask a more experienced staff member.
Either they will answer or they will tell you who is best to talk to. This will most likely be the lecturer/prof who is  overall responsible for intake.
Say: "Oh I don't want to bother them. Do you think it would be alright?"
There is a good chance they will arrange a brief phone conversation with the person. You will end up discussing your aims and interests as well as mere conventions.
Important
If you meet indifference or even hostility at any point when asking for information, this will tell you something something about the department and how it is run. Personally I would only want to go to a friendly place and would cross anything else off my list.
By contacting and talking to people, you change from being paperwork to being a human being. They will notice your application when it lands on their desk.


As a department head, what to do if a professor leaves without giving out grades? I am department head. An adjunct professor teaching two courses in my department left without notice. He did not deliver the grades to me.

We have no staff in that field to give the final exam again. Even so, I wouldn't know how to convince the students to take the exam again, and I do not know what to do with the class activity, which should be part of the final grade.

The registrar is forcing me to deliver the grades, but I have no idea what to do.

Does anyone have any experience to share? What do department heads normally do in this situation?

I assume you've already tried to convince/pressure the instructor to provide enough information to assign grades.  Assuming he's not dreadfully ill, it would be incredibly unprofessional for him to refuse, but sometimes people are unprofessional.  If you don't know him well, is there someone else in the department who could try to talk some sense into him?  Was anyone else involved in the course, such as a TA or grader?

Once you've convinced yourself that you just can't get the grades, you need to take this up with the administration.  It's a really awkward situation, and you shouldn't be improvising a solution.  Whatever you do should be discussed with and approved in advance by the dean (or whoever has a similar level of responsibility in your university).  Presumably this issue has arisen before, and the previous decisions will serve as a precedent.  If this is the very first time, then you'll be setting a precedent.  Either way, you don't need to take sole responsibility for figuring out what to do, and you shouldn't.

Assuming the following:

the old prof is gone for good
there are no available grades in the system
the exams went with the prof, and possibly destroyed
we are talking about last fall's term, so the course has finished and the students have moved on

It looks like a possibly unrecoverable situation. The students did their part, not their problem the tests didn't get marked and they are entitled to the credit and the grade.

To phrase it in a contractual issue, the students contracted with the university for the education and agreed to prove their competence within a specified time period. The university in turn agreed to provide academic credit and a grade. The students did their part, the university cannot demand extra work from the students due to a failing on it's part. That the professor absconded with the final exams is not the student's problem.

I would say that unless it is a critically important course, like "Infectious Diseases 320" or "Nuclear Physics 440" where an incorrect grade could be disastrous, assign a grade near the student's average in other courses. Some students may rightly feel they are entitled to a higher grade, those same students will likely understand the situation and agree to rewrite the final.

Remember that "fair" in many cases is what everyone agrees with. If I think I deserve a B+, and you offer me one based on my semester average (along with a crystal-clear, full disclosure explanation of what happened) I will be ok with it. If I think I deserve an A I may consider wether that grade will actually make a difference and take the B+ rather than rewrite the final.

(and it looks like someone borrowed my assumptions)


What are the differences between these kinds of articles: original, review, letter, and short communication? I am interested in knowing, what are the differences between  Original Paper, Review Paper, Letter and Short/ Rapid/ Brief Communication paper?

Thanks to everyone for reading and taking the time for the great responses.

This will vary pretty heavily depending on the journal in question. But generally speaking, in broad strokes:

"Original Paper" - This is a generic term for a full-length, original research finding paper that doesn't fall into another specialized category.
"Review Paper" - This is a paper summarizing the state of research on a topic. These can often be somewhat long, are often but not always by invitation only, and this category can include meta-analysis, but doesn't have to. This may also be the umbrella that commentaries fall under, but again, not always.
"Short/Rapid/Brief Communication" - A shorter version of "Original Paper", whose methods, findings, etc. don't justify a full length paper. They still contain original findings, but are general much more straightforward.
Letters - Possibly even shorter original findings, field reports, single observations, etc. This can also include arguments about previously published papers, which involve either opinion pieces or snippets of contradictory or supporting research.

Original artical is under good headings ,all headings that must be present in every original paper but review sometime have some heading missed like materials and methods but not always happen this ,the main difference is  that study is rational , different areas result collecting together .The size of review artical is longer than original one.the short communication have not headings properly but all aspects are clear properly it is much comprehensive.


Can I rewrite sentences after my article has been accepted, when reviewing proofs? My paper got accepted in AEÜ. I want to make some changes in my article. Can I rewrite some sentences when reviewing the proofs from the journal?

The key word in your question is "some."

If "some" refers to a small number (less than about 10), and the "rewrites" are relatively minor, this should not be a problem. On the other hand, if you have an extensive list of changes spanning multiple pages, and the changes affect the interpretation and argumentation of the article, then the publisher will likely balk at making all of the changes without obtaining editorial approval

If the article has been accepted my understanding that it is very poor form to change anything that is not grammar/spelling etc.

If you change the meaning of a sentence in any way, even without meaning to, you may change the interpretation of the work in a small way - therefore this is no longer the work that has been accepted, but a different document.


What happens if a student takes pictures of a test and sends it to classmates that have not already taken it? My friend had to take their test separately, because of a certain disability, before everyone else had to take the same test. They were supervised by a staff member and when the staff member left the room they decided to take pictures of the exam and proceeded to send it to a few classmates that were going to take the test in the next few days. The professors became aware that the test was compromised (leaked) and made a new test in 45 min that covered harder material. The professors sent out an email saying they were tracking down the student(s) involved. Should my friend come clean or transfer before the professors are able to suspend or expel them?
Any advice will be helpful - thank you

Your friend engaged in outright cheating. In nearly all universities, what they did is a major violation of the codes of conduct that students are rightly expected to abide by. This isn't a "grey area" situation, your friend knowingly did something that was very wrong and I cannot imagine that the university authorities will see much cause to show leniency in this case. Further, as there were likely only a limited number of student who took the test early, your friend is likely to be caught. The professors probably already suspect who it is and are gathering evidence. I doubt your friend will have time to go through the whole process of transferring before they are found out. Further, if one of the few students who took the test early suddenly applied to transfer, it would look quite suspicious.

In this situation, there really isn't much that your friend can do. The ethical thing to do would be to admit what they did and accept the consequences, with the faint hope that coming clean will lead to some degree of leniency. That said, if self preservation is the only concern, they can sure attempt to transfer before they are caught.

As for you, as a budding academic, choose your colleagues and friends wisely. People's bad actions can rub off on you and they can bring you down with them. Someone willing to do this is a poor friend to have indeed.

I have to disagree with the other answers. In all universities where I studied and worked (only in Europe) there was never a rule that students were not allowed to distribute exam questions after a test. Indeed, I find it somewhat strange that a professor gives the same test twice or leaves the student alone (if the exams are in short distance of each other).

Some details are missing from the question. If there is a rule that this is not allowed or the professors mentioned that they should not share the exam questions, what they did is clearly wrong and they should come forward.

In absence of such a rule (for me, it is not at all clear that "every student knows this" as it is said in another answer), your friend is in my opinion ethically in the right. However, a professor might often do nasty things/threaten the student even if they have no basis to do so. In this case, I would talk to my student union/maybe even a lawyer and discuss the case with them if it is wise or not to come forward. (This may also depend on specific details such as how many students were taking this test earlier.)

Edit: Some people have misunderstood my point so I try to make it clearer: If the student was told that the second exam will have the same questions as the first, my second paragraph applies: Then, they would have implicitely been told not to speak about the exam. In this case, what they did was clearly wrong, period. Then they should come forward and accept the appropriate consequences.
On the other hand, if the student was not aware of the exam questions being equal, my third paragraph applies: The student should consult a student union or lawyer. In this case, they did nothing wrong -- how could they possibly figure out the professors lazyness?


Will a recommendation letter such as that written for John F. Nash be convincing? I noticed in the book "A Beautiful Mind", by Sylvia Nasar, that a recommendation letter, for PhD applications, written for John F. Nash runs as follows: This man is a genius.

Then, out of curiosity, I wonder that if such reference letters for PhD applications work in the present days?

Image taken from the Graduate Alumni Records of Princeton University:

Even though the event that inspired this questions may or may not have actually happened, the question is still a valid one.

I suspect it greatly depends on who wrote the recommendation. If the person writing that recommendation is a great authority in this field and is known for not giving praise easily, then such a recommendation letter might help. On the other hand, if I were to write such a letter...

In my experience, most communities of high achieving people don't openly value intelligence.  Generally they dismiss it and say that hard work and luck is what's really important.  And they would laugh at you if you wrote your IQ score on your resume.

If someone said "Person X is very smart" and didn't write anything else, I would see it as a backhanded compliment.  Like "X is smart, but he doesn't have the traits that are actually valuable in academia."

In fact, if I don't like a professor, and someone asks me what it's like to work with them, I usually say something like "this guy is brilliant."  Which is true for pretty much every professor at a good university.


Publishing similar but much longer article "again" in different journal? I am about to submit a 3.000 words article. It needs to be submitted soon, and I will have to submit it, but I know that I could flesh this out much more, and arrive at something with around 7.000-10.000 words, if I had more time. However, the basic idea would remain the same. It would be much more detailed, but I would not be making a completely different point.

Could I publish the 3.000 words article in journal A (if accepted), and then later this year publish the 8.000 words version in journal B?

It depends on what you mean by "flesh out". If you mean "waffle a bit more, add some detail to the introduction and discussion" then the answer is an emphatic NO. If you mean "add some further analysis that uses the original manuscript as a starting point and explores a different, previously undiscussed angle", then the answer is a hesitant yes, but it begs the question of whether it would be more effectively presented as a single, comprehensive paper.

In this case, the first short one published might be treated as an abstract with a length longer than usually expected, and the later long one the real article. They can be treated as one whole, or individually, because they serve their purpose respectively.


Is it normal to get an angry review that does not address any point of the work? I recently submitted a paper for publication. I was amazed to read the tone of one of the reviewers.
Previously, it was read by a pair of peers. I am completely sure that they would tell me if they found something wrong with the manuscript. Instead, their comments were positive.
This reviewer did not address any specific point of the work, just underestimated it as a whole. I could understand if his/her opinion was that the work is poor overall, but I perceive his/her comments as unnecessarily offensive.
As examples, the review contains the sentences:

It seems to the present referee that the author does not realize what constitutes the fundamental problem of molecular quantum mechanics as related to calculation chemistry.
The simple fact that the author ... and then he picks the "best" through statistics and numerology, reflects his attitude and respect towards the concept of THEORY.

On the contrary, very often my colleagues joke about (and many times we have discussed) my obsession with accuracy and scientific rigor. So, I am very convinced that the manuscript can not have an unusually high lack of rigor.
Although I have already published papers, I am inexperienced in publishing. This was the first time that I did the publishing process by myself.
I wish to know

Are these kinds of comments normal from reviewers? If so, what motivates them? I tend to think that the comments should be an objective appreciation of the work and not the author.
How are they perceived by the academic community?
Should I respond in any way?

Edit:
Just for clarification. I don't have evidence that the reviewer misunderstood the work. The only comment he/she made is the second quote that I previously included in the question. It is noteworthy to say that this point is far away from the central point or incumbency of the paper. The other thing he/she mentioned about the work is related to the title.

Getting angry reviews that, in your opinion, fail to understand your work is normal. It's sadly part of the territory.

It's hard to say why someone writes an angry review. Maybe they're an angry person, maybe they had a bad day and didn't like your work, or maybe they're one of those "tough love" people and get a little harsh when they disagree about something.

Your best approach is to ignore the tone of the review. If your paper got accepted, celebrate your publication. If you get a rebuttal, try to address their underlying concerns by politely pointing out why they are wrong and you are right.

If you are certain that your work is correct and the reviewer is wrong, think about what in your paper might lead them to believe what they did. If one person thinks you did something wrong, others might too. Consider rewriting that part of the paper to clear up any misunderstandings. It may be time consuming, but it will make your paper all the stronger in the long run.

Not to make any assumptions as to your research ability, but if this is your first time submitting a publication on your own, it is entirely possible that your technique is wrong. You can be rigorous in your approach and still do things incorrectly. It may be worthwhile to approach a more senior researcher that you trust and get their opinion on your paper with respect to the review.

Unfortunately it is quite common that authors receive negative feedback on their work, however this is often based around a misunderstanding or just a difference in opinions. What one might consider the right theoretical/scientific approach, might be perceived as the worst by others. I and probably others reading/commenting this topic have a hard time answering your questions the right way hence we haven't read your article nor the angry review. We can only guess and reply based on "feelings" etc.

Reading the newspaper online OFTEN shows angry reviews / comments by people that simply doesn't share the point of view that of the author. In my opinion this is what develops our written skills etc and this is what papers are about, bringing different topics for discussion?

If you want a more direct answer, please submit your article and the negative review. That would help a lot!


Article waiting for AE assignment for too long? I have submitted two articles to a journal. One of them got accepted within 10 days, but the status for the other one has been "Awaiting AE assignment" for 15 days now. The journal says on average they take 30 days to make a decision on a paper. Should I contact the journal about the status and why it's not changing? Is it possible that they forgot my article? And would sending a reminder have a negative impact on the decision of the journal?
Thanks.

You can send a request for an update at any time. You may or may not learn anything. There could be many reasons for a delay, including not sending too many papers to one editor and needing to find another who is suitable.
But an average of 30 days tells you little about the distribution of actual times. There is no real reason to panic unless you have other options for the paper that seem equally good.

If you search on this site, you'll find people whose papers have been under review for more than a year. 15 days is nothing in academic time, especially with a global pandemic going on. I'd suggest to wait until at least their stated average time before you ask for an update.


Are there instances of papers the first parts of whose colon-wise titles are questions? pre-colon-part: post-colon-part is a format which is often used in titles of papers. In all of the instances I have seen, the first part is an informative phrase, a (fictitious) example of which may be

Optimal consensus control of drone swarms: a game-theoretic approach.

But, I am wondering whether there are instances of papers# first parts of whose colon-wise titles are questions; as another fake example, something like:

Constructive or destructive?: Implications on the effectiveness of my
vaccine on the mutated coronavirus

I just tried to look up potential occurrences of the pattern pre-colon-part?: post-colon-part in Google Scholar by searching "?:". However, my query yields nothing. Has anyone already encountered such instances in the scientific literature?
# I am preferably interested in the potential instances which are composed by English native speakers, and/or published in prestigious journals.

There are plenty of articles that have a title in the format "Question? Answer/Suggestion", however, without colon.
I'm pretty sure that you cannot have a colon following a question mark, given a question mark indicates the end of a sentence (same as full stop and exclamation mark).
See also this question on english.se: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/51485/sentences-ending-with-both-a-colon-and-a-question-mark

You don't need the question mark; it is implicit in "Constructive or destructive:"


What to do about a student whom I suspect of having plagiarized but who claims not to have? I caught a student plagiarizing on a programming assignment by copying someone else's code and replacing some variable/function names. I gave the student a zero, and shortly afterward he emailed me maintaining that he's innocent and I'm falsely accusing him of cheating.

What should I do?

Inform the student of the school's official procedure for appealing an accusation of plagiarism, and suggest he follow that procedure. (Also see: How can I prove that I didn't plagiarize.)

Policies and procedures are there exactly for situations like this one.

Generally if the student chooses to appeal, the procedures involve other parties (a dean, or a committee dedicated to such matters, for example) evaluating the student's side of things and your side of things (your reasons for believing that the student plagiarized) and then deciding on next steps according to school policies. (Here's an example.) So if you think the student is likely to appeal, you can start to prepare your side of things - the "evidence" - in the meantime.  (Personally, when in this situation I also like to let the department head know that this appeal might be coming.)

Note that you don't need to have caught the student on videotape, or anything like that. You'll tell the committee what you know, they'll make the decision as to whether it's enough evidence, and they'll make the decision as to whether the consequences you have imposed should stand. Deciding whether your evidence meets "standards of proof" for an appeal according to school policy is their job, not yours (they have much more experience than you in this matter.) Assuming you made your accusation in good faith, you don't need more evidence for an appeal than you did for the original accusation.

If these are programming students, they will succeed or fail as a team in their future careers.

Why not get them used to this mindset by borrowing a page from the military? I'm sure many will consider this too draconian,  but it will be surprisingly effective if the entire class is penalized.

If you have objective and effective criteria to identify when plagiarism has occurred (a big hurdle, I know) I see no reason why you cannot give the entire class a zero on that assignment.

This will build camaraderie among the students as they will have a common enemy (you), will encourage collaboration and teamwork since they'll have to check each other's work (to ensure that it is not too similar) and teach them to watch out for each other and become self-policing.  All of these are critical for their future success as a programmer.


PhD student, issued contract at year 3 which will sign over intellectual property. Is it legal? I'm EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Science Research Council, the biggest UK funding source in the sciences and engineering) funded. Several months into my PhD an industrial sponsor came along. In exchange for additional funds they wanted me and the other PhD students in our group to spend some time during the PhD at their sites and work on industrial problems. This is known as a CASE award. I'm not sure what the university signed, but I have not signed anything. It was a verbal agreement with my supervisor.

I'm now in my 3rd year and writing up. The industrial sponsor has decided to renew their agreement with the university and just issued me with a contract (it states the university and industrial sponsor have agreed upon additional clauses as of early 2015). The clauses/contract that I've been asked to sign states that I will give the industrial sponsor all my intellectual property (to which I currently own) generated over the course of the last 3 years. It also states that the industrial sponsors will review all publications and stop me publishing anything they think will give them a competitive edge (Note I'm not and have never used any of their data, resources or industrial knowledge/work/ideas etc. this is my own work) - I'm just about to publish the remainder of my PhD and then submit my thesis in the coming months. I was in good position to finish early and focus fully on moving to the industrial site for the remainder of my PhD and work on the projects the industrial sponsors wanted me to look at. Clearly for any projects done while there, the IP would belong to the industrial sponsors - however they want everything, including the stuff I did before they even got involved!

Additionally signing the contract means that they can make my thesis closed - i.e. future employers are not allowed to see it. This could damage my future prospects as I was also looking at work outside of academia and they will no doubt want to know what I've been up to. This was never part of any agreement and I would have never taken on a PhD with these terms. Academia is all about the publishing and the free flow of ideas - this all makes me a very cheap slave!

Legally, where do I stand? I understand that as an employee issued with new contract I would have to either sign or walk away, unless it goes against the heart of the contract. But I'm a student and I'm in the last few months of my PhD, if I walk I get no qualification.

I've been told that they can't make me sign it - but won't go into detail as to whether it will affect my PhD or not? Again I'm EPSRC funded the industrial sponsors have paid me extra around 10% of the EPSRC stipend in exchange for me spending several unpaid months at their site working on projects of their choice. I've been told by my supervisor that it's in my best interest to stop resisting and ultimately sign the contract. Can they do this three years in? Has anyone been through anything like this? Anyone have any advice?

Legally, you can't be made to sign a retrospective, retroactive contract.

Professionally, if your supervisor or the university person responsible for the CASE studentships decided to be obnoxious about it, they could make the completion of your PhD uncomfortable.

As long as you don't need the CASE money or the on-site experience, this looks like a useless deal for you; in your shoes, I'd be minded to talk to my supervisors, then the faculty graduate tutor. Explain without emotion that you didn't sign up for a CASE studentship; ask if they can give you a good reason why you should sign up, because from where you are, it's hard to see any value in it.

They won't want to stop you finishing. You're EPSRC-funded, and having EPSRC-funded students fail to finish causes a problem for the department when it seeks a renewal of the funding. So you do hold quite a lot of the cards, here.

Ultimately, it's going to be a negotiation. It would be very surprising, and rather irregular, if they did sign up with the sponsor having given the sponsor the belief that this contract will retroactively apply to all current PhD students: I've only seen the terms and conditions apply to those students who start their PhD as CASE students. My hunch is that it's more that someone is just trying to get something for nothing - a free rider.

Talk to a patent lawyer. It is going to cost you some money, but this sort of thing -- namely employee inventions, inventions of students, contract terms with respect to IP -- comes up all the time in a patent lawyer's practice.

Approaching your university's IP arm may not be in your best interests. Try and get independent advice.

I am not a lawyer, but I am well aware of sections 39 (Right to employees’ inventions) and 42 (Enforceability of contracts relating to employees’ inventions) of the UK Patents Act 1977.

I do not believe that university students are considered employees for the purposes of s.39 and, as such, any invention belongs to the student. However, to what extent the agreements you entered into, either explicitly or by your actions,determine ownership of your IP will be determined, needs to be assessed by a competent lawyer.

Again, this is not legal advice. You get that from a lawyer, who you've engaged to advise and/or represent you.


Citing propositions etc. in a master's thesis So in my mathematics master's thesis I am mainly following a certain paper, trying to understand it and present it's results in my own way. Now for a few chapters in my thesis I am basing them off of chapters in the paper and I'm unsure on how and what I need to cite. I generally start of these chapters saying something like "this chapter looks at ...blah blah blah....following (cite source)". Also for remarks and analysis I've taken from the paper I also cite those. But what about Propositions or proofs I've taken from the paper? (Stuff which is not'common knowledge').

As these are generally interspersed throughout the chapter, writing things like "this result taken from (cite source)... nearby each of the results seems clumsy and breaks the flow of my writing, so I would prefer not to do something like this if it is necessary to cite each of them.

Including propositions from elsewhere with just a generic remark at the start of the chapter is risky, and I would strongly advise against it.

In particular when it comes to proofs this makes it very difficult to see what is going on: Are you providing your own proofs for statements deemed to be "obvious" in the paper? Are you expanding a proof from the source? Are you merely paraphrasing?

For propositions, a rather elegant way that does not impact the writing flow would be:

\begin{proposition}[\cite[Proposition XX]{source}]

...

\end{proposition}

For proofs, you can just put a sentence outlining the extent of your contribution at the start, where it also does not break the flow.

As long as you make it clear where your information comes from everything is fine. Just take care not to quote any text literally, except of course equations or important definitions.


Is a joint science PhD/JD a bad idea if I end up pursuing academic science? Question. I'm going into my third year as a PhD student in oceanography, and due to my interest in law, I'm considering applying to the concurrent PhD/JD program at my university. I’m wondering whether this might damage my future prospects as an academic scientist.

My background. I have long been interested in both law and science, but I'm not sure whether I would end up pursuing law, science, or both after graduation. My scientific research (computer models of the global carbon cycle) has implications for law and policy, but is completely independent from law and policy in itself. I think my background places me at the very top in being able to understand the science, but that is only one of my interests in law. My interest in science has not waned at all, and my scientific career is going pretty well. It’s my interest in law that has grown.

The program. I've come to learn my university has a pretty flexible joint program (7 years instead of 4-5), and they’ve stressed that the course load can be made flexible to accommodate thesis research in my home department. At this point I believe I could maintain a level of scientific productivity even when studying law half- or three quarter-time. Financially, I think it's likely I could do the program for free, but worst case I might no longer be eligible for my $25K/year stipend. This would not be a dealbreaker, and I would find out before having to commit

My concern. My concern is that I don’t know exactly how I would want to use the two degrees. I'm interested in many different types of law. I would never be unhappy that I took the time to study law, if only to quench my intellectual interest. I would only regret the decision if I decided to pursue an academic career in science and this damaged by chances. Specifically, I'm worried that:

It could suggest a lack of commitment, i.e. a kind of 'Carl Sagan effect', where a professional interest outside your area of research is counted as a lack of seriousness.
A JD would obviously reduce my scientific productivity for a few years while studying. While I believe I can maintain some productivity, the number of papers, citations, etc. would necessarily decline over that period.

Interesting question.  There are so many factors to consider, including time, cost, workload, etc.

It does seem though that having credentials in both disciplines can give you both a unique perspective and a means through which you can influence public policy. Forward-thinking academic departments may see that as a plus.  Of course, others could see it as a lack of commitment to pure science, but I'm speculating.

You should consider that the merging of science and law is not uncharted territory. A great example is Vanderbilt's law and neuroscience initiative, funded by the MacArthur Foundation. See
Vandy Law & Neuroscience for details.

However, Vandy does not have a 'law and neuroscience' department, and I doubt that the law school or school of psychology (housing neuroscience) would specifically look for a candidate with both a PhD and JD.  But, it would certainly fit. This may be true of other institutions as well.

To me, the answer is simple.  If you prefer being out in the open, setting-up field labs and are not too worried about the loss of revenue (in the near to medium-term) that will be lost by not pursuing Law, then go for the Oceanography research.  However, if you are more of a people person, looking to change personal outcomes of clients and would welcome the extra certainty and financial security of being a successful law practitioner, then law is the way to go.  Law is always changing -- just as science -- so both topics will keep you stimulated.  Always go for the topic that you would do for fun, then you will succeed as enjoyment will be a huge motivator for achievements in your chosen field of endeavour.

IF CASH IS A PROBLEM IN THE NEAR TERM...
Look into the most attractive, yet future-proof, and marketable combination of unique research interests in oceanography and/or Law that can be pitched to funding stakeholders.  A good, well planned and articulated PHD proposition and pseudo-business plan can be all that's needed for great PR for the university and guaranteed funding, together with a pathway into business afterwards.


What to do about "grade grubbers?" An annoying aspect of working with a "strict" grading system (e.g., 90%+ = A, 85% = A-, 80% = B+, etc.) is what I call the "grade grubbing" phenomenon: the people who feel compelled to raise complaints about the grading because they didn't get the final score they want—but have no real argument in support of a higher grade. This is not about legitimate requests to reconsider because of a mistake but instead students searching for any reason why they deserve the X points they need to get a better grade. It’s exemplified by the kind of argument that begins “I know it’s wrong but . . . .”

I do not have the power to change the grading structure—that is imposed from higher up.

Are there any satisfactory methods of discouraging such behavior? I don't want to stop people with legitimate issues from asking for regrades (mistakes happen!), but I would like to avoid having to deal with the student who tries every which way to get the few points they need to move up a level.

I usually say that my rule for regrades is like the NFL's rule for replay challenges: there must be "indisputable visual evidence" that the original grade was incorrect.  For instance, scores were added incorrectly, or a correct answer was marked wrong.

If the score was a "judgment call" (for example, I deducted two points for some error and the student thinks it only deserved one point deducted), I won't change the grade, unless I did something really egregious.

I've seen the policy "We regrade the entire assignment and your grade could go up or down" but it makes me a little uncomfortable.  It suggests an element of randomness or caprice in the grading, which I don't want to promote, especially for younger or weaker students who may already feel like their grade is random.  I don't think students should feel like they have to roll the dice to get a genuine error corrected.

My experience is from a senior high school perspective.  In the English department, it was usually essays or essay-format questions on tests that students wanted remarks because they thought they deserved a higher mark.  If a student approached with this sort of request, and I as a teacher felt they were just fishing for extra marks, we would make a clean copy of the assignment, so that my comments/corrections/marks were not on the paper, and pass the paper over to the department head for re-marking, with the warning that his decision would be final and would replace the mark I had assigned--no matter if it was higher or lower.  Of course our department head had the reputation of being the toughest marker in the department, and his re-marking often (but not inevitably) resulted in lower marks.  Once the news got around that this was the way re-mark requests were being handled, the number of students who were just whining in case they could coax a few extra marks out of the teacher, dropped.  They didn't want to take the chance that a re-mark would leave them worse off than before.  The students who had a legitimate complaint still had a way to have it addressed, and of course addition errors were handled on the spot with no attempt made to discourage them.


Undergrad students grading other undergrads: ethical, professional, or even legal? As an undergraduate, I've been working as a TA in an electronics lab for a while. Recently I have been asked to grade other students' lab reports. I have also done some oral examination, but I guess that's relatively fine, since there you can indeed see if he knows what he's supposed to know.

However, when it comes to grading reports, they may be to some extent copied from other reports, may have data tampered with after the lab so they look correct, and in general are made to look correct through collaboration and some Google copy-paste, it becomes very hard to tell who deserves the grade and who doesn't.

Also, I myself wasn't getting good grades at those reports, and I never could understand what those correcting were expecting from me, so I would be grading on a different basis than they are. In fact, I really can't find much wrong with the reports, so I feel like I'm doing a lousy job (even though any time I express doubt about my judgement I am assured that stuff can't go wrong).

One final detail is that it's a hardware lab, and while I'm not bad at it, I'm headed straight to software, so I probably look at things from a different perspective, not to mention that what's important for me may be quite different.

Considering the above worries, does it seem fair that undergrad students grade the reports of younger undergrads, does it seem professional for those in charge of those groups assign such work to undergrad TAs, and finally, is it even legal for an undergrad to affect another undergraduate's grade by handling grading processes?

It's a fairly common practice at some universities for older undergraduate TAs to grade younger undergraduates' work. My undergrad institution relied heavily on this - it's perfectly legal and ethical SO LONG AS you, the TA, do not discuss one student's grades/work with another student. More generally, a TA in the United States is bound by FERPA as to what is legal or not.

If you're concerned about not knowing what to mark as wrong, consider asking the professor you are grading for for an answer key or an example solution set. They may be unwilling to give this to you outright, but hopefully they will at least walk through an example with you and point out what they're looking for in a fully correct answer.

I'm sorry, but it isn't about sharing like @campussano's answer suggests. This is - almost certainly - the result of universities cutting costs by hiring under-experienced teaching staff. While you may be able to effectively check your colleagues' lab assignments, you're probably being used as a pawn against the graduate researchers, to lower their overall employment/upkeep costs. University managements very often try this "juniorization": non-tenured Doctors head courses, Ph.D. candidates teach, and undergrads check homework or even serve as teaching assistants. For shame.

What you - not personally, but collectively - should be doing in my opinion is forming a academic staff union (or overthrowing the comatose leadership of the existing union). At the very least people in your situation should get the same pay as their seniors (if not more), to de-motivate this kind of practice.


How to sign your email to students, so to avoid their immature behavior? Or how would you like to be addressed?

As a graduate TA, I went by my first name. But I thought that some students were becoming too friendly. They took things for granted (for example, asking for a homework extension every week without even bothering to make up an excuse, or showing up to my office hours and interjecting with comments meant to be funny but came out sounding obnoxious).

I will be an assistant professor next year, and I am wondering whether asking my students to call me Dr. LASTNAME would resolve some of the rudeness that I've encountered.

But how do you ask? Sign my email Dr. LASTNAME? That sounds pretentious. Should I just use initials (FL for FIRSTNAME LASTNAME)? I sign all my emails with my first name, but doing that for students is an open invitation to call them by my first name. How do people transition from a graduate TA to someone with a PhD in front of a class full of undergraduate students?

**EDIT: I have had several students be truly rude to me, but in keeping with the spirit of anonymity, I did not describe in detail what happened. But My colleagues were shocked and appalled at some of the behaviors that I have encountered.

That said, I do very well with evaluations, often nearing perfect score, and my students score well above average in multi-section calculus classes. As you might imagine, my classes are fairly well-attended with high level of  participation. Of course there are pros and cons of familiarity, but I am somewhat puzzled at this display of lack of authority in my classroom, as all of my colleagues also go by their first names. I hope this is more information.**

Like JeffE's comment, I always prefer students to call me by my first name. My male and female, Asian and white colleagues also prefer to be called by their first name. There are some exceptions where they insist on some title according to local custom for showing respect. However, I do not have the problem you describe (students expecting unreasonable things and acting in completely unprofessional ways). The reasons that I do not have to deal with these problems is because I simply do not accept them.

Actually, I am fairly strict but also fair and I always try to be open, transparent, and predictable to my students. They know if they arrive to class late, they are absent. If they submit late, they fail. They want more time, they won't get it.

I do not see how what I allow them to call me (excluding rude names) would result in overly familiar behavior. Indeed, many of my Asian colleagues are far closer to students than I would ever allow myself to become. The ones who demand more formal forms of address are the ones who seem to get the closest with students. Perhaps this is how they remind students that they are still the teacher.

In short, student behavior is driven by your attitude towards them and you can convey a tone of seriousness in the relationship without requiring formal salutations.

(An answer from an undergraduate in the U.S.; cultural differences will probably apply)

I took a Computer Science intro class 5 years ago. I had a great professor (a TA), who preferred to be called by his first name. I was infinitely more comfortable with this lecturer, and so I had no qualms in asking office-hour-questions (less intimidation factor), and gaining valuable knowledge because of it.

You can't know how your students will interpret this type of change until you start. Students expect, and want an authority figure in their university courses. Yet, they might be more comfortable in a 'friend-like' setting, where rank, title and authority are less of an issue than what they learn. As a student, the most effective combination (for me) is the following:

Create an open and relaxed environment as the instructor: let students call you by your first name. This creates a more open atmosphere, where rank, title and authority are less of an issue for the student than their learning perogative.
Ensure that students respect you: clearly define expectations (usually in the syllabus), so that students are aware of what you expect

Ensure that students do not take advantage of the 'first-name-basis'

if your policy states that you don't accept late work, make no exception to the rule
if your policy states that being 5 minutes late to class equates to an absence, make no exception to the rule

As long as you remain authoritative, yet lax, your students will do what students will: some will respect and adore you, some will slack and resent you. That is the way of the world.

Given the above, you have a significant advantage, in my eyes, by allowing students to address you familiarly. You allow students who feel more comfortable doing so avoid the pitfall of "this professor is so intimidating and smart that I can't go to their office hours because they'll resent me for asking basic questions and make me feel stupid", yet you remain an authority figure for those who prefer to address you as 'professor'. Of course, whether or not students are intimidated by you is partially dependent on your social behavior as a whole, and not just the title. But speaking from experience, having had professors who were very strict with their titles, the feudal-esque authoritarian role does not sit well with a lot of students, as it puts them in the 'peon' (laborer, serf, etc.) level compared to you, which in my opinion is not conducive to a learning environment.

Moreover, the argument that students will take advantage of the 'lax' state of address is completely ridiculous. You, as the professor, have absolute authority to lay out the rules in your syllabus. If students don't follow those rules, what does it matter whether they call you Joe or Professor Johnson? You can easily state, for example, that you will ignore email requests that do not fit a certain format. You have that power. What does your title have to do with it?

All in all, as a student, I would prefer if professors were more lax on the title aspect of their career, and focused on the academic aspect. As long as they ensure that guidelines (laid out in the syllabus) are followed, state of address/title has little to do with it the pedagogy.

(An answer from an undergraduate in the U.S.; cultural differences will probably apply)


Why do you need to study a subject at a university level to teach it at a high school? If you want to teach mathematics at a high school for example, then why do you need to study it at a university? You will learn new stuff, but you won't teach anything of that at a high school.

On one hand, when I myself was in high school I was wondering about the same thing - especially that I learnt the whole high school material (in maths and physics, I mean) in the first year, so felt that I could have taught as well as a teacher. But indeed, as pointed out by Xander Henderson and Massimo Ortolano, only at the university (in fact, only during my PhD studies; well, in fact only as a post doc; well, in fact... hm, you get the idea) I learnt the bigger picture.

So, studies are so that if a student asks "what will I need the quadratic equation for?" you could give a better answer than "because it will be on the test".

What is a better answer in this case is a whole different issue. I have lots of friends who indeed, once they finished high school, never solved a quadratic equation again. But on the other hand, they also didn't need the knowledge about Hamlet, genetics, WW II history, etc., in everyday life. That doesn't mean that they, we, you shouldn't learn about those things. I have lots of knowledge that I don't need in my life - but I enjoy obtaining it, possessing and connecting it with other areas.

A math teacher who does not know that

the real numbers are an algebraic field;
set theory and boolean algebra are isomorphic (and what an isomorphism is);
modern math constructs the natural numbers from nested empty sets,

just to name a few, cannot competently teach 1st grade math. The reason lies in what I consider one goal of education in general, and here in math particularly:

Education should not be limited to conveying some degree of useful technical proficiency.

That is, the goal of teaching English1 should go beyond the ability to read a manual or write a shopping list. It should teach about poetry, the human condition, the beauty of language and rhythm; it should instill wonder and curiosity and open up perspectives which are perhaps not available at home or on TV.

The same thing goes for math. Math education1 should not be constricted to counting correct change or buying the right amount of wallpaper. Mathematics is about beauty and symmetry. It is about the power of abstraction. It is about beholding different infinities. It is about the realization that the mind has no limits. Math is like mental CGI; if you can think it, it is there. Math is as creative as sculpting: What you carve out of reality has always been there, you just made it visible. But it is about discipline and correctness, too. Like literature, math shows us what's underneath the surface.

1 Also in grade school.


Can I add an inscription on a bachelor thesis that I have been working on for almost a year? I have been working on my bachelors thesis for 10-11 months now and am about to hand it in. Without bragging, my topic was by far harder and more work than most bachelor theses.

Now I am wondering whether I should add an inscription to my parents in it. I really want to show that I am grateful for giving me the opportunity to study. Now I have read up on some advice on the internet saying that I probably shouldn't do it because bachelor theses are generally only meant for a small amount of people.

With my thesis this is different as I am planning on releasing at as a documentation of my work (my bachelor thesis was to write an improved version of an existing API).

What do you think?

EDIT:

I am talking about a short "To my parents." on a separate page in the beginning.

EDIT2:

Please remember, a Bachelor thesis is different to a dissertation.

If you want to dedicate your bachelor thesis to somebody, or acknowledge people: by all means, just do it!

It is your thesis, after all.

A title page dedication may come across as a little pretentious.

I would recommend an acknowledgements section at the back. This is a more traditional way of thanking anybody who helped out, and it's a perfectly normal thing to have in any kind of thesis. You can also use that to thank your supervisor, your friends who helped to proofread, and anybody else you like. This also allows you to state why you want to thank your parents, which may make it a bit more meaningful.